TubaForum.net

Though it's pretty obvious that the Miraphone 98 B-flat tuba - which I'm now playing - is really large, maybe I was in denial just a little bit because it's nowhere close to as much to work to make it go compared to the really large C instrument that I owned a while back, which (and though a significantly shorter instrument) was a Rudolf Meinl 5/4. Even though that tuba offered really good tuning (considerably better than the two smaller sizes in C that RM sells) and I did a really major mouthpipe alteration (downsizing) to the RM, it was still a good bit of work to play the thing. The 98 B-flat - clearly - is easier.

The difference between playing a B-flat and a C in any size is pretty profound, and I'm not going to go into any of that stuff, but - as a thread title suggests - I forgot about the advantages of that Orchestra Grand setup with really large tubas (tubas that don't offer the amount of resistance that some of us prefer - which help us do quite a few different things more easily, and with better results).

The Orchestra Grand Cup isn't that dissimilar to the Symphony cup, but its features are scaled down just a little bit (features which specifically help the Symphony cup to produce a really "pretty" sound), the Orchestra Grand backbore features a little bit smaller throat, and I took away that reverse taper feature. Finally, the exit bore on the Orchestra Grand back-bore is more conservative, whereby if anyone has both a Symphony shank and an Orchestra Grand shank of the same shank size, they will notice that the back end of an Orchestra Grand shank is thicker metal.

Sometimes, I've swapped out only one of those two Orchestral Grand components, and sometimes I've swapped out both. This time I swapped out both, and I also moved from the intermediate shank size to a (smaller) standard shank, which really pushes the limit (with this particular tuba) in regards to the mouthpiece spacing to the choke-point at the very end of the receiver (where the mouthpipe taper actually begins). I've almost got the end of the mouthpiece sitting right on the choke point. This isn't always a great thing, but - in this particular case - it apparently is.

The double low range is more accessible with the OG setup on this particular instrument, long sustained low pitches (whereby composers/arrangers don't understand our limitations) are able to be held out longer, and the overall sound is just a little bit more "together", which is something that I was also hoping would occur with this change (once it occurred to me to try this change).

I sell fewer of the Orchestra Grand components than any of the other, but they do have a place, and this particular instrument (combined with this particular player) is one of them. It would be easy to point out that I'm not as young as I once was, but - though I'm no longer young and without that extra level of "young man strength", maybe I'm also playing a little bit smarter than I did when I was young, and have found ways within myself (aside from my equipment) to achieve more and better results with less work. (??) ...and the same thing with brass instrument repairs these days, whereby it's less strenuous, faster, and better.

Over the last week, I've played the Star Wars - Main Title four times, and I've played Young People's Guide (which begins on a very wide resonant double low D) four times. I've also been through a bunch of standard Broadway stuff with typical bass lines and low brass chords that go along with that genre. It's all better. Again, this setup is not for every tuba, and it might not be for every player.

-------------------------
sidebar:
This has to do with growing old...
I had been thinking that my ability to read music at sight and react had slowed down, but - at the same time - I knew that the pages were getting fuzzier and fuzzier, and I finally went and purchased a pair of intermediate distance reading glasses. It took me a second visit to the glasses store to get the right prescription. Basically the left eye needs plain glass, and the first try had a correction in the left eye which was not needed - and which was (of course) detrimental. Once I got the setup optimal, I'm back to mashing the proper buttons and reading the pages correctly, thank goodness. I probably should have done this two or three years ago, but it's hard to set aside half of a day to do something that isn't just absolutely immediately pressing. The fact that I can once again see the written pages of music has lowered my stress level considerably, and maybe that's stating the obvious.

I use an Orchestra Grand cup and Symphony shank on my Hirsbrunner, and both OG cup and shank on my Holton. The OG combination on the Holton indeed makes the low range easier to speak clearly. The Holton's enlarged fourth valve branch doesn't help there, and neither do the issues I've faced as I've aged.

Rick "never had a great low range even when younger" Denney

yup...thnx...and - with the really large tubas - I also believe that the OG helps keep the "sousaphone" out of the sonority.

bloke wrote: ↑Mon Feb 12, 2024 10:00 am yup...thnx...and - with the really large tubas - I also believe that the OG helps keep the "sousaphone" out of the sonority.

Always with really big tubas, the challenge is avoiding woofiness. The mouthpiece that came from Holton for the 345 was the Revelation 52, which is a toilet bowl. It is the Woofmeister. Clearly, the target sound for that mouthpiece was that of a jumbo sousaphone.

I first tried the PT-48, which is more cup-shaped and is pretty good at avoiding woofiness. I bought it from Mike Sanders--it was the first mouthpiece he used with his Yorkbrunner. I then tried a Geib, but for me that went a little too far, and several others, including your first Symphony (which was a two-piece at that time). The OG combination has been the best balance of size and clarity. My kaiser-type Hirsbrunner has that clarity baked in and didn't need the smaller shank to increase it.

I find that proper fit in the receiver is really important--as important as a lot of other features.

Rick "big tubas don't need toilet-bowl mouthpieces" Denney

Rick said: "I find that proper fit in the receiver is really important--as important as a lot of other features."

So that means the end of the shank butts up directly to the "shelf" at the choke point?

I know euph players make a big deal out of this ("the gap," like on the UK underground.) I have not yet paid any attention to it and wonder -- ok, if it's causing a problem, what is the problem it causes, and am I good enough to tell the difference? With dystonia making my lips twitch or my cheeks seize up at inopportune times, sometimes I think subtleties may be lost on me.

Mary Ann wrote: ↑Mon Feb 19, 2024 5:48 pm Rick said: "I find that proper fit in the receiver is really important--as important as a lot of other features."

So that means the end of the shank butts up directly to the "shelf" at the choke point?

I know euph players make a big deal out of this ("the gap," like on the UK underground.) I have not yet paid any attention to it and wonder -- ok, if it's causing a problem, what is the problem it causes, and am I good enough to tell the difference? With dystonia making my lips twitch or my cheeks seize up at inopportune times, sometimes I think subtleties may be lost on me.

If you search the old place for discussions of the Adjustable Gap Receiver you'll find all sorts of discussion about the potential effects. Not all tubas even have a separate receiver--many are simply fitted over the leadpipe--so the notion of a gap varies all over the map.

For me, if a mouthpiece doesn't insert far enough, it just doesn't do the things it's supposed to do. Intonation is one of those things, though I'm not sure everyone will agree about that. It may be that intonation is a byproduct of something else it affects, like pitch flexibility. I have a couple of tubas with smaller receivers than the typical Euro size of my newer instruments, including the Hirsbrunner, Holton, and Eastman. The 184 and the 101 work best with the mouthpiece that Doug Elliott machined for York Master, which he described as being "Old Miraphone" size.

One of those mouthpieces in my Hirsbrunner may well bottom out in the receiver, which is too far.

Rick "the great thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from" Denney

Matt knows that I'm not a fan of adjustable gap receivers, and he and I get along. I think those things are a bit of a red flag - to subsequent buyers - that the seller or a previous owner perceived that something was wrong, and they were trying to fix it. In particular, it saddens me to see those things installed on rotary instruments whereby the original receiver was originally the final taper of the mouthpipe tube itself. I don't know that they are as big of a red flag as a main tuning slide trigger, but they are more noticeable in pictures. Probably the biggest red flag is the unlacquered bell on a lacquered instrument.

With all of the mouthpieces that are out there these days, it's just not that hard to find a mouthpiece with a cup, throat, backbore, and shank size combo that works well with a particular instrument... the only hard thing is learning how to know what an instrument needs, and how to find it. I believe one thing that people discount - that has as much of an effect as anything - is the rim contour... maybe not on tuning, but actually maybe even on tuning, because - if the embouchure is locked in place by some rim contour - it makes it more difficult to favor the tuning on pitches.