Posted by Jim Andrada on June 03, 2002 at 16:31:05:
In Reply to: Re: The Engineered Tuba posted by Rick Denney on June 03, 2002 at 12:13:58:
Good response, Rick!
Of course you're right about the conflicting requirements! I spent a lot of years in the software consulting biz and it's the same thing - requirements running the gamut from conflicting to mutually exclusive, or worse.
And by the way, I have great respect for "try and see" and the way things evolve over time to meet needs - but at the same time the needs are shifting and changing and perhaps the evolutionary process finally can't keep up.
I also think you're dead on about the case - I also believe that unless the bell is free-floating you're inviting disaster - I've seen too many precision assemblies damaged in transit by the foam that was supposedly there to protect them. Does anyone do real drop testing???
So maybe the question should be in several parts, as it would be if we were to try to think of a tuba as a "system", i.e. a) what requirements do you think manufacturers are addressing and not addressing, b) how would you prioritize them, and c) if they were to address them what would be different.
Let me toss out a couple.
1) The rotary valve issue. Maybe a different drive mechanism would be superior as was suggested. Timing belt? Chain drives? Electrically operated solenoids?
2) Transportation. Case design etc, wheels on the tuba itself, etc
3) Ergonomics. Wouldn't it be nice if there were a nice carrying handle somewhere on the horn so one didn't have to grab it by the valve tubing to carry it around? Adjustable carrying rings for when you want to ballance the horn while standing? Flexible or otherwise adjustable leadpipe so you could get the right contact between face and mouthpiece?
4) Materials.
5) Intonation/Acoustic properties. Do we really know what makes a great sounding tuba (assuming any two people could agree on what a great sound was!) Or what it really means to say a horn is "centered" or the tone "bendable".
I guess, what I'm fishing for here is how, if we were to start with a clean sheet of paper, knowing what we do of history, would a modern "engineering"/"systematic" approach yield something radically different, or converge to what we know and love (???) today?