C tuba valves, continually increasing technical expectations, and 1st slide stuff...

[bloke]

My F tuba is an old/"classic" 4+2 configuration.
I installed a trigger on the 5th slide, whereby I can play "low F" on the 2nd partial (all valves down, and 5th slide triggered all the way out).
That F is a very commonly asked pitch (in tuba music), so that makes sense (at least, to me), because it's far more stable (this F tuba and most F tubas) than an open/fundamental "low F".

C tuba
More and more often, I'm being asked to play "low D's". This pitch SUCKS BAD on 5-valve C tubas, as the closest valve combination is 5-2-3-4, which is at least 4 inches shy of being enough tubing (requiring a frantic reach-over and huge pull of the #4 slide)...RIGHT WHEN we're trying to keep our embouchures VERY stable, so our low pitches don't "shake".

Were it common practice for C tubas to feature 6 valves (with the same classic 4+2 configuration (whether "4" of them were piston or rotary valves), the 1st slide could STILL be micro-tuned with the right-hand thumb (via a spring trigger)...and the "low D" would have a spot-on valve combination to the there-and-ready (5-6-3-4) and "low E" would have the option of the go-to 2-3-4 or the (a hair higher-tuned - and a bit closer to "right") 5-6-4.

I understand that it is really easy to respond to a post such as this with "yeah, but...", or "...but that's not how it's done"...or "that's one too many valves!"...or the smart-@$$ "what do you think a tuba is, a bassoon ", etc., etc...

...but the realities are these:

- Tuning veracity expectations - across the board - are becoming "tighter-and-tighter".
- Tuba range is being extended (downward) more-and-more.

...and for you B-flat-playing majority-of-us guys out there (who don't give a sh!t about this topic...)
This number (in a show that I played, last weekend) tickled my funny-bone SO MUCH that I had to look away, in order to be able to play...
...just the surreality of it...

[Dan Tuba]

I really like having a 5-valve BBb tuba for all of the new wind band/brass ensemble literature. Makes life easier.

[MN_TimTuba]

As a guy who has been asked to do some tap dance in musicals back in the day, and a BBb player, I'm just here for the tapping Santas.
Thanks for posting!
And yes, I do still have the tap plates deep in my underwear drawer.
Tim

[JC2]

Everyone is a bit different. I've gotten very used to pulling my slides to the right position, so much so that I don't really think about it. I personally find pulling the slides makes playing the tuba much, much easier and gives you more options. After a while you get used to the alternatives that are available with the slides set in different positions. It's especially helpful to smooth out certain musical passages by using the easiest valve changes. Just a few examples- pulling the first slide quite far out gives very easy changes from low F (135) F# (235) to G (13). Also C# and D played 123 and 13 (with a big 1st slide pull) is much easier to get smoother than 523 and 4. Pulling the 4th slide out a bit gives you an in tune low D (2345) Eb (1245) and low E (524). There's many more...

A lot of people also sound great not pulling the slides. I personally find I can get the most out of the instrument pulling and pushing to find the easiest solutions for a particular passage. I'm also a pretty accomplished piano player, so five valves and a few slides to work maybe doesn't seem that complicated to me. YMMV

[bloke]

…I've gotten very used to pulling my slides…

I’m right there with you buddy, but I just don’t like having to pull more than one of the slides (ie. “hand-hopping”).
I purposely chose (now: decades ago) a C tuba where every #1 slide adjustment only involves from “all the way in” to only about 1-1/4 inches out (minimalizing that movement) and with viable workarounds (no pulling of any other slides) for everything other than “double-low D”.
I would just like to never have to monkey with the #4 slide, and have quickly sold C instruments that required monkeying with the #3 slide.
With a 4+2 configuration, (again) there are alternative two-whole-step lengths offered, and any required #1 slide manipulation can be reassigned to the right-hand thumb (a trigger with a not-heavy spring).
Of course, this is quite different (with the gain being that it offers more/better options, and is less frantic), but we had to learn the other system, and this one could certainly be learned.

