Posted by Rick Denney on August 23, 2002 at 16:16:55:
In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What A Horn (long) posted by Tony Z. on August 23, 2002 at 15:08:12:
It isn't so much that it is weak, it is that it doesn't move independently without a lot of training. For me, it is the least independently controllable finger on my right hand.
But I think that is a weakness than can be overcome, and I'm working on it. I watched Roland Szentpali carefully last time I saw him perform, and he used the third valve in lieu of 1-2 in almost every case. In his case, it seemed to simplify the technical passages rather than make them more complex. For me, it's about the same when by brain is working.
I use 3 instead of 1-2 for the all 1-2 combinations below the staff, and for all 1-2 combinations in the high range starting with the top-space G on my York Master. The 1-2 is sharper and therefore helpful on the B and D (in the domain of the flattish fifth partial). The G at the bottom of the staff seems to go both ways. Now, the only time I manipulate the first-valve slide is for Eb's, where it needs to be pulled if I'm not on my game. Other first-valve notes want it mostly all the way in.
Here's why I go into this detail: This horn works so much better with the third valve used in lieu of 1-2, that I believe it was designed that way. I could use 1-2 all the time, but would have to push that first-valve slide around a lot more. I wonder if the Willson, being a pro-quality BBb tuba, is more designed for the European approach than for the American approach. Most American tubists who would spend that sort of money for a tuba would be buying a C, so I have to think the target market is the European orchestral player.
Rick "who resonates strongly with Klaus's notion that these manipulations increase with lack of practice" Denney