Re: Re: Re: Why F tuba?


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by agreed (?) on April 24, 2001 at 00:25:35:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Why F tuba? posted by Ridley on April 24, 2001 at 00:10:35:

I've seen the MW45... instruments, and they looks like "normal-large" (by post-1960's standards) F tubas to me.

I play a B&S F which I consider "large" - because, let's face it, overall it is about the size of a Miraphone 186(4/4 BBb/CC) except that it's an F instrument.

I think that F tubas with H-U-G-E bells and branches (not unlike those VERY old 20" bell Conn EEb tubas that were "just too big to work right" [no offense intended to the owners of old Conn EEb's]) are cumbersome and of little use. (I've owned one of those "too big" Conn EEb's, and tried to it professionally very briefly.) From my brief visits with an F instrument such as yours (MW25...), I believe it to be "well-balanced".

I guess its sorta like the 3 Little Pigs...Too Small / Too Big / and JUST RIGHT (within fairly wide acceptable perameters)

Joe "YFB621's are OK, but I don't dig 'em too much either." S.


Follow Ups: