Knowing what we know now...

[eupher61]

Alter the third valve to play flat another half step. On certain tubas with very long third valve slides this can be done. Basically it tunes the third valve to equal the 23 combination, which is handy in certain fast passages. And in the normal cash register of the instrument who uses the third valve for anything other than the 23 fingering....

This strikes me as an excellent idea. I also think I may remember reading about one or two pros who used 4-valve tubas and who made this modification themselves. Anybody know if I'm remembering correctly?

That's the classic setup of a French C tuba, usually 6 valves.

[jacobg]

I'm all for the two shoulder sousaphone. We talked about it here:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=52001" target="_blank

And yes, we are reinventing the wheel here. But that's ok.

One of the remarkable things about the tuba is there is so much tubing it allows for almost infinite variety of shapes. But basically tubas come in three shapes: the rounded rectangle, the circle, and the orenophone.
How about a tuba shaped like a lobster bib? or a jetpack?

[Art Hovey]

In addition to this, Pilczuk had great results with leadpipes for trumpets, cornets and flugels which had thirteen chambers in them, one for each chromatic note [yes, plus one]. I don't think anything like this has been tried on a tuba leadpipe, but I don't see why it wouldn't work. IDK whether Pilczuk had/has a patent on this idea. The rights are now held by repair guru Rich Ita and he could doubtless help with this issue. Rich would probably need some interested parties to gear up to make such pipes for tuba. . .

The leadpipe of a trumpet is a significant fraction of the instrument's overall length.
In the middle and upper register of a trumpet there are nodes and antinodes in the leadpipe.
The leapipe of a tuba is a small fraction of the tuba's overall length. There are no nodes in a tuba leadpipe until you get into the very high register.

When "experts" discuss "nodes" in a brass instrument are they referring to pressure nodes, or velocity nodes? The two are very different from each other, and failure to distinguish between them reduces any discussion to pure mumbo-jumbo.

[Donn]

What I'm trying to describe is an electronic device that can accept that right input (vibrating air, square wave) and feeds the correct electronic output signal based on that input into an amplifier and speaker (or maybe just headphones for practice at home) system.

Wouldn't this play considerably different from the real thing, because there's no air-column feedback for a "slot"? I could be all wrong, but I have the impression that once a good note slots in, it conditions the whole system including my buzz. The instrument could be workable anyway, I guess? but it would be hard to recover the natural sound, if I'm right about that anyway. If you just more or less amplify the buzz pitch, the intonation will be kazoo-ey, if you use buzz pitch to select a pitch you're back to the Yamaha controller.

[royjohn]

Art Hovey wrote:

The leadpipe of a trumpet is a significant fraction of the instrument's overall length.
In the middle and upper register of a trumpet there are nodes and antinodes in the leadpipe.
The leapipe of a tuba is a small fraction of the tuba's overall length. There are no nodes in a tuba leadpipe until you get into the very high register.

Art, you're quite right and I hadn't thought about that. I still think the concept of tuned chambers might work and I definitely think that plotting out the nodes would help in designing tubas. . .perhaps folks do it already or are moving braces, etc., around without knowing exactly how this works.

As far as what kind of nodes, I think the nodes that Schilke plotted were pressure nodes, as I recall someone used sawdust or microphones to find spots where there was less vibration. That would be a pressure node, no?

My point was that designing based on the acoustics of the horn should produce improvements, if empirical juggling hasn't already produced all that can be done. Can you say that I'm wrong?

[NCSUSousa]

What I'm trying to describe is an electronic device that can accept that right input (vibrating air, square wave) and feeds the correct electronic output signal based on that input into an amplifier and speaker (or maybe just headphones for practice at home) system.

Wouldn't this play considerably different from the real thing, because there's no air-column feedback for a "slot"? I could be all wrong, but I have the impression that once a good note slots in, it conditions the whole system including my buzz. The instrument could be workable anyway, I guess? but it would be hard to recover the natural sound, if I'm right about that anyway. If you just more or less amplify the buzz pitch, the intonation will be kazoo-ey, if you use buzz pitch to select a pitch you're back to the Yamaha controller.

Edit - I've seen a little more of the research on brass instruments since this post. There's no way that I know of for this to work correctly and still give the proper air impedance feedback to the player's lips. Consider this a dead idea. Donn BTW is correct.

[Dan Schultz]

Sousaphone design that spreads weight to both shoulders.

That stick supporting the bell is going to get in the way on the football field! Maybe put a wheel on it.

[jacobg]

Can we take the toilet seat tuba and fold the bottom bow down over the back? So one doesn't have to worry about balance issues? It looks like it's going to fall over if you were walking around. It also seems like having both arms so high up would become tiresome.
Or, as I proposed in the last thread, put the entire tuba in a backpack, with only the valves and lead pipe up front.
And as I recall someone else proposed putting the valves in the back also, and controlling them remotely via bicycle brake cables.

[J.c. Sherman]

Can we take the toilet seat tuba and fold the bottom bow down over the back? So one doesn't have to worry about balance issues? It looks like it's going to fall over if you were walking around. It also seems like having both arms so high up would become tiresome.
Or, as I proposed in the last thread, put the entire tuba in a backpack, with only the valves and lead pipe up front.
And as I recall someone else proposed putting the valves in the back also, and controlling them remotely via bicycle brake cables.

Actually, I think rounding it over your back would lose the leverage gained. These are actually (usually) very well balanced, with the back bow acting as a counter weight; otherwise you'd be continuously bench pressing the thing!

[jacobg]

I realize that the toilet seat tuba might seem well balanced, but ponder for a second:
If someone asked you to carry a weight of 15-40 lbs, in any form, for 3 hours, what would be the best way to do it?
Isn't this exactly what outdoor backpackers have to do? And don't they choose to carry the backpack with two shoulder straps, loosely attached to their backs, with a frame that touches their butts, and a strap around their waist?
I'm using armchair ergonomics here, but it seems as if the butt acts as a third point to distribute the weight, and your upper back (rhomboid and deltoid) makes for a stronger base than the trapezius muscles adjacent to the neck.

[NCSUSousa]

I realize that the toilet seat tuba might seem well balanced, but ponder for a second:
If someone asked you to carry a weight of 15-40 lbs, in any form, for 3 hours, what would be the best way to do it?
Isn't this exactly what outdoor backpackers have to do? And don't they choose to carry the backpack with two shoulder straps, loosely attached to their backs, with a frame that touches their butts, and a strap around their waist?
I'm using armchair ergonomics here, but it seems as if the butt acts as a third point to distribute the weight, and your upper back (rhomboid and deltoid) makes for a stronger base than the trapezius muscles adjacent to the neck.

This discussion actually starts my thoughts down the path of building a backpack-like frame and straps then modifying a helicon/sousaphone design so that the entire instrument hangs off of that frame with the COG at waist height.
Adjustable straps are necessary so that the bell will fit above the player's head regardless of height (or so that the instrument body isn't below the player's hips for marching. With adjustment to the straps, a piano bench should be comfortable (no back interfering with the tuba).
Start with a Helicon with a lengthened mouthpipe. Rotate the valveset as needed for ergonomics.
Two options for the bell:
1 - Stay Helicon. Bell under the left arm, pointing forward. Not ideal for sitting in a chair in a group rehearsal, but should work fine on a marching field (as long as the bass drums aren't incorrectly placed).
2 - Modified Sousaphone/Recording Tuba. This time the bell needs a taller section between the gooseneck at the top and the right angle at the body. Make it tall enough to place the bell over the player's head (centered). This one's also tricky because of the length of pipe going up the player's back.

The design for bell option 2 may end up looking more like a twisted open paperclip with the final wrap going around 1 side to the bell behind the player before heading up. It also allows the player to put the instrument on from 1 side (clipping into the frame) instead of having to lift the entire thing over their head.

[David Richoux]

I'm pretty sure Yamaha already made the electronic trumpet.

I have an early 1970s version Steiner EVI electronic instrument (pre-MIDI) that sort of works, but there were a lot of ergonomic problems with it. Having just three key switches required another controller to set the octave, that is the big round rotating switch. It can play in tuba range as well as higher, but it never really seemed to feel right to me.

I haven't tried any of the later versions that are still in limited production...

[David Richoux]

Maybe something like this? (Sorry for the small image, but there are more views at http://www.fanfarelesnob.com/index2.htm )

This discussion actually starts my thoughts down the path of building a backpack-like frame and straps then modifying a helicon/sousaphone design so that the entire instrument hangs off of that frame with the COG at waist height.
snip

The design for bell option 2 may end up looking more like a twisted open paperclip with the final wrap going around 1 side to the bell behind the player before heading up. It also allows the player to put the instrument on from 1 side (clipping into the frame) instead of having to lift the entire thing over their head.

[NCSUSousa]

Maybe something like this? (Sorry for the small image, but there are more views at http://www.fanfarelesnob.com/index2.htm )

Actually, that's pretty close.
If there's a way to flip the bell so that it's not around the player's knees, I think that might work. Everything from the circle up to the mouthpiece is about what I was thinking.

[jacobg]

This guy has managed to create a 3d model of individual components of a tuba.
The parts can then be combined into a tuba of any shape.
http://donbergland.com/journal/2011/03-march/18.html" target="_blank

[Jack Denniston]

How about an adjustable/flexible leadpipe? If you like to rest your tuba on your chair, the mouthpiece often hits us in the nose or the chin. If we are downstream players, the mouthpiece often arrives at our face at the wrong angle.

So we go through all kinds of workarounds to raise or lower the tuba.

Or we raise or lower the leadpipe.

Or we change the angle of the leadpipe.

None of which is inexpensive, easy to do (or undo) or ideal.

If only we could just turn a dial (or something like that) to bring the mouthpiece to our face at the height and angle that works best for us.

[Tubajug]

I like the idea of a 4 front valve tuba having the fourth valve on the thumb.

I toyed with the idea of doing that on a Yamaha YBB-103. The rotor could go right in that tubing before it enters the valve block since the leadpipe/main slide enter the bottom of the valve block.

[GC]

How about an adjustable/flexible leadpipe? If you like to rest your tuba on your chair, the mouthpiece often hits us in the nose or the chin. If we are downstream players, the mouthpiece often arrives at our face at the wrong angle.

So we go through all kinds of workarounds to raise or lower the tuba.

Or we raise or lower the leadpipe.

Or we change the angle of the leadpipe.

None of which is inexpensive, easy to do (or undo) or ideal.

If only we could just turn a dial (or something like that) to bring the mouthpiece to our face at the height and angle that works best for us.

This already exists for the sousaphone and would be quite easy to modify to work on a standard tuba.

At what cost to intonation and response? Modifying and shortening the leadpipe to accept such a mechanism again wouldn't be cheap unless a do-it-yourselfer took it on.

It's a mod I'd personally love to see. I have a fairly short (and wide) torso, and I'm tired of mouthpieces being at nose-to-forehead height when resting on a chair. I have to sit on the front of the chair and let my legs hold the horn. I haven't managed to find a tuba stand/chair combination that doesn't leave me with backaches.

A flexible or re-angleable leadpipe would do wonders for me. Having a tuning bit on my old 25J made life much easier, and a flexible pipe would be even better, as I need the mouthpiece to be low and angled down a little

[J.c. Sherman]

An adjustable lead pipe would be a relatively easy design, with little compromise in response or openness. The main "challenge: would be the receiver support, but not a prohibitive challenge (I have a design in my head).

Martin and Conn both messed around with the bit system to relatively, if not modern, effect. But it doesn't allow a huge height adjustment... just about 1.25 inches or so.

[Donn]

Aren't leadpipes thought to be critical to a good tuba, small details matter, the slightest dent ruins the whole tuba, etc.? Could the articulated leadpipe play a significant role in the sousaphone's generally undistinguished reputation for fine tonal quality?