TubaForum.net

Congrats, Joe! It's great when a years-long itch is successfully scratched. I'm waiting for recordings . . .

.

Is the Miraphone fourth valve wrap the inspiration for your Stubby Holton’s 4th valve wrap?

tofu wrote: ↑Sat Apr 16, 2022 11:35 pm Interesting that 2 guys - Bort and Bloke - both been saying they're out of the BAT arena - and yet here we are - two of the biggest BATs out there have pulled them back in. Although, now that Bloke has gone even bigger than Bort - I'm expecting Bort to counter with one of those Nimitz class 6/4 Rudy's.

I don't recall saying I was out of the BAT arena, but maybe I did... IDK... If anything, I wanted one more go at it while I'm still young enough to play it and carry it... With the hope that if I like it (which I do), I'll be physically able to use it for a solid 20+ years if I'm lucky. I'm quite a bit younger than Joe, so whatever his motivations were (including "now or never"?) I'm VERY happy for Joe that he had this opportunity, and know that he worked quite hard and sold a lot of very nice (but not income generating) instruments to make this happen.

Is the Siegfried actually bigger than the Rudy? Same bell size, Rudy bore is . 866(!) which is bigger than the already big . 835. Bell geometry is different, I'd bet that the bottom bows of the two horns are similar, but the Siegfried bell gets wider sooner... Whereas the Rudy has the characteristic shape where the last 6 inches or so of height see the most bell diameter expansion. Which tuba looks bigger? Which one holds more water? Which tuba makes the player look smaller?

@bloke, how tall is the 198? (and OMG, is it awkward to measure the height of a tuba!) I'm around 42-43 inches... And the keel is part of that.

In the end, none of this matters. They are both huge, and both sound fantastic. Joe's very new build tuba has many many benefits, and I'm sure it has many improvements in manufacturing and tolerances over my 60+ year old tuba. Maybe his is easier to play than mine. Maybe by a longshot! Maybe they are similar? Both should classify as handmade (whatever that's worth!), and they both would be smaller than the (unnecessary novelty) Rudy 6/4. I'm happier than hell to have my Rudy. I bet Joe feels the same about the 198.

Would be neat to see them side by side, as Rick has done on his webpage about 6/4 tubas... But I don't know when J is coming up to Mpls for the photo shoot. :P

Oh, Max, you know my vote!

And yes, it did take me a bit to figure this out

You also know what happens when you press the quote button instead of the edit button, doh!

I’ve CONSISTENTLY raved about this ~particular~ BAT as THE exception…
- tuning
- clarity
- flexibility
- sonority
….I just didn’t ever think I would find one
- at all
- for sale
- within my budget

The ONLY other BAT that raises my eyebrows is the M-W 195P-5 (B-flat), but those sound too much like my M-W 5450 (C instrument)…so I wouldn’t gain anything by owning one of those.
IF C, then the only BAT with a usable scale (that I’ve played) is YCB-826S. The C BATs, though, are all somewhat “hollow”-sounding…Thus (to obtain a certain type of resonance), some players will tend to overplay them.

Somehow, I suspect under 20 (??) have been made. The only two of which I’M (??) aware in the USA are this one and the show instrument. Perhaps there are more over here…(??)

@bort2.0
4th rotor body (same BORE) is MUCH larger diameter…
Porting (surely) is more open.
‘ feels the same to my hand.
As far as how tall it is, I published that in an earlier post.

Show that you have a sense of humor.Call it Ugly Child.

… so do you mean play that song - and record the video?
I certainly wouldn’t sing it; I don’t think the lyrics would go over too well here - or anywhere.
… but that’s a GREAT name for the horn.

edfirth wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 3:15 pm Show that you have a sense of humor. Ugly Child.

Congratulations on the new tuba! I will probably never get to hear one live, so I can only imagine.

Couple of questions:

It’s light given its size - so made from sheet brass?

Why do you like the Fafner piston model but didn’t like the rotary version yet you like the 98 with rotors?

I guess I just don’t have the answers to any of those questions.
I find it difficult to move around with enough nimbleness on the rotary version of the 195, but I have no “why” to offer.
Maybe it’s just something as simple as the fact being that the recent vintage Miraphone .835” rotors are skeletonized versions of their .772” bore rotors, which makes them even faster (same diameter, and less mass) than 186/188 valves…(??)
Also – as the rotor bodies are small in comparison to the bore - the “D“ shape of the bore distortion in the rotor casings (vs. the “o” shape through the tubing of the instrument) is more severe than with a larger diameter rotor, which offers more built-in resistance – resistance being one of the “secret ingredients” to nimbleness.
Again… Tubas this big are supposed to have weird response characteristics, uneven range dynamics/color, and play all out of tune… at least, based on my experiences.

Ricardo wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 4:42 pm Congratulations on the new tuba! I will probably never get to hear one live, so I can only imagine.

Couple of questions:

It’s light given its size - so made from sheet brass?

Why do you like the Fafner piston model but didn’t like the rotary version yet you like the 98 with rotors?

If i make a worthy suggestion, may it get added to the polling options?

I didn't know model names or numbers well enough to know about Siegfried.
But now knowing that, i feel i need to offer the name "and Roy"

I also am at least acquainted with the tales of Robin Hood, suggest the name "Little John" as worth considering.

And lastly "Joshua", partly anticipating some "walls come a-tumbling down" type sounds, more obtusely (and they may be connected, now i think of it) as a WarGames reference.

Anyway, maybe i'll come up with another suggestion or so...

Ricardo wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 4:42 pm Congratulations on the new tuba! I will probably never get to hear one live, so I can only imagine.

Couple of questions:

It’s light given its size - so made from sheet brass?

Why do you like the Fafner piston model but didn’t like the rotary version yet you like the 98 with rotors?

I have played/performed with both the 195 and 195P a lot over the past 6 years. The 195P is more nimble to me. I think it has to do with the type of rotary valves, like Joe was saying Heavy, kinda sluggish. One nice thing about the 195 rotary is that the spit doesn't run back out of your mouthpiece Both are great tubas, and I would love to be able to own one, lol

Wouldn't Agent 99 be Agent XCIX?

humBell wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 5:39 pm I didn't know model names or numbers well enough to know about Siegfried.
But now knowing that, i feel i need to offer the name "and Roy"

Or how about just: “Siegfried”.

If I didn’t know better, I’d say someone’s using the “poll” function to lure the community into talking about their new acquisition.

Regardless of my take on things: congratulations. It’s good to know you have a good 98. I tried two of them at Miraphone and one of the two was indeed a really good axe.
The other, literally, sucked eggs. So much so that I can’t understand why they even bothered to have it finished (silver no less!). Better to have looked into why it sucked and fixed that.
Anyway: congrats.

pjv wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 2:32 am Or how about just: “Siegfried”.

Or better yet, Sig Freud as something this large and shiny must surely be compensating for... (looks down)

pjv wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 2:32 amOr how about just: “Siegfried”

I don’t care for the misnomer, as the character - to which they apparently refer - is a tenor.

The purpose of the poll is to poke fun at both myself and at the freak jury, as I have been singing the praises of this model for quite a few years - with others (understandably and consistently) responding that I should put my money where my mouth is. … so anyway, since I finally did that – and “Siegfried” makes absolutely no sense (OK…perhaps slightly more than “Cardboard Box”, but not much more) – I thought I would throw some choices out for the FJ.

(Just to clarify, I have no intention of naming it. I don’t name my tubas - just as the overwhelming majority cattleman and chicken farmers don’t name their machinery - nor their stock.)

When there are choices of some same-model new instruments available for sale, it often seems to work out that silver plating one of them is the “odd curse“. Oddly, I can think of some other models of tubas - that I don’t like at all - which are nearly always finished in silver. This “consistent coincidence” is just the sort of thing that gets people off-track - as to cause/effect - isn’t it ?

…and I’m still wondering whether more than two of these ever made it over to the United States, as I’ve only known of the display model – and quietly known of this one as well - for quite a few years. I haven’t seen any Americans speak up on any forums and talk about their model 98 tubas.
About the only European kaiser B-flats - that I’ve seen Americans buy (other than possibly a Chinese knock off or two) - have been $2500 used ones offered up on eBay...but yes: RM 5/4 B-flats obviously fit into this category as well.

testing instruments at shows…
Here’s a pitfall into which I’ve fallen before:
“The low range/entire instrument just doesn’t respond right“ (etc…)
If I stuck with that (“plays like a dog”) display instrument long enough, I may have discovered that the fourth circuit, or third circuit, or main tuning slide are full of water. (Under normal conditions, it would be easy to hear the water sloshing around inside, but elephant rooms feature this constant low frequency rumble that can easily cloak that sound.). Typically - at elephant rooms, people blatt on tubas and walk away - and those in charge of booths are busy chatting up people, and never think to go around and empty the water out of the instruments.

Anyway… Today is (badly needed) chem-clean day, and I sure hope that this thing fits in the tub - though it’s quite a large tub.

I wondered how your trial went. I'm pleased that you acquired it, and I hope it brings you joy and $$$$.

PS: Per our previous conversation, I hope it doesn't start collecting dust too soon. I need to pay my part for last year to Uncle Sam (about what he wanted for the 98) and save some more before I'll be ready to come get it. I'll need a reason to come to blokeplace next spring anyway.

PPS: And if you haven't received that item in the mail, I'll send another one today.

Doc (hoping Joe plays the Shirt out the XCVIII, loves it, and it doesn't become a dust collector)

I see this thing working better than most anything else for Prokofiev (and similarly-written/scored) works and OLD SCHOOL pops applications - orchestrated PRIOR TO the era whereby those who scored such works for orchestra tended to score the tuba as a reinforcement for the basses - rather than as a "defacto 4th trombone" (whereby I will - nearly automatically - employ the cimbasso).

...and sure, I'll be discovering MANY more applications, and will (probably?) tend to squeeze it into other applications - as the resonance (again: combined with the intonation/flexibility "easy buttons") is/are so alluring.

Oddly, I'm nearly "self-obsoleting" my (an amazing instrument) F tuba, as I'm becoming more and more convinced that my (particularly large, easy to play in-tune, and broad-sounding/easy-responding low range) compensating euphonium is often a better choice than an F tuba for SOME of the late-classical era/early-romantic era orchestral literature. I'm fairly weary of "Symphonie Fantastique" - just as one example - but it makes about 1000% more sense to play it on a (again: easily-played/great-responding) compensating euphonium, than with any F tuba. That having been said, I'll automatically grab the F tuba to play the Meistersinger Prelude (which defines very easy/semi-effortless execution, with only a few run-throughs at home), whereas many other Americans will choose a long/large C instrument - working arduously through the higher passages and "the trill". I'm not exactly a "trend-follower" (nor setter).

bloke wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 9:30 am I see this thing working better than most anything else for Prokofiev (and similarly-written/scored) works and OLD SCHOOL pops applications - orchestrated PRIOR TO the era whereby those who scored such works for orchestra tended to score the tuba as a reinforcement for the basses - rather than as a "defacto 4th trombone" (whereby I will - nearly automatically - employ the cimbasso).

...and sure, I'll be discovering MANY more applications, and will (probably?) tend to squeeze it into other applications - as the resonance (again: combined with the intonation/flexibility "easy buttons") is/are so alluring.

other applications... I was thinking the recent Dvorak was very good on the Holton, but the 98 could be set on auto-pilot and never have to hit the throttle. An easy button. That is, if you need to squeeze the 98 into something. Many similar opportunities will come up - I hope we can hear some examples of it in action!