TubaForum.net

The thread on interesting things you can do with compensating valves and a quint valve by @Finetales got me thinking about my personal adventure with the additional valves on my Kurath and Holton.

I have been learning about the various extension valves, especially regarding F tubas. I had played a number of six-valved rotary F tubas back in the 1980s when I was just screwing around with the things, years before I would actually take up the F tuba in school. Further, I remember playing on a SEVEN-VALVED F tuba at a display at TMEA, and not believing the owner that it was a factory-built instrument rather than something he had created by a repairman. Later I received a catalog in the mail with that specific instrument listed in it as an "optional upgrade premium model" that I never saw again, so perhaps no one else ever ordered one and the company stopped offering them. I don't know.

While I did not yet know what the 5th valve was for, I was used to seeing them on tubas. I had seen lots of six-bangers F tubas in catalogs at that time. I learned from a guy on the phone at Custom Music (perhaps Fred himself?) what a 6th valve was for, sort of, and that 5th valves usually could be ordered in three different lengths.

The order of the extension valves made it difficult for me to understand. )I suffer from dyslexia, so things like this can get pretty jumbled in my head… or perhaps I am just a stupid tuba player? Heh, heh, heh…

My first 5-valved instrument was a 1980s Mirafone 188 with a 23 5th valve. I never worked out how it was tuned, but I remember that this was referred to as a double whole-step or major third valve. I also remember hearing about flat whole-step valves, flat half-step valves, and (oddly) sharp half-step valves.

I always thought the 23 valve was a flat double whole-step, right up to tonight, until I actually worked out what was happening. It turns out that — in principle — the old school 23 5th valve was a SHARP double whole-step.

Let us apply this to the fingers…

M2 5th
Low G = 4
Low Gb = 24
Low F = 54 (5 replacing 1st plus a good slide pull to get it in tune)

M3 5th
Low G = 4
Low Gb = 24
Low F = 523
therefore…
Low E = 54

This means it is a SHARP M3 because if it were in tune it would not make much of anything, and if it were a FLAT M3 54 would be equal to a corrected Eb. This means we have been thinking of the old 23 slide incorrectly, calling it the wrong interval. Because in actual use, a "flat" interval extension valve is usually about 50¢ flat, and a sharp 23 would be about 50¢ sharp. If we think of the old style 23 5th valve in this way, it becomes a flattened minor third……… (wait for it)……… or a FLAT THIRD VALVE.

So, why should I G.A.S. about this change to how the elephant is now thinking of this dinosaur of a 5th valve setup?

It is a stand-alone 7th valve.

If we think of this length of extension valve as a flat m3 rather than a sharp M3 we then have all sorts of interesting possibilities presented to us.

Keep in mind that these extension valves tend to be cut to be 50¢ off from a "real" note. For example, given: C tuba with flat M2 5th valve

Low F — the "factory fingering" would be 14, but it is very sharp. It can be played 124, but that usually is very flat. If your 1st is normally very far out, you would play 124 and ush in a lot. If your 1st is normally mostly in, you can play it 14 and pull out a lot. OR — you can save the adjustment by using 54, with 5 acting as a 1st valve with a long slide pull — OF FIFTY CENTS (or so).

However, on a horn with a 23 5th valve, you would not play it 54 or you would get an E, so you have to use 5th and go up a half step to 23 instead of 4, so 523 low F.

So while a flat whole step is an extended whole step, an M3 5th is not functionally used as a RAISED MAJOR THIRD (or 50¢ raised 23 combo) but as a FLATTENED MINOR SECOND (a 50¢ FLATTENED 12 combo).

So, in the F tuba parlance of Joe Sellmansberger, a flattened 12 combo is functionally the same as a flattened 3rd valve. Joe likes to compare 5 and 6 on an F tuba to 1 and 2 on a CC tuba. I had never thought about it like this, and it changed my whole attitude about the addition of a 6th valve to an F tuba.

Every 6-valved rotary F I had ever played before hearing this idea was set up at the factory with 5th as a flat half step and 6th as a flat whole step. (So index finger half step and middle finger whole step.) However, if you reverse them then what you have, functionally, is a small CC tuba (F + 4th valve) with 2 valves. Another reason I had never thought this way was that rotary F tubas back in the day frequently had uselessly bad low Cs, so no one would ever think of their F tuba as a small CC when the 4th is depressed. But it is a perfect fourth interval, exactly like the F attachment on a trombone.

