Discussion of tuba sizing

[KingTuba1241X]

There has to be an agreed upon scientific system of measurement. Imagine if your system of determining tuba size was how the Police determined speed on the highways?

There hasn't been and isn't going to be any such scientific system of measurement in our lifetimes, so we're just going to have to hold off on issuing citations.

That is also because the customer doesn´t ask for it and nobody learns the customer what to ask for.
I can think of three curves that could be usefull, impedance, frequency (pp-ff) and directivity.

With the impedance curve you could see if there are any notes that don´t resonate properly or if there are leaks in the instrument. There should never again be a tuba sold without an impedance curve, stop selling lemons.

The directivity shows how broad the sound or how much the tuba projects the sound in one direction.
Frequency curves gives an indication of the color of the sound. How much harmonics and which one´s. pp and ff to see how the tuba changes sound between the two.

The latest two will need a learning curve to see how the difference of the curve relates to how the players percieve the differences. It could provide useful info to quantify the sound better then all the words we use now which means something different for everbody.
Or they don´t work and we need to look for other curves.

Research on flutes shows that the player dominates in how the flute sounds.
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... rsion_2020

If the customer isn't smart enough to ask or understand what the difference between a 4/4 and a 6/4 tuba is, they sure as heck won't be asking a music shop about which horn has the best impedance curve or frequency curve. (Unless it's one of us, but I'm talking School kids or parents interested in buying a new horn).

[donn]

With the impedance curve you could see if there are any notes that don´t resonate properly or if there are leaks in the instrument. There should never again be a tuba sold without an impedance curve, stop selling lemons.

In a casual search, I found no equipment suited to this procedure, nor even a description of what it would take. Are you aware of any example? Do they use mechanically generated tones?

[bloke]

I’m not going to get involved in the chest puffing nor technospeak, but there is a size designation for short (usually rotary valves) tubas with relatively fat bodies and not-the-largest bell flare diameters:
“piggy”
Originally, the term pertained to one model made by one manufacturer, but - since then - quite a few tubas - of that general shape/size - have been introduced to the market by various manufacturers, and in B-flat and C.

The Miraphone 191 and the St. Petersburg 202 both certainly fall into this size category.

[MN_TimTuba]

I like Joe's farm animal idea, so I'm going with Bunny, Pony, Piggy, Bossie, Horsie, and Ox.

Tim

[GC]

Trying to force as strict definition onto fuzzy categorization is pointless.

Might as well call 'em what you want to. Everybody will anyway.

[KingTuba1241X]

Shouldn´t everybody known when buying a secondhand car to check the compression, all you need to known is one number and it needs to be the same for every cylinder.

That's not the way stuff works man, you're asking a LOT from humanity at that point. I don't even think most people buying a tuba for their high schooler or grad even know or care 4/4, 5/4, or 6/4.

[KingTuba1241X]

Shouldn´t everybody known when buying a secondhand car to check the compression, all you need to known is one number and it needs to be the same for every cylinder.

That's not the way stuff works man, you're asking a LOT from humanity at that point. I don't even think most people buying a tuba for their high schooler or grad even know or care 4/4, 5/4, or 6/4.

Isn´t this the time of smartphones, youtube... If you want to invest a little time you find a video of how to do a compression test and where to buy the cheapest gauge on youtube.
It´s just laziness and I see that everywhere, at work or on other fora where it is scary how little effort people want to invest in some knowledge.

They just aren't interested in getting that far into something they consider either a hobby or routine maintenance. Perhaps lazy, but that's a lot of unnecessary emotional investment for most people believe it or not.

[donn]

If a test like that were available, tuba shoppers would look at it, and possibly be motivated to learn how to interpret it.

That initial conditions is a hard target to meet, though. A shop like Hornguys or Dillon might be able to get you test results on a couple tubas they have in stock, but common buying trends seem to be to buy Chinese stuff from a seller who isn't likely to satisfy this need - maybe doesn't even handle the merchandise physically, has limited stock on hand, or just isn't into doing this work. Or second hand.

Then you get into whether the test really serves an important purpose - will the tests correlate very well with owner satisfaction. A manufacturer could certainly think about using tests like this for quality control, or even design, but it would have to really pay off for buyers if it's going to be worth learning. The place to start might be university tuba studios, where you could get a handful of decent players to go over a few tubas and their response data sheets and see if there's value in it and if so, how to make that accessible to a reasonably motivated shopper.

[KingTuba1241X]

If I was to spend 5000 dollar and think I could miss an episode of wheel of fortune or reality soap.

Yeah, that's unfortunately not how the average American consumer thinks.

