Neptune...

[Wyvern]

"tubacody", I would say if you have the money, go for a 6/4 if that is what you want - as long as your reason is "sound", rather than a passing fad.

But just remember that you will have to work a lot harder to produce the results on a 6/4 if you need to play delicate, high, or fast technical passages.

However, if it is the "sound" you love, it will be worth the effort. I am very fortunate to have a good arsenal of tubas and I enjoy playing them all, but I must say, if for some reason I could only keep one tuba, it would have to be my Neptune as that is "THE tuba sound in my head".

[tubacody]

Whew... thanks again guys.

I have spent countless hours with Mr D and can hear his response to my question in my head now... and I would come away feeling even more impressed by him.

I've personally spent way less time with Mr K and am not too sure what he would say. However I know it would be articulate and easy to understand.

Suppose I should clarify something.... I am really only shopping around for a good Neptune. It is labeled a 5/4 right? Lee Hip in San Antonio supposedly plays on one, and although that's not WHY I want one, it's a pretty good sell. Bob plays a Eb 99% of the time, so he would suggest something smaller, I can feel it in my.....

In my searching for a new desktop picture and came across the Yamayork which sparked wanting to see one. Thats all. NO comparison shopping was being attempted. Lord almighty it's gorgeous.

[Wyvern]

Suppose I should clarify something.... I am really only shopping around for a good Neptune. It is labeled a 5/4 right?

No, a Neptune is definitely 6/4.

However, someone wrote on the old TubeNet that the Neptune is a 6/4 which responds like a 4/4, or something like that. I would go with that assessment. It is certainly easier to play than my Cerveny Kaiser, although that is officially classified 5/4. It is far too easy to get hung up by classifications - just go by the sound.

I hope you enjoy it!

Jonathan

[TexTuba]

Lee Hip in San Antonio supposedly plays on one...

Yes, Mr. Hipp does play one. I've seen most of the main universities in Texas, and not once have I seen an ensemble in which a tuba player needed a 6/4 CC. Hell, I get "the hand" enough with my 186! I couldn't imagine what I would do with one of those...

Ralph

[Rick Denney]

I am really only shopping around for a good Neptune. It is labeled a 5/4 right? Lee Hip in San Antonio supposedly plays on one, and although that's not WHY I want one, it's a pretty good sell.

Yes, indeed. I lived in San Antonio when Lee Hipp got that instrument, and he really makes things happen with it. Like Wade, his sound concept is Alexanderish, and the Neptune seems to be a popular BAT for Alex players.

Rotary tubas that are enormous are often called 5/4 even when they are as big as piston instruments that are called 6/4. The Neptune uses the same bell as the B&S PT-7, and it's probably the same bell as the 2165. There is no standard for these designations, so it's hard to compare.

During a visit a couple of years ago, Lee played my Holton and he thought it needed more air than his Neptune. That's also a good sell--my Holton is one of the more efficient of big tubas that I've played.

But read Wade's post. Lee got his from that first batch that Wade was talking about. (To Wade: Those early Culbertsons were made by VMI like they are now. Orpheus was importing them for the first time at the same time they were introducing VMI-branded instruments. That was 1990, give or take a year--soon after unification.)

Rick "present for Lee's first trial of a BAT during a symphony concert--recalling that it was a first-gen 2165" Denney

[Wyvern]

The Neptune uses the same bell as the B&S PT-7

I have never seen a PT-7, but according to the B&S website the PT-7 has a 500 mm bell, while on the Neptune it is 520 mm, although they may be made using the same mandrel, although I do notice the PT-7 is also 2 cm higher?

During a visit a couple of years ago, Lee played my Holton and he thought it needed more air than his Neptune. That's also a good sell--my Holton is one of the more efficient of big tubas that I've played.

My theory is that the Neptune is more efficient in its use of air than most big rotary tubas due to it having a fairly modest bore through the valves of a graduated 19-21 mm, using I understand, the same valve block as the 4/4 PT-4 (and PT-20 and 5/4 PT-6), only really opening out after the valves. That compares with a Fafner valve bore of 21.5 mm which seems more typical of big German rotary tubas.

Those early Culbertsons were made by VMI like they are now.

Was VMI always just an alternative name for B&S, or were they once two separate companies which later amalgamated (like B&H and Besson did in the UK)?

[tubacody]

Are two crying infants really necessary? I did chuckle however...

So it sounds to me like I should consider a rotor Neptune before a piston one.
Are the prices about the same?

[Rick Denney]

I have never seen a PT-7, but according to the B&S website the PT-7 has a 500 mm bell, while on the Neptune it is 520 mm, although they may be made using the same mandrel, although I do notice the PT-7 is also 2 cm higher?
...
My theory is that the Neptune is more efficient in its use of air than most big rotary tubas due to it having a fairly modest bore through the valves of a graduated 19-21 mm, using I understand, the same valve block as the 4/4 PT-4 (and PT-20 and 5/4 PT-6), only really opening out after the valves. That compares with a Fafner valve bore of 21.5 mm which seems more typical of big German rotary tubas.
...
Was VMI always just an alternative name for B&S, or were they once two separate companies which later amalgamated (like B&H and Besson did in the UK)?

The bell diameter difference is just where they trim and roll the bell edge. Lots of the old York band instruments had 22" bells, and it's common for Rusk and other converters to trim them down to 20" like the CSO York. But they still come off the same mandrel. The overall length is a different measurement unrelated to the bell mandrel. There are fewer bell designs on the big tubas than you may realize, from everything I've heard.

For example, the 2165 has a 20" bell, and the 6450 "Baer" has a 19" bell. But both those bells come off the same mandrel.

My point was that the throat of the bell and its basic wide taper is similar between the Neptune and the PT-7. They are bigger than the PT-6 and the Gronitz PCK, and explicitly similar to the York/Holton design. The Fafner that I tried seems to have a little more of the German stovepipe shape, and I think that's the reason for its more Teutonic character.

The Neptune is based on an American concept, even in the rotary version; hence the 3/4" bore through the first several valves. That's the standard bore for Yorkophones. To my eye, the Neptune and the PT-7 have largely the same outer branches.

I'm not sure, however, that the 3/4" bore is at the heart of the efficiency of Yorkophones. Just what is at the heart of that efficiency has been debated endlessly, but I rather look on the entire taper plan as a single system, where a change over hear might have the same effect as a change over there. It's hard to draw conclusions about valve bore without considering the outer branches and the leadpipe.

As to the brand names, both B&S and VMI are modern labels put on a state-owned enterprise that probably had a name like "Tuba Factory Number One". The VMI factory makes B&S-branded tubas, and it's been called VMI at least since unification. Now, they are part of JA Musik, which also owns Wenzel Meinl (aka Meinl-Weston and Melton). I suspect the sign out front says "VMI" or "JA Musik", and if it was in decadent America, it would probably also say "Home of B&S Tubas" among other things.

Early on, the VMI-branded instruments were marketed as budget models, and the B&S instruments were "professional" models. It had to do with exclusive marketing arrangements, I suspect. Custom Music had the B&S brand locked up, and when the factory was an instrument of the DDR state it was probably fine with them--fewer filthy capitalists to deal with. But after unification, the factories in Markneukirchen and Kliengenthal seemed to want to compete more widely. VMI, as a separate brand, wasn't subject to the exclusive importing of the B&S brand. That's why Orpheus Music in San Antonio could import them.

It seemed to me at the time that Orpheus competed on price and presented the VMI tubas as a bargain, while Custom targeted a smaller segment of the market willing to pay a higher markup for B&S exclusivity. At that time, B&S only had visibility with F tubas, and the first VMIs I saw were contrabasses. But they all came out of the same factory. VMI would put any brand on the instruments that would sell, and I've seen variations on the earlier B&S PT-1 BBb tuba with the names Bach, Musica, F. Schmidt, VMI, Meister Gerhard Schneider, and Vespro. Culbertson was just another stencil brand, except that Mel Culbertson did apparently influence or control the design of the Neptune and the Apollo, just as Parantoni and Tucci have influenced the designs of B&S tubas.

Now, nobody even pretends there is a difference--VMI's tuba page seems to point to B&S, and the model numbers on B&S were the VMI numbers.

Rick "who once owned an early VMI-made Vespro" Denney

[Rick Denney]

Are two crying infants really necessary? I did chuckle however...

So it sounds to me like I should consider a rotor Neptune before a piston one.
Are the prices about the same?

To the first question, yes. Consider it a rite of passage. Stick around a while and contribute and soon enough it will be someone else's turn to come in new and tell the regulars about their problems.

To the second question, I suspect the prices are similar, but prices even for the same instrument vary. The only way to know the price accurately is to call a dealer and make him an offer that he accepts. But you knew that already.

Rick "who only saw one crying infant" Denney

[Wyvern]

Thanks for that reply Rick - interesting!

[Casey Tucker]

cody,
you should look into the MW thor. the sound concept that bob instilled in me should be similar to what you're looking for. the 5/4 thor is an amazing horn. hold off and try it out at TMEA. roger lewis is awesome. he'll give you all the specs you need.

if you don't mind me asking, but what are you getting the horn for? i know you play w/ mr. pedigoe (sp?) in a quintet where both a 5/4 AND a 6/4 would seem a little much. im using a PT20PS in the ensembles (i get the hand all the time with my 4/4. it plays bigger than most 4/4's) and a Mira 180 F in quintet. they do miss the CC but when paired with the right mouthpiece i can achieve the same sound (in mid to high/higher range. low range on an F is obviously different) if an audition is what you're aiming for, you should really check the thor and the 2000, 2155, PT6, Gronitz PCK and other various horns for that matter (i just happen to like the thor :D )

all in all, if you're looking for a main axe (cc to practice and win auditions) then check out a large 4/4 or a 5/4; they're great. quintet horn, try looking at the mira 186/188. you used to play one so you know the sound. hope this helps.