Re: Re: Newer tuba models are missing ________ .


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

Posted by Wade on August 14, 2003 at 12:46:30:

In Reply to: Re: Newer tuba models are missing ________ . posted by Alex Fan on August 14, 2003 at 02:11:09:

I agree wholeheartedly with you! My Alexander has a lot of color, "character", and less-than-stellar (but quite workable) intonation. The tubing walls are 50% thinner (!!!) than my safe, easy, and boring YFB 621. In fact, the little Yamaha is a bit heaver than the big Alex; go figure. Also, the Alex really projects easily. I think the thinness factor is at work here, as well.

I have noticed that many modern recordings have excellent, but bland tuba sounds in abundance. And I am less than excited about listening to them. But you give a listen to Ron Bishop playing Shostakovich 5 and your hair stands on end. I was hoping to make a discography of older recordings using thin-walled instruments and comparing them to today's heavier horns, but it was unfair due to recording technique improvements. Maybe someone could get together a list of newer recordings made on older equipment? I do not know.

But my Alex is a lot of fun to play. That is for certain. And it is a very light weight instrument. A lot of newer tubas leave me cold, even with the ease-of-use card tossed in for consideration.

Wade


Follow Ups: