Recording bell tubas evolution to upright bell

[sactubaguy59]

Can anyone tell me why tuba recording bells were replaced by upright bells?

[imperialbari]

As bloke hints, the recording bells came after the original upright tubas, made as they were for a specific era of recording with limited microphones.

I like my York Master BBb with its recording bell, but I also realise the reasons why that type of bell went out of fashion:

They are much clumsier to transport.

They have a very little selection of workable mutes (if any).

They don't allow tubas to be standed on their bells.

Klaus

[eupher61]

http://berkshirereview.net/wp-content/u ... ession.jpg
In the earliest days of recording, microphones did not exist. Recording was done into a reversed megaphone, which funneled the sound to the cutting stylus, which cut into either wax or metal.
http://www.vjm.biz/images/4%20Studio%20 ... %2015a.JPG

So, sound that didn't go directly into the horn really didn't get recorded, at least not clearly. How to get a tuba to record, then? Especially since tuba was often used to double string basses, since the bass' volume was often not loud enough to be heard over (under) the rest of the group. Turning sideways helped but made it tough to see the conductor.

Remember, too, that the sousaphone was not originally a forward bell. From what I've seen, the forward bell came about on both souzies and concert horns at about the same time. I have no reference for that specifically, but anecdotal evidence suggests it.

As recording technology improved, including the electric microphones, the need for the directional sound diminished. And, in pop music, tuba became less desirable for some reason.

This parallels the rise and fall of the banjo as well. Banjo cuts through a lot more than guitar, so it was much easier to record. As the technology to record a guitar improved, so did the preference for the guitar.

Recording bells have their place. I prefer not to have a mic in as many circumstances as possible.

[Art Hovey]

I suspect that upright bells are less costly to make (in terms of labor) that recording bells.

Upright bells typically get smashed much more quickly in schools because kids rush to put the tuba away (standing on the bell) at the end of the band period. So the schools buy new tubas more often.

When I was in high school we put our recording-bell tubas flat on the floor under a table, or on top of a table. They lasted for generations.

My father considered upright-bell rotary-valve tubas to be "old-fashioned".

When I played in NY All-state band in 1959 and 1960 there was one upright-bell Alexander. The rest of the section was all recording-bell piston tubas.

I still put the recording bell back onto my father's Martin for outdoor concerts.
A colleague with a mirafone tells me that it sounds better with that bell.

[Donn]

There are a range of angles, true?

It's tricky to judge from pictures, but like this Martin I'd say tilts about 30° off vertical


... and this Conn more like 45°?


... and I bet there are some that come even closer to literally forward-facing.

[tofu]

My father considered upright-bell rotary-valve tubas to be "old-fashioned".

That's interesting. As a young kid in the 1960's I thought the opposite - that big "old" bell front piston tubas were old fashioned. I'd go down to Orchestra Hall with the folks and see AJ with the upright bell York, hear that glorious bottom and think - yeah I want to be that guy and it must be "that horn" that does it. It also didn't help that most of the schools in my area had tons of aged bell front Conn 20js from the '40's and '50's that were well used by my time and they all started buying shining new 186 Miraphones.

Bell fronts still have their place, and I own a couple, but they still look funny to me.

[Dave Detwiler]

Forward facing bells for numerous instruments, including the tuba, were introduced by Conn in 1908. See my blog post at http://tubapastor.blogspot.com/2012/12/ ... -1908.html

[Dan Schultz]

There are a range of angles, true? ... and I bet there are some that come even closer to literally forward-facing.

How about this one? It's 90 degrees. It's not likely to be a sousaphone bell since it's on a very old Kaleshen New York 'stencil' (probably a Bohland and Fuchs) tuba.

[Donn]

Interesting, it has the sort of periscope look that reminds me of another notable bell front, the King "Symphony."

[iiipopes]

Even Sousa preferred the upright bell, envisioning the souzy as a concert instrument; hence, the "raincatcher" is the original configuration for a souzy. Only when parade and field marching became the norm was the bell angled forward by Conn and became the "conventional" configuration for a souzy.

I have a recording bell stack for a Miraphone 186 for sale if anybody wants it.

[pwhitaker]

This one?

http://mainetoday.mycapture.com/mycaptu ... ryID=52602" target="_blank" target="_blank

[Tom Mason]

Unless I have misread the posts, I have not seen the sound color effect of bell up as opposed to bell forward addressed.

The bell front will give a volume effect increase as opposed to the bell up configuration. (This is a direction change, and not a volume increase as measured by an device placed at the same place in relation to the bell). The bell up configuration tends to let you hear the sound at an angle, which tends to allow more bass frequency to be heard. The bell forward tends to let more mid range and highs to be heard.

I recall a band program close to where I grew up that had 2 Yamaha 321's and a King 1241 in its high school section. The director would have the King player (usually the best player in the section) play with the bell reversed when playing in a gym. The director got the warmth of the sound without the direct impact of the bell in your face.

[Wyvern]

There has never been a history of much use of recording bells in the UK. The only ones I know of we're a few orchestral F tubas for actually recording. So I was very interested when visiting my friend in Michigan, Andy Loree to try his Conn with recording bell and upright bell and compare. We found that the projection using the recording bell was double that of the upright bell, and personally I did not notice any loss of harmonics.

I think the recording bell is particularly useful playing in bands outside without any shell or surrounding buildings to reflect the tuba sound, or in theatres where with upright bell, the tuba tones tend to get lost in the curtains over the stage.

I don't know when production of recording bell tubas actually stopped? I believe there are none made today, but I will reveal that will soon not be the case, as I have plans for Wessex to shortly release a new recording bell BBb tuba.

[Jack Denniston]

I purchased a new Bell model Meinl Weston in 1968. It had a detachable upright bell. I don't recall being offered a bell front bell, but as I recall, I was told that the reason for having a detachable bell was that it provided the option of either upright or bell front.

I'm now playing an old King 2341 with an upright bell. My King sousaphone bell fits perfectly, and I've used it several times in situations where the sound needed to project forward, rather than up.

[tubajazzo]

Last year I started a thread about "how useful is a recording bell" because there was a 186 with exchangeable bell offered in that german auction site. Since last summer I own it and am very happy with this thing. The recording bell gives some extra volume and responds and sounds very well. For playing trad jazz it is a big asset and often spares a microphone. And it looks good!
My tuba is a 186 but has no Miraphone branding. It was delivered by a small german maker in Black Forest (Sum). Seems that they ordered a 186, cut the bell off, made a connection ring with three bolts and added the recording bell, which is bigger than the upright (50 cm diameter). The Sum shop does not exist any more. I bought it from the first owner high up in Black Forest, for whom it was made 1993 as a custom model.
I don't think Miraphone produces any bellfront tuba any more, but they made a detachable bell for Oystein to make the tuba easier to transport.
Will provide some pics later.

Gerd

[TubaSteve]

I know I am probably well out of the fast lane, but I love my recording bell horns. I am excited that the Holton BB-350 that Lee Stofer is rebuilding for me will have the original recording bell and an upright bell for when I want that. However, right now, I am having so much fun with a Reynolds BB that I rescued from the scrap pile last fall that I am not going to rush Lee for the Holton. It was on the way to the smelter (really!), when I discovered it and the recording bell for my BB-350. That was close.. Back to the Reynolds, I have three of the recording version Reynolds tubas, one EEb and two BBb's It is this last one that I just love the sound of this horn. It is a Cleveland built horn, that we bent up and installed a new lead pipe and I found missing valves for it, and Lee gave me some hardware for it. I was hoping to trade it to Lee for credit on the work I am having done to the Holton, but I am so glad that I decided to save this horn, as it is a real player! At a concert last Christmas, I had 4 people come out of the audience after the show seek me out and tell me, "What beautiful sound that horn has!" How often does that happen to tubas? I very much like my Mienl Weston 25, and it is my best choice horn for several of my occasions, but I am using the Reynolds almost all the time. Summer "Pops" season is fast approaching, and we play outside in a band shell and for that, the recording bell or one of my Reynolds Sousaphone's are my choice. I am glad to see some folks advocate for them. I asked my director if he minded the recording bass, and he said, "Mind, I love it!"

Steve

[EdFirth]

Steve makes a good point. In the right hands a bell front is very effective with the added option of putting the sound where you want to.And you don't have to overcome the acoustic problem(although most have done so nicely) of the bell facing to the right or left. On the other hand, in the wrong hands it can be a blatty annoyance. Jake had one of those big Holton copies of his York with both bells and used the bell front at Ravinia. there was an article, I think it was in The Instrumentalist, about this in the late 60's or early 70's that Roger Bobo was involved with where they had someone on stage going back and forth between a raincatcher and a bell front and the observation was basically that the raincatcher was a nicer sound while the bell front was course and blatty. So there has been a kind of movement to only encourage students to buy upright bell horns... in C ...with at least five valves please. I think we should play what our ears tell us is the right tool for the job.Ed

[Uncle Markie]

As usual I agree with Ed Firth.

I have both bells for my Martin; I can testify that there are many benefits to the bell front tuba. Professionally I have usually worked alone - it's a rare pleasure to be in a section these days. The bell front helps a lot with dodgy acoustics - outdoor bandshells (NOTHING sounds good in a Wenger Bandmobile!) and low ceilinged night clubs and catering halls.

An upright bell would have been a chops killer on the Ringling Circus Band; the bell front gave me a shot a the mike and the band could hear me all the time with less effort on my behalf. It helped me hold the time together, etc. with certain drummers (who shall remain nameless) who were in a hurry to get to the next measure.

There are variations in bell front configurations. Most of the Kings 1240 and 1241s and all of the Martins were angled back slightly - more of 45-degree tilt as opposed to a 90 degree found on other makes. In the worst cases the 90 degree bell front put a wall of brass between the player and the sound of the horn. I never had a problem hearing myself with a King or a Martin.

For what it's worth - it was condition of my employment with Paul Lavalle and Band of America that I had a bell front tuba. The same thing went for Jerry Kuhl who played euphonium (and wonderfully so) on that tour. Lavalle wanted the audience to SEE the instruments... showmanship, etc.

I suppose a bell front is a luxury today since they are no longer manufactured and most guys can afford ONE tuba..

Mark Heter

[roughrider]

It is always great to hear the perspective of posters such as Ed Firth and Uncle Markie. Their real life experience with these bell front horns is good to learn from. I have owned my King BBb "Symphony" Recording Bass for forty years now. It has been the main horn until just recently when shoulder problems have kept me from hauling it to two different rehearsals a week. I play a Boosey&Hawkes "Imperial" BBb which is permanently located at the band hall and which I have had a fair bit of work done to. This is a terrific horn as noted by other posters in a previous thread. I like playing the new horns, however I always go back to the tried and true. Imperial for inside work and King for outside. It works for me.