Appropriate tubas for brass band

[jtm]

use photographic transposing programs to transpose their treble clef music to bass clef, but that's really not how it's done, either.

Wait, is this a thing? Sounds amazing for us wanna be brass band players who never learned how to read anything other than Bass clef very well.

Besides it apparently being a thing (which is pretty cool), Eb treble clef parts are easy to read by just pretending they’re bass clef, mostly. The notes are in the right places, so just add three flats to the key signature. Once you figure out which accidentals to read as-is and which to modify a little, you’ll be all set. I “discovered” this (like many other people) in middle school sitting next to the bari sax player.

[arpthark]

use photographic transposing programs to transpose their treble clef music to bass clef, but that's really not how it's done, either.

Wait, is this a thing? Sounds amazing for us wanna be brass band players who never learned how to read anything other than Bass clef very well.

Besides it apparently being a thing (which is pretty cool), Eb treble clef parts are easy to read by just pretending they’re bass clef, mostly. The notes are in the right places, so just add three flats to the key signature. Once you figure out which accidentals to read as-is and which to modify a little, you’ll be all set. I “discovered” this (like many other people) in middle school sitting next to the bari sax player.

It's funny how this happens. I played trombone in 5th grade, and our band classes were combined brasses and saxes. I found this out then because I was able to play out of my alto sax player friend's book when I forgot mine one day, and it still sounded right.

[GC]

removed by me; misread a previous comment

[bloke]

Play what you’ve got and play it well, nobody will care.

This reaction to the point that I made sort of (and * no fisticuffs, please) makes my point.

The American version of the British brass band is more of a "Casual Friday" thing.
It's not a 160+ year tradition, and much more of a "Hey, let's take a stab at doing what they do" type of thing.
Competitions are more of a social gathering than a matter of pride.
American ones rarely (ok...so hate on me) are as good as the British ones.
The last three words of the quote (yes? no?) say it all.
Finally, there's (tuba-player-wise) a strong west-side-of-the-pond contagious "hate" on top-action tubas, as well as a lack of familiarity with and fear/skepticism of the Blaikley System.

bloke "I recall an orchestra concert whereby a DMA and Juilliard graduate was hired to play second tuba on the Berlioz, and they had to be prompted (during the Saturday night concert, as the early movements were being performed) to not cross their legs on stage. Younger people - including 'Generation fill-in-the-blank', have not yet figured out that the music is secondary, the show/spectacle is primary, and people are not interested in being educated by the sublime, but (as people are primarily visually oriented) are far more interested in being entertained by what is seen - and uniformity - nearly always - adds to a spectacle."
______________________________________________________
*

[andycat]

I'm nearly 40 years into the "tradition", having been a member of several "famous" bands: Besses o'th' Barn, Faireys. Brighouse and Rastrick and Foden's. twice!

At Foden's we have 2 Yamaha's (BBb) and 2 Besson EEb in the section. Personally, I've tried many different tubas in brass bands, and no one frowns upon it but they just don't work as well as a 3+1 comp for the full on stuff. Blend, technical passages, sound are all better FOR THIS SETTING. I've tried a St Pete, a York Master, a 2341, a PT6 etc etc but for me, I always return to a 3+1.

BUT, if you're in an emerging brass band country, or a community band, or not one of the "Top 20", then hell, use what you have. I'd rather see a brass band with any tuba players, then no brass band at all....

As for what I think it should sound like, have a listen to any of the top 3 from this contest, but personally I favour "our" bass section sound, it takes a lot of work to not be nasty or overblown, which is too common these days.

Or perhaps I'm just an old fart.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SBOU-_ ... mercyMusic

[edfirth]

BRILLIANT!!! There you have it folks. Andy, Thanks for posting this. and I very much enjoyed the post of your band doing a stand up concert a year or so ago. Your bass section is SUPERB. Best, Ed

[Tubeast]

Thank You so much for this example, Andy.
I think it perfectly demonstrates what THE REAL THING is all about.

- the individual instruments´ sound concept is unique and WILL NOT be resembled by OTHER instruments of the same bugle length:
No, the "High F Side" of an Alex triple french horn will NOT be able to play those alto horn solos and match that sound.
And no, the opening solo played on a Trumpet of the same pitch will NOT sound the way this cornet sounded.

- Especially fascinating is the great diversity in tenor voices: tenorhorn, bariton and euphonium as well as trombones may all have the same bugle length, but could not just swap parts: the music would be totally different.
- Of course, contest literature is well honed to rely on and feature all those combinations of sound colors ONLY a Brass Band is capable of.
Have them play "Böhmischer Traum" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SBOU-_R55s and it will be a piece of cake to them, but it´ll sound funny and far from the original.
Same goes with an Austrian Blasmusik trying to recreate marches from Brass Band tradition: All the notes will be there, but the music will not.

