Re: Re: Tuba metallurgics, carbon sousas


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

Posted by Alex C on August 25, 2003 at 20:08:36:

In Reply to: Re: Tuba metallurgics, carbon sousas posted by Rick Denney on August 25, 2003 at 13:13:20:

I hate to jump in on this without data handy. Oh, well...

While working at the University of North Texas, a doctoral student showed me studies done by organ builders on organ pipe material. Their conclusion, if I remember, was that the material (wood, brass, aluminum, etc.) did not affect the tone. The embouchure of the pipe did, and it's shape WAS affected by the material used, e.g. wood embouchures were a different shape than metal embouchures.

Neither did the SHAPE of the pipe affect tone. Square, round or oval pipes producted essentially the same tone. Of course, none of the pipes were conical as tubas are.

His study involved "identical" Miraphone 188 tubas. I think there were 5 of these horns, two silver, one lacquer, one gold brass lacquer and one other finish. The test audience was made up of music majors at UNT (discriminating musical ears without doubt).

Their conclusion?

To sum up, there was more difference between the two silver-plated 188's than between any of the other two horns.

What does that mean? I would guess that it means individual construction of the tuba is more important than the material it's made from.

Schilke insisted that lacquer ruined brass, while metal-plating did not. He's hard to argue with.

I'd like a wood tuba with square tubing that has the proper rate of taper. In defference to Reynold Schilke, non-varnished.


Follow Ups: