Small F Tuba Sound

[TheHatTuba]

What type of sound do you guys think is best for a small f tuba, American like a Rusk F or Kanstul or German like a 180?

[TexTuba]

That's a loaded question. The REAL question is what do YOU prefer?

[Bob Kolada]

I've never played a 180, but I've played and like a small Rusk York F, a few Kanstul F's, a Yamaha 621F, a MW 182, a Cerveny 653-5, and several old Eb's. All are great horns. The Kanstuls, my small King Eb, and the one Rusk F I played I thought sounded -maybe- a little thick. I actually like the 621F's sound, or at least what I get out of it. The Cerveny has a great, fat sound, and the 182 has a surprisingly big, though leaner sound. I really enjoyed the 182 I played. The Kanstul was the most even playing, though the 621F may tie with it. I kinda went back to this paragraph several times.

For me the epitome of small bass tuba sounds is the small, century old, super short bell Conn Eb's. I still have the one I had years ago in my head- big clear, powerful, sweet,... and with great intonation as well. Slightly sharp 6th partial but a very flexible 5th partial. My small King has a great sound but it's not quite what I had in that small Conn. My best moments in music were on this horn. I so want to find a nice clean one!

[Jeff Miller]

I use a Hirsbrunner 388. It's the smaller bored piston valve model. I think smaller is great, because you can make a smaller horn sound bigger, but it's really hard to make a big horn have the tibral complexity of a small horn. And you don't have to work as hard to be heard.

[Karl H.]

I always thought the Alex F was the ideal F tuba sound. It's a 'small' horn physically (albeit with a very large bore) yet I've never the sound referred to as 'small'. Ringing, clear, and projecting, yes; never small!

I guess I'm playing with word order here: are you talking about a "small F tuba" sound, or a "small" F tuba sound?!

Karl "who MIGHT be a little biased" H.

[J.c. Sherman]

I share your bias, Karl.

I like to defend the little Yamaha 621 as being what I think is a do-it-all F. While maybe never ideal for anything, it CAN do any F work you want, and can be capable of an enormous amount of sound.

J.c.S.

[tclements]

The definitive answer is....... IT DEPENDS!! I love the Alex sound. I use the small Yamaha whenever the part says Ophicleide and I love THAT sound. On 'Bydlo,' I believe the Dehmal makes the perfect sound. Let your ears and your heart be your guide!

[jonesbrass]

The YFB-621 is a nice horn, to be sure, I just was never sold on the projection of the sound. Always felt like you had to work harder to be heard "out front" than on some other "small F tubas."

[J.c. Sherman]

Elephant, I totally agree with you. Have you tried a Faxx Helleburg? I've found it just plain awesome for this beast. Pulls the top F 1/4 cent flat, but I don't even notice it since it's perfectly easy to play in tune.

These horns, once well learned, are just plain EASY. Just did a band recording with mine as the top tuba of three. It cranked very nicely!

[bill]

I have had a M-W 182 F for more than 2½ years. It took me a while to get the hang of playing it. I had owned several Eb's (Willson 3400s, Conn Jumbo, Conn small bore) and, once upon a time, Cerveny F and a YFB621. Mostly I played larger Contra Bass Tubas, Hirsbruner HB 19, Cerveny BBb, and the like in Bands and Orchestras. Then, I got old (Ouch!). Switching to a smaller horn was a solution to no longer being a beast of burden and seemed attractive. After about 7 years of return to Eb (I have been playing 62 years - the first three on Eb then a long stretch on BBb) I decided the Willson was getting to be too much to carry comfortably so I looked around and decided the M-W 182 was about what I wanted to handle.

I had one built for me, silver and with a two whole step 5th valve. It is marvelous. I experimented with mouthpieces and discovered several work really well (Wick 4L, G-W Matanuska, Conn 3, J-K 8B-D) but have settled on a Yamaha 64. When I hear recordings of my quintet or of either of the two orchestras I play with, I am continually surprised at the controlled volume I can get. The only thing I can not out play is the tympani and, frankly, that is their problem, not mine. I am continually being asked to back off a little on cadence petal tones, when I toss those in, even in things like R-K Russian Easter .

Most F tubas I have played are capable of a great deal of sound and a solid low register if you practice making such a sound and are comfortable with your mouthpiece and equipment. This is also true of some smaller Contra Bass tubas, too. I have a recording of me holding up an entire orchestra on the music from The Producers and you can not tell the size of the horn from that recording (it is a Weril 680). I would not advocate any of this turn to smaller tubas for people who don't believe it can be done or for people whose goals include overwhelming a large first line professional group but, since I never play in those situations, the smaller horns work very well for me. Oh, not at all as an afterthought, an afternoon of work with Velvet Brown got me doing things I never thought were possible on tuba. She is a wonderful teacher and an inspiration.

smallM-W182009.JPG

[Rick Denney]

All this talk about how the Yamaha 621 can make a lot of sound has me wondering. My experience with mine is that there is a ceiling above which it will not go while maintaining a characteristic sound, and the only solution is to make it loud in the way a trombone is loud. I'm sure that's as much me as anything, but I don't have that problem with the B&S.

When I tried out F tubas, I tried them at the Army conference with a friend doing some listening from 20 feet away in the Elephant Room. The ambient noise level was typically deafening. He could not hear me on the 621, but could hear me clearly on the B&S, when both sounded the same to me.

I had had difficulties playing the Yamaha in our band, which is a typical community band that usually plays too loud, getting through the noise. I wanted to play F for transcriptions of 19th-century works when the tuba part was split enough for the upper part to emulate an orchestral tuba part and the lower part to fill the string-bass role. Using F provides a distinct voice. But it has to be heard even in the blastissimo sections.

Yes, I can bury my quintet with a 621. Frankly, burying that quintet does not require a terribly large shovel. But when I do, my sound is tending bass trombone rather than euphonium.

I use the B&S in quintet at times when I want to keep my skills up on that instrument, but the 621 is probably better suited to that group.

I have heard people complain that their F tuba sounds more like a euphonium than a contrabass tuba. Isn't that the point? If I want the sound to be like a contrabass, I would just play a contrabass. When the part goes high, however, the extra security of the F tuba usually accompanies the need for a different sound. I play F because I want a distinct sound: compact and meaty, with lots of clarity and presence, rather than cavernous. Don't ask a cat to do a dog's job.

Rick "who agrees that walking bass lines need that big-tuba felt-rather-than-heard bounce even in quintet and who has on occasion complained that F tubas lacked that soul" Denney

[opus37]

I think you have to think about the mouthpiece and tuba combination. With my old Martin, I used a Denis Wick #2 or #3. My quintet group was asking for more volume. I switched to the Bloke piece Imperial and now they love the sound and feel I might be a bit loud. The sound being a bit brighter cuts through a bit more. Oystein Baadsvik uses a Miraphone Starlite 383 Eb with a Bruno Tilz Nea M3 mouthpiece. I think the general consensus is he sounds great. Next to Steve Campbell with his jumbo CC ( I don't know the brand), sounds significantly brighter. But he's a soloist where Steve is a Orchestra guy. Both sound really good.