You had to have been there.

[bloke]

The best F tubas are - of course - those that can be easily played in tune and also are not set up (as are the majority built and sold today) to sound like contrabass tubas. These instruments are easier to use to make very short sounds (sounds which don't hang over past those made by a trombone section), and (same thing) easier to use to play soft little staccato "buttons". When it's time to really make a racket, it's easier to pick out their individual sonority (yes, tuned and at the appropriate volume level), rather than them generating some umbrella type of sound that just sort of mixes in with everything else. In a symphony orchestra, they blend better with the bass trombone on quite a few works, whereby a very large percentage of tuba players would rubber stamp those pieces as contrabass tuba parts.

I don't expect very many people to get this, because I suspect that not many people will ever experience this.

ie.
(Classic) F tubas (and/or classic 15" bell E-flat tubas) are good for more than playing Berlioz and college tuba recital pieces.

[russiantuba]

My first F tuba was a Miraphone 180, my second a very old YFB 621 which I sold to Sam Pilafian. My third one was a mid 1980's B&S F. By this time, I had my sound concept locked in before going to a Gronitz PF 125.

I have a student with a very old Miraphone 181 that I like quite a bit and also very much liked the Elektra when I played it. I would like to spend a bit of time on an Alexander F.

Why did I switch? My B&S leadpipe angle was activating my TMJ to a significant extent, so it ended up looking like some custom work was going to happen. My focus was solo and chamber playing (mainly quintet) while still wanting a horn with some cutting power (I feel for solo and quintet work, a larger sound covers that a bit). I feel my F has the tonal color of a rotor F tuba with the resonance of a bigger horn, unlike a lot of other horns (MW 45SLP, MW 2250, Willson, Adams/Hirsbrunner, YFB 822, etc).

What bloke mentioned about staccato I do sacrifice a bit. However, having a shallow mouthpiece and a very tight, efficient throat as he suggested really has helped the horn out even further.

[Sousaswag]

I love my contrabass replacement F tuba. I’ll love it even more when the rotors are cut down to normal design…

[MiBrassFS]

Been there? Been where? Intriguing…

I don't expect very many people to get this, because I suspect that not many people will ever experience this.

Why is that? There’s plenty of F and Eb tubas of all shapes and sizes out there, more than ever, vintage and new. If it’s something desirable and/or necessary, people will find it and apply it.

Don’t forget…

Everyone has different weaknesses/strengths, and - thus - different things work to individuals' advantages/disadvantages.

[bloke]

@MiBrassFS

What I'm saying is that most F tubas built and sold today are built so as contrabass tuba players can play them right out of the gate. (This characteristic also obviously makes them easier to sell.) Even mine was considered to be quite large when first designed (well over a half century ago), yet the mouthpipe tube interior begins at less than half an inch - with the first size of cylindrical bore encountered being only 17mm, thus not as previously described in this paragraph. (The earliest versions of the model I own actually featured a small - or some would say a bass trombone - size receiver.)

I would liken most sold today to one-foot-shorter versions of "monster" E flat tubas made in the earlier part of the 20th century, whereby (if no tuba player available) they are perhaps designed for trumpet players to be able to pick something up, grab an E-flat baritone saxophone part (or read the bass clef tuba part as if it were written in treble clef and add some sharps) and get a big round sound, even though a whole bunch of tuning quirks. The default type of resonance from the later 20th century and beyond F tubas lacks definition and articulation presence compared to classic F tubas) and can tend to disappear into the sound of a symphony orchestra just as can that of a typical 6/4 tuba. Since I just mentioned contrabass tubas with a similar stumbling block, I believe the purpose of the style and shape of the kaiser B-flats in continental Europe (avoiding a so-called "umbrella"/non-distinct type of resonance) is to avoid the tuba sound from just becoming part of the aggregate.

In summary, I view the old school F tubas as being desirable - in that they are not trying to be fake contrabass tubas, and even though the player must spend time with them and learn how to play them.

I worked with an exceptionally fine bass trombonist this weekend, Mr. Jason Beghtol. (I doubt if anyone has heard of him, because he's down in north Mississippi doing an excellent job of teaching students, playing amazingly well, and probably not going to trombone conferences and rubbing elbows.) When we were playing the pieces that were programmed, I was imagining that - had I used a big contrabass to but to play the particular programed pieces (or even one of the many "rounder-sounding" F tubas), the patrons would have heard "something" with the bass trombone, but may not have been able to identify what it was (perhaps pipe organ...??). Again, maybe you had to have been there.

The use (, manufacturing, and sale) of classic F tubas has faded away, and I sort of doubt that it will come back. After all, the current style ones are bigger...and bigger is always ______.

[gocsick]

For us non-F players... where would the classic B&S Modell Symphonie and derivatives fall in your categorization scheme @bloke .

[bloke]

I believe that model is just about as far as one can go without beginning to lose the "classic" type of resonance.

A long time ago, I picked up a handmade instrument (mostly, very similar to the Symphonie Modell) called "Perantucci" - later versions of which would be designated "PT-10". It offered a fatter sound, and it was a little bit more difficult to play some of the pitches in tune, but - again - it was fatter-sounding.
It came (used) with the bargain price, and at that time we were doing pretty darn well financially. Mrs. bloke told me that I could keep both of them if I would like to. I thought about it for about twenty seconds and dismissed that idea. First of all, it seemed silly, and secondly my Symphonie is (go ahead and label it opinion/bias) better. I'm thinking the introduction of the PT-10 type instrument (which featured/s a contrabass tuba-size mouthpipe and bore size(s) was the point at which the (so-called) "line" was crossed.

