TubaForum.net

Ran across the post below on Instagram. This may be the CC tuba that “inspired” the Holton Harvey Phillips model? Interesting tuba and great post.

If you’re referring to the 330 C model - which was the factory “cut” sister of the B-flat 331, I’m pretty sure that those models (based on examining them up close, as well as looking at pictures) were recycled from some short 4/4 size tooling which Holton used beginning a century ago or so ago. I never heard about a C version (of the design to which I specifically refer) cut down from the B-flat until those two models came out shortly before Holton was shuttered, but the various Holton generations of that basic short/compact/wide-bell design resemble – nearly completely – the bell and bows manufactured by York over in Michigan: the Model 33 and such. (The Holton and York bell-ands -bugle designs were so similar, that some people believe that one factory made the bodies for both models, but I don’t believe that to be true at all.)

Linked below is an old write up that I think was published shortly after those models were released. The pictures are pretty clear, and I believe it it’s pretty clear that the instrument is basically the same bell and bows shapes that Holton – again – recycled two or three times during its history, and that resemble the short 4/4 York designs very much… (The Holton B-flat - that some may have watched me stick together in the repair forum - began its life as a three-valve top-action 1960s release of the same bell and bows design.)
I’m pretty sure that all of the generations of that design were very short – only 32 inches tall – just as it is the one that I currently own.
Those who’ve seen Mr. Phillips’ short Conn C tuba will see that this Holton/York shape (shortened to C) is not a whole lot different from the primary Conn instrument that Mr. Phillips mostly played, which – I’m guessing – is why Mr. Phillips was willing to endorse that new Holton model.

https://www.norlanbewley.com/holton331.htm

thanks for the post.
Love the C# 23FTone !

indeed...I enjoyed listening as well...
Thank-you.

Sounded quite a bit different than Harvey...

.

@tofu

re: Holton 330/331

Those things are only 32" tall and the bell diameter is only 18"
(significantly smaller than the "new-style" squatty King tubas).

I don't know how big/tall that person is, and - further - many tubas (in pictures with their owners) tend to be the beneficiaries of perspective - just as with caught fish.

finally: Notice how the bell barely clears the top of his head.

The old Conn CC that Harvey played was quite a bit different that the Harvey Phillips model that Holton built. Wasn't that Holton billed as the first computer designed tuba?

I think I read that Harvey's Conn got smooshed one way or another and after being completely resurrected, didn't play to his liking.

Here is a picture of him with his Conn. Definitely not a large tuba by any stretch of the imagination. And yet, it seems that he never had trouble balancing any ensemble he played in (including subbing in plenty of orchestras)...

If you look in the picture at the top of the page, above Sergio's right shoulder are a few pictures. Here is the one of Harvey.

I honestly don’t see much difference.
Harvey‘s old Conn that everyone was accustomed to seeing was not many more than 30 inches tall - probably 32 or so (notice that in the picture the Conn bell barely clears Harvey‘s head, just as in the Bewley picture of the Holton), and had a wide bell and a small bore – I would guess .658” or something like that…(??)
… The Holton was just about the same tuba over the years; that design had always featured a 19 inch bell, but they cut it to 18 for the Phillips models. The Holton bore size (whether top or front action) was always .665” … again - other than the valveset - just about a dead ringer for a York 33.

I’ve had both a Phillips 330 and 331 up next to my reconfigured Holton (again: which was made in the 1960s, was top action, was .665 inch bore, and was sold as a “student“ model at that time.)
They may have used a computer to play around with the bows’ configurations, but it’s the same old tooling.

able to be heard:
This design can make a lot of racket. I don’t know if you remember me posting a bunch of little clips from the first time I used mine in an orchestra (which was the Bartok Concerto for Orchestra). It made plenty of racket, particularly that disruptive B-natural in the last movement - shortly after that quick dance commences.

The tuba in those photos of Harvey... How close Is that to either the 2J or 3J?

Which Rochut etude is Sergio playing here? Can't find it in my books....

bort2.0 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 24, 2022 11:22 pm The tuba in those photos of Harvey... How close Is that to either the 2J or 3J?

I always thought that Harvey’s tuba was about the size of a 3j (which isn’t all that different from a 2j). I still think this.

cjk wrote: ↑Mon Apr 25, 2022 9:08 pm I always thought that Harvey’s tuba was about the size of a 3j (which isn’t all that different from a 2j). I still think this.

That has always been my impression too.

… and also extremely similar in size to the York model 33 and the extremely similar Holton instruments, including the last time Holton dragged that tooling off the shelf – just before they were shuttered – to create the “Phillips“ models…whether or not they drew pictures of those models on a computer screen.