German tall smokestack vs fat, short and wide taper

[Walter Webb]

Could someone explain to me the difference in sound and playing feel between, say, a tall Mirafone 186 (http://www.daveamason.com/mirafone/cctubas.html" target="_blank) and the short but much wider bell that flares out so quickly (http://www.kanstul.net/detail.php?pass_ ... nd%20Brass" target="_blank)? Is one better for a certain kind of playing? I see the same thing in old baritone horns vs euphoniums. Is there some advantage or real difference between them? I presume there is more to it than just the bell, and assume the bore taper leading up to each is also different.
Thanks, Walter

[arpthark]

Rick Denney makes some nice observations on his website about this very topic.

http://www.rickdenney.com/york_vs_miraphone.htm" target="_blank

http://www.rickdenney.com/the_tuba_sound.htm" target="_blank

[SousaSaver]

The bell has a great deal to do with the sound, but the overall design will have a greater effect. I mean bore size, rate of taper etc.

[iiipopes]

A few years ago I sat in a community band section that had three 186's of various vintages: the older "stovepipe," the new wider flare, and my retrofit St Pete upright along with the stock recording bell. My observations, and YMMV:
1) The traditional 16 1/2 stovepipe had the classic Miraphone sound; rich, a little dark, "point-and-shoot" tone.
2) The newer 17 3/4 bell is the "Bach 37" of tuba bells: moderate tonality, good projection and breadth, consistent through the range, but a little too "vanilla" to my personal preference.
3) The upright 16 1/2 St Pete bell has a wide throat, very small flare. It has depth and darkness that looks towards the Alex east, but with the right mouthpiece with a slightly curved bottom makes a great foundation to a moderate sized ensemble in a moderate to large room. Also, it is shorter than the stovepipe, so there is more of a conical profile from the bottom bow to rim than on a stock 186. This necessitated the tuning slide be lengthened to match.
4) The recording bell, with my custom Kanstul 18-style hybrid mouthpiece: as traditionlly "American" as it gets, with overtones, breadth, presence, outdoor support, etc. In a blind test, it would be hard to tell the difference between it and any other moderate bore recording bell tuba, except for the burble of the rotors rather than the pop of pistons for the articulation.

[Walter Webb]

The recording bell, with my custom Kanstul 18-style hybrid mouthpiece: as traditionlly "American" as it gets, with overtones, breadth, presence, outdoor support, etc. In a blind test, it would be hard to tell the difference between it and any other moderate bore recording bell tuba, except for the burble of the rotors rather than the pop of pistons for the articulation.

How would this be for a sonically flexible combination: a 1961 Mirafone BBb with two bells, one recording (19", original) and the other straight (17",custom made)? The seller also fabricated a longer slide to compensate for tuning differences between the two bells. Mirafone used the same tuning slides but the first branch after the main tuning slide was shorter on the recording bell models.

[UTSAtuba]

Rick Denney makes some nice observations on his website about this very topic.

http://www.rickdenney.com/york_vs_miraphone.htm" target="_blank

http://www.rickdenney.com/the_tuba_sound.htm" target="_blank

This is probably your best resource. Some of have likened a "tall, smokestack,German-style" horn to a very direct, laser-like sound. And, a "fat, short, wide taper, American-style" horn to a more blossomy sort of sound. I've played on both, and on different rotary *profiles. They both have their advantages and disadvantages. Heck, the audience wouldn't be able to tell the difference. "Oh, what a nice tuba sound!"

Joseph "play what makes you happy"

*A St. Petersburg 202N BBb produced the exact same sound as my former VMI 3301P (B&S PT-2P). Intonation, though, was a whole different story...

[tubajazzo]

Joseph "play what makes you happy"

best advice ever given...

Gerd

[iiipopes]

The recording bell, with my custom Kanstul 18-style hybrid mouthpiece: as traditionlly "American" as it gets, with overtones, breadth, presence, outdoor support, etc. In a blind test, it would be hard to tell the difference between it and any other moderate bore recording bell tuba, except for the burble of the rotors rather than the pop of pistons for the articulation.

How would this be for a sonically flexible combination: a 1961 Mirafone BBb with two bells, one recording (19", original) and the other straight (17",custom made)? The seller also fabricated a longer slide to compensate for tuning differences between the two bells. Mirafone used the same tuning slides but the first branch after the main tuning slide was shorter on the recording bell models.

That's almost exactly my setup: the upright bell for indoor concerts and the recording bell for outdoor concerts and other concerts where more projection is needed. I have my customized Curry 128D for the upright bell and my Kanstul custom for the recording bell. A most versatile combination that serves every gig that I will reasonably forsee to ever play, from quintet to large ensemble. I also have the longer tuning slide for the upright bell and a stock tuning slide for the stock recording bell. I'm glad to know which branch was shortened.

I also have some interesting intonation differences: with the recording bell, everything is usually where you expect it to be, with the usual flat 5th partials that require shoving 1 for 2nd space C and 1+2 for D. With the upright bell, on my particular instrument, 2nd space C is right on, only 1+2 needed for midline D and lip up for 2nd valve Db. But the lower octave is a little sharp and I have to concentrate on keeping a big "OH" to keep the pitch down on the lowest levels, or finger low G 3 instead of 1+2. low Eb is 1+2+4 with a little raise to the back of the tongue to accelerate the air to bring it right on pitch. Likewise, if I'm going to be above 4th line f for any length of time, I'll use my Bach 18 to make sure the intonation is up where it needs to be. With a lot of different mouthpieces, the upper octave will tend to go flat with the recording bell. With both, the middle octave is as secure as anyone can reasonably ask for with either bell.

It can vary from horn to horn. I got to play another example that was only a couple serial numbers off mine, and it had a slightly different overall intonation characteristic. Not better or worse, just slightly different.