towards a better four valve non-compensating system

[bloke]

The way these are typically set up, it seems to me that these don't benefit very many pitches.
The fