Which bass tuba do you play?

[KarlMarx]

The choosing of a bass tuba is a recurrent topic.

It would be interesting to poll the demographics of bass tubas already out there.

Carolus Marximus Bassophonicus

[Mark E. Chachich]

My bass tuba is a York Monster E flat. I got it in 1978 and have had no reason to switch. Back then E flats were not very popular and old ones were even less popular. One exception was Baltimore where many (most?) of us played E flat. We were getting the old E flats cheap and the new ones were not too expensive. Also, I play the CC contrabass tuba for almost everything and the E flat rarely.

My E flat works and it is paid for!

Mark

[KarlMarx]

I play more than one F tuba. One has 5 rotors, one has 4 pistons + 1 rotor.

I did not vote because I use them a fairly equal amount. There is no option for that situation in your poll.

Your "problem" is not foreign to me, even if it rather is sort of richness than a problem. I was very well aware about it when setting up the poll, as I also could have checked two categories, non-comp and comp piston Eb’s, myself.

As this poll was designed to prioritise a clear overview over some well defined categories rather than to reflect more exotic situations, I avoided to list compensated F tubas (very few were ever made, hardly available on the market) and to list combinatorics of any thinkable permutation of owning more than one F tuba.

However, I still would want you to take part in the poll. I would suggest, that you boil the situation down to: "Which one would I keep, if I were forced to live with only one bass tuba?"

Carolus Marximus Clarificatus

[Rick Denney]

I play more than one F tuba. One has 5 rotors, one has 4 pistons + 1 rotor.

I did not vote because I use them a fairly equal amount. There is no option for that situation in your poll.

Ditto me. I would probably keep the rotary F as my only F if necessary, but not because it has rotary valves.

You might get something more interesting by dividing up your categories on size lines rather than valve lines, to find out why people own bass tubas. Are they their default instrument (ergo, they get a big one with six valves for versatility)? Are they something they use for solos and small ensembles only (ergo, they get a smaller one, also with lots of versatility)? Are they something they use for big orchestral works (ergo, they get a big one). Did they buy it for brass banding? Etc.

Rick "who doesn't care much about valves, as long as they work well" Denney

[Glaucon]

You might get something more interesting by dividing up your categories on size lines rather than valve lines, to find out why people own bass tubas.

An excellent point.

When dealing with most basstubas for the purpose of soloing, I really don't understand why you would want to go with anything but pistons. Not to be offensive to anybody on here who uses rotors for soloing -- I'm sure they're great horns -- but I set out looking for a soloing instrument when I bouhg tmy F and hence for a horn with pistons. THere was some discussion on here a while back about back pressure created my rotors, and how it often will put a "blip" in your sound as you change between notes. Though different rotors do this to varying degrees, it has been my experience that pistons work much more fluidly and allow for one fewer thing that the player has to try to smooth over/work around.

I saw the only difference between Fand Eb as being very instrument-specific. Another student plays on a Besson Eb and it is a fantastic horn, but I was looking for the Yamaha sound, so invested in an 822 F, and couldn't be happier.

WIth all of this, lets keep in mind that we all know our sound -- it will just be interesting to see how most people see their sound as being most easily allowed to come through (via the horn choose).

[KarlMarx]

I play more than one F tuba. One has 5 rotors, one has 4 pistons + 1 rotor.

Your "problem" is not foreign to me, even if it rather is sort of richness than a problem.

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!

RICHNESS????!!!!

You are assuming FAR too much. All of my tubas are working instruments and pay my rent, food, bills, gas, entertainment, et cetera. I make very little money in relation to my educational level. I am 40, have no children, and am still paying rent, which is a good indicator of my level of "richness".

Personal economics rarely are a topic on this board. And you can rest assured, that I didn't allude to yours, as I had absolutely no idea about who you are and under which circumstances you live.

While many here have been blessed with parents that can afford to GIVE such nice musical instruments to them, as well as a new car in many cases, I have had to earn and pay as I go. I have never owned a new car in all my 40 years. I never owned a car at all until I was 26. I have never owned a new tuba, either.

I am NOT complaining about this. I am fairly proud that I have what I have. I got everything without any help except from my (earned) scholarships and my (very, very earned) GI Bill money. I really wish that I had been a better player or that things had worked out differently, as I feel that I could have done a little better in my life. But I am pretty happy, overall, rich or not.

You may have edited your posting. As far as I remember reading the first version, you have a number of tubas, which allow you to make more or less optimal choices, by artistical parameters, of instruments for each performance. That is kind of richness in my eyes.

$$ are nice, but there is a richness beyond them.

Carolus Marximus Richicus

[KarlMarx]

Ditto me. I would probably keep the rotary F as my only F if necessary, but not because it has rotary valves.

You might get something more interesting by dividing up your categories on size lines rather than valve lines, to find out why people own bass tubas. Are they their default instrument (ergo, they get a big one with six valves for versatility)? Are they something they use for solos and small ensembles only (ergo, they get a smaller one, also with lots of versatility)? Are they something they use for big orchestral works (ergo, they get a big one). Did they buy it for brass banding? Etc.

Rick "who doesn't care much about valves, as long as they work well" Denney

If the board software had allowed to set up the poll as kind of a matrix with a dual set of parameters to choose from, size might have been entered as the second set. Alone within the last actual poll category just one maker offers 4 distinctly different models.

However I still think the great divide runs between rotors and pistons.

Fine repairmen posting on this forum have kindly provided documentation of project instruments. It is fairly common to put a set of front action pistons on the bodies from old top piston tubas. And of course to replace worn out front action piston blocks with newer ones, sometimes from another maker.

But it is extremely rare to put rotaries on a carcass originally belonging to a piston instrument. And vice versa.

Around 1990 Kalison offered at least one tuba model with exchangeable piston and rotary sections. I don't think that model had any particularly following.

Each valve type has so many implications in the overall acoustical design of each model that I tend to consider rotary and piston instruments very different types of tubas. I prefer one type, but accept that others make different choices.

Carolus Marximus Tolerantius

[Dylan King]

I used tyo play a six valve Rudy F tuba. It had a woderful, velvety sound and blended great with the orchestra, but the low register was difficult when recording and playing solos, and I knew I had to go with a piston.

When my career moved from orchestra playing to composition and studio work, I sold the Rudy (right here on tubenet) and bought a Yamaha 621. I couln't be happier. The low register jumps right out into the harmonic spectrum, and the intonation is fantastic. Probably a Yamaha thing. I have been using it more and more for recording, even on low stuff when I don't feel like pulling out the Yorkbrunner. Tommy Johnson plays his 822 almost exclusively in the studios. There is something you can't get with a rotary valve tuba when it comes to recording. It's that snappy, versatile sound you here on so many sountracks these days.

I would never recommend the 621 for orchestral work. It is just too compact of a sound and does not project. It really depends on what situation you're playing in. For my purposes, it is fantastic!

[KarlMarx]

To my best knowledge polls on this board are anonymous. Nobody should feel him/her-self being embarrassed by casting an honest vote.

The reason for this statement is, that I see quite a number of hits on this thread compared to the number of poll votes.

This is not a poll solely directed towards pro players or self-alleged upper end amateurs. It is for all of you guys and galls out there.

I accept the relative proportions between the 5 polling options, but for one:

Some century ago at least two US makers spewed out a by then revolutionary design in large numbers, which ever since then has been recognised for its sound maybe more than for its intonation. I am thinking of the Monster Eb's from York and Conn plus possibly from other makers.

There must be many of them out there still. I don't care if they are used for jazz or community bands. Just make your entry in the poll. You shouldn't be ashamed of your instrument. After much R&D I am even convinced that some certain cut Missenharter figures under the F pistonnaires.

Carolus Marximus Encouragimus

[tubatooter1940]

My only horn is an Eb top action 3-banger.I missed the poll but I'm happy to report my 1940 King is tight,in tune except F in the staff,and has the midrangy tone I need to avoid blowing my speakers.I would like to access
another octave down low but I can live with the three valves if they are quiet and fast.Pistons rule!
www.johnreno.com/

[Dean E]

. . . . Some century ago at least two US makers spewed out a by then revolutionary design in large numbers, which ever since then has been recognised for its sound maybe more than for its intonation. I am thinking of the Monster Eb's from York and Conn plus possibly from other makers. . . . Carolus Marximus Encouragimus

--I play a satin silver, York 3-valve Eb monster with a 19.5 inch (49.5 cm) bell and .687 inch (1.75 cm) bore. It was manufactured about 1914-17. There is an original small receiver, but Denis Wick mouthpieces work well, especially DW1. It has great false tones, besides great, sweet sounds all the way up the staff. I believe that this York monster Eb is sometimes cannibalized for its bell, to be used on CC cut horns.

--Also, I use my York 3-valve non-detachable-bellfront Eb a lot. It was made about 1926-27 and has a 20 inch (50.8 cm) bell and .656 inch (1.67 cm) bore. I used this bellfront recently as the only tuba for the Reston Chamber Orchestra's film music concert. Although we played in a hotel lobby with a very high-ceiling, the horn was super, especially in Chicago.

--I also like taking my peashooter Conn Pan American 3-valve Eb to community band rehearsals because it is easy to transport. It was made sometime between 1901 and 1921, and has a 16-inch (40.6 cm) bell and .625-inch (1.59 cm) bore. I had to cut the tuning slide to bring it into modern pitch. I use the Denis Wick small shank mouthpieces, usually a 2, and when I am warmed up the horn can occasionally produce a breathy, pedal Eb. I still cannot hit the G# in Bydlo with this horn, though I'm working on it.

