Posted by Klaus on August 24, 2002 at 22:12:10:
In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Replacing lead pipe posted by Lee Stofer on August 24, 2002 at 09:51:05:
Thank you for your reply, Lee.
I have seen the same pattern, yet I am glad to have it confirmed by a person with a much wider and deeper knowledge than mine.
However my limited insight does not prevent me from having ideas.
I can remember the visuals of tubas from back around, when I was 4 or 5 years old.
My audial memories go less far back. Even from my first years in band, when I played a rotary valved alto bone, the tuba sound stays less than present. However I remember my first encounter with a helicon in 1961 or 62. I have told of that very ugly experience in previous postings.
When I entered our equivalent of your high school back in 1963, I had a teacher, who had been in the US, which was very rare back then. He had brought a record made by a brass quintet from NY, its name not in my memory any longer.
The tuba was a large rotary contrabass, that had a sound, that impressed me back then, but which I only would accept from a widebored contrabass trombone or from a cimbasso nowadays. Lots of dark bottom and a rather cutting edge on the top. But not the full and unedgy warmth, that I now associate with large US-style pistoned tubas and sousas.
I truly guess, that the absence of nickel silver leadpipes in US style pistoned tubas is a very deliberate choice by their makers. Done with the purpose to keep up the beauty of their full warmth. Whereas the makers of the German style uglyphones have a much wider scope of freedom in their choices of materials, as not even gold would help them out.
Is this a highly political posting. Be sure!
Klaus