Serious question: Why C tuba over Bb?

[EdFirth]

If you study as a tuba major in college(and that's a whole other discussion) your teacher will likely want you to switch to C. You then play everything at school and in practice on a C. If you then decide to try the audition circuit you have then spent the last four or so years working up everything on a C. So besides the fact that everyone (mostly) is using a C at the auditions where do you find the time and playing outlets to become as proficient on Bb? If you do win the position you could play Bb when you like, unless the conductor tells you different. But by then what's the use? Ken Herrick has related on here that Arnold Jacobs loved the way Ken's rotary Bb King sounded and blew and even quoted him as saying something to the effect of "If I'd known about these at Curtis I wouldn't have bothered with the York" but then stated that he'd been playing on the C York for so long that relearning everything on the Bb King was too much trouble. Strong statement from one whose playing, and especially sound we(mostly) seem to hold in such high esteem. And how many of you either use a derivation of that C York or want one? As an old guy who has played most styles of music quite a bit I think your sound is in your head, and you find the tool that makes it easiest to get on a regular basis. But I guess the discussion will continue. Ed

[AndyCat]

Bb trumpets. Bb trombones. Why not Bb tuba? Works for me.

[Watchman]

Ken Herrick has related on here that Arnold Jacobs loved the way Ken's rotary Bb King sounded and blew and even quoted him as saying something to the effect of "If I'd known about these at Curtis I wouldn't have bothered with the York" but then stated that he'd been playing on the C York for so long that relearning everything on the Bb King was too much trouble.

Interesting you bring up those old Rotary Kings. That's a branch of American tuba design that seems to have faded out as most big rotary tubas today tend to want to advertise a "euro" influence. It seems like these were quite popular for a time from Helleberg through Bill Bell.

With all the clone talk on this board lately, I wonder if anyone will ever revive this model. The only attempt I know of was the old Meinl Weston Bill Bell model, and I don't think they make that anymore. Perhaps someone with more knowledge about this than myself will contribute.

[roweenie]

I see this topic has reared its ugly head, once again.

*sigh*

I still maintain that for free-lancing, BB flat tuba is more convenient (and so did guys like Don Butterfield).

Look at these facts:

Band music - mostly flat keys (I've seen passages that have tied many a CC player's fingers in knots, that were practically effortless on BBb)

Traditional Jazz - mostly flat keys

Brass quintet - mostly flat keys

Orchestral music - mostly sharp keys, but relatively nothing technically difficult enough for tuba to warrant the different key of instrument (I have yet to see a passage that is so difficult that a CC tuba would be absolutely mandatory)

The trombones (your "section mates") are in Bb.

I don't believe any listener can tell the difference between the two different "whirling cones of brass".

The build and design of the horn is what primarily determines the sound and playing qualities of a horn, not pitch.

I went to Manhattan School of Music (on scholarship, too!) playing BB flat tuba (horrors!)

I was accepted at Juilliard for my master's degree playing my audition on a BBb tuba (horrors again!)

The whole "CC" vs. "BBb" thing is just rubbish.

I wouldn't trade my York 712 (in BBb) for ANY similar sized tuba built today (or ever) in CC.

[MartyNeilan]

Ken Herrick has related on here that Arnold Jacobs loved the way Ken's rotary Bb King sounded and blew and even quoted him as saying something to the effect of "If I'd known about these at Curtis I wouldn't have bothered with the York" but then stated that he'd been playing on the C York for so long that relearning everything on the Bb King was too much trouble.

Interesting you bring up those old Rotary Kings. That's a branch of American tuba design that seems to have faded out as most big rotary tubas today tend to want to advertise a "euro" influence. It seems like these were quite popular for a time from Helleberg through Bill Bell.

With all the clone talk on this board lately, I wonder if anyone will ever revive this model. The only attempt I know of was the old Meinl Weston Bill Bell model, and I don't think they make that anymore. Perhaps someone with more knowledge about this than myself will contribute.

That would probably be more useful than a civil way horn or an awful-clyde.

[windshieldbug]

Short-bore bassoons and CC tubas are both attempts to achieve the same thing:

faster response and bigger sound with less work

The trick (with both short-bore bassoons and CC tubas) is to build them so-as they can easily be played in-tune.

With some examples of some models, success is achieved.
Persistence (and, likely, going through a bunch of instruments) can cause one/some of these instruments to end up in a persistent person's hands.

Best explanation I've heard, and what it feels like, too!

[Three Valves]

This CC snobbery is unseemly.

Time for BBb to take it to the street!!

[Dubby]

Ken Herrick has related on here that Arnold Jacobs loved the way Ken's rotary Bb King sounded and blew and even quoted him as saying something to the effect of "If I'd known about these at Curtis I wouldn't have bothered with the York" but then stated that he'd been playing on the C York for so long that relearning everything on the Bb King was too much trouble.

Interesting you bring up those old Rotary Kings. That's a branch of American tuba design that seems to have faded out as most big rotary tubas today tend to want to advertise a "euro" influence. It seems like these were quite popular for a time from Helleberg through Bill Bell.

With all the clone talk on this board lately, I wonder if anyone will ever revive this model. The only attempt I know of was the old Meinl Weston Bill Bell model, and I don't think they make that anymore. Perhaps someone with more knowledge about this than myself will contribute.

That would probably be more useful than a civil way horn or an awful-clyde.

Doesn't Wessex offer a BBb rotary tuba based on the King? Or is the XL based on something different? Looks like a good option to me if the sound is there.

[michael_glenn]

There are no hard keys, only unfamiliar ones. I just like CC better because like Bort said, you're starting with 0. Same reason why I prefer F over Eb. It's closer to 0. I like Eb for brass band because you pretend it's 0.
All in all, regardless of key, a good tuba is a good tuba. And conversely, a bad tuba is a bad tuba. If I had the choice between a Seigfried and a Norwegian Star or crappy old Chinese CC and the old 6v Jinbao F? I would choose the BBb and Eb simply because it's better tubas. But when you put same quality flat keyed tubas verses the natural keyed tubas.... I'll take the F and CC.

[bort]

One silly thing observed with CC players in band:

-- Director "tunes the band" to a Bb.
-- This note is played with 1st valve on a CC tuba.
-- That note sounds good to the player, so everything is "good to go".

In reality, it's just 1st valve that's "good to go." I remember very well sitting to the left of a player who did this... the Bb sounded fine. Every note after that was way off.

Frankly, the real reason I learned CC was because I went to college, and there was 1 tuba available for me to use. It was a CC... so I would play that, or have no tuba. Easy choice, and as mentioned earlier, by this point, it's not worth re-learning everything.

[Wyvern]

I thought C was used in orchestra because;

1) Music more often in sharp keys

2) Tuba part often goes into higher register than found in most band bass parts

So just for the ease of the player. It seems to me that American orchestral tubists usually still use C where a German player would change to F tuba (e.g. Brahms 2, Bruckner 4, etc.)

[Dylan King]

"Tuning" to any one pitch is silly. It has nothing to do with anything.
This is particularly true where student musicians are involved.

Yep.

Why CC? Mostly because that became the trend over the years in the trendy U.S. of A.

Why did it become a trend?

It started mostly with the pros in the big orchestras. I'm sure they wanted CC horns because for one thing, as has been discussed here, they start at "0". When getting new music (which in those days they were all the time), it was probably easier for them to sight-read. Also, the guys who really put the CC tubas on the map were playing specially made instruments that were in their day state-of-the-art.

I don't think any of the top session players (other than the LSO--although even Patrick Herrild has a CC) that don't bring CC and F tubas to the studio. Seems like a safer bet when one is sight-reading for a living. In the seventies and eighties when studying to be a "pro" tubist was becoming a real thing, many the popular tuba ads had guys like Tommy Johnson and Roger Bobo with CC and F tubas.

I prefer CC, just because that is what I switched to from Eb when I got serious about playing the tuba in Jr. High back in the eighties. I have no desire to play on a BBb tuba. CC and F have become my comfort-zone instruments.

[oedipoes]

It really doesn't matter much...
Depends on what you are used to, the key of tuba you have practiced most on will be most comfortable for you.

In my opinion, Walter Hilgers would still sound like Walter Hilgers on C tuba, and Arnold Jacobs would sound like Arnold Jacobs on BBb tuba.
Moreover, the audience wouldn't notice the difference...

Sounding good has more to do with the quality of the musician than with the key of his instrument.

[Peach]

All this talk of keys is a non-issue in my experience. Sure, if we're talking about kids groups and basic arrangements for poor quality amateurs, but I just don't see the key thing in Orchestra really. Look in your excerpt books and see what you get: all sorts. As John Fletcher said years ago, (forgive the paraphrase) : "Modern music modulates so widely that the key of tuba one plays becomes irrelevant"
No question some keys lie better on some pitch of tuba but I don't see anyone wanting to become proficient in 12 keys of horn & switching every modulation. If there was a real argument for orchestral sharp keys, some bright spark would have marketed the G tuba (and possibly the D as a 'high' Contrabass?) instead of that horrible flat - keyed F tuba. No.

Someone said here already; its just what one becomes used to. That's all really as I see it.

[pgym]

It started mostly with the pros in the big orchestras. I'm sure they wanted CC horns because for one thing, as has been discussed here, they start at "0". When getting new music (which in those days they were all the time), it was probably easier for them to sight-read.

I'm not sure I buy this.

I don't see any evidence that orchestras wanted trombones, french horns, flutes, or strings that start at "0," so why would tubas starting at "0" be preferred/deamanded/required?

I also don't see why a person who has full command and fluency of all 12 scales in their major and minor iterations on a CC would have an easier time sightreading than a person who has full command and fluency of those scales on a BBb.

I don't think any of the top session players (other than the LSO--although even Patrick Herrild has a CC) that don't bring CC and F tubas to the studio. Seems like a safer bet when one is sight-reading for a living.

It seems to me that a more likely explanation for the reason session players bring CC and F tubas to the studio is that that's what they have and are most familiar with, not because it's necessarily easier to sightread CC than BBb. After all, session trombonists are sightreading too, so why would sightreading on a BBb tuba be any more difficult than on a Bb trombone? (Then again, maybe tuba players, as a rule, are just dumber than trombonists. )

In the seventies and eighties when studying to be a "pro" tubist was becoming a real thing, many the popular tuba ads had guys like Tommy Johnson and Roger Bobo with CC and F tubas.

Hence, sheeple.

[bighonkintuba]

Wow...

I could continue to post pretended-to-be-ignored sarcasm and nonsense posts here...

[Rick Denney]

How many of the most popular piston CC's also have "York model" attached as a descriptor, or show some physical resemblance to Donatelli/Jacobs' York tuba? Arnold Jacobs, and people who wanted to sound like Arnold Jacobs, are a big reason for CC tubas being considered the "pro" horn in America.

That's only really been true since the late 70's or early 80's, when Hirsbrunner came out with what was the first really workable version of the York design. The Holton that had been made in the 50's and 60's in limited quantities was too inconsistent. In between, most orchestra pros were playing instruments like the Alexander, (troublesomely) pitched in C. And Roger Bobo probably had as big an effect in favor of Miraphone as Jacobs had for Yorkish BAT's until more recently, but he played the C version, too. I'm not sure those who cut their teeth on Alexanders were following Jacobsean influence in playing instruments pitched in C. I think that trend was cemented before Jacobs became famous. Bill Bell was more influential than Jacobs until at least the 70's, and he played a C in orchestras before Jacobs was even in an orchestra.

Rick "thinking Jacobs is responsible for popularizing the Yorkish design, not for popularizing the use of C tubas in American orchestras" Denney

[Jay Bertolet]

Rick "thinking Jacobs is responsible for popularizing the Yorkish design, not for popularizing the use of C tubas in American orchestras" Denney

I couldn't agree more! In fact, my recollection of that era (the 70s) is that players were finally having easy access to instruments made in the same style as the Chicago Yorks and that professional tubists quickly polarized into 2 distinct groups: Those who were playing in a similar style as Jacobs and those who were more in the style of Bishop and Schmitz and Kirk. The instruments designed after the Yorks have a very distinctive style of sound, just as the instruments of Alexander, Rudolf Meinl, and Meinl-Weston (like the Bell Model) have an equally distinctive and different style of sound. None of that has anything to do with the issue of CC versus BBb. As Rick suggested, I think the tradition of using CCs in major American Orchestras was established long before Jacobs came on the scene.

[bort]

Ok, so this makes me wonder -- why are there so few "modern" York-style BBb tubas out there? Everything inspired by the Chicago York forward seems to be in CC. When were the last Holton 345's made? In the 70s? I suppose the BMB 6/4 exists in BBb, but I'm thinking of larger trends.

I realize the answer is like that there's basically no market for any of this, so the lowest of the low market items (a modern York-style BBb BAT) is the first one to go. It just seems interesting to me that in modern times, this combination of CC and York seems to be what has "stuck."

[sloan]

BBb OR CC?!?

Both.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_nffM4ulPDA

all 4

or 5...