And the "small tubas" of the different band traditions fulfill totally different roles:
- form an independant bass section with the BBb colleagues (Brass Band - 19" EEb)
- Stay at home, high tuba voice is obsolete (Concert band). Alternative: Provide those pedal Cs and B naturals the BBb tubas gloriously suck at.
- Tie the REAL tuba sound to the tenor- and baritone horns and, in fact, everybody else (Egerländer and most other alpine Blasmusik)
(F tuba ist better at this than EEb compers, in my opinion, because they (F-tubas) sound like fat oval baritons rather than small tubas)

[Grumpikins]

Its all about the intended goal of the group (aside from sounding great).

Are you trying to strictly represent classic, formal british brass band?

Are you trying to enjoy brass band music with whatever/whoever shows up?

Sent from my SM-J327VPP using Tapatalk

[bloke]

There may be "better" tubas than the "best" B-flat/E-flat compensating tubas...but (again) tradition, and - even more than tradition - definition.

ex: Corps march with "contras", even though they're crappy, unwieldy, and don't put out as much sound as sousaphones.

[The Brute Squad]

Play what you’ve got and play it well, nobody will care.

Basically what I'd say. To butcher a common saying among photographers, the best tuba is the one in your lap.

[Sousaswag]

To be clear, I'm not frowning upon 3+1 tubas here. I actually REALLY like the comp eefer's. I just like what I own better.

But, none of the bands I play in are really going for the true, traditional, British Brass Band. Most are there for enjoyment.

More generally, the audience wants a GREAT sounding performance. I truly don't believe that the vast majority of people are going to care what kind of tuba I'm playing in the back row. Different groups with different audiences may see that differently.

[bloke]

"Continuing to come back after your comments" is not arguing nor disagreement...but only clarification.

I despise contras. I can't imagine any sort of tuba that is more difficult to hold nor which offers more mediocrity of results - in spite of anyone's best efforts (and I would MUCH prefer to march with a King fiberglass sousaphone), but - were it that I signed myself up for a corps (and they were dumb enough to accept a fat old man) - I would play a contra, because that's what's done.

I'm not crazy about 3+1 BB-flat contrabass compensating tubas (which tend to be a bit unwieldy, compared to the E-flat ones). The best of them were made decades ago, and every "improvement" or new model (in my view) has resulted in more intonation problems with them (rather than fewer), but - were I to sign up for one of those bands - I would play (sure: a 1950's - 1970's) Besson/B&H BB-flat 3+1 comp., because that's what's done. (If there are two tuba parts - band/orchestra/whatever - I prefer the lower part, and view it as the "first" part, particularly if it's just as busy as the higher-pitched part.)

[andycat]

BRILLIANT!!! There you have it folks. Andy, Thanks for posting this. and I very much enjoyed the post of your band doing a stand up concert a year or so ago. Your bass section is SUPERB. Best, Ed

Of course, you SHOULD like Foden's... you're nearly one of us!
https://www.fodensbandheritage.co.uk/ab ... th-cornet/

[kingrob76]

I have a guy in a section I play in who uses a Besson 981 Eb. I've played it. It's one of the hardest instrument to play that I've ever played (for me at least), tough to find centers on notes and intonation isn't good. Maybe it's a lemon - dunno. I had him play my 983 and he said it was like night and day and so much easier. I mention this because he's British and he grew up playing a 3+1 Besson Eb.

I can respect tradition, and see how it matters. If the goal is to be historically accurate (like playing civil war-era instruments for that era of music) then I get it, but otherwise whatever sounds and plays best should what is used as far as I'm concerned. It's hard enough to sound good, I don't want to have to do that on an instrument that makes that even more difficult for me.

[bloke]

I have a guy in a section I play in who uses a Besson 981 Eb. I've played it. It's one of the hardest instrument to play that I've ever played (for me at least), tough to find centers on notes and intonation isn't good. Maybe it's a lemon - dunno. I had him play my 983 and he said it was like night and day and so much easier. I mention this because he's British and he grew up playing a 3+1 Besson Eb.

I can respect tradition, and see how it matters. If the goal is to be historically accurate (like playing civil war-era instruments for that era of music) then I get it, but otherwise whatever sounds and plays best should what is used as far as I'm concerned. It's hard enough to sound good, I don't want to have to do that on an instrument that makes that even more difficult for me.

I've never enjoyed playing any of the straight-mouthpipe E-flats...Isn't that the 981 ?
If JP's 2-series 3+1 (yellow brass) came with the same mouthpipe as the 3-series, I KNOW that I would sell a bwuttlode of 'em, but alas...

Otherwise (typically "out-conservative" conservatives) again: I really believe that only 15" bell 3+1 comp. E-flats belong in those bands...so they actually sound enough different from the 17" - 19" bell BB-flats.

