"cimbasso"/"Verdi hated the tuba"/etc.

[J.c. Sherman]

' not sure this question was answered. I suspect my phrasing wasn't very clear.

How many are following Verdi's instructions and using their ophicleides to perform Verdi's "Requiem" ? If not the ophicleide, is there a modern-day west coast American creation offering an "ophicleide-like" sonority that can blend with modern-day large-bore trombones in a non-cylindrical sort of way?

I'm one, yes.

If I'm not, does it have to be a west coast creation? I think for this work a modern day cimbasso works quite well; but there's an east-coast creation made specifically for ophicleide parts:
http://www.musikhaus-syhre.de/html/body_ophikleide.html
But I wouldn't use it. I think you'll get a better result from this work with a chimp (or my F slide contrabass) rather than any tuba-like object. My $.02, and not a flat "ophicleide" answer.

[J.c. Sherman]

...so (based on those bell/body tapers and the dismissal of tone holes and leather pads), there is finally an application ("Of.") where my 1920's Conn small-bore tuba would be the perfect modern choice...or is it not tall enough?

Plenty tall - taller than my BBb cimbasso, but not a perfect modern choice. However, it would work "better" than a PT-10 or 621. It would actually be an interesting experiment (taking some of the 3rd trombone's pedal Bbs)... if it's the really tiny Conn, and we're talking about the Requiem, it could be worth trying...

but I wouldn't.

Too tubby for me; nothing to do with volume, just too broad sounding... Conn Ebs don't sound like ophicleides and don't blend like ophicleides. But with the much wider flare, it's closer in profile to a valved ophicleide, but the bore size is (believe it or not) quite a bit bigger than a period valved ophicleide or most bombardones of the period.

BUT... that Conn Eb would be a hell of a lot better than anything else besides an actual ophicleide or modern cimbasso. And only because it's an ophicleide part. For most of his other works, I'd sit it out or build a cimbasso (I'm sure yours would be quite spectacular). This is one his works which wouldn't work with a regular Bass Trombone very well...

J.c. "if this is as close as I can get to convincing bloke to embrace the ophicleide" S.

[Bob Kolada]

Isn't a euphonium a good modern sub for an ophicleide? I'm not really digging those "pit F tubas".

[J.c. Sherman]

Isn't a euphonium a good modern sub for an ophicleide? I'm not really digging those "pit F tubas".

Usually, yes. But this work is a little different, and Verdi's stance was different. A Euphonium would perhaps be better than the Bloke/Conn hybrid, but they aren't ophicleides.

Berioz never allowed for the complete replacement of his ophicleides (exept on second parts to support the first ophicleide)... Verdi took a different tack.

[Donn]

But with the much wider flare, it's closer in profile to a valved ophicleide, but the bore size is (believe it or not) quite a bit bigger than a period valved ophicleide or most bombardones of the period.

Argh, "valved ophicleide". What a nomenclatural disaster. Do you reckon Verdi et al. may have meant any such thing?

And while I'm with the dumb questions about the ophicleide - I thought they came in various sizes? Which one goes to low C?

[Z-Tuba Dude]

I think Bloke got it backwards....


To my ear, a bell-front baritone sound is pretty similar to the sound this ophicleide: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGBmqthN ... e=related"

Although obviously not an authentic instrument, the sound of a BF baritone seems to be similar "enough" to the sound of an ophicleide, that it could be a passable substitution.

On the other hand, a tuba sound is really NOT very similar to the sound of a contrabass trombone (valved, or otherwise), and therefore is probably not a great substitution, according to my friend, Joe Green.

[J.c. Sherman]

But with the much wider flare, it's closer in profile to a valved ophicleide, but the bore size is (believe it or not) quite a bit bigger than a period valved ophicleide or most bombardones of the period.

Argh, "valved ophicleide". What a nomenclatural disaster. Do you reckon Verdi et al. may have meant any such thing?

And while I'm with the dumb questions about the ophicleide - I thought they came in various sizes? Which one goes to low C?

The valved ophicleide, or "ophicleide a piston" is a real thing, and shares much of the narrower bore profile with the traditional ophicleide; in fact, Baines suggests some were converted, if memory serves. Basically, there is narrow cylindrical tubing added before the regular taper lowering the pitch to F, with three valves allowing it the compass to low B. Verdi did know of it, it was more popular in Italy than most places, if only for a short while.

