When to upgrade?

[smyoung]

For those of you who have ever upgraded your horns, specifically your contrabass horns, what were your reasons behind doing so? i.e. what prompted you to say, "I need a bigger/better/etc... tuba" ?

Why I'm asking...

I certainly don't want to be "upgrade-happy" because I want to get the most out of the tuba I have, but I AM curious because I find myself at times wishing I was playing on a tuba that allows for a bigger sound, is more open in the lower register, and "slots" better. Currently I'm playing on a MW 32 CC (5 rotary) and it doesn't seem to be able to handle the big fat sound I want to get out of it.

I also don't want to blame the horn for anything that I'm lacking ability-wise, but this past week I've been fortunate enough to borrow a CB-50, and I definitely notice an improvement over the 32 in some areas. I can get more big core sound in the low register, and it doesn't seem like I have to be on pins and needles all the time getting notes to slot correctly.

Anyway, I'm interested to hear all your upgrading stories.

Cheers,
Stephen

[Homerun]

For me, I upgraded when I switched from BBb to CC my freshman year of college. I went from a rotary Bb (I think it was a MW, but I can't remember) to a MW2145. As I went through college, I played every horn I could get my hands, or, erm, embouchure on. When the 5450 came out, I somewhat fell in love with it, and found a friend getting rid of his, so I snatched it up. However, I had already decided that I was getting a bigger CC when I left school, so it was between the Thor and the PT-6.

In the future? I think it depends on your needs. I have been contemplating trading my Thor in for a big F, because that fits the type of work I am doing right now. That probably has the most bearing on the situation.

To me, it's pretty simple. Do I have the extra money this may cost to get a bigger (and maybe better) horn? If yes, then do I genuinely have a need for said horn? And then I go shop. Because if I had a need, I don't want to be hampered by money. If I fall in love with a horn that's going to cost me 12k, I want to be able to spend it.

Again, just my experiences, and I am sure others will tear my thoughts apart/ give their own stories

[imperialbari]

The OP’s way of thinking is valid, but I do not necessarily agree about the terminology (and that is no because I am foreign to English).

For me upgrading an instrument is about going from an instrument, which is impossible to play in tune to one allowing for playing in tune. Or allowing better dynamics or a purer sound due to tighter valves or whatever.

The going from a certain rotary tuba to a certain piston tuba is not necessarily an upgrade even if the player experiences a better platform for expressing the music he is imagining between his ears. For me that rather is about picking a more relevant tuba for this specific player. It is very well possible that another player would experience the reverse switch as going to a better platform for his needs.

Some players simply cooperate better with certain types of instruments than with other types. Even the best tuba players tend to use different tubas for different playing applications.

One certain TubeNet’ter, who certainly can play tuba, has owned I don’t know how many jazz tubas and contrabass tubas during the 11 years I have known about him. And after all he has a better access to knowledge about the tuba market than most of us have.

One might assume his problem was of a psychiatric nature, if it wasn’t for the fact he has had a steady relationship with the exact same bass tuba for almost thirty years.

Sadly very few tubists are in a location where they get the chance to try tubas until they find their optimal instrument.

Klaus

[bort]

I had an MW-30 for a couple of years, before deciding to get a Miraphone 1291. I changed for the reasons you mentioned. The MW was NOT a bad tuba, and it served me just fine. And if I couldn't have afforded the switch and still only had the MW, I'd be happy enough.

But the 1291 was more sound with less work, and that was important to me. The more effort you can spend on making music and not on physically playing the tuba, the better. A Honda Civic and a Corvette can both drive 100 mph, but one of those is going to make it a whole lot easier to get there.

[Homerun]

A Honda Civic and a Corvette can both drive 100 mph, but one of those is going to make it a whole lot easier to get there.

NICE. Tiger Woods can still beat me with a set of Walmart clubs, but it's alot easier for him to do it with his Nike's and waitress girlfriends.

[Michael Bush]

Eh, I just sell and try something else when I get bored with what I've got. So far, surprisingly enough, I have made money with this approach.

[ckalaher1]

My perspective is a little different, as I plan to come back to playing after a seven year hiatus. I don't have a horn at the moment, but have been taking the time to travel and play anything I can get my hands on.

I have owned several CC's, which included a 188, 5/4 Rudy, 2145, and a rotary Neptune. After trying the newer horns on the market, something I hadn't done in @10 years, I have come to the conclusion that today's new models make playing considerably easier. These models include a PCK, several Thors, 1292s, 1291, Bruckners, etc.

Since you're playing an older model horn, albeit one that many have had a great deal of success with, take the time to play as many models as you can. Find out if the model you are playing is holding you back, or if you actually perfer it to the more recent flavors of the month. You'll never know unless you try.

I know I fell prey to "the grass is always greener" with regards to switching horns. Many do I would assume. Just get out and give as many as you can a blow. Be patient, and I'm sure you'll make the right decision.

[Rick Denney]

Klaus has it right, and so does Joe.

You start with two things: 1.) your ideal sound concept, and 2.) what is possible in the context of your life. Understanding those two things lead to a set of requirements, and the perfect tuba is the one you can afford and carry that fulfills those requirements.

In the context of my life, any tuba that requires hours a day of skill-building just won't do. I'll never be able to devote that kind of time, even if I wanted to. I need something that will not get in my way if I'm playing on weak chops.

For a kid majoring in performance in college, that might not seem to be a concern. But notice that Joe still mentioned efficiency as the feature that gets his attention first. Efficiency means the same thing to both of us--an instrument that gets us a bit closer to technical perfection with the same or less input of effort and energy. The only difference between us is where we are on that curve.

For me, though, efficiency and sound are related. A high-end performer can many any tuba sound good, but it is easier to achieve particular effects using an instrument that efficienty produces that effect. The question isn't whether it's capable of sounding good in the hands of a high-end pro, but rather whether it's capable of sounding good in my hands. A tuba more suited to our objectives move high-end pro and hobbyist a little further down their yardstick of performance, even if where the pro started is at the other end of the stick from where I start. Efficiency for me means an instrument with more resonance and color, just as it does for a pro, but for me it might allow me to cross a boundary from bad to mediocre, instead of from good to excellent.

I also want an instrument that won't embarrass me in terms of intonation. I do not want to have to memorize a completely different set of my thinking for every note, and my ears aren't good enough to find a path through the mass of poor intonation that usually surrounds hobbyists in the groups in which they play. I just want to lay out a good, solid pitch that will help pull others in the group to me, but it has to be approximately correct or I have no complaint if they ignore me.

I own a Miraphone 186, which is a more open tuba than any of the older rotary Meinl-Westons I've played. It's also a brighter sound, and the appeal of the Model 25 and the Model 32 was that they were darker. But to me, they also have a closed sound that requires a lot of effort to open up. The Miraphone is more open, but without the bottomless depth that I have grown to love. The other night, I played my Miraphone for a while, enjoying some aspects of how it played. Then, I picked up the Holton, and that extreme depth and resonance reasserted itself in my head. Likewise, I love my Yamaha 621 in many playing circumstances, and it is both efficient and has a good scale (at least mine does). But then I play the B&S and it has a quality up high that no amount of effort on my part can produce on the Yamaha, and it has projection in a large ensemble setting that the Yamaha cannot deliver. That said, the Miraphone made things possible that my previous tubas could not deliver, and I never for a minute regretted the hole I burned clear through a credit card to buy the Yamaha.

I have played good Getzen G-50's (same as your CB-50), and they are really fun and easy to play. They are definitely more resonant and efficient. But if dark and forbidding is the concept in your head, the Model 32 is more likely to get you there. It will take more work to achieve fun, open, and colorful on a 32 than on a CB-50, but it will take more work to achieve dark and forbidding on a CB-50 than on a 32. But if you want dark and forbidding, an Alexander might get you there more easily, though with the price--intolerable for me--of having to work through more intonation issues.

