Posted by Rick Denney on February 03, 2003 at 15:19:50:
In Reply to: Is Gronitz PCK a BAT as we know them? posted by MrT on February 02, 2003 at 09:53:40:
Because I'm foolish, I'll attempt a semi-serious definition of the various terms.
Tony Clements started the whole BAT thing with his definition of the quarter system, which ranged from 3/4 (Is that a euphonium?) to 6/4 (Big-A$$ Tuba).
But we use terms in this world of words to describe physical things so that we can communicate more effectively, again using words. We'd rather sit in someone's living room and play quartets and trade horns, but words are all we have, and we have to make the best of them.
Rudolf Meinl used the quarter system to designate sizes of tubas. But all their tubas are proportional, so that a bigger bell means a bigger body and a bigger bore. Their 4/4 tuba has an 18" bell, their 3/4 tuba a 16" bell, a 5/4" tuba a 20" bell, and a 6/4 a 22" bell. The throats, bottom bows, and tubing bore are sized to match. Thus, the terms are valid in separating their various models.
The system is not so convenient when referring to the short, fat American designs. Most of the American-style tubas are much shorter than German rotary tubas, which makes them look still fatter, because the bottom-bow bore is closer to the bell where it is bigger around, and because our eyes compare height and width to determine fatness.
But it is the tubas that define the terms, not words. So, let's put together a list of contrabass instruments, and put them in a categories, just for fun:
3/4: Yamaha 621, Weril
Small 4/4: Getzen G-50, Conn 5xJ, King 2341 (new), PT-1, Rudy 3/4, Conn xJ, M-W 2145, VMI 2103
Large 4/4: Miraphone 186 (and 188, though it's as big as some called 5/4), M-W 30, PT-4, VMI 3301
5/4: M-W 2155, Hirsbrunner HB-21, M-W 2000, PT-6, Rudy 4/4
6/4: M-W 2165, Yorkbrunner, PT-7, Rudy 5/4, Rudy 6/4, Conn 2xJ and 3xJ (i.e. Orchestra Grand), Holton 345, Willson 3050, Cerveny 601, CSO York, M-W Fafner
Of those in the 6/4 category, some are kaiser tubas in the German tradition, and some are grand orchestral tubas in the American tradition. The Rudys, the Fafner, and the Cerveny are kaiser tubas. The Holton, Yorkbrunner, 2165, York, and Conns (front action and straight bell) are grand orchestral tubas. The Willson seems to me a mixture. Of course, this isn't binary--each instrument represents a point along a continuum of characteristics.
I don't think the 6/4 terminology was solely a marketing ploy by Hirsbrunner to demark the Yorkbrunner, because I believe Rudy Meinl used it first in reference to kaiser tubas. Therefore, I'm suggesting the term "grand orchestral" in the way Dale is using it: the description of the largest class of short, fat tubas in the American tradition. This allows Tony's equation of 6/4 = BAT to continue.
The Gronitz may be an anomaly. It's called a Kaiser by the manufacturer, but it looks more like a grand orchestral tuba. So sue me--my definitions don't sweep up all current usage.
Notice also that I size Rudy Meinl instruments up. They are just plain bigger than their stated sizes indicate. If we took RM's designations, then a 2155 would be a 4/4, and a Conn 56J would be a 3/4.
Of course, none of this has anything to do with how the tubas sound. It has only to do with how proud you are looking at yourself in the ensemble's portrait. The biggest tubas may or may not have what people associate with Jacobs's designation of "old man's tuba." Being a kaiser or a BAT does not mean it has that magic.
I include the top-action Conn recording basses in the BAT category, but not the grand orchestra category. They are their own beast. They share lots of characteristics with all really big horns, but they have their own separate characteristics, too. I think of them as a cross between a concert tuba and a sousaphone.
Rick "interested in how definitions change when they aren't written down" Denney