As for your picture, the low ranges, left to right, are B, A, and "pedal" D, so all can descend to low C; the last instrument (contrabass in Eb) is a modern experiment and there's really no literature for it. The first two are typical, with the left one being the most common in orchestral use (C); Berlioz preferred one of each on the left (C & Bb).

[Chuck Jackson]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxpNBUg5 ... re=related" target="_blank

Even Alan Baer is in the conspiracy Bloke. The plot thickens!!!

Chuck

[J.c. Sherman]

A Sudrephone is similar. Here's one exaple of a valved ophicleide:

Valved_Ophicleide - sm.jpg

If you could find a Sudrephone and turn off the mirliton, you'd be close enough, I'm sure... though I've never seen a bass.

[Lingon]

...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxpNBUg5 ... re=related" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank...

Special arrangement with five trombones, the cimbasso included?!

Ooh, it also reminds me of a concert where the bass trombonist, they used two tenors one bass and tuba..., played one more of those tones, nice FFF solo b trbn, than the rest of the orchestra, in the beginning of the piece.

[tbn.al]

It is soooooo embarrasing when that happens!

[Bob Kolada]

NO!!! The Tu-Bone is that thing that came out a few years ago. Remember the guys who made it INSISTING that it was a bass trombone sub for high school tuba players, NOT a cimbasso?

[Lingon]

Thanks for the link. Very descriptive and informative facts from the 'Oxford Grove Music Encyclopedia':

...The tone is full and resonant and such composers as Mendelssohn, Schumann, Verdi and Wagner wrote important parts for it which are not always well replaced by the blander-toned tuba...

[MartyNeilan]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxpNBUg5 ... re=related" target="_blank

Even Alan Baer is in the conspiracy Bloke. The plot thickens!!!

Chuck

I love how the beginning was played Con Ballso.
Anyone know the specific horn the Big Man was playing?

[GC]

Hm. I wonder if this has set the record for the longest thread.

[J.c. Sherman]

a keyed brass instrument

http://www.google.com/search?q=ophicleide+definition

Distinct from the ophicleide a piston

[Wyvern]

My guess (considering affiliation) is that it is a Meinl-Weston model 41 TuB...cimbasso.

http://www.meinlweston.com/melton-meinl ... 1-262.html

The tubing arrangement matches the MW 41 from what can be seen - and almost certainly an F going by who is playing it

[Lingon]

...The goal in such situations should be to match TODAY'S trombone section as closely as possible...

Ah, all these pages summarised in one sentence. You are absolutely right. There should be a match with todays trombone section like that Verdi probably strived for a match with that days section. So the modern cimbasso played in a sensible way is very close, however the question is, as JC pointed out, if not the modern slide cb trbn in F is even closer/better?!

[cambrook]

Great post LJV! I've followed this thread but not found the time or headspace to contribute; I didn't know where to start - and then you go and sum it all up beautifully....

We are all familiar with the size and sound differences between a small F tuba and a BAT, but there is as much difference between a CC or BBb "tubaphone" type cimbasso and something like the Haag. I've played a CC and BBb Rudy Meinl cimbasso, and while they are fun instruments I don't think they are a good blend with trombones for Verdi (at least with me playing). However, I can see that they would be very effective in film-score work.

I'm lucky to have a Haag to play whenever I want, and the smaller bore does give a good blended sound with our trombone section. Someone commented previously that one of the problems of a smaller bore cimbasso is that they are stuffy with 4 or 5 valves; maybe it's because of the Hagmann valves, but that isn't much of an issue on the Haag. It does take me a little while to adjust to it when I haven't played it for a while, but once I've "dialled myself in" it's a marvellously responsive instrument.

Cam

[Lingon]

...I would use a Miraphone 184 and a C4 mouthpiece to accomplish LJV's goal the best I could...

I am absolutely sure that you will try your best and also make a marvelous sound from that combination of tuba and moutpiece, and I believe it may work great with a (modern) trombone section that consist of very large bore instruments something like slide euphoniae. If on the other hand you will make the best blend with more standard (modern) trombones I think unfortunately you have to lean towards a slightly more cimbassoish smaller bore more cylindrical, not being totally without any conical parts though, instrument like one or another of those modern ones that are mentioned earlier in this thread, or of course a homebrow with the correct dimensions.