Just to absolutely clarify…
The # 1 slide - very likely - will still need to be manipulated, with the system that I’m suggesting. Even were there a no-quirks tuba, 1st valve, is not enough to add to 2nd valve to make a good minor 3rd, so even a theoretical no-quirks tuba would require pulling the 1st valve slide for any pitches played with 1&2. (Of course, a theoretical “no-quirks“ tuba would defy physics.)

[Mikelynch]

I do know of one very successful C tuba modification with a 6th valve, though differently configured.

But on a related note, let's expand to where it's really needed. My non-empirically proven view is that the best way to improve almost any 5 v piston F would be to add a 6th valve (extra points for alternate slides for 1/4 tone, and long 1/2 tone0.

Mike

[tubanh84]

I had a PT6 with a 2nd valve slide kicker. That's a great solution to most intonation problems.

I'm also enjoying my new major third 5th valve.

[bloke]

Of all the defacto 6/4 tubas that I ever owned, a (so-called) 5/4 - made by Rudolf Meinl - featured that same #2 slide gadget - which couldn't quite "make it" to a GG semitone, though close - and (possibly) that's why (along with surprisingly few quirks) that was THE best-behaving (intonation-wise) double-oversize contrabass tuba that I ever owned (back when I was interested in owning them).

I still had to remove my hand from the #1 slide, though, to operate that thing.
(My F cimbasso also features one, but I designed it to be operated by my left hand thumb, which - being "The Bard of TubaForum" - was otherwise just sitting there - being dumb.)

[Casca Grossa]

I'm also enjoying my new major third 5th valve.

I am in agreement with this. I am so glad to have switched back to the old style Miraphone 5th valve. My first two 5 valve CC tubas were old style Miraphones (185 and 188). Although it has been 20 years since I played this layout, my brain picked it back up easily. I feel like any intonation issues down the lower depths can be fixed by manipulating the 5th slide which is also very convenient to reach.

My two cents...

[tubanh84]

@bloke @Casca Grossa

With both the second valve kicker and the 5th valve being in the left hand, I do need to learn my choreography so that I can fluidly move between the 5th valve (and before, the kicker) and the first valve slide. That's been a steep learning curve, and find myself being out of position a lot. But it will get better with practice.

[iiipopes]

...and for you B-flat-playing majority-of-us guys out there (who don't give a sh!t about this topic...)

I don't think it is a matter of giving a $#!+ about the topic. It is a matter that most of us started on a concert band BBb tuba or souzy, and did not pursue orchestra or any other genre where the CC is preferred. Having played CC tuba at times over the decades when a BBb wasn't available when I could not afford one of my own, I agree with the observations in the initial post completely. And now, I schlep my BBb as a community concert band player. Yes, if the opportunity presented itself, and if it were indicated that a CC tuba I should have, I definitely would take the observations in the initial post seriously in choosing an instrument.

I don't remember the name of the piece, but some years ago I was in another community band that performed this particular piece in a large regional university concert hall. It had a chorale section in concert D major in the middle of the piece, of course with the final tonic cadential chord. On my BBb, I played that concert D an octave down, fingered 234. Not loud, but precise. The fundamental caught the hall and the entire band stacked up on it for a wonderfully resonant chord before moving on to the next section of the piece, with overtones and difference tones reinforcing each other all over the place so the chord sounded twice as loud and rich than it actually was. As you observe, had I been playing a typical 5-valve CC, I probably would not have been able to provide that foundation and it would not have had the same musical effect.

So yes, I am interested. Yes, I do give a $#!+. But for me and many players, any opportunity to make it matter is essentially non-existent.

[matt g]

I dunno… both of my CC tubas have an easy to grab and pull fourth valve slide with plenty of pull. And as (not super) often as that D pops up in various literature, C seems to show up with similar frequency. Pedal C on a CC tuba is usually more in tune than the same pitch on BBb (all four and a big pull of first or 2345 with the same problem as D on a CC).

Left hand access and ergonomics is important. Some manufacturers disagree.

[bloke]

That's completely cool...and let's not pretend about the primary reason for a C tuba's (a mostly post-1970's trend) 5th valve:

THE MAIN REASON for a 5th valve - on a C tuba (regardless of "old-style" or "new style" is to supply an on-demand/on-the-fly "low F", as that pitch is so commonly requested in ALL SORTS of written music...

...but (as the LOW RANGE of the tuba continues to be extended - in "fesshunul woiks" - via midi-composing and cut-and-paste arranging) a SIXTH valve seems to now be worthy of consideration...

...so ABOVE is a SHORTER version of the original post.

sidebar: but also having to do with Mr. Popes' comment regarding "when B-flat tubas are best"
When I go sit in with my buddies - in one particular good-playing-but-not-over-regulated community band, I always (now that I have one) take my B-FLAT tuba, and (also - just in case the only one who shows up to play baritone/euphonium is a dear old lady, who tries hard, but...) my euphonium is in the back of the car - if needed...and she appreciates having someone to lean on. (As concert time becomes nigh, more-and-more euphonium-ists always show up...or - as with tub-ists - is it euph-ists ??)...and I always disappear at least three rehearsals prior to their concerts, because - as I'm not going to play in their concerts (and I don't, because I feel that it is THEIR band, in addition to the fact that their tuba players are quite competent) - I believe it only fitting/proper/polite to do so.

[bloke]

The same argument eventually extends to the BBb tuba as well.

Another issue, as you (@bloke), have pointed out in the past, is slapping another couple of pounds onto an already heavy(ish) instrument. Especially if the design has left handed actuation of valves five and six with a tuning trigger on the right thumb.

Agreeing with posts above, my 188 with the 2+3 fifth valve was really easy to play in tune in most of the low register with less overall slide pulling. I’d think a BBb with a similar setup would yield similar results.

I started on trumpet and was taught to manipulate third, and then first valve slides to play in tune. The notion was that coordinated slide movement was nearly as important as getting the right valves pushed. So when switching to tuba, the same mentality applied, just covering more real estate. That being said, I still set up my horns so that 2 and 3 don’t get touched and the majority of the work is done with the first valve slide with fourth coming into play for a few pitches in the low register.

[bloke]

I can go along with what Matt's saying (what's good for one is good for the other - only a whole-step lower)...other than this one point:

Four-valve B-flat tubas already HAVE a "low F", and "low E-flats" aren't asked for particularly often...THOUGH (now: supporting - rather than countering - Matt's point) as so many (suck-tuning, on a 5-valve C tuba) "low D's" are now found in "archustrul muziks", more-and-more "low E-flats" are found in the same music, as well as some of the more-involved/complex/advanced (ok...the hillbilly term: "Grade 6") wind-band music.

Though I'm not going to convince anyone...
I'm still glad that (with my personal B-flat tuba) I choose to forgo a "5th" valve and ONLY install (as cjk refers to it) a "6th" valve (adjusted semitone), as "low F" is ALREADY "there" and the adjusted semi-tone eliminates the suck 2-4 intonation issue, yet DOES define a pull (of upper #4) for "low E-flat" as that pitch asks for 5-2-4 (with 4 needing a few more inches of tubing) on my personal B-flat tuba set-up.

not brags, but facts:
I'm not an intonation wiz, but work very hard at it. I work VERY hard at it BECAUSE I'm NOT a wiz at it.
I'm complimented quite a bit (by people who way out-play me on other "archustrul" instruments) regarding my "sound", and I believe that the "thing" is not so much my "sound" (OK...it's alright, I guess), but the extremely conscientious (read: trying VERY hard) TUNING that I offer to them makes THEM resonate (as they - NOT me - put it) "in my sound", because (well...) they're not having to fight "tuba intonation quirks" (at least, not as much as they may have to do so elsewhere...??)

bloke "When at home, I not only work hard on intonation, but WORRY - a lot - about it."