Re: Size is Relative


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

Posted by Rick Denney on April 02, 2003 at 11:51:52:

In Reply to: Size is Relative posted by SW on April 02, 2003 at 00:28:36:

I think the teacher's point is in defining the range of conditions for which each instrument is suitable, and making sure that the range overlaps so that you don't have a gap right in the middle. For example, if you have a really large contrabass tuba and a really small (sounding) F tuba, there might be certain small-ensemble situations where you'd have to compromise a lot. If you had a bigger (sounding) F tuba or a smaller contrabass, you would not have to compromise that middle-of-the-road playing situation.

My F tuba is small, but it is not small-sounding, and I find that it is just fine for quintet with other players at roughly my level. If I were asked to play in a small orchestra, or a brass ensemble bigger than a quintet, it might not be enough, but surely my Holton would be too big.

I think you'll find that most players end up with a 4/4 or 5/4 contrabass in addition to their 6/4 orchestral horn and small F, or a big F tuba by itself, to fill that gap.

But I agree with you that if you don't ever expect to play in those medium-sized ensembles, you might not need a mid-sized horn. I play in a concert band and a quintet, and mostly use my 6/4 Holton and 3/4 Yamaha F tuba. It's nice to know that I can pull out my 4/4 or 5/4 tubas if an appropriate gig comes my way. When I played in an amateur orchestra, the 4/4 instrument was ideal and the Holton would have been too big.

Rick "seeing the good sense in both approaches" Denney


Follow Ups: