Posted by Rex Roeges on August 25, 2003 at 17:13:00:
In Reply to: Re: Tuba metallurgics, carbon sousas posted by Rick Denney on August 25, 2003 at 13:13:20:
I have also wondered about this topic: Whatimpact do the materials of construction have on the quality of the sound coming out of a tuba? Bevan tells about Mahillon experimenting with different materials and that he even built a cornet made of cheese! I have heard anecdotal stories about extensive testing done by both Conn and Schilke but coming to different conclusions. I have heard about a French Horn player that made a bell out of bondo (or was it spackle?) and it played very nicely. I’ve heard of glass flutes that are reputed to sound exquisite, and I saw a picture of a glass tuba (don’t know how it played). I know that some people wrap leather belts around their bell to change the sound, but I had my children hug the bell of my MW20 (adding lots of dampening), and I couldn’t tell the difference when I played. Some trombone players swear by their gold-brass bells, others swear at them. Many people have condemned the sound of fiberglass Sousaphones, but some colleges use them and get very good sounds out of them. What about those all-nickel silver Alexander tubas out there? I’ve heard Chuck D. play with a carbon fiber bell, and he sounded great. How about thickness of the metal? The Willson Eb’s have very heavy bells and are generally praised for their sound, while the Nirschl’s have very thin metal and are praised for the same thing. Cerveny also makes very thin walled tubas, but I haven’t heard anyone saying that they are going to challenge Nirschl in their market niche.
I have to wonder whether any of this really makes such a big difference. I am starting to believe it is 1. what comes out of the mouthpiece, and 2. the SHAPE of the open bugle (plus valved tubing) , and how well it models the “optimum” speaker horn, that matters most for quality sound production. Everything else, like materials of construction, thickness of metal, coating on the horn (lacquer, silver, etc.), annealing of the metal, etc., are secondary effects that have a much smaller, but perhaps perceptible, impact on the overall quality of the sound.
There have been no published, systematic studies (that I’m aware of) that seriously study this question, so we have lots of pet theories and conflicting anecdotal accounts. Also, we have no standards on what is a “good” sound, no metrics to compare one set of construction parameters to another. The best that we can do now is to create a bunch of identical horns of different materials, have players play them blindly, then answer a questionnaire (the Conn and Schilke studies). This is expensive and is generally a poor testing methodology.
It seems to me that the first step here is to establish quantifiable acoustical standards of what is desirable, as far as a tuba sound. If we don’t do this, we are doomed to trial and error type improvement, and being at the mercy of the latest marketing fad. Any thoughts?
Rex