Wessex CC 6/4 Rotary valve Tuba 'Titan'

[TubaJacob]

Thoughts?

https://us.wessex-tubas.com/products/cc ... 6250652852

[Sousaswag]

So... York bell and main bows with a B&S/VMI valveset, no? An improved Neptune, I guess.

Looks interesting... I hope the fact that it's so lightweight doesn't mean it folds like a pancake if you look at it wrong.

Not my cup of tea, but it does fill a void that is there... Other large rotor CC's aren't quite as big as this one seems... Except for the Rudy.

Tuono - Owned one. It was great.
Regular ol' PT6 - Never played one I didn't like.
Rudy - Never played one I didn't like.
MRP - Owned one - It was also great.

[bloke]

weight:
Before I added on some gadgetry, my previously-stock Miraphone model 98 (five 21.2mm bore rotary valves) only weighed 24 lb... it's also very much 6/4 - a little different (besides the overall length) from this Jinbao tuba, as the 98 is basically a set of kaiser taper bows with an American 6/4 bell section (virtually identical to Holton 345, except with a kranz) at the end.

Realize that - at only one more pound of weight, It's a B-flat instrument with a whole bunch of things that are longer (main bugle and all of the circuits), and thus there's more stuff that should weigh more.

MIRAPHONE 98 BB-FLAT


I really couldn't imagine (having experienced that, and having paid the price) carrying a very large thin wall handmade tuba around in a lightly padded sack, but I guess that's what people do. (At least for now, my instrument is not all beat up, and I've used it quite a bit for several years.)

I personally harbor such a ridiculous pro B-flat and anti C bias - at this time, that I'm not going to comment about that stuff (much like a recovering smoker, I would suppose)... and (duh) it would be really unfair to comment further anyway, because I've never played this model. The specs report that the bore sizes are no larger than the typical piston bore sizes paired with similar instruments, so I'm not really sure what the advantage is of mounting rotors (maybe something...) I'm also noticing that - even though the bore sizes are the same as with typical piston versions of tubas in this size range - the mouth pipe is a typical rotary instrument length (LONG) which necessarily defines this as a smaller instrument (certainly in the capillary portion of the instrument) than a similar piston instrument - whereby the valves on a piston version would be closer to the mouthpiece, thus the bore of the bugle of the instrument would begin to expand sooner
(I'm not criticizing this either. I like resistance, I use it, and this might work very well, for all I know.)
The pictures look cool...

[Bob Kolada]

The first valve slide doesn't look all that accessible unless you have child sized hands, or Bob length arms. Maybe one of these left side kickers? Your thumb would be right by the 4th valve slide then as well.

[dp]

Whether performing Mahler, Wagner, Bruckner, Strauss, Prokofiev or modern symphonic repertoire, the Titan delivers

[bort2.0]

There's something unsettling about it. I think it's the over-effected photos, with the black background, not being able to see the true size of the bell, and the overall matte appearance of the finish. I'd much rather see a clear, shiny, and real photo of the tuba sitting in the showroom., or with a person holding it, etc.

The design isn't a surprise -- Jonathan Hodgetts played a rotary Neptune for many years. He loved that tuba, and then started his own tuba company and basically didn't use it after that. Plus, B&S stopped making the Neptune long ago. The two of those together... Well, I'm not surprised he made something that reminds us of the Neptune.

However,.the Neptune wasn't a York style tuba. It was a tighter wrap and a taller bell (the gap between top bow and bell was bigger than on the Titan). It seems like the Titan has larger bottom and top bows than the Neptune does, and that the Titan is more of an actual 6/4.tuba. The Titan (36.5") is also far shorter than the Neptune 39" or so).

The Neptune always felt and played like an oversized 5/4 tuba. It didn't have the ultimate weight of a 6/4 in terms of sound, but it sure had no deficiency either. I wish there was another Neptune around here to try again sometime, I'd like to have a other chance now 10+ years later to know what I think now..

The Titan seema like an odd combination, maybe it works, maybe it doesn't. It'll be interesting to hear an actual review of this one sometime.

[UncleBeer]

Nitpicking here: The measurements are wrong: 20mm ain't 0.75". It's .787". No idea what the actual bore is.

[bort2.0]

Nitpicking here: The measurements are wrong: 20mm ain't 0.75". It's .787". No idea what the actual bore is.

I saw that too. I'm guessing the millimeters are correct and the inches are wrong.

[bloke]

Fair enough, but how are we to know which is correct?

19 and 20 mm (.75" and c. .79") is a very common pairing of bore sizes.

That said, German kaiser rotary tubas are typically somewhere around 21 mm bore...YET the online sheet makes a big deal out of this being basically a York style tuba (which typically feature .75" and .79" bore valve section tubing), yet with rotary valves...
... whereby nothing in particular is going to be a good guess (on our part, until clarified) as to what is actually correct.

