bloke wrote:
...and no, this has nothing to do with Dr. Young and his 7-rotor King/Gronitz. Dr. Young's monstrosity is based on the incorrect assumption that tubas' overtone series are in tune. My solution is based on the realization that they are not.
This is why I like your idea, because it deals with a real problem. By accepting the faults for what they are, it becomes simpler (maybe not technically but on paper certainly) to diagnose and address this problem. Nice job sir.
The little bit of truth in your post made me think of this quote from Carl Sagan.
"The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It may be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not be consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences do not determine what's true."
Instructor of Tuba & Euphonium, Cleveland State University
Principal Tuba, Firelands Symphony Orchestra
President, Variations in Brass http://www.jcsherman.net
Will that rod take the gold plating needed to match your tuba, or will you use old King style gold tinted lacquer? Does the Jupiter substitute for the original King lacquer imply the same level of social acceptance, or will it degrade you in the tuba community?
bloke wrote:
Send me your 2165's en masse (along with your massive stacks of $$$$'s) and I'll "mass produce" them.
All kidding aside, if one wanted to get a 2165 or similar horn "Bloked," do you know what a ballpark cost for this would be?
Now that you have done the R&D, repeating this would (hopefully) be considerably less time consuming and just require parts and few(?) hours labor.
It seems to me that most of the alterations you have made are changes that could be made to the design of the horn in general so that they would be better coming out of the factory. Yes, the tuning valve that started this thread may be a bit of overkill for most players, but you have mentioned a number of other tweaks that you have made to improve the horn's playing and intonation tendencies. I'm wondering, if these are improvements why wouldn't they make these changes to the design to begin with? It does seem silly that you have had to do all of this work to make the tuba play the way you want it to. I wonder how much of this translates to changes that everybody would appreciate and how many are specific to one person's playing and might not translate into an overall improvement for most people?
Besson 983
Henry Distin 1897 BBb tuba
Henry Distin 1898 BBb Helicon
Eastman EBB226
That spring is in accordance with my ideas about having the vector force, where the real action is (the valve rotation) rather than at the trigger end of a push-rod assembly. You have a combo of two springs, which is even better. But when I suggested keeping the original test spring you told about it humming in resonance. An argument ringing with me. So now this question:
How do you avoid humming from this illustrated spring?