6/4 Doubling

[TheHatTuba]

I know some pros double with a 6/4 CC and a 6/4 F. What is the point of both being 6/4? Is it to replicate the sound of each other?

[bort]

I've always guessed that it's to avoid needing a smaller CC tuba. Have just a BAT and a BAfT and be done.

[Bob Kolada]

I know some pros double with a 6/4 CC and a 6/4 F. What is the point of both being 6/4? Is it to replicate the sound of each other?

Regarding the bass tuba, I would guess that (maybe slightly less than) half folks have a small bass tuba. Yamaha 621's are super popular and those small Kanstuls seem to be spreading. That's what -I- would do (big contrabass, small bass) to get a bigger contrast.

[bububassboner]

I've always guessed that it's to avoid needing a smaller CC tuba. Have just a BAT and a BAfT and be done.

Bingo. Having a huge CC and a small F can make a tonal "gap" where the CC is too big but the F is too small. While I think just a large F and a BAT is not ideal one can cover most of what needs to be played.

[Rick Denney]

I know some pros double with a 6/4 CC and a 6/4 F. What is the point of both being 6/4? Is it to replicate the sound of each other?

I'm not a pro, but I will be playing my band's upcoming concert using a 6/4 contrabass and a large F. I'm using an F for the reasons anyone would: For two of the pieces on the program, the lighter sound of an F is more musically appropriate. But it still needs to have sufficient projection and volume to carry the tuba role in the large ensemble, so I use a large F with lots of projection. But I specifically do not use an F that sounds like a small C--I want the F sound, I just want it loud enough without having to make it sound like I'm pushing.

And for the other pieces I'm using my Holton 345 because it makes me happy, and helps carry the bottom of the ensemble.

In the case of one of these works, we are playing a transcription of a 19th-century orchestral work. It has two tuba parts, and the first part is clearly an orchestral tuba part--at least mostly so. The second part seems more like the transcribed orchestral string-bass part. The first part is written with a much higher tessitura to give it a distinctive voice (why else arrange for two paprts?) Big tubas give the right sound for the second part, and an F tuba gives the right sound for the first part (as long as it can be heard).

The other work we are doing was intended to have a lighter tuba sound, and it is written high and in low dynamics. It would be difficult to achieve that quality with a big contrabass, so I'm using my F. Again, though, a small F would get swallowed up rather than positively lightening the sound of the section.

The main reason I own a large F is because I could not make my small F do the job in these situations without the sound going trombone-like. My large F is a big orchestral F, but it still sounds like an F.

Rick "who uses a small F in certain chamber-music applications, such as the upper tuba part in a euphonium-tuba quartet" Denney

[Wyvern]

I don't buy into (or maybe I don't understand) the concept of a "6/4 F tuba".

I have also never understood exactly what that means in the context of an F. 6/4 seems to be applied by Meinl-Weston to some F, but not used by B&S - but if one considers the size of the bell throat on the PT15, then maybe they are 6/4 with that being 15 inches in circumference - about the same as a 4/4 CC. Interestingly the main tuning slide is also identical in bore to that on my 6/4 Neptune.

The main reason I own a large F is because I could not make my small F do the job in these situations without the sound going trombone-like. My large F is a big orchestral F, but it still sounds like an F.

Rick has perfectly defined the reason for playing a large F.

Everyone has their own requirements and tonal concept, but I have found I'm quite happy switching between 6/4 CC and large *F for everything from symphony orchestra, to wind band and quintet (in a ratio of probably 60% CC / 40% F). Nice tonal contrast, and will cover everything as long as one has an F with good low register.

I did previously have good 4/4 CC, but found I was just not using - always preferred to be playing my Neptune or PT15 for their 'special' tone.

*Works equally well with large Eb as long as it has good high-register response, but I prefer the F tonally

[hubert]

To my knowledge the origin of this use lies in the difference between bass tuba and contrabass tuba in orchestral parts. The use of a 6/4 or another size instrument is a question of tonal concept of the player or conductor, I would say.
Hubert

[Z-Tuba Dude]

It seems that the 6/4 F tuba idea, is simply bigger is better. Many tout, as an advantage, an F tuba that sounds like a small contrabass.

To me, if you're gonna play a F tuba, play a F tuba! Not a CC tuba with F fingerings!

[tubatom91]

The one reason I really enjoy playing my 45s (listed as a 6/4) is that it can sound like an "F" tuba orchestrally and can sound alot like a small CC as well. I know not everybody likes that but that is why they make a bunch of different styles and sizes of them.

[MartyNeilan]

I've always guessed that it's to avoid needing a smaller CC tuba. Have just a BAT and a BAfT and be done.

Bingo. Having a huge CC and a small F can make a tonal "gap" where the CC is too big but the F is too small. While I think just a large F and a BAT is not ideal one can cover most of what needs to be played.

I ran into that problem a few years ago, when I had a very big CC and a very small F. Great for large ensembles and solo/recitals. But, there was that "middle" quintet and small ensemble usage that neither horn served adequately.

