Re: Re: Re: Again String vs.Tuba Post.Analyse


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

Posted by Steve Marcus on November 01, 2002 at 13:22:41:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Again String vs.Tuba Post.Analyse posted by AW on November 01, 2002 at 13:01:02:

My dealership sells Allen (coincidence on names unintended) Digital Organs and Steinway Grand Pianos.

Digital church organs have indeed improved tremendously.

But the physicists on this BBS (Dr. Young, etc.), of which I am NOT one, will tell you that air is moved in a different fashion from organ pipes than from the paper cones used as speakers for digital organs. Thus, since what our ears perceive as sound is caused by moving air, we can discern the difference.

Likewise, the very best digital pianos will never replace the sound and presence of a Steinway Grand Piano. The vibrations eminating from the spruce soundboard are perceived differently by us humans than the sound generated by paper cone speakers. (BTW, one piano manufacturer actually marketed their unstrung piano, with spruce soundboard, as a substitute for conventional paper cone speakers--but that's another discussion for another BBS).

The point for this thread is that our ears perceive the characteristics and sound of a true acoustic tuba differently than any other source of bass pitches.

I share in the opinions expressed by others in this thread that the sound of the tuba is unique. Personal taste, perhaps (obviously, those of us on this BBS favor the sound of a tuba!), but nonetheless, undeniable.


Follow Ups: