Martin 6/4 BBb

[Frank Ortega]

I own a 1932 Martin Mammoth BBb and love it!

If I didn't own that one, I'd buy the one at Dillons, great instrument, even with the wrong bits!

However, here is a 6/4 BBb tuba that no one is talking about, and they should be!

https://www.dillonmusic.com/dillon-dbb- ... -case.html" target="_blank

This 4 rotary, 6/4 BBb is in a word, awesome! Very well in tune with a rich, warm, dark sound. Very easy to play with great response and low register.
And it wont break the bank either. I liked it way better then some name brand 6/4's that I compared at the store. Check it out if you get a chance.

[Daniel C. Oberloh]

The Holton model 98 (CC) and 99 (BBb) were first offered in the 1950s and later were renumbered 345 BBb and 345CC.


D. Oberloh

Thanks Dan.
The screen shot that I took from the album cover features parallel bow upper slides.
When 99 became 345, were the slide circuits - at that time - changed to the (Bb version of the) CSO York C tuba configuration?

late 50s catalog should answer your question, Joe.


dan'l

.

[EdFirth]

I think the Martins aren't being used by the big orchestra guys is that no big symphony guy used one so aspiring young players don't have them on the radar. If Bill Bell or Jake or Chester had used them they, because of the recordings , would be extremely sought after. We are an imitative group and it's safer to go with the flavor of the decade than strike out on your own. Also, Martin folded around 1960 so there aren't that many out there. There were almost no tubas like Jake's York when I was in my formative years unlike now where the York craze has taken over the big horn market. And again, there aren't the recordings to spark players to "sound like that" with Martin tubas. Like Paul said, they went for a different market that was where the money was at the time. Chris Olka played mine at my house and, even with the Yamaha York etc. was knocked out. I currently own a three valve top banger that was originaly purchased by the Vaughn Monroe Orchestra and subsequentialy sold to Don Butterfield, who had it overhauled and had King(Martin had folded by this point) reproduce a Martin upright bell for it complete with engraving. It is an amazing instrument. I don't forsee a comeback for these horns but they are pretty amazing and I'm thankful to own one. Ed

[roweenie]

I want to like Martin's more than I do. Not gonna back that up with anything other than I prefer York.

The Martin tubas I've played are fine horns, no question. Their quality and playing characteristics are admirable.

With that said, I prefer my York tubas, also. They don't appear to give me the troubles reported by others - maybe mine are exceptional examples.

And, I don't recall any other player, living or otherwise, having any influence over my decision to own and play them.

[williamp]

[quote]Your link works fine for me. Is that the 20" bell or an earlier (I think) 24" ish bell?
/quote]

The bell measures 23".

[roweenie]

Even if the Martin 6/4 intonation characteristics weren't superior to all other old US-made 6/4 Bbs', just the fact that their valveset bore size is something ~other than~ .750"/.748" makes them admirable, eh?

The unusual size bore (.718?) makes it admirable because it is unusual (I don't think anyone else used that bore size). In fact, if I had access to a valve set of that size, I wouldn't hesitate to experiment with it on any future York project. I'm not necessarily locked into the 19mm/.750 variety, but it seems to be the only variety currently available for purchase.

IMHO, it is not the only thing that makes them admirable ....they are unquestionably fine horns - I am just saying that the Yorks I own are, too.

[SousaWarrior9]

Even if the Martin 6/4 intonation characteristics weren't superior to all other old US-made 6/4 Bbs', just the fact that their valveset bore size is something ~other than~ .750"/.748" makes them admirable, eh?

Agreed. I like to brag on Martins not because I think they're superior to Yorks or other tubas of that style, its just my preference and what works for me, just have others have stated they prefer the Yorks. They are both fantastic instruments in their own right (as are the Holtons, Conns, etc), just slightly different flavors of sound and feel.

That being said, I think there is room in the market for a horn of this style. If nothing else to have some greater variety on the market when it comes to large piston tubas. I can think of at least 5 factories off the top of my head that currently make a York copy, as well as several more whose large contrabass tubas are at the very least mimicking characteristics of the Yorks in terms of specs and layout.

And while, in the modern market, the old top-action, recording bell Martins may conjure up images of the dance band world, the fixed upright bell, front-action variants don't look all that dissimilar from their York-styled counterparts and I believe they could hold their own in a modern orchestral environment when a BBb is called for.

Especially in an era where Chinese manufacturers are bringing back more and more niche designs if the past, I don't see why a horn like the Martin wouldn't be a viable option, especially considering there relative scarcity compared to other horns from its day. The intonation characteristics and ease of playability alone I think are reasons enough that its a worthy clone candidate.

A couple things would have to be considered, however if a manufacturer were to attempt to clone this design for the modern market, which may be why manufactures are yet to jump on this design:
-Do you attempt to offer a CC equivalent? Most past attempts at cutting martins have resulted in abysmal playing horns (although it can be done through painstaking effort and time/money, so Is that worth it/cost effective?)
-Do you offer the recording bells and/or top action valves as an option? Most players today shy away from the top action recording horns, so do you only offer the front action, fixed upright belled models?
-Do you in include the bits, to stay true to the design, or do you redesign the leadpipe to be slightly longer and fixed to resemble most other leadpipes?
-Finally, do you attempt to Make a 5 valve variant, and is so, where the hell would you add a fifth valve if you wanted to? Most orchestral players these days are demanding a fifth valve even on their BBb horns, but due to the rapid taper of the Martins specifically after the valve set, where could one squeeze in a fifth valve without screwing everything up?

Of course, even after all of this, I have failed to address the obvious: the demand for "American-style 6/4 piston BBb tubas" is significantly smaller today than it was in the heyday of York, Conn, Martin and the like, which is most likely why, back in the day nearly every U.S. manufacturer had their own take on a BAT, whereas now days we're only left with a much more limited variety in this category (and none being U.S. manufactured to boot). Perhaps the Martin design, or other designs for that matter, aren't being tackled is because the current crop of York-styled big horns is enough to fill this one part of the market which is now more niche than decades past.

Still, all that being said, I'd still like to see someone in China give it a try. After all they felt comfortable reproducing tornister tubas, sackbuts and ophicliedes enough to put them out on the market, so I don't think something like the Martin would be out of the question. I did get to ask Jonathan once about the possibility of copying the Martin design, and he said something to the effect that they did consider it among a couple of designs when developing their 6/4 BBb model, but decided to go with something more York-like instead. (don't mean to put works in his mouth for the record, he's free to chime in and correct me if I'm wrong here).

long story short, I'm not expecting a full 31 flavors in the BAT market, but more than one would be nice.

[Paul Scott]

It's not a "better-than" thing and no different from the choice of car someone drives. I believe a player has to find their "voice" and for me it was most efficiently realised with a Martin, (or ok, several Martins!). I'll add that my needs had little to do with playing in an orchestra, (although I never received any complaints when I did).

I am very appreciative of Yorks, Kings, Conns, Huttls, etc. and the people who play them. It's interesting to me that the older horns are never "vanilla" while the newer ones almost always are, IMO.

I don't think anyone will be duplicating the sound of vintage Martins anytime soon. Hell, even Martin couldn't do that consistently in the end!

[roweenie]

It's not a "better-than" thing and no different from the choice of car someone drives. I believe a player has to find their "voice" and for me it was most efficiently realised with a Martin, (or ok, several Martins!). I'll add that my needs had little to do with playing in an orchestra, (although I never received any complaints when I did).

I am very appreciative of Yorks, Kings, Conns, Huttls, etc. and the people who play them. It's interesting to me that the older horns are never "vanilla" while the newer ones almost always are, IMO.

I don't think anyone will be duplicating the sound of vintage Martins anytime soon. Hell, even Martin couldn't do that consistently in the end!

Agreed, 100%, and this is, in essence, my point - thank you for your comments. I've played some of your horns, and I think they are outstanding examples - and I hope you had the same impression with mine.

I do think you've got an interesting point when it comes to consistency. All of our cumulative experiences tend to be built on percentages and statistics, so maybe "quality" can be boiled down to this? Maybe even Stradiveri made some clinkers, and as a result haven't survived to this day......

[Paul Scott]

Agreed. Thank you and yes, your Yorks are magnificent, as are your Holtons!

[SousaWarrior9]

It's not a "better-than" thing and no different from the choice of car someone drives. I believe a player has to find their "voice" and for me it was most efficiently realised with a Martin, (or ok, several Martins!). I'll add that my needs had little to do with playing in an orchestra, (although I never received any complaints when I did).

I am very appreciative of Yorks, Kings, Conns, Huttls, etc. and the people who play them. It's interesting to me that the older horns are never "vanilla" while the newer ones almost always are, IMO.

I don't think anyone will be duplicating the sound of vintage Martins anytime soon. Hell, even Martin couldn't do that consistently in the end!

So true. I went through several horns before selling on the Martin (or, similarly, several Martins). Most of my previous horns were good, no doubt, but the mammoth is what really feels like my voice to me. And It'll be a different horn for every player. Still a big fan of the King, Conn, and York horns I've played and they are no doubt a great voice for other players, as well as countless other horns.

Your comment about the tendency of newer horns tending to sound "vanilla" as opposed to older ones also rings true for me as well. I'm really not sure why this is. It could be somewhat of a placebo effect in some ways, but I think there's something more to it. There just seems to more character to them.

As to your comment about replicating the sound, It is true that It would be likely impossible to replicate the true essence of any of these old horns perfectly as you said because it is not merely the design that makes the horn. So many variables in the manufacturing process are at play that can change any number of qualities in an instrument, I just think it would be worthwhile for someone to take a shot at it. Even if it ends up not being exactly like the real deal, it would still probably end up being a pretty good horn nonetheless.

