New F tubas vs the Symphonie

[prodigal]

Hello all,

I'm getting a financial plan in place for an F tuba. Does anything new from B&S or Miraphone hang with the masterpiece of East Germany? Gotta have rotors, I'm used to 5 of them.

It could be down the road a bit, but there sure seems to be a lot of new models in the virtual showrooms then back in the day.

Or should I just bide my time, and pick up a good Symphonie.

Thanks, I value your opinions.

[bloke]

For years and years, every time a new F instrument came out I would try to try one and compare it to my (bought new c. 1982) Symphonie. When a couple of new models came out, I actually bought them - used in new condition - if they were priced below market (just so I could test them) because they were models that weren't showing up in elephant rooms. (I did this with Gronitz when everyone was going nuts over them, but they weren't on display anywhere... I paid about $8,000 for one in new condition hoping to be excited by it, played it for about 10 minutes, was sorely disappointed, advertised it for sale, and sold it for $9,000.)
A very few of the subsequent F tuba models (nearly always with large mouthpipes, large initial bore sizes, and bell throat diameters which are quite large) play in tune about as well as good versions of Symphonie models, but none of them are easy to play. This has been overly discussed here (admittedly by me), but the current goal across the industry seems to be to try to make them sound like contrabass tubas... with most of them only accomplishing a diffuse sound and surrendering the resonance of the sound.

Another (non-starter, to me personally) characteristic.- which seems to plague so many other models of F tubas - is a mile-sharp second space open C. I just can't think of a workaround for this which I could personally happily embrace. This includes some models which were redesigned and about which it was boasted that they "now play better in tune than any other F tuba on the market"...ie. they still featured the sharp second space C.

This is not just a tuba trend, as I've also discussed. It's even found its way into bassoons. Most of the saxophones made today are "big". Brand new, some of the big saxophones are really expensive, but don't really hold their value. The saxophones that hold their value (the best ever of the appropriate sized saxophones, and made by the company which was actually started by Adolfe Sax himself) were made between the later 1950s and the later 1960s by one company. Needless to say, an overwhelming percentage of trombonists today play instruments which are the next thing to being bass trombones (big .547" bore sizes, big bells, almost bass trombone size mouthpieces, and built-in features which tend to make them bigger yet). Often, they end up sounding (again on the other ends of the instruments) almost like English baritones, rather than offering a classic trombone type of resonance. It requires really powerful players - and often playing quite loud - for them to begin to sound like when I would identify as a classic trombone sound. I believe that sometimes - when music directors ask trombone sections to play louder - what they're seeking is the classic trombone type of resonance, rather than more actual quantity of sound.

Oversized wind instruments are alluring. They're fun to play for a while, because they feel so different. Players use the adjective "free-blowing", and other related adjectives... but the sound intensity (emitted from the other end of the instrument) often isn't there. Again, they tend to produce diffuse sounds. What players feel often isn't heard. Even when trumpets have only slightly oversized bells and slightly oversized bores (small differences in small instruments end up being bigger differences), the sound that comes out of them tends to be diffuse compared to some of the most widely-produced models. Players tend to refer to big trumpets as "jazz" instruments, and tend to mate them with shallow cup mouthpieces, and they often end up sounding like smaller trumpets - emitting a small thin harsh sound (which admittedly has always seemed sort of odd to me)...but I digress...(a lot).

As the so-called "large F tubas" are obviously attempts to make them sound and even feel like contrabass tubas (falling short on both counts), as well as most all featuring really curious tuning, (and I've said this before) I analogize them to the so-called "monster" E-flat tubas of the 1920s - 1930s... (which were probably designed for trumpet players to be able to double on tuba, when a band couldn't manage to round up a tuba player)... but that problem really doesn't exist anymore, and I believe that many (certainly American) tuba players are really hesitant to learn how to play classic F tubas, and manufacturers have addressed this hesitancy via most of the recent designs.

[Porky]

Symphonies are great tubas but they aren’t the best tubas out there. Bloke makes some points in his post above. If I were you I’d try as many F tubas as you can and pick from there. Rather than listening to a retirement home of tuba players ramble about opinions. Ultimately it’s up to you to decide what’s going to work for you.

[bloke]

a retirement home of tuba players ramble about opinions.

clever cut

What's ignored - from my admittedly typically overly-long screed - is the fact that every time a new model has come out, I've put forth every effort to test most all of them... (again) Including quite a few models which are typically not encountered in elephant rooms... such as the super high-end B&S 4XXX and 6XXX models (still: just too large and too much work, though excellent intonation)... and I never passed over testing any of the piston models, just for what it's worth (with the best of those being the MRP, though those don't seem to be 100% consistent, for some unknown-to-me reason).

One thing's for sure, no one can stop "progress", and instrument designers obviously can't stop when they stumble across the best compromises...
... and so many things that instrument designers do to placate customers is to address the tactile ("tactile" including resistance and facial, and not just the manual), while sacrificing the sonic.

I guess in just about any discipline (and I'm referring to everything, not just music... everything), stuff is going to get larger and larger. We've certainly seen that in the mouthpiece world, and I personally found that trend isn't particularly helpful either.

One of the big-selling Chinese F tuba manufacturers claims to have completely copied their personally-owned "Symphonie" model, and most of the dimensions may be there, yet a genuine Symphonie model's mouthpipe tube expands from just under one half inch in diameter, whereas their copy starts out significantly larger than that, with the resonance and resistance (with less resistance offering an adverse effect on facility) just not being the same. This reminds me just a little bit of when another maker claimed to copy Howard Johnson's Mahillon tuba, but just didn't seem to have the courage to build it with a .625" bore (just too far off the norm, even though it was a major characteristic that caused it to be what it was), and issued a replica with a 17mm (.669") bore. It just wasn't anything like the Belgian original.

[Sousaswag]

There ARE some really good modern F tubas out there, but you won’t like what I like, or what bloke likes, etc.

If you want rotor only, then look at the modern B&S and Meinl Weston models. In my opinion, they’re all really good. I like the Meinl Weston models more, but that’s just me.

Or, look at older B&S Pt-10, 15, 16, etc. They’re also good.

[MiBrassFS]

.

[bloke]

The word of the day is “screed.”

That is all.

' amazed that you read that screed.

one word: worldclasssound

bloke "combination screed and troll, per usual...but most F tubas (including some B&S Symphonies models - as they were hand-made...as well as dogged-out/worn-out Symphonie models) suck, and many other F tubas are millstones (definition 2b)."