larger vs. smaller lead-pipe on rotary Neptune

[barry grrr-ero]

My rotary Neptune came with the smaller lead-pipe. Is there anyone who prefers the larger pipe? I'm acquiring a larger pipe from a private party. The reason I want to experiment is because I definitely preferred my prototype Miraphone 188 with a larger pipe put on. That was several decades ago. Thanks in advance.

Barry Guerrero

[TheHatTuba]

I don't think the differences are too big. Mine has the small pipe on it, but I could certainly live with just the large pipe. One of the prior owners only used the large one fwiw.

[bort]

I only owned my Neptune for a few months, but I greatly preferred the control of the smaller pipe. Years ago, I had the stock leadpipe on my 1291 (which is large) replaced with a leadpipe from a 1292 (which is smaller). The smaller pipe gave it more control and better focus, and maybe about 5% less strength in the low range.

[Roger Lewis]

I believe that the original thinking was to use the smaller pipe when the horn was in CC and the larger pipe was to be used when you were playing it as a BBb with the shorter 5th valve slide and the 5th valve reversed

Roger

[Mark Horne]

I use the smaller lead pipe as the default. I've tried the larger lead pipe twice and consistent with Roger's comments it felt and sounded like it was better suited for Bb. A little darker tone, perhaps a bit bigger sound but at the cost of slightly less responsiveness. I have not tried switching the horn to the BBb configuration but I suspect that the larger lead pipe would be a good match for that.

[Wyvern]

I have tried the larger on my Neptune a few times, but always revert to medium pipe. I just feel the response is better.

I have always thought of the medium pipe makes the Neptune sound more like an American BAT, while the larger like a German Kaiser. In fact the response with larger pipe seemed more like the Cerveny 701 I used to own

[barry grrr-ero]

Thanks for the all great input. I'll experiment when the bigger pipe arrives. I prefer using wider, bowl shaped m.p's (Geib style), so maybe the larger pipe will work OK with that. I figure that for such a large tuba, I should be getting fatter notes from the low F, on down to the low D. A bigger pipe might open that up a bit. I know there are trade-offs.

Decades ago I owned a prototype Miraphone 188, and I definitely likeed that horn better when I installed a larger pipe on it. But that's still a smaller tuba.

Barry Guerrero

[bort]

In my opinion, F to Db are just kind of less fat notes on rotary CC tubas than on piston CC tubas.

[barry grrr-ero]

. . . unless you're a M-W "Tuono" owner, I suppose.

[Ed Jones]

When I first got my Neptune 20 years ago, I used the large leadpipe because I thought it was the manly thing to do. After five years, I started to use the smaller pipe because it was the smart thing to do.

[barry grrr-ero]

I finally got to play my Neptune in rehearsal with the larger pipe. For MY Neptune, it definitely plays better with the larger pipe. My tech felt the same way too (who's also a tuba player). It seems more even from top to bottom, even though the highest notes take a tad more effort. I'm able to get the low F's, E's and Eb's that I would like to have. It also seems that the 'scale' is better on it, so that I'm not needing to jerk tuning slides around so much.

Some might say that the notes don't 'slot' as well on the bigger pipe. But on the smaller pipe, I felt as though I had to 'hit' exactly right in the middle of the slot, or I would miss the note altogether. The bigger pipe feels more 'forgiving' in that regard, yet the notes still seem to have plenty of core or 'center' to them. From my perspective - and for what I'm trying to do with the Neptune (which is to put a bottom on concert bands) - the smaller pipe just seemed too restrictive, as though it were somewhat choking the horn. The larger pipe lets the Neptune tuba be what it really is (and again, that's just from my personal perspective).

I want to thank everyone for their very helpful input.

[Mark Horne]

After reading Barry's experience with the larger leadpipe I realized that I had only tried my larger leadpipe at home and not at an actual rehearsal or performance. Since I had an outdoor park gig yesterday I decided to go ahead and switch to the larger leadpipe to test it in real-world conditions.

Overall I think it has some real merits, and could be the preferred option depending on what your goals are. As expected the sound is a little less bright but this is not necessarily bad - it takes more work to get an edge on the sound if that's what you want. The high range doesn't really suffer much; in fact I agree with Barry that the slots are more flexible in the middle and high ranges - I found it easier play loud in this range without chipping notes. The near-pedal range (Eb, D, Db) was a bit more open, which is already more open on the Neptune than other horns I've played. The response of the low G changed for me. It was a little more difficult to hit (felt a little restricted) but interestingly enough was better in tune.

With the smaller leadpipe the response can be a bit uneven depending on the mouthpiece (notes around E below that staff come out much easier than others). I did not detect this tendency with the large leadpipe nearly so much.

I may go ahead and leave the larger leadpipe on for a while and see how it works after I have had more time to adjust to it.

[barry grrr-ero]

Wow, I'm glad I 'inspired' someone to at least give the bigger pipe a try. I'm sure the results will vary for each individual horn, choice of mouthpieces, etc.

I played my second set of rehearsals this week (two bands) and definitely prefer the bigger pipe. The intonation IS better (for me), and I'm not having to jerk tuning rings and rods all around. The sound and 'feel' is much more even when I play a 2.5 octave chromatic scale. I'm chipping less notes too. I'm blending better with the BBb tubas in the first band (two of them). And - best of all - I'm not having to get in several hours of practice ahead of going to rehearsal, just to have a good rehearsal. I can come in cold and pretty much 'ace it'. For me, no comparison. Maybe my smaller pipe wasn't a good one.

I agree that the low G takes a tad more 'oomph' to get going. But a nice trade-off is that the notes from low F and lower (down to the D) are easier and fuller sounding. I'm one of those jerks who occasionally likes to play a lower Eb or D down an octave at major cadence points (as long as it sounds good).

Oh, and I forgot: slurring across the break from open notes to valved notes (from G and from C) is easier and smoother. Those breaks were much more pronounced on the smaller pipe (I hate that!).