Re: Re: F Tuba: American or German?


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

Posted by Jay Bertolet on July 12, 2000 at 10:50:25:

In Reply to: Re: F Tuba: American or German? posted by Joseph Felton on July 12, 2000 at 02:50:31:

Great post Joseph!!! And not just because you mentioned my name alot...;-)

Actually, even though you ask me to clear up my approach in this, you seem to understand it pretty well. Having a stable of 4 instruments allows me to go for either consistency or contrasts. This is very hard to explain, much less quantify, but I'll give it a shot using my own equipment and situation as an example. Obviously, others will feel differently about it and what I do almost certainly won't work for others so take these ideas for what they are worth to you.

My whole concept of sound is based around my Rudy 4/4 CC tuba. In my mind, this is about as "vanilla" an instrument as you can get. Not too big, not too small, not too dark, not too bright, etc. All of my assessments of my current crop of tubas revolve around my perceptions of the Rudy. For me, the Willson Eb is an ideal complement to the Rudy. They sound very similar, they feel very similar, and I can pretty much do what I want with either one. One principal I hold dear in my orchestral playing is the concept of consistency of sound. My desire is to sound pretty much the same on anything I play unless I choose to sound differently, for whatever reason. The combination of the Rudy and the Willson is very consistent for a CC/Eb pairing. This combination is one of the few I've found that keeps the Eb as a nearly equal partner in projection and versatility. And both horns play very consistently top to bottom, keeping their individual sounds consistent as well.

Having this "core" to work around, I have chosen a couple of other tubas that have markedly different sounds from that. The Cervany 641 Eb sounds very much like a typical medium sized F tuba. The Nirschl York copy sounds like the typical (if you can call it that) 6/4 type tuba. These are both very different sounds than the Rudy/Willson pair and they both have their uses. One of the things I really like about the Nirschl is the versatility it possesses. I'm selling my Cervany 601 because the Nirschl does everything the 601 does plus many other things. That is one reason why the Nirschl was so attractive to me and worth the extra cost. The thing I really like about the Cervany 641 is that it is in Eb, while still sounding like a typical F tuba. This simpifies my fingering process considerably! The 641 is a wonderful solo tuba and it works really well in those smallish orchestral works, like Berlioz & Mendelssohn.

One thing you'll notice about my approach is that I don't use different mouthpieces to achieve different sounds. Many great players have used that approach successfully so I'm not going to presume to say here that it isn't a valid technique. Suffice it to say that this method didn't work for me. I prefer to match a specific mouthpiece to a specific tuba and then use different instruments to produce the different sounds I want. My priority is on producing a "characteristic" tuba sound, based on whatever that is from a given instrument. I've had my biggest playing problems when I tried to make a given instrument sound differently than the way the horn was designed. And I firmly believe that different designs of instruments are meant to sound differently and that finding that "characteristic" sound is very important to eventually being able to really utilize the instrument to its full potential.

Regarding the whole "Germanic vs American" thing, I don't make those distinctions based on what I see, rather on what I hear. A characteristic Germanic sound, in my mind, has more core to the sound and less size. I thought Rick Denney had it exactly right when he suggested "think Roger Bobo". There are other players that come to mind: Ron Bishop on his Alex, Dave Kirk on his Alex, etc. And is it a coincidence that these players were all using rotary valve, German designed tubas? I don't know enough about instrument design to answer that question but my guess is that this had at least something to do with it. Just like I would say that the late Arnold Jacobs' orchestral sound was distinctly different, in part, because of the CSO York he played. That type of instrument is associated with a large, wide sound that isn't as "core projected" as the Germanic style tuba. You all know this sound, the presence is in "feeling" the sound rather than being actually aware of it. And there are current examples of these players as well. Mostly, these players are using Yorkbrunners, 2165's, Holton's, and Nirschl's. But I've heard players on these tubas sound more cored and I've heard players on Germanic style tubas sound more wide. This is why I think it is important to base judgements on what you hear rather than what you see.

I'm sorry this turned into such a long post. This is a topic I think about all the time and feel very passionately about. I hope that others will take up this discussion, as Joseph suggested. I know that I am always looking for a better understanding of the whole sound production process.

My opinion for what its worth...


Follow Ups: