PaulMaybery wrote:I suppose it can also depend on whether the player plays with flattenend fingers or arched. Those of us who came under Bill Bell's influence are used to keeping our fingers pretty flat.
bort wrote:I'm glad you said that, because my thought was, when I hold my hand in a playing position, my fingers are arched... and look a whole lot more in a straight line than they do when they are flat.
Much of the comfort/discomfort in the right hand fingers is related to the position of the thumb angle. If the angle is approaching 90 degrees with relation to the forefinger, this tends to put a strain on the finger tendons. As the thumb is brought closer to the forefinger in an almost parrallel position, that tendon tension is somewhat more relaxed. Some players avoid using a thumb ring for that reason. When we have the 5th valve installed for activation by the right hand, we open up a pandora's box with a number of ergonomic issues. It appears that on the Gnagey Eb tuba, the thumb is not really stretched all that much and the hand can be used rather in a natural position. But I think it does need to be tried to be appreciated and that I am probably jumping to conclusions.
I'm sure Sam is very pround of his creation, and justly so. There are several visual elements of the design that naturally challenge the way we think of the form of this tuba. I applaud him for thinking outside the box.
Wessex 5/4 CC "Wyvern"
Wessex 4/4 F "Berg"
Wessex Cimbasso F
Mack Euphonium
Mack Bass Trombone
Conn 5V Double Bell Euphonium (casually for sale to an interested party)
Played this new Gnagey Eb yesterday at the conference. The valves to hand position was very comfortable - no strain or discomfort at all. (I am 6'2", 35" sleeve.)
Soundwise it was solid - pedal D to F (BC) above the staff and in between solid.
I also tried this horn briefly yesterday. I found it very comfortable to hold (and I'm at the other end of the scale at 5'7" and 31" sleeve) and it behaved exactly as advertised. The Elephant Room is not the optimal test environment, of course, but I liked it very much. I play one of their "Solo" compensated Ebs, and the sibling resemblance is clear. They share the same bell and large bows and same bore in the main block. The low end is much easier, larger and more secure, as might be expected, and the increase in bore at the 5th valve is noticeably helpful. For what my opinion is worth (which is to say, exactly what you just paid for it!) I think they have done a very nice job on an original design.
Question Sam: would it be difficult to lengthen the fifth valve slide on this horn so that the 5th becomes a tritone valve, sounding low the A-natural (like it can on the Gronitz Eb)? That helps to make the low ending fingerings much, MUCH easier (in my opinion).
Also, this looks to be sort of a 'do everything' type eefer. Could you or someone else discuss your thoughts on the high range - can it almost stump for an F?
barry grrr-ero wrote:Question Sam: would it be difficult to lengthen the fifth valve slide on this horn so that the 5th becomes a tritone valve, sounding low the A-natural (like it can on the Gronitz Eb)? That helps to make the low ending fingerings much, MUCH easier (in my opinion).
Also, this looks to be sort of a 'do everything' type eefer. Could you or someone else discuss your thoughts on the high range - can it almost stump for an F?
Barry Guerrero
That's an interesting idea. I'm reading that that what you propose is that the 5th valve length would be a half step lower than the 4th valve. It would be possible to do, but somewhat difficult. You'll notice that the 4th valve tuning slide is right there for the left hand to pull. Would pulling it out enough to lengthen it a half step (which it will pull to do) work in lieu of making a very long 5th valve?
There is little question in my mind that it works as well as any big F tuba in the upper range. And you have the huge bonus of it sounding like a good sized CC in the low range. FWIW