Again, I'm not running anything down. I'd be interested in playing it (were I still into playing C-length instruments).

Screenshot_20260726-135340~2.jpg (11.46 KiB) Viewed 17781 times

Being a very large 6/4 instrument with rotors, I would say that 20 and 21 are more likely than 19 and 20, as far as the millimeter diameters of the tubing in the valve section.
That said, the smaller two bore sizes thing is actually more interesting, because it's not the typical thing.
I'm sure (sooner, rather than later) this inconsistency on this webpage is going to be corrected.

In the kindest possible way, as constructive criticism I would strongly recommend having someone like Carl do the video demos of this line of instruments, rather than some who have been selected up to this point in time.

[Billy M.]

The first valve slide doesn't look all that accessible unless you have child sized hands, or Bob length arms. Maybe one of these left side kickers? Your thumb would be right by the 4th valve slide then as well.

I was actually looking at this really closely and noticed a finger lever on the right side of the slide and it's spring-loaded from the left side. It appears you would put your hand between the fourth valve slide and grip the leadpipe, anchoring your thumb under the lever.

I'd be interested to try it, but doubt it would provide me anything I can't already do with ease for my needs with my MRP.

[Billy M.]

The design isn't a surprise -- Jonathan Hodgetts played a rotary Neptune for many years. He loved that tuba, and then started his own tuba company and basically didn't use it after that. Plus, B&S stopped making the Neptune long ago.

The Titan seema like an odd combination, maybe it works, maybe it doesn't. It'll be interesting to hear an actual review of this one sometime.

Wasn't the MRP basically a redesign of the Neptune to eliminate some of its deficiencies? Granted, I believe the MRP was slightly smaller, but that's what I seem to keep hearing about why the MRP was created.

[bloke]

Yeah I believe the Neptune was basically a pt6 which featured a suddenly expanding bore at the bottom bow and bell.

Neptune intonation is interesting, because doing this defined (at least) different intonation quirks versus the 2165/2265/6450 bugle.

I tend to suspect that the MRP thing used some of the new technology, which finds the best intonation compromises based on the beginning and ending size of any particular bugle of any particular length.

[bort2.0]

Neptune is the Mel Culbertson changes to the PT-6 design, which was in part because of wanting a tuba that could play in either BBb or CC.

MRP uses the Fafner bell and bell either directly or as deep inspiration to make a rotary CC tuba that sounds like a BBb tuba. I just learned that it's nicknamed "the tuba with the big hips " B&S says so themselves

I would imagine that the MRP and the Titan are quite different tubas from each other.

[Timtamtuba]

Thoughts?

https://us.wessex-tubas.com/products/cc ... 6250652852

Maybe im a hater but my initial thoughts are, wow do we really need another giant cc york tuba copy thing?
Full disclosure though
I had a very bad experience with a wessex tuba years ago and I don't think I'll ever get that taste out of my mouth.
I just struggle to think of who would buy this

[bort2.0]

.
I just struggle to think of who would buy this

That's a good way to put it!

[Sousaswag]

I think the Neptune used some combination of 2165 bell (maybe??) with a large bottom bow they had to mess with to fit onto a Pt6 body.

The MRP is just a better version of a Pt6. Fafner bell and bottom bow mated to that body…

JUST like the 6450 is a better version of a 2165 with, you guessed it, a Fafner bell stuck on there with (likely) the bottom bow of the 2165/2265/6450/MRP/Fafner being shared.

Back to the handmade thing… I’ve spoken to several repair guys who don’t have much good to say about the big Wessex and Eastman tubas as far as being easy to damage… I don’t have any experience with either make’s big tubas but I would imagine there’s some truth to those statements

[Timtamtuba]

.

[Timtamtuba]

Neptune is the Mel Culbertson changes to the PT-6 design, which was in part because of wanting a tuba that could play in either BBb or CC.

MRP uses the Fafner bell and bell either directly or as deep inspiration to make a rotary CC tuba that sounds like a BBb tuba. I just learned that it's nicknamed "the tuba with the big hips " B&S says so themselves

I would imagine that the MRP and the Titan are quite different tubas from each other.

Sorry to derail but all this talk about the Fafner bell but have yall ever tried the Fasolt the 196? I don't know how meinl weston can call it a 5/4 instrument when its physically bigger than any 6/4 ive held. Thing was so huge I got rid of it in like 6 months it was just too big to carry around too big for any ensemble I was in. I think my point is I think a lot of tubas are actually just too big.

[Sousaswag]

I think the Fasolt is just a Fafner with a 2165 bell. Never seen one in the wild, though…

It may be physically TALLER than many others, but it’s probably not as “thick” as your standard York or Holton 6/4 style.

[bloke]

yes...

Thin-wall tubas are easier to damage.

Carelessness (vs. carefulness) also defines "most anything" being easier to damage.

"Carrying something around in a sack" (vs. a hard case) also points towards easier to damage.