[bort]

Hey Marty, which setup was that? You've had so many over the years...

I'm actually feeling that way a bit with my Marzan/Cerveny setup. I really like both of them, but while the Marzan certainly is not a BAT, I think a 5/4 CC and 3/4 F setup does leave a "hole" in the middle.

Another thought -- is it easier to have a 5/4 or 6/4 and try to "play it smaller" or have a 4/4 and try to "play it bigger." Seems like a lot of people (like me...) do the former (or think they'd like to do the former), but may be better served by the latter.

[Z-Tuba Dude]

Another thought -- is it easier to have a 5/4 or 6/4 and try to "play it smaller" or have a 4/4 and try to "play it bigger." Seems like a lot of people (like me...) do the former (or think they'd like to do the former), but may be better served by the latter.

I think no one ever really "needs" to have a 6/4 CC horn. (as a disclaimer, I do own one!)
IMHO all of the contrabass literature works just fine on a 4/4. A 6/4 horn just provides a broader tone, but does not change the music that you are making.

[bort]

I completely agree, and may have not written my thought clearly. Actually, now I'm not sure what I was trying to say...

Either way, it's no secret on here that I want a Miraphone 188... among other reasons, it's simply the right size for me!

[MartyNeilan]

Hey Marty, which setup was that? You've had so many over the years...

MW2155R and Cerveny Harmonia F pre mods and pre Blokepiece - there was a "hole" in the middle that could have been filled with a 7/8-4/4 CC or a large Eb.

The MW2155R was a beast of a horn, but just overprojected in a smaller environment, no matter how soft it was attempted to be played (which was a whole difficulty in itself, due to the wide open leadpipe.) A quintet tuba, it was most definitely NOT.
The Kalison K2001 which ultimately replaced it could go as big, but also did small much better and was surprisingly useful in a quintet when played lightly with a shallow C cupped mouthpiece. The Donatelli that came along later was also surprisingly good at "small" (although it wasn't near as large as the KaliBAT.) Maybe the whole German vs. American taper things at work?

Adding additional bracing to the Cerveny Harmonia solidified the low register significantly, Wade tweaked it more, an AGR added down the road adding a little more "weight" to the leadpipe/bell, and playing it the second time around with a Blokepiece further helped. It was/is still a small tuba, but can easily out play its size. The last time I had it, it was a fully capable quintet tuba.

I see myself going down that road a little bit now. The massive BART is also one of the lightest weight tubas I have ever owned, so it can be played "delicately." However, the thick fat timbre at soft volumes may not be the most appropriate for anything smaller than a medium sized brass ensemble with a couple of bones in it. I borrowed my son's 12J for something around Christmas when I needed a small horn. The 12J/5J are not among my favorite instruments, although they are one of the best options for a middle-school tuba. The "Schiller" stenciled 186 clone I owned was a good quintet and medium sized tuba, I sold it to a student but may get another someday. I still feel those are the best bang-for-the-buck new horns out there. The new 6 valve F intrigues me as well. I was never in love with my 2145, but that was an excellent quintet tuba and medium purpose instrument as well.

Edit: Tagging onto what Ben said, a true 186 (especially the older ones, IMHO) does EVERYthing. There are just other horns that do certain things "better."

[bort]

Thanks Marty. I agree, the Cerveny sounds bigger than it looks.

Last summer, I used my F tuba in a large band (section of 6 or 7 tubas). That was a LOT of fun -- large sections of BBb or CC only can be a little bland. But, I could have stood to use a larger F tuba to avoid having to work quite so hard. Ideally, it'd be nice to have an F tuba that is bigger than the Cerveny, but still a true F tuba and not a CC substitute. But, one thing at a time for me....

[cjk]

...
The 6/4 F tuba is a oddity for me, I am uncertain what one is.
...
I feel 90% is preference. As I have mentioned before, I think the "pro's"/"big boys" have more than 2 tubas, and I can guess they aren't all 6/4 horns either.

I don't have a clue what a 6/4 F tuba is either.

Most of the pros who I have known personally have an arsenal something in the ballpark of this:

* Big CC tuba, sometimes two, only used in orchestra, large ensembles, or tuba conferences
* A 4/4-ish or smaller CC tuba, used most often used as a quintet, church, pop, or "gigs other than orchestra" instrument.
* An F tuba approximately the size of a B&S F tuba.
* A Euph, typically a Yamaha 321 when they need it, often borrowed.

This is only a broad generalization of what I have seen. I'm sure your mileage will vary.

[Wyvern]

The flexibility of the 6/4 contrabass tuba being played is an important consideration on if a 4/4 is required as well, or not. The Cerveny Kaiser I used to own was very difficult to play delicately and would certainly not work with an F as all required.

However, my Neptune although even bigger can be played with great delicacy, has an easy high register and I have successfully used with chamber orchestra, quintet and for solos. Being handmade it is even as light to carry as a 4/4, so I just don't feel the need for anything in between it and the F. If I want a contrabass tuba, the Neptune will do perfectly just refining tone through changing leadpipes or mouthpiece.