Posted by Rick Denney on February 01, 2004 at 14:04:19:
I had hinted broadly on this forum that I was in the market for a Miraphone 181-6 to play in the Loudoun Symphonic Winds when the repertoire called for a bass tuba. I had played the Yamaha 621, but the word from the podium was that the sound wasn't really getting out, and I think that at long last I'd found my potential on that instrument.
So, I took my checkbook to the Elephant Room to look at big F's. I also primed my sound-sense by playing for TubaRay the Cantuballada CD performed by Hans Nickel on the drive into Fort Myer. Since getting that CD last year, it has forced me to completely reconsider what I want an F tuba to sound like.
I tried an assortment of Meinl-Westons, two 181's (one each in the 5+1 and 4+2 configuration, and both with unaffordable gold-brass bells), a prototype Miraphone that seemed even a bit bigger than the 181, a used PT-10, and a very nice and inexpensive (but too small for my objective) Amati being offered by Lee Stofer. The Meinl-Weston that I thought was something like what I wanted was the 46SLZ, but they are too expensive new and too new to be used. Strangely, none of the piston F's rang my bell that day.
While admiring that 46SLZ in the Baltimore Brass booth, I noticed what looked like an old PT-10 a couple of spaces over. Upon closer inspection, it was an even older pre-Parantucci B&S Symphonie with five valves and clockspring linkages, looking to have been made perhaps in the 70's or earlier. I picked it up and blew a few notes on it, and found I could not immediately reject it as I expected to. There was something about the way it sounded that caught my attention.
Bin and Albert let me take the B&S to the far corner to compare it directly against the new 181's, and after playing around with them for a few minutes, I enlisted Ken Sloan for assistance. During a lull in the exhibit, I gathered together one of the 181's, the Miraphone prototype, a Yamaha 621 that seemed just like mine, the PT-10, and the old B&S.
I played the tune on each of the instruments versus the B&S. Ken's opinion matched my ears: The Miraphones sounded big, but neutral, with the prototype being bigger sounding than the stock 181. The old B&S had that fat, edgy F tuba sound with loads of personality. It was fine in the low register--bordering on being too fat--and clear as a bell up high. The 621 sounded airy to Ken in the upper register while the B&S remained clear (Joe would probably tell me to use a shallower mouthpiece in the Yamaha and quite trying to make it something it isn't). The PT-10 was between the old B&S and the Miraphones--more neutral than the old instrument but not as generic as the Miraphones.
So, then we tried the Projection Test. As bad as Elephant Rooms are for testing tubas, they are great for testing projection. I played a little piece of Meistersinger on the 621 and on the B&S, while Ken listened from 20 feet away, surrounded by other elephants. To me, they both were putting out the same volume of sound. To Ken, the 621 was literally unhearable while the B&S was clearly hearable. This is what Gil had noticed from the podium--I was singing the hair off the trumpeters' heads with the 621, but it wasn't escaping those back two rows. Great for quartet and quintet, but too small to carry a tuba part in a wind ensemble.
So, forget what I said before. I bought the B&S Symphonie. I figured I aleady had a generic-sounding F tuba. Why did I need one that was also generic, but just louder? This one produces the classic F tuba sound. Yes, there will be experiments, eventually, and I plan to put my finger on the difference between them. Whatever disease that made it impossible for me to get a decent low C on these before is apparently no longer afflicting me. I think that's probably good news.
Rick "who'll post later about his visit with Mike Finn" Denney