So, once we are able to make the leap of considering our F tubas to be small CC tubas when the 4th is engaged, 5 and 6 become 1 and 2………… (wait for it again)………… and the old school flat minor third (sharp major third) becomes a CC tuba 3rd valve.

Perhaps this is how that guy's 7-valved F tuba was equipped? The three left-hand vales were NOT in the traditional order, and again, they made little sense to me as I could not figure out what the intervals were supposed to be, as all of them were about 50¢ off from anything on the tuner, halfway between "real" notes because I did not have 4th down when I used them.

I did not get this tuba at all. The owner was a rather snotty grad school "leaker" who seemed to enjoy seeing me so befuddled by his tuba. He did not attempt to help me understand it. Rather, he sort of sneered at me because I could not automatically whip out the Hungarian March on the thing, having only ever played BBb tubas up to that time.

Whatever, dude. He was nice enough to let some idiot kid play his nice tuba, so there is that…

Anyway, with my 5-valved Kurath having been successfully converted to a sick 6-banger, I now understand that adding a 7th valve (a purely intellectual exercise, I promise) would not be introducing something new, but building an old-school 5th valve.

If this were done, I would have an F tuba with four pistons, and when the 4th was pressed, the three extension valves would be a normal three-valve set with slides for a CC tuba. Since 7th would never be used for anything except for the lowest few notes prior to the pedal register, it could be set up with the needed slide pull for an in-tune 13/123 combo, making this the low range:

Low C = 4
B = 64
Bb = 64
A = 564
Ab = 674
G = 574
Gb = 5674
F = 0 (5714?)

This late-night intellectual ramble has been brought to you by CAFFEINE. Goodnight.

If any of you are still here, you're not one of those mental weaklings who are overly taxed by lots of words or complex ideas. You get to take that knowledge with you to the grave.

Well done.

There's a tendency for humans to want to have everything be the same. There's a fantasy about using the same mouthpiece for several instruments in the same family of instruments when they are actually very different instruments, there are fantasies about having the same fingering systems from the smallest/shortest to the largest/longest of instruments that might be owned by a player and etc. Thinking about all of my instruments, their fingering systems vary so much that it actually helps me remember which one of them I'm playing rather than becoming a confusing factor, and experience has taught me that - at least as far as I'm concerned - every instrument I own needs to have a (its own particular) mouthpiece found for it, and continuing to test new-to-me mouthpieces with instruments is nothing to be ashamed of. I believe a lot of people grew up having teachers who rattled off the old believed to be truism, "Pick a mouthpiece and stick with it", which is b.s. Our dads and our instrumental music teachers all meant well (and an overwhelming percentage of their advice was good advice), but some of the stuff they told us wasn't right, and it echoes in our heads throughout our lives. Experimenting with alternate mouthpieces could easily result in something which could easily become a benefit, when something is found that offers more pluses than minuses compared to the mouthpiece that's currently being used.

Currently, my F tuba is the only instrument I own which is set up with a 4 + 2 system as Wade describes, but I also have a right hand thumb trigger connected to the 5th slide. I like to push the fifth slide out just a little bit for 564 so-called "low A", because that fingering is slightly sharp - whereas the other alternative 234 is slightly flat. It's always easier for me to control things when the instrument is just the right length, rather than trying to be a hero with my embouchure. The other time that I depress that fifth slide trigger is when I have a so-called "low F" to play, at which time I'll throw that slide all the way out to the end of its stop rod's range and play that pitch with all six valves on the second partial - rather than "open" on the fundamental partial, as this makes it so much easier to control the pitch, and particularly at top volume levels.
My particular F tuba is really easy (or really challenging) to play, depending on how someone might view it. It offers pretty darn good tuning characteristics out of the box, but - besides that - it offers barn-door-wide so-called slots, where about just about any pitch in the range of the instrument (whereby music is typically written) can be put just about anywhere without feeling like it's being favored by the mouth, and at just about any volume level. For someone who never grew up tuning guitars from a very young age or was never much concerned with tuning very early in their life, I can understand how beginning to really learn to tune and listen (maybe around age 15 vs. age 5) could offer a pretty big challenge, and - even though I started tuning guitars at age 5, and listening to what "in tune" and "out of tune" sounded like (and all that jazz), I still have to REALLY pay attention when playing that instrument (my F tuba) just as I do with playing any tuba, to keep myself out of trouble and out of the woods/between the ditches.
another subtopic:
I'm just as guilty as everyone else, because I converted a 186 that had a left hand fifth valve, but - rather than taking these old tubas with left hand fifth valves and and converting them to right hand thumb fifth valves - it's a whole lot less rigmarole to rig up a right hand thumb trigger for the first valve slide, and leave the fifth valve alone. As a matter of fact, when the left hand operates the fifth valve on an old tuba, a left hand thumb trigger can also be added to move the fifth valve slide in and out, particularly to address the inevitably out of tune pitches that involve the fifth valve, whether it's the old long fifth valve system or the subsequent popular shorter fifth valve circuit. People think they can't get used to something like that because it's not what everyone does, but that's nonsense. People can pick up a new cell phone and - within a short time - work their thumbs a mile a minute and text with a new different-shaped keyboard, and if they can do that they can certainly slightly change their button mashing and trigger-pulling habits when playing the tuba - or "a tuba". I think some people need to be a little bit more trustworthy and confident of their own abilities and flexibilities.