[EdFirth]

I want to clarify my earlier post. What I should have said was the big orchestral players aren't using them because they've never heard one in a big orchestra. Not that they're better than Yorks(I would love to own one) or Conns or Holtons. My actual horn of choice for orchestra is a King rotary Bb but that's just me. I've never gotten so much unsolicited feedback on an instrument as when I've played it but my Martin could absolutely do the job. As long as we're talking Martins, have any of you repair guys ever considered adding a fourth rotary valve after the MTS to a top banger? If it could be done there are a lot of players with three valve ones who might like to go there. As far as the bell facing the wrong way it doesn't seem to bother the Brits with their 3+1 Eb's. I've played top banger horns in oechestras and all they seemed concerned about was tone, pitch, and time. But we have to work with who we have to work with so your mileage may vary. It should really be more about music than hardware. OK, I'm done. Best to all, Ed

[Alex C]

For me, I think the Martin achieves the quintessential American band tuba sound. The Conn 24J has that sound as well.

It is a dark sound with lots of fundamental. The huge bell diameter assists in diffusing the sound so that if you pump a lot of air into it, you just sound like more string basses, IMHO.

Even the darkest sounding American orchestral tubists (Alexander players in the last generation) had much more clarity than the Conn or Martin will give. And that's why you would never see a BBb Conn or a Martin in a professional orchestra.

There is a guy selling his 6/4 rotary valve CC Martin. I have lusted after that thing, I promise but.... alas, no for me.

[Donn]

That sounds a lot like what a couple other people have said - bass rather than brass, etc. So ... where does that leave the Holton 345 and lookalikes - is it in the same American band tuba class, with the 6/4 Martins and 24Js?

[toobagrowl]

^ The big Holton 345 and similar tubas are in the same 'concert band' category as the other large American 6/4 tubas of the past, even with the differences between them.
I agree about the newer horns sounding more 'vanilla' compared to the older ones. But I also think there are more 'vanilla' players today, too.

I think what Alex was saying with past players on Alexander tubas (Mr Schmitz, Thornton, Bragunier, Bishop) was that thier sound was 'dark', yet much more focused and not diffuse like today's 6/4 players.
I agree that the big 6/4 York/American style tubas almost have a 'string bass section' quality to the sound; while the Alex 163 and similar 'dark rotary' German tubas almost have an 'electric bass' quality to the sound. The 'string bass section' sound of the large 6/4 tuba fits great in large concert bands; the denser/more compact 'electric bass' type tuba sound works great in orchestra.

As for Martins, I don't think I've seen one in person
I mean I've played Yorks, Holtons, Kings and Conns, but no Martins yet.
I'd like a chance to at least play one someday, but I'm in no rush. Does anyone have any good video/audio of a Martin tuba being played

[Donn]

Not to put too fine a point on it, but what I meant was, given that "bass vs brass" is a fair answer to the original question, why 6/4 Martins aren't one of the big BBb orchestra tuba options - what about a BBb Holton 345, in an orchestra section? I guess, when I put it that way - why of course not, the players who lean that way would be playing a 6/4 CC tuba, and the big BBb orchestra thing is maybe more of a European concept?

[Frank Ortega]

In case any one is curious, here’s how a 6/4 Martin sounds in an orchestral setting.

https://youtu.be/CLJY7uqrJlw" target="_blank

That’s my last performance in my 9 year tenure with the Chelsea Symphony of NYC.

I’ve posted it before because I think it makes a valid statement on behalf of the
Martin tubas.

Btw, it’s a 1932 4 valve, front action, with one piece original upright bell and bits!

Enjoy!

[toobagrowl]

Why 6/4 Martins aren't one of the big BBb orchestra tuba options - what about a BBb Holton 345, in an orchestra section? I guess, when I put it that way - why of course not, the players who lean that way would be playing a 6/4 CC tuba, and the big BBb orchestra thing is maybe more of a European concept?

Only fairly recently have some of the 'top orchestra pros' started using big BBb tubas on select pieces from Prokofiev, Shostakovich, etc. That was only because one or two 'top pro' players started using large BBb tubas, so others followed suit. Again, we go back to the whole clout/infuence 'thing'. There were a few independent/ stand out players back in the day like Ev Gilmore (formerly Dallas Symph), Ross Tolbert (formerly Minnesota Orch) who used BBb tubas, though. I think James Jenkins has always used a big BBb in Jacksonville Symph, too.

The big BBb orchestra thing in Europe are mostly using large rotary Kaiser BBb's

@ Frank Ortega:. Thanks for posting a clip of the Martin in orchestra context

[MikeMason]

In case any one is curious, here’s how a 6/4 Martin sounds in an orchestral setting.

https://youtu.be/CLJY7uqrJlw" target="_blank

That’s my last performance in my 9 year tenure with the Chelsea Symphony of NYC.

I’ve posted it before because I think it makes a valid statement on behalf of the
Martin tubas.

Btw, it’s a 1932 4 valve, front action, with one piece original upright bell and bits!

Enjoy!

Ha! Definitely not woofy,puffy, or string bass like! I dig the growl!