TubaForum.net

It is something I don't like to admit--the past several months, I was struggling with getting low range response, and felt like I was working super hard in the lower range on my CC tuba, not getting the core or response like I once had. Figured it could be lip or face issues from getting older, or just playing CC way more than my F (as I used to do more time on F) and my mouthpiece or other needs were changing. I had played on several tubas last time at Buckeye Brass in the summer meeting a student for some custom work, and played on their line of tubas and thought I liked mine the best, but none of them had the low range issues I was having, and just shrugged it off to "Miraphone Siegfried being so good".

Sunday on a gig in a pro tuba quartet on the low part, I noticed some response issues. I was a bit dehydrated from starting more running after an injury and had not increased my water intake, and then I noticed between sets that my valves were not responding to valve oil. When I got home, I saw my first valve guide had broken.

I took my CC tuba in yesterday to Buckeye Brass for new valve guides and yamaha euph/tuba springs (after a VERY stressful first day back teaching, and lets just say, teaching was the easy, no stress part) I get home and suddenly, all the low range issues, response, centering, gone.

It could be from the few days of just F tuba, weather changing, and extreme lack of sleep causing a jinx effect, but having properly fitting and sealed valves and stiffer (but flexible springs), seemed to have fixed the issues. It is playing better than it has in several years. Last time I got the guides done was 134 in 2009 and 2nd in 2011, and the springs was 2020 or 2021. It is amazing how we can adjust suddenly small changes over time, but at a certain point, the small changes become too much.

I brag on the shop a lot, but it is really great having one of the top tuba repair techs in the country somewhat local to me, someone that has the knowledge from a design and manufacturing background who incorporates this into their repairs and customization.

1 - 600:
a nice close shave of any skin where the mouthpiece makes contact with the face. I would say that if a person is XX chromosome and might have a little peach fuzz in the mouthpiece area, this is just as valid a recommendation for those people.
In my personal experience, even short stubble compromises low range response (and no one needs respond by telling me personally how wonderful their low range is on top of their heavy beard. I couldn't possibly care less. )

601:
Clean the build-up out of the machine part of a tuba, particularly the mouth pipe tube, but certainly the valve porting and the adjacent cylindrical tubing as well.
The overwhelming majority of tubas that schools, university students, and working professionals bring to me (for things other than cleaning) need to be cleaned MORE THAN they need the thing done for which they brought their instruments to me.
I actually know of (and know) a former large university studio teacher who was denied tenure due to failing a recital which was one of the things required for tenure. It was a very nice F tuba with no mechanical problems. 6 months later (after having lost that job), it was brought to me and actually had approximately a 3/32 inch thick (3/16 inch diameter) white deposit all the way from the end of the mouthpiece receiver to the end of the valve section and through all of the tubing. It was unplayable, I cleaned it, and afterwards was a wonderful instrument (a beautiful silver B&S pt-10).

602:
Yes, check for valve porting alignment issues.

603:
TRY something OTHER THAN a mouthpiece with a wide rim with a lot of (ie. too much, in my view) contact area, try something OTHER THAN a mouthpiece with any throat size much larger than 8.2mm, and try a mouthpiece with a rim that does NOT have a sharp angular transition from the rim to the cup. (Just as a very divisive elected official reports sometimes: "We're going to try it, and see what happens."... so maybe just TRY it, and see what happens. If better things don't happen after a month or so, maybe stop trying it.

604:
If there happens to be encountered a model(s) of tuba(s) that seem(s) to play better than your model in quite a few significant ways, try to find ways to revisit that model(s) from time to time, and try to make high quality self-informed judgments as to whether one might benefit from a better instrument. Great big mouthpipe capillary bores (the small ends of mouth pipe tubes) generally have demonstrated (at least, to me) that they accomplish the opposite of what seems to be the intention of them (ie. They seem to offer a lack of focus and a less accessible low range), and (as previously intimated) the same goes for mouthpiece throat sizes.

605:
There are some pretty good and really good less-costly tubas, but it seems as though most of the really easy to play tubas tend to cost more (though there are also some high-priced "difficult" tubas as well). If tuba playing is a serious endeavor, possibly consider having equipment ownership represent a bit larger portion of an income or spending budget.

606:
Maybe try playing really-really low pitches without the tongue.
When played very low properly (with a really pleasant marketable sound, regardless of volume level), the mouth is so open that the tongue can end up being a hindrance. Just adjust the lip tension and air to the proper amounts to play the desired pitch, and (simply) start blowing. again: "See what happens."

My comment totally unrelated to most of everything that has been said except for: If your mouthpiece bore size is too big in comparison to your air availability, you won't be able to push enough air through it to get your lips flapping as needed for the low range to sound, because you'll run out of air before you get results. Source: moi. Data: well below the staff is far easier for me on a euph not because of the cup size but because the bore size of a euph mouthpiece is a much better match for my available air. I can sustain a low below-the-staff concert Bb on a (French) horn for FAR longer than I can on a tuba, because the air required is so much less.

Mary Ann wrote: Fri Aug 29, 2025 12:16 pm My comment totally unrelated to most of everything that has been said except for: If your mouthpiece bore size is too big in comparison to your air availability, you won't be able to push enough air through it to get your lips flapping as needed for the low range to sound, because you'll run out of air before you get results. Source: moi. Data: well below the staff is far easier for me on a euph not because of the cup size but because the bore size of a euph mouthpiece is a much better match for my available air. I can sustain a low below-the-staff concert Bb on a (French) horn for FAR longer than I can on a tuba, because the air required is so much less.

I agree with Bloke’s assessments. I’ve had my horn since 2007 and though it wasn’t bad as of late, I noticed giving more work. This would explain why with the valves. Less shifting and pivoting, less effort.

I’ve been encouraging students to move away from large throat mouthpieces. An entire high school band I work with were supplied with PT 50s (drum corps use these apparently), and over the years I’ve had a couple students buy the PT 88s. They look the same visually from the outside. This past band camp one of the 88s got passed around and one of the older students said “I can get the same results out much easier with half the effort”.

I’m not going to debate the funnel vs bowl, because I prefer the bowl, but the bigger difference between the PT 50 and PT 88 is the throat. There are better ways to approach the low range than just shoving a ton of air down an air hog of a mouthpiece.

bloke wrote: Fri Aug 29, 2025 10:50 am 1 - 600:
a nice close shave of any skin where the mouthpiece makes contact with the face. I would say that if a person is XX chromosome and might have a little peach fuzz in the mouthpiece area, this is just as valid a recommendation for those people.
In my personal experience, even short stubble compromises low range response (and no one needs respond by telling me personally how wonderful their low range is on top of their heavy beard. I couldn't possibly care less. )

(snip)

All through college I had a rather long mustache. And all through college my low range sucked. It was not until relatively recently that a gentleman (who had a low range for days) in the brass band I was in told me I should consider trimming my 'stache to above where my mouthpiece hit. He was right. It instantly opened up my low range, and I no longer leaked air out the sides all the time. Looking back, I think I had better response when I was in high school. Now I think it's just because I didn't have a mustache.