--I also have two 3-valve, Eb Conn Pan American project horns. One is a helicon and the other is a sousa.

[KarlMarx]

www.johnreno.com/

Liked the sound clips found at

http://www.johnreno.com/CDs.htm

very much!

The hyperlink is the block of red letters below the CD cover with the lifebelt.

Carolus Marximus Appreciatus

[KarlMarx]

Here, where the poll has exactly 100 entries, the numbers have a nice "clean" and interesting distribution:

F tuba with rotors 35% [ 35 ]
F tuba with pistons 20% [ 20 ]
Eb tuba with rotors 5% [ 5 ]
Eb tuba with pistons (non-compensating) 20% [ 20 ]
Eb tuba with pistons (compensating) 20% [ 20 ]


Overall F tubas are preferred over Eb tubas at a ratio of 11:9

The by far most preferred category is the F tuba with rotors. Its ratios to the other categories are 7:4 and even 7:1. This category has a very long history, especially on the European continent.

The F tuba with pistons has not been marketed for very long aside from some British, Belgian, and GDR top piston models, which hardly can be found on the market any more. So the modern F tuba with front action pistons has been fast in getting a noticeable share of the market.

The Eb tuba with rotors can be hard to find on the market, even if it has had some good incarnations. I remember a Rudolf Meinl with 4+2 rotors as known from the B&S F tubas.

The Eb tuba with pistons (non-compensating) has had very strong positions in the US as well as in the UK. The currently best sample of this type appears to come from Swiss.

The Eb tuba with pistons (compensating) has a very strong representation in the British style brass band movement and in UK orchestras. The introduction of especially one front action model appears to have opened the doors to new markets.

The results of the poll doesn’t surprise me that much, but it still would be interesting to see, if the ratios would be the same, if the poll hits 200 entries. It is hard to believe, that only 100 out of 2000 registered members of the TubeNet play the bass tuba.

Carolus Marximus Pollus

[Hank74]

Could someone explain to me why the E and F tubas are considered the "bass tubas" when the C and B tubas have longer tubing and hence can produce a lower sound than the E and F.

Hank74

[KarlMarx]

....why the E and F tubas are considered the "bass tubas" when the C and B tubas have longer tubing and hence can produce a lower sound than the E and F.

The F and Eb tubas roughly play in the same octaves as the cello, the bassoon, and the bass trombone. Hence they are called bass tubas.

The CC and BBb tubas roughly play in the same octaves as the string contrabass and the contrabassoon. Hence they are called contrabass tubas.

The comparisons are not precise down to the last detail, but they are fair in the bigger picture.

Carolus Marximus Comparisonus

[ThomasDodd]

Could someone explain to me why the E and F tubas are considered the "bass tubas" when the C and B tubas have longer tubing and hence can produce a lower sound than the E and F.

Bb and C tubas are contra bass instruments.
Also the source of the term "contra" used in Drum & Bugle Corps.

Look here or here.

More confusing are terms like contralto (like the clarinet), baritone (like the saxophone). Generally contra* means an octave lower that the "normal". So contrabass is 8vb the bass, and contralto is 8vb the alto.

[KarlMarx]

I didn't vote for the same reason. I sometimes use an F with Rotors, sometimes an Eb with 4 pistons & 1 Rotor.

Please enter the poll with a vote for the one you would keep, if you were forced to sell off one of your bass tubas.

A poll like this one cannot be totally accurate and comprehensive. However the most faithful result will be the one, which reflects the truest biases of the players, who already have bought and who are actually playing bass tubas.

As a bass tuba player I have my own quite specific biases, but as a pollster I have no other wishes than reflecting the realities of the bass tuba universe as well as possible.

Every single honest vote isn't just welcomed. It is badly needed for a faithful result of this poll!

We may come back to the subtleties at a later point of time.

Carolus Marximus Pollinius

[Hank74]

I appreciate the clarification about the bass and contrabass tubas. That means I'm the proud owner of two contrabass tubas! Yippie! But hats off to the regular bass tuba owners.

Hank74

[tubatooter1940]

I would like to thank KarlMarx for his favorable comments on my C.D. samples at http://www.johnreno.com/CDs.htm
Dennis Gray

[KarlMarx]

I would like to thank KarlMarx for his favorable comments on my C.D. samples at http://www.johnreno.com/CDs.htm
Dennis Gray

You are the one to be thanked!

I love, when the inherent human laziness is put aside and a tuba player, in a pretty ripe age to the boot, plays 4-beat patterns instead of trying to get away with 2 beat honking.

I never have been confronted with a singer/guitar, harmonica, and tuba set-up before. But this one works very much to my liking.

Carolus Marximus Gratificantus