None of the above in any way equates to buying an instrument instead of developing skills, nor does it in any way mean that I think I can make progress just by whipping out my checkbook. But of the many tubas that I have bought, the ones I kept were the ones that made me a little better player than I was before, giving me room to progress within the context of my sound concept and lifestyle, with "better" and "progress" defined by the effect I am trying to deliver.

Rick "who doesn't do dark and forbidding" Denney

[iiipopes]

The two things that raise my eyebrows are
- more efficiency
- better scale
Both need to be in place for me to start scratching my chin, and (notice that) "tone" isn't on the list; The tuba doesn't make the "tone". I do.

I believe I can safely say that as I close in on the half-century mark, with a couple of established community-style band gigs, the possibility of a couple of small ensemble gigs, and realistically no orchestra gigs, that I probably will never "outgrow" my 1971 Miraphone 186 BBb detachable with both the factory recording bell and the retrofit upright St Pete bell. With the Curry and the upright bell, I can get as dark as I ever need to; with the Kanstul 18 derivative and the recording bell, I can get as bright as I need to, bordering on souzy territory; with the Kelly 18 I can split the line in the middle of the road right in two, indoors or out; and with a PT34 or Bach 18 I can get up into F tuba territory and ride there as long as I need to.

[Allen]

I don't think any of us are in a position to really know what the best course of action is for you. However, you asked for our "upgrading" stories, so here's mine.

A few years ago, when I decided to return to the tuba after a multi-decade sojurn elsewhere, I bought a new MW 32 CC tuba. I liked it very much as an all-round horn. It was suitable for ensembles large and small, and was easy to play in tune (particularly after I had the first valve slide lapped and the first valve vented). My first step beyond that was to acquire an F tuba (Yamaha 822). That wasn't an upgrade; it was a foray in a different direction. That F horn was good for quintet and solos, but was big for an F tuba.

I didn't think I had two tubas that contrasted enough. The next logical step was to get a BAT. I wound up with a lovely rotary Neptune CC tuba (which I also find easy to play in tune). My plan was to sell the MW 32, but I haven't. Each of these three instruments is sooo good at a particular range of music-making. The MW 32 is great for when I want to play contrabass tuba in a small ensemble, or need a sound with a lot of core to it. The Neptune is great for large ensembles, when I need a broad, enveloping sound (the tone is to die for). Finally, the Yamaha 822 F has a much more direct and compact tone, and is nimble, and more secure up high, as you would expect a bass tuba to be.

I agree with Bloke: It's the person behind the mouthpiece that makes the sound. I can sound like me on any tuba -- even the cheap little Eb student model tuba I keep around for kids to try. However particular tubas sure can help me get particular sounds or effects. As an amateur, I can use all the help I can get!

A further note on the MW32 tuba: If I could only have one tuba, I would be happy keeping it. It is a jack of all trades. The very low range (from about D down) takes very slow air and a lot of practice. There were some notes that didn't want to slot well, but as I practiced more they started to slot well. The only note I find difficult to slot is the Ab at the top of the staff. I've been informed that some other CC suffer from that lack of resonance. [The Neptune has no slotting problems.]

Cheers,
Allen Walker
"I'm done buying tubas. Really. This time I mean it. Honest."

[sloan]

upgrade? Some of us don't upgrade - we accumulate. Here's my history (more or less).

After 25 years without a tuba, I decided to return to the fold. I'm "not tall", but at this point in my life didn't have any trouble writing the check, so I got a Yamaha 621 BBb. Small, nice, easy to play and perfect for me at the time.

Eventually, the 621 proved to be too small to play in large ensembles, so I started looking for something a bit bigger. Just in time, the new, new King 2341 arrived, and after much shopping and side-by-side comparison I found an excellent one. It's still my default instrument - the one I return to after excursions away from middle-of-the-road vanilla. Was this an "upgrade" from the 621? Not really. The 621 is probably objectively a "better" tuba - but it's not "better" at the things I need from the 2341. On the other hand, the 621 is *perfect* for a distinct type of situation - so I still have it. It's just not my "go to" tuba, anymore.

Somewhere along the way I picked up a cheap, very old Eb peashooter helicon. Just to have fun with, and for things like TubaChristmas. Certainly not an "upgrade" - but my first foray into Eb fingerings. Intonation is terrible, and it's realSmall - so
it's mostly a novelty item. It's also something I don't mind loaning to my trombone-playing son when he wants to go to TubaChristmas (and...he is a better player and can handle the funky intonation).

Now that I had Eb in my fingers...I needed a "real" Eb tuba. I didn't really go looking for one (the way I did for the 621 or the King) - but one of those accidents of the community, and the Army Band Conference, brought one to my attention at just the right time, and just the right price point. So...I acquired a significantly modified Besson 3+1 Eb. And then I had some work done on it to fix various intonation problems. And now, it's a perfectly good Eb that I use from time to time (esp. at Christmas season). It's different from the other tubas I own in several different dimensions: it's a bass tuba (not contra, not helicon), it's 3+1 - all of which are useful *to me*. My main use is in a medium-quality band where the number of tubas can vary from 1 to 5. When there are a small number, I need to bring the King (or something bigger...see below) - but when there are plenty of contras...it's nice to add the bass to the mix.

And then....there's the 6/4 factor. Again - at just the time I was prepared for it, a very nice 1934 Conn 36J became available, and I snapped it up. It's *significantly* different from everything else I own - and yet, it's not clear to me that it's an "upgrade". I'm slowly getting the work done on it to bring it up to tip-top shape (it had one rotten bow, valves that are overdue for replating, and a few intonation issues that offered the opportunity to completly change the 1st and 3rd valve loops). When done, it will be very nice - certainly not a "historically accurate" restoration - but a 6/4 that will do things I can't do with the King. But, it won't ever be my "go to" tuba. For one thing, it's not something I can just pick up and toss in the car to go to a rehearsal - the sheer size requires
a bit more care and planning.

Somewhere along the way, another accident of the market happened, and I acquired a VERY NICE Buescher Eb helicon. This was definitely an "upgrade" - completely replacing the peashooter Eb helicon and relegating it to "wall hanger" status. Again - there were a few plumbing and intonation issues, but now it's a joy to play, in all those places where an Eb helicon is what you need.

So, only ONE of these acquisitions was really an "upgrade". I can imagine upgrading the 4/4 BBb entry in my stable - but it would really have to be a SIGNIFICANT upgrade, and that would probably require writing a SIGNIFICANT check. Similarly, I can imagine
upgrading the Eb tuba category - but that would probably mean buying something brand new (big check) and would also mean a slightly different flavor of Eb) I really don't think I'll do either of these any time soon - but you never know what opportunities might pop up. You have to be prepared to recognize those opportunities when then happen.

But - I've done a LOT of "upgrading" - mostly by modifying and repairing what I have. At least 3 of the above tubas are SIGNIFICANTLY better than when I bought them. If there's something not quite right about the horn you are playing, sometimes the most efficient way to upgrade is to modify/repair the one you have. And - if you are prepared to do the repair/modification - sometimes the best way to "upgrade" is to buy something that's not exactly an upgrade...and then fix it.

Now...if you want to talk *mouthpieces* ....

[Dylan King]

In Jr. High I started playing on an ancient (this is in 1988) Reynolds Eb tuba. After a few months my teacher wanted me to perform Tubby the Tuba with the band, and also suggested that my family invest in a professional horn. My cousin (Lester Dropkin) was a pro tubist at the time, and was able to arrange the purchase of a 15 year old Mirafone 185 CC horn, previously owned by the Colorado Symphony principal.

I performed Tubby only two weeks after receiving the new horn (in 1988), and somehow with a lot of practice pulled it off. I loved that horn, and it served me through high school (when I began playing pro gigs in L.A.) and well into college, winning a full scholarship to UCLA under Tommy Johnson in 1992. As a freshman I won every top chair in the school on that horn, and there were 30 tubists in the marching band and a number of tuba majors at that time. I loved that horn. It had tuning jiggers on the first and fifth valves, and played with a straight forward punch and an incredible amount of volume.

After a quarter at UCLA, Mr. Johnson encouraged me to purchase a six valve Rudy Meinl F tuba (it was one of his personal horns) in order to play solos with more accuracy and spunk. I performed the Broughton Sonata and the Vaughn Williams on that horn my freshman year, and was glad I didn't have to putter through them on CC. Around that time, Gene Pokorny won the L.A. job, and I was visiting the LA Phil frequently on various dates with French Hornists, Oboists, etc...

Hearing Gene play his Yorkbrunner led me to ask Tommy about how I might sound on a large horn like that. He thought it was a good idea, and Custom sent me a Yorkbrunner to try for a month, which Tommy also borrowed a few times to try in the studios. We spent a Sunday at his house comparing horns, between the 185, the Yorkbrunner, and Tommy's Neptune, which I now believe is owned and played by John Van Houten. We both decided that the Yorkbrunner was the horn for me, especially in my (at that time) quest to be the next big orchestral tubist. I sold the 185 (still miss that horn), and managed to gather up enough cash to buy a new Yorkbrunner.

My first experience with the big horn was in the UCLA orchestra. I got a lot of looks from all of my fellow musicians when they heard the organ-like sound of that horn, and I was happy. But I missed the direct sound of the 185. There were also more intonation issues with the big horn that I was able to deal with over time; over all it was slightly more difficult to play. But the sound was tremendous, and still is. The Yorkbrunner has served me well since, but didn't lead to an orchestral career (not the horn but turns and crossroads in life).

Almost 20 years later I ordered the Bruckner, perhaps a step down from the Yorkbrunner -- but for good reason. I no longer have aspirations to play in an orchestra full time, and I wanted something right in between the HUGE sound of a 6/4, and the dexterity and intonation of a rotary CC for recording. Although my primary gig these days is producing religious TV and scoring to picture, I still record tuba parts in my home studio, adding tracks for composer friends and the like. The Bruckner is an ideal contrabass for that purpose.

Some time ago I also replace my Rudy with the Yamaha 621 F because I wanted a portable tuba that could do anything. It will never sound quite like the Rudy, but it sure gets nice comments when I solo in Church, and records very well too.

It all winds down to the individual. Your sound, your aspirations, your budget, your current playing situation, your level of vanity (as far as having the best horn is concerned), and a little bit of either luck or divine inspiration, depending on how you look at it. Some players get along with the same rusty horn for a lifetime, and others play through dozens over the years. Whatever you decide, it will be the talent behind the horn and the character behind the man that makes it happen, with the latter being most important in the long run.

DK

[Rick Denney]

Yes, yes, yes: It's the player that makes the sound and all that.

But really there is only one justification required for buying a tuba: You want it and you have the money.

It's okay to buy a tuba just because you want it, as long as doing so doesn't endanger your responsibilities. Just don't expect a tuba to make you happy.

Rick "nothing wrong with having nice things, as long as they don't have you" Denney

[MartyNeilan]

People sell their smaller horn because they need a bigger horn.
People sell their bigger horn because they need a smaller horn.
People sell their bass tuba because they spend more time on contrabass tuba.
People sell their contrabass tuba because they spend more time on bass tuba.
People sell their piston horn because they prefer rotors.
People sell their rotary horn because they prefer pistons.

My ultimate point - what is upgrading to one person is downgrading to the next.

[Tubajug]

Since the original post is almost two years old now, I'm interested: Did you ever "upgrade?" As Mr. Harvey used to give us, what's "The Rest of the Story?"

[Kevin Hendrick]

... None of these 6/4 CC tubas from any maker (that I've yet encountered) offer "easy-schmeasy" intonation. If you've noticed, though, I've installed an "easy button" ( viewtopic.php?f=2&t=40442 ) on mine.

bloke "motivated far more by laziness than by any other singular motivation"

Somewhere, Robert Heinlein is smiling ...