the elephant wrote: ↑Fri Jan 10, 2025 1:51 amI always thought the 23 valve was a flat double whole-step, right up to tonight, until I actually worked out what was happening. It turns out that — in principle — the old school 23 5th valve was a SHARP double whole-step.

That is interesting. Having never owned a “23” fifth anything, I never really thought enough about it. I’ve always looked at anything with those valves and thought, “nice horn, not for me.” Not sure that will change for me at this point, but I think this all is valuable info to consider.

The long length of 5th circuit to which you are referring was surely simply devised almost as a "whatever it takes" length to "do what it needs to do", and the fact that it's roughly the same length as the (most common valve system's) second and third valves depressed likely has little to do with anything.
That having been said, the 2-3 valve combination is known to be squirrely - just as is the analogous 5th position is on trombones, so if depressing that valve with that length can act as an alternate for a squirrely 2-3 pitch serendipitously, well... how nice!

In my mind, “23” seemed nebulous (of course, not to those more learned of the system…).

Yes, I like the sharp 23 combo because it gives an alternative to the flat fourth partial problem as mentioned.

Even though I'm used to flat whole step, If I ever get around to adding the fifth valve to my Piggy, I have thought about making it the longer one, or at least having it with a modular extension sort of like the B&S rotary CC fifth valve setup.

The multiple feet long so-called 2-3 length 5th valve is going to tend to require fewer valves for double-low register playing, and those who buy into the "air flow" theories (vs. the "air column resonance" theories) are going to find the longer fifth circuit more appealing. The longer ones are also so-called "open wrap" - at least on the Miraphone instruments, and - again - the "air flow" people are going to find that appealing as well.

I readily admit that the shorter fifth valve circuit found on most tubas made today is most useful when paired with a even shorter six valve, but almost no contrabass tubas feature sixth valves, and a whole bunch of built for American consumption F tubas don't even feature them. This system leaves the double low pitch one step above the "open" fundamental epically sharp, requiring frantically grabbing some slide that's not normally grabbed. I believe that the more F tuba playing in ensembles occurs in the United States and the more epic double low tuba music composition and arranging occurs (due to composers and arrangers having access to MIDI keyboards - which simply play those pitches easily), the more likely it is to start finding six valve systems offered on contrabass tubas...

... oh yeah, and 4 + 2 is the most logical setup for this, and with the right hand operating a #1 slide trigger, rather than a fifth rotor.

Not having read anything but most of the original post -- the 184CC that I played for years had the 23 major third 5th. I had the slide set so that I could use it as a stand-alone valve, allowing the octave above the pedal octave to have aall one-valve notes except for the Db/C#, which is what I like because I can tune those valves to the best compromise and not have to pull slides. I don't like the other lengths of 5th valves because I have to get into using multiple valves instead of single ones, and I got used to the single ones back then. I'm in the pedal octave very seldom so it works. You have to have bigger lungs than I do to play in the pedal octave when it gets into multiple valves, so I became reasonably adept (for my playing level) at the false tone above the pedal, which allows single valves from it down to the pedal.

Now THIS is the content I crave!

Your realization about the function of long 5th (or later) vales can be put a simple way: they are all tuned to the 4th valve.

The flat whole step 5th valve on a 6-valve F tuba is an in-tune 1st valve in C.
The flat half step 6th valve on a 6-valve F tuba is an in-tune 2nd valve in C.
The logical 7th valve would be an in-tune 3rd valve in C, which is your sharp 23/flattened 12 valve.

So, in the F tuba parlance of Joe Sellmansberger, a flattened 12 combo is functionally the same as a flattened 3rd valve. Joe likes to compare 5 and 6 on an F tuba to 1 and 2 on a CC tuba. I had never thought about it like this, and it changed my whole attitude about the addition of a 6th valve to an F tuba.

Exactly!

To take this way of thinking further, you can think of a 6-valve F tuba as a double tuba in F and C, where the F side has 3 valves and the C side has 2 (and the 4th valve is the change valve). You can get even closer to the functionality of a true double if you put the 5th and 6th valves in the 4th valve circuit (making them dependent). But, in both cases, you actually have more options than a true double because you can use the valves of each "side" in combination rather than only one or the other.

Awhile back, someone posted (either on here or on TubeNet, I can't remember) a link to a tuba website that contained a valve fingering calculator spreadsheet. Basically, you input the length of each valve as a percentage of the overall tube length, and then it will spit out every possible fingering, what pitch that fingering is closest to, and how many cents off it is. Obviously it doesn't account for each instrument's intonation quirks between partials, but it gives a good idea of "will this valve be useful or not?"

When I found that spreadsheet, I expanded it to accommodate up to 7 valves, and then put dozens of different possible combinations through it. For each combination, I went through and wrote down the most in-tune fingering for every note starting from the open 2nd partial note and going down. These fingering charts are then displayed on another tab of the spreadsheet.

To cut to the chase of this thread, the standard 6 valve setup is one of the best setups, with a total deviation score (combined number of cents off from in tune) of 19. Adding the long 3rd as the 7th valve only actually improves one note - instead of 234 (low A on an F tuba) which is 9 cents flat, you can use 47 which is in tune. (Well, the 7th valve also allows you to play the fundamental pitch with 13467, which is closer than 123456. But I don't think that really matters since you can also just play it open.) It definitely doesn't feel like it makes enough of a difference to be worth all that extra weight, cost, and complexity.

The absolute best setup I found was the standard 6-valve arrangement, but with a slightly shorter 6th valve. If you cut the 6th to where 13456 is in tune (about halfway between the long half step and a normal half step) and tune 3 so that 23 is in tune (which is how I have the 3rd set on everything I try in the calculator), the total deviation score is only 7. No other setup I've tried (and I've tried a LOT) comes close! I suppose if you added the 7th valve to that setup, you could put that 47 fingering back in and drop the total deviation to just 3. But again, I feel like a whole extra valve just to make one pitch very slightly more in tune is probably not worth it.

^ I believe that spreadsheet was on Art Hovey's website.

http://galvanizedjazz.com/tuba.html

What I like so much is that my horn is already very well in tune. Adding valves in this context merely gives a more easily memorized PATTERN of fingerings with no slide pulls, very little lipping (which I hate), and fewer alternates to dig through. My horn has a logical fingering progression down to Ab, where there is a break, but from there down it is in a pattern with the Ab. I see the 7th valve being used for low Ab, G, and Gb, and possibly as an alternate for open pedal F, as Joe says, that would act like avoiding an open string, which is a constant issue with that note: it *really* wants to "pop" out, and that is not a good characteristic. Also, that open pedal F is one of the only out-of-tune notes on my horn, being somewhat sharp. My current alternate for open low F is 56-134, which is dead on and very easy to control. I imagine that 7-134 or somesuch would work well, too.

Tightening up such a nebulous area of a horn is intellectually entertaining for me. Yeah, they don't let me out all that much…

arpthark wrote: ↑Sat Jan 11, 2025 4:11 pm ^ I believe that spreadsheet was on Art Hovey's website.

http://galvanizedjazz.com/tuba.html

I use Art's spreadsheet on my projects. It has been useful.

arpthark wrote: ↑Sat Jan 11, 2025 4:11 pm ^ I believe that spreadsheet was on Art Hovey's website.

http://galvanizedjazz.com/tuba.html

That's the one!

the elephant wrote: ↑Sat Jan 11, 2025 4:34 pm My current alternate for open low F is 56-134, which is dead on and very easy to control. I imagine that 7-134 or somesuch would work well, too.

With the 7th valve, 13467 is the most in-tune alternate for the fundamental, at 9 cents sharp.

If the 7th valve is to be an assistant for a few low notes only, you might consider making it dependent on the 4th valve. That way you don't have to mess with the open taper at all. I think putting both the 6th and 7th valves in the 4th circuit wouldn't be at all noticeable to the player unless they're really into many-valve mid-register alternates.