Variations in playing characteristics of instruments

[kingrob76]

Recently I've been pondering why two identical instruments (in terms of model) can be dramatically different in how they play.

For example, let's use a Miraphone CC 186 as a template for discussion. These instruments are not hand made, and are remarkably consistent but every so often you can find an absolute gem or an absolute dog, often times with no outward variances that are discernible. What could it be about those instruments that is all that different? Granted, over the past 60 years or so the 186 has changed in design and materials so it's not reasonable to expect a brand new one to play like one from 1967. Still, I could play one from 1984 and one from from 1988 and have two different experiences. Used horns, I get it - there's a ton of reasons: things like valve alignment, tension on a slide from misalignment, a well placed small dent in a leadpipe. But I've seen this with new horns, too.

A more closed example of this is my own experience selecting my 1291. I played a used one and was impressed, so I decided to fly out to WW&BW and pick a new one out from the stock on hand (about 15 in silver). Roger Lewis was kind enough to pull about 5 or 6 of them and sit in the room while I played. The first 3 did nothing for me - sounded just fine, but didn't feel right. The 4th one, Roger's eyes got wider and said "that's the one". In his words, it "shook hands with me". I knew it right away as well. It was dramatically different than the other 3 to me in comparison, felt more alive and responsive. Yet all 4 were brand new and had arrived in the same shipment. What could possibly be so different about that instrument?

In my head, if I can quantify the possibilities that influence these outcomes it could be possible to dramatically improve a given instrument relative to its peers. Are tiny variances so influential in relation to performance?

[bort2.0]

"One of the good ones"

I'm not sure exactly what happens, but different instruments are simply just different. Even when it's not "handmade", there is still a large amount of hand WORK involved in the assembly of the instrument. And as soon as the instrument leaves the factory (and likely before), every bump, dent, everything will have some minute and cumulative effect.

And isn't there some myth/truth/theory about tubas that are played extensively having the molecules/brass/whatever lined up more properly in the bell than something that's brand new and rigid?

Also, previous repairs, quality of soldering, and a ton of other factors... different tubas are just different.

Particularly for a competent tuba player such as yourself, you are at a level where you CAN discern the differences between individual differences. If they are 99% the same, you are at a level where YOU can tell that 1% difference.

It'll drive you mad, it'll be helpful for you, it may even be fun. But most of all, you have to remember that unless they are all sitting next to each other and lined up for back-to-back play tests, once you select one and move forward with that... it's useless to go back and try to find the other tuba that has the OTHER 1% difference.

You tried my 1291 at USABTEC a long long time ago. Maybe 2008? It was a very good example. I've played some 1291's that sucked in comparison, and some 1292's that were better (and also some 1292's that sucked). Pretty sure even the worst of those was a fine playing tuba, and if that was the one I had to go home with, I'd do just fine with it.

[York-aholic]

Scroll down to the section titled "To Play or Not to Play"

https://www.thevillagetinker.com/projects.htm

[dp]

Just about everybody hated statistics as undergrads.
No matter, the (somewhat) generic term multivariate analysis
comes to mind.

"Human Factors" was another term
for a range of course study as well,
but more "psych" than "stat"...

Then theres this thing

[bloke]

“Send me your dogs.”

I’ve gleefully bought “dogs“ before...
(My own amazing 5450 was a “dog”, when I inspected for purchase.)
I’ve even bought “dogs” from people who warned me that their for-sale tubas were “dogs“. The vast majority of them just badly needed their valvesets and mouthpipes really cleaned.
‘ funny how - when my own tubas fill up with water, and I forget that they have filled up with water - they suddenly are “dogs“...and I’ve experienced this with instruments at stores and shows as well. Even instruments that are put away dry (yet warm), fill up with water - as they cool off in their cases...
...and here is where water often hides - and it really screws up a tuba:
in the #2 circuit, as water will not drain from that circuit on a piston tuba without rolling the tuba around, or pulling the slide.
...and – back to the “cleaning” thing - this goes double for filthy interiors of all valvesets and mouthpipes. Some of you probably think I’m pooh-poohing the premise of the post… I’m not, but what I’m telling you is what I’ve seen many many times…and more than one or two tuba players (widely-known to-other-tuba-players) have brought in their instruments to me with really filthy valveset interiors, and all they wanted me to do was to take out a couple of bell creases.
...yet another “dog”...??
the squatty Holton that I just finished building out of spare parts…UNTIL I addressed all of its shortcomings, and finally was willing to call it “done”...
...I won’t go into specifics about a particular PT – 15…but the valveset interior of that instrument - I very strongly suspect - caused its owner to not be awarded tenure at their university.
- absolutely unplayable, prior to cleaning
- one of the best I had ever played, after cleaning

[bort2.0]

Just about everybody hated statistics as undergrads.
No matter, the (somewhat) generic term multivariate analysis
comes to mind.

"Human Factors" was another term
for a range of course study as well,
but more "psych" than "stat"...

Then theres this thing

These days, we call it "individual differences." Well at least within my PhD program that's the phrase.

Also, interaction effects are possible too (the combined effect of two factors is different than just the sum of the two effects of those factors on their own).

BTW, I totally forgot about the Duo Gravis until I saw your name here. Still want it? Send me an email, let's get this thing done. :)

[hrender]

Just about everybody hated statistics as undergrads.
No matter, the (somewhat) generic term multivariate analysis
comes to mind.

"Human Factors" was another term
for a range of course study as well,
but more "psych" than "stat"...

Then theres this thing

Then there’s Sturgeon’s law.

I liked undergrad stats, but it was watered down for us CompSci majors, which probably helped. It also helped that the prof was an adjunct who looked like a wrestling coach and had an accent like Al Smith.

[cjk]

The care and skill of people varies significantly, surely even tuba assemblers.

Every tuba is assembled by hand even if machines or molds are used to manufacture some of the parts.

One person's "dog" is some other person's "gem" (and vice versa).

[Doc]

I don't think it luck/happenstance/kismit/divine provenance/whatever that when the pro tuba wranglers (Joe, Dan, Lee, Dana, Matt, etc.) get done really working a tuba over with issues arising from build, assembly, fit, alignment, and cleanliness, that the tuba often plays significantly better in some (or many) aspects, even sounding and feeling like a different instrument. This, at least to me, is not some imagined phenomena.



But... Don't be too proud of these technological tuba restoration techniques you've created. The ability to build/rebuild/clean/repair parts, or even an entire tuba, is insignificant to the power of one good cryo treatment!

Vader.jpg (76.87 KiB) Viewed 391 times

snowtuba.jpg (69.93 KiB) Viewed 391 times