Posted by Jay Bertolet on November 12, 2001 at 23:35:57:
In Reply to: can-o-worms posted by js on November 11, 2001 at 23:30:52:
I had a chance to really test your theory last week. You may know that I have switched to the Nirschl 6/4 as my primary horn over the last two years. As a result of this shift in equipment, I've been looking for a really nice quintet horn to complement the Nirschl. I recently purchased just such an instrument, a Miraphone 184 CC. The 184 is a really outstanding quintet horn that has exactly the type of sound I'm looking for in a brass quintet. When I purchased this horn, I only intended to use it in the quintet, never in the orchestra. Last week, we had a rehearsal for a quintet job we had coming up and we held it just prior to a dress rehearsal for a pops concert we were doing that night with the popular singer Michael Bolton. I thought about it and I figured that since the Bolton concert would be amplified anyway, it wouldn't make any difference for me to bring the 184 in and just see what happened. It even made some sense in a way because in those types of situations, clarity can sometimes help with amplification.
Was I surprised! Using the 184 in a concert situation was an interesting experience. The sound wasn't at all what I would go for in a normal, acoustic concert. But listening to the intonation with the trombones and also the blend was a real eye opener. For me, it was a much quicker process to determine intonation variances and do the appropriate adjustment with the 184. For some reason (perhaps the ones spelled out in Benade's book that John Swensen mentioned) it was much easier for me to hear the intonation, as compared to the trombones. This made adjustments much easier. Just remember, sound wasn't really a consideration here because I don't believe there was much acoustic projection at all.
However, where we part company is the notion that a 6/4 can play more out of tune and still not bother listeners. That is definitely not true for me! I don't find that the Nirschl is as easy to discern on the pitch as the 184, but it is still completely obvious to me when I'm out of tune with it. Fortunately for me, this doesn't happen too often because the Nirschl behaves pretty well for me. That said, if I didn't feel very comfortable and secure with the Nirschl's intonation, I can easily see how such a horn could be a horrible nightmare to play in an ensemble.
Why? If I had to guess, I'd say that the sound of a typical 6/4 tuba is so fundamentally oriented, that the intonation doesn't seem like much of an issue for an entirely different reason than you suggest. I believe it is easier for others to hear it and lock into it. Such a sound is really strong and hard to ignore if you're a trained professional musicians who is pretty good at matching the pitches you hear. I imagine (which is all I can do since I'm only playing in the ensemble on just such an instrument) that such a sound sticks out and you just naturally gravitate to that intonation level. I get that comment from my colleagues all the time (wow, that new horn you have has such a clear pitch center). Ironically, it is harder for me to match that sound to the others I hear than the smaller 184 sound (or just about any other smaller horn I've ever used). As any good ensemble player will tell you, it usually isn't such a good idea to come into an ensemble and just start laying out pitch. There should be give and take and the 6/4 type horn makes that process a little more difficult for me. However, this also could just be my own newness with the horn.
Interesting topic!
My opinion for what it's worth...