Also...
Decades ago - the first time I ever blew into a compensating E-flat tuba, I thought it was terrible, and couldn't imagine anyone being able to play one and sound good...but (fast forward to fat old man, who's spent time with all sorts of tubas), I now understand that tubas/brass all need what they need, and I can't pick up a .480" bore valve trombone, blow into it as if its some mouthpipe-removed bass trombone, and expect it to do what it's supposed to be able to do.

[jtm]

Otherwise (typically "out-conservative" conservatives) again: I really believe that only 15" bell 3+1 comp. E-flats belong in those bands...so they actually sound enough different from the 17" - 19" bell BB-flats.

For the brass band I’m in, the color of bass sound is probably a 2nd or 3rd tier issue. My 15.75” bell non-comp F sounds plenty different from the BB-flats, so I’ll make it do for a little longer. And I do like the front valves

[kingrob76]

I've never enjoyed playing any of the straight-mouthpipe E-flats...Isn't that the 981 ?
If JP's 2-series 3+1 (yellow brass) came with the same mouthpipe as the 3-series, I KNOW that I would sell a bwuttlode of 'em, but alas...

Otherwise (typically "out-conservative" conservatives) again: I really believe that only 15" bell 3+1 comp. E-flats belong in those bands...so they actually sound enough different from the 17" - 19" bell BB-flats.

Also...
Decades ago - the first time I ever blew into a compensating E-flat tuba, I thought it was terrible, and couldn't imagine anyone being able to play one and sound good...but (fast forward to fat old man, who's spent time with all sorts of tubas), I now understand that tubas/brass all need what they need, and I can't pick up a .480" bore valve trombone, blow into it as if its some mouthpipe-removed bass trombone, and expect it to do what it's supposed to be able to do.

The 980 has a 17" bell and the 981 a 19" bell, the mouthpipe tapers on both I believe. The 982 has a 19" bell and the straight-in leadpipe (with a variant having a slightly tapered leadpipe). I've found the Yamahas - all of the Eb ones - to be much easier to play, compensating or not. I assume it's just an acquired taste...

[bloke]

I guess I still got the models mixed up...
I tried to go to the Buffet website and double check...
Whichever one has the straight mouthpipe (which hits me in the chest) - I'm thinking that they also claim that the straight mouthpipe is fatter (larger) on the inside...ie. a larger mouthpipe.

Anyway...whichever nine-eighty-whatevers, I never seem to much care for the straight mouthpipe comp. E-flats (including the Chinese ones - whether well-made or sloppily built)...and (when I revisited the comp. E-flats...and (as well as FINALLY playing a VINTAGE 3+1 comp BB-flat that did NOT have worn-out valves) I discovered that they're really (sure, if not leaky and well-made) quite fine tubas.

DECADES AGO, hearing James Gourlay play a wonderful solo on one convinced me that there was SOMETHING that I was NOT "getting" about blowing into those things...but (fast forward MANY years), I didn't afford myself the opportunity to figure out what's up with them until quite later.

My 65-year-old 3+1 comp. Besson E-flat has new-LOOKING (no failed plating whatsoever) pistons, and they don't rattle around in the casings, but they're not absolutely air-tight (compared to JP or B&S/Besson pistons). That having been said (being bell-front) I nearly exclusively use it to play in jazz combos, and the very slightly leaky valves offer just a little extra amount of "slipperiness" (wonderfully easy bends and glissandi, etc.) with that particular instrument...

...so WERE THERE a local (professional level) brass band, WERE I invited to participate, and WERE I ONLY allowed to play the "E-flat basses" parts, I would probably buy myself a JP 3-series (JP377 - ok..."silver" if "We use silver instruments, in this band"), order a YEP-321 (again - silver if required) 15-inch bell from Yamaha, and put together a really nice (new/hybrid) instrument.

Otherwise, I already have an "in progress" 3+1 BB-flat Besson 17-inch (detachable) bell bass, which also has a 19" (detachable) bell and a 24" (detachable recording) bell.

I really am not comfortable playing 3+1 tubas, unless I rest them atop my right thigh. I'm pretty sure I've observed Buffalo Bill holding/playing his the same way.

[eeflattuba]

Up here in Canada i have been playing in a very good British brass band for the last thirty years.My weapon of choice is my 30 year old besson sovereign 981 ee flat.It has a straight leadpipe.Intonation is spot on.The other e flat player is playing on a yamaha 321.The conductor who comes from across the pond likes the sound we produce and so do i.Our current bb flat section consists of two yamaha 32 bb flat tubas.On occasion i may lend one of the bb flat players my yamaha bb flat neo tuba.

[LeMark]

If I was playing on a brass band, I would play my Eb or BBb for one of two reasons.

1. I don't get to play Eb very often, and need the practice

2. I know how to read treble clef, but suck at sight transposing