Around that time, all sorts of wind instruments were being made larger, and there were a whole bunch of trade-offs across the board in regards to wind instruments. Some volume and breath of sound was gained with many of the new instruments, but some subtleties were sacrificed, as well as parts of those instruments' resonance characteristics. This was also around the same time that Solti had been appointed to Chicago, and London (records) was recording them putting microphones all over the place and advertising those lp's as "Full Frequency Range Recordings" (or something like that ??) Besides the maestro pushing everyone to play at their max, the recordings sounded even more "max" than the orchestra, and players (particularly of brass) all over (at least) the United States we're trying to imitate that recorded/engineered sound in their live sound. Just as with any other historical event/trend in the world - whether natural or man-made, there are still consequences today.


(OK... One could suggest that this is just about as over the top as one could go with this, but - on the other hand - I read somewhere that this movement is meant as a satire of the Meistersinger Overture, so - if satire - then it certainly succeeds.)

Just to be clear, I linked this audio track as a demonstration of the general historical trend and the London recordings stuff. It has nothing to do with the F tuba topic.

[MiBrassFS]

Seems like there was a resurgence in players making their own choices (possibly?) spurred on by the fall off of the big box music stores (including how that affected the manufacturers) serving up vats of whatever the latest thing coming down the pipeline happened to be, regardless of size. People had to make more varied choices because of the lack of availability (pandemic not withstanding).

Stuff sitting in closets was remembered and used. Old school F tubas rediscovered.

Looking on the bright side, maybe this all was a good thing.

But, this was also a “perfect storm” that played right into the hands of some of the Chinese makers, too. So, independent thought may been short lived as people seem to prefer to run in packs.

My choices are driven by two factors. First, purchases of opportunity. Something good that makes itself available at a very right price. Secondly, a purchase driven by my singular opinion. In other words, if I like it, that’s good enough for me without seeking input and approval from others.

Maybe more shark than bottom feeder.

[bloke]

I think the audition thing and the wish to conform drives a lot of the so-called classical market instrument purchases. The fallacy is that there is work in the classical market and that it pays enough to buy groceries.

If audition committees are wanting to hear wide-belled cut-to-C 6/4 size tubas with 3/4 inch bore valve sections, it's because that's what they've become accustomed to hearing as a "tuba". Were they to hear something that doesn't conform, the resonance qualities could distract them so much that they may not notice the fact that an operator is head and shoulders above all the other applicants in their ability to make music... and bass tubas that don't sound like contrabass tubas could prove to be equally aurally distracting to committee members.

[russiantuba]

Were they to hear something that doesn't conform, the resonance qualities could distract them so much that they may not notice the fact that an operator is head and shoulders above all the other applicants in their ability to make music... and bass tubas that don't sound like contrabass tubas could prove to be equally aurally distracting to committee members.

Ironically, I texted my professor (the one with a full time orchestral job) about one of the standard excerpts and he told me something off the wall different. He said no one will expect that, so do that.

[Tubajug]

So you're saying I should use my Eb for the overture to "Orpheus in the Underworld" that we'll be playing on our next community orchestra concert?

[bloke]

So you're saying I should use my Eb for the overture to "Orpheus in the Underworld" that we'll be playing on our next community orchestra concert?

Have you played through it?

me...??
I'd probably play it on my oversized compensating euphonium with my Elliott contrabass trombone mouthpiece - UNLESS it was just one of fifteen or twenty tunes on some random pops concert - at which time I'd probably play it on "anything".

you...??
Try it on your E-flat. Do your trombonists overplay, or are they tasteful?
(That having been said, Orpheus of the Underworld isn't an overture that I would rate as requiring all that much good musical taste.)

[tubanh84]

I've spent the last 10 years going smaller and smaller with my equipment. I'm aided by the fact that I don't play professionally, so I don't need to please anyone or meet anyone's expectation. I've been toying with just going down to one horn, either a small Eb or medium sized F, because I don't need much else. (The majority of my playing is demonstrating some concept to my violin-playing daughter in one of her violin pieces. She doesn't see the benefit of hearing the pieces on tuba. As I explain to her, she would understand them less if I tried to play it on violin :)) The problem is I love all my 3 horns - Gnagey CC, 184-5U, MW 182.

My running theory is that the clarity of smaller horns would get people through preliminary rounds of auditions more consistently than 6/4 York copies. But once you're in a back-to-back-to-back semi or final, the committee would be drawn to the size of the sound of the 6/4 compared to a 4/4 once they heard a competent player on a 6/4 immediately before or after a competent player on a 4/4. Even if subconsciously. Of course they would take the "bigger" sound. It's our primary calling card. I also fully believe that a Miraphone 188 or similar is more present in the group than a 6/4 York copy. I have heard precisely one player make a York copy sound affirmatively present in a major orchestra in a live setting. (2 if you count a Gronitz PCK). They sound amazing alone on stage, but then get lost. I'm always more drawn to German BBb or F tubas in a group.