Posted by Rick Denney on March 05, 2001 at 11:53:53:
In Reply to: Re: 2165, a York Copy? posted by Could the York be a copy too? on March 04, 2001 at 20:50:17:
We have to be careful with this word, copy.
The Yorkbrunner and the Nirschl were instruments based as directly as possible on the original Yorks. But then the makers tweaked them to fix problems and inconsistencies, and I'm sure both makers made compromises in the original design to make them easier to build. It is unlikely that these compromises do any harm, and perhaps their play-testers thought they were an improvement. So, they are not exact copies, and don't claim to be.
The Holton was based on the York, and they were trying to produce a horn with the York's characteristics. But they made compromises, too, such as using the bell and bottom bow from their current large BBb, which (supposedly) are larger than on the Yorks. I think it is safe to say they were inspired by the Yorks, not copied from them.
The Yorks themselves were not copies of anything that anybody has detected, but they were certainly inspired by the "Monster" tubas being built by Conn, York, H.N. White, Martin, and others at the time. Stokowski wanted a huge, organ-like sound (according to the story recounted in Song and Wind), and certainly Bill Johnson at York knew enough about tuba design to know how to produce that sound. Beyond that, I think he got lucky. Everything fell together on that horn (including the player), much of which was beyond the control of the maker.
The 2165's exact roots have been recounted elsewhere, but I think it's safe to conclude from that story that Warren Deck had not found his voice on the Yorkbrunner or on the Conn he played previously (was that a 36J Orchestral Grand Bass?), and was steadily and systematically pursuing that voice. Perhaps he thought he had it with the 2165, which was an amalgamation of what he'd learned in his search, but apparently that horn also did not give him what he sought, because he now plays other equipment.
When I tried out an early 2165 many years ago, I could hardly make sounds on the horn. This is my limitation, to be sure, but I did not find the same limitation on the Yorkbrunner I tried out previously, or on the real York that I played this year at the Army conference. It seems to me that Warren wanted a horn with a more open feel than the Yorks and their copies--openness that is fatal for a person of my abilities. In that way, they are more like the kaisertubas with rotary valves--huge bores that such the air right out of you. That experience leads me to believe that it plays more like a big rotary, but sounds more like a big American-style horn.
When someone gets it right, as Bill Johnson did with the CSO York, then others will try to copy its best qualities. Each of the copies have tried to find the best balance between getting what's good about the York and modern requirements for playing and production. Each "copy" represents a different set of values in that trade-off analysis. It is possible that the copies are, in some ways (and in different ways) better than the original.
Rick "who doesn't entirely disbelieve the notion that the Yorks were inspired by Sousaphones" Denney