[the elephant]

[dp]

[pjv]

WARNING! HIGHLY OPINIONATED OPINION FOLLOWING:

This sizing thing is just a bowl of baloney. This was a phony construct invented buy a long gone tuba retailer in the 1970s. This was an attempt to define the undefinable, and as a marketing ploy at the start of the "mine's bigger" movement. The first "designation" was devised to delineate on what was a 'full sized' tuba, along the lines of stringed instrument designation. To clarify the difference, say, between a Mirafone 186 and a student model like the small King or Olds. The current designations arose through comparison to the 4/4s. Rudolph Meinl makes what is called a 3/4. This is ABOUT the size of normal 4/4 tubas, but is quite a bit larger than say a Yamaha 103. Alexander 163 is larger than the Mirafone 186, but are both considered 4/4s. Mirafone's 185 is smaller than the Rudy 3/4, but is considered a 3/4. Mirafone's 184 is considered a 1/2 size, but is bigger than most student 3/4s. Let's look at the other end. Rudy Meinl's 5/4 CC, Willson 3050RZ, and MW Tuono are all large .835 bore tubas, but are considered 5/4 and are VERY large tubas, larger than the 6/4 .750 bore CC BATs. What would be the designation for the Mirafone 190, the large Rudy BBb, and the Wexxes Kaiser, 7/4? Or would they be 5/4s, as the last branch is quite a bit smaller than the 6/4 BATs?

I suggest this designation: small, medium, large, BAT.

Respectfully submitted,

This!
ps "small, medium, large, BAT"(BART) yeah, that's what I meant with the 34/, 4/4. 5/4, 6/4.
A VERY general way to classify a tuba so that one more or less know what your talking about.

[pjv]

My 184 has decided to identify as a 6/4. #transtuba

Perfect!

[pjv]

It feels like home!
Anybody else getting that sentimental feeling that things are "back to normal".
You know, like how we all used to yell at each other around the dinner table.
And by "dinner table" I mean TubeNet.

Can't wait for the piston v. rotary thread!

and I am REALLY enjoying every minute of it!

[bloke]

I’m not sure what a “monkey sandwich” is...(??)
Maybe, some people - who like to target/shadow selected subscribers, here, and pick random specious arguments about tuba stuff - are ~also~ cannibals...(??)
I don’t believe the ~term~ “piggy“ (as a size and shape of tuba) existed a hundred years ago, but neither did any of the math fractions that people tend to try to attach to tuba size ranges.
I have to admit to have never seen a 4/4 nor 5/4 tuba size designation until ~after~ I saw a Swiss maker advertise their CSO knock-off (four decades ago - the second knock-off ever made – after Holton) as “6/4“ - in the T.U.B.A. Journal.
I would love for someone to find that full-page ad, scan it, and - along with the date of publication - post than scan here. I distinctly remember raising my eyebrows at the use of a fraction - to describe a tuba’s size - in an advertisement.
======
otherwise:
“Getting all worked up and insulting when taking on mundane topics about nearly nothing at all” seems to be an effective method of trolling...Just check out the length of this post (though I’m going to have to wrap it up, because it’s about time to flush).

[the elephant]

… I´m calling this a monkey sandwich.

I’m not sure what a “monkey sandwich” is...(??)

This whole raging, burning desire to categorize tubas by size is a rather stupid thing to argue about, boys and girls.

Seriously.

Y'all need to get a hold of yourselves and go do something else for a few hours.

Now go on. GIT!

[KingTuba1241X]

WARNING! HIGHLY OPINIONATED OPINION FOLLOWING:

This sizing thing is just a bowl of baloney. This was a phony construct invented buy a long gone tuba retailer in the 1970s. This was an attempt to define the undefinable, and as a marketing ploy at the start of the "mine's bigger" movement. The first "designation" was devised to delineate on what was a 'full sized' tuba, along the lines of stringed instrument designation. To clarify the difference, say, between a Mirafone 186 and a student model like the small King or Olds. The current designations arose through comparison to the 4/4s. Rudolph Meinl makes what is called a 3/4. This is ABOUT the size of normal 4/4 tubas, but is quite a bit larger than say a Yamaha 103. Alexander 163 is larger than the Mirafone 186, but are both considered 4/4s. Mirafone's 185 is smaller than the Rudy 3/4, but is considered a 3/4. Mirafone's 184 is considered a 1/2 size, but is bigger than most student 3/4s. Let's look at the other end. Rudy Meinl's 5/4 CC, Willson 3050RZ, and MW Tuono are all large .835 bore tubas, but are considered 5/4 and are VERY large tubas, larger than the 6/4 .750 bore CC BATs. What would be the designation for the Mirafone 190, the large Rudy BBb, and the Wexxes Kaiser, 7/4? Or would they be 5/4s, as the last branch is quite a bit smaller than the 6/4 BATs?

I suggest this designation: small, medium, large, BAT.

Respectfully submitted,

This!
ps "small, medium, large, BAT"(BART) yeah, that's what I meant with the 34/, 4/4. 5/4, 6/4.
A VERY general way to classify a tuba so that one more or less know what your talking about.

My "Medium" King is "Larger" than a "BAT" but not quite a "Large" tuba. Numbering systems always work better. And all airline pilots across the globe must speak English because it's the Universally agreed upon language in Aviation communications. The chaos on Runways at large international airports would be just like this thread if everyone decided what's best for them.

[lost]

I appreciate contrary viewpoints on how tubas should be sized. It's how discussion happens.

I understand why the York copy was called a 6/4 if that was 2 sizes larger than what the company made at the time.

[matt g]

Didn’t Hirsbrunner make a Kaiser BBb at the same time they copied the York?

[Dan Tuba]

One reason I like owning/playing a Conn 24/25J tuba is that "nobody" is gonna out do me on size... nobody