Re: Re: Is Gronitz PCK a BAT as we know them?


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

Posted by actually, on February 02, 2003 at 21:32:45:

In Reply to: Re: Is Gronitz PCK a BAT as we know them? posted by Christian Klein on February 02, 2003 at 20:59:14:

when TC coined it a few years ago, it was directed towards the York-type horns,
as soon as the term was used here in tubenet tuba-euph tuba-talk pergatory, it would up being applied to practically anything that weighed more than 20 or 30 pounds. I guess the thinking is "duh....its big, and its a tuba...its a big-ass tuba!" When I think of that I think of that dopey cartoon starfish Patrick laughing the way the kids like so much. Now "B.A.T." is even used to describe the Conn-types of recording basses, which I personally think deserve the acronym "P.O.S." Sorry, but I hated the one I had to play in HS, I hated being told I had to use one of them for the pep band in college, and years ago I was happy to sell mine to Paul O (who complained like all good recording bass collectors tend to do.) b.t.w....I am curious, since when is a 3/4" bore "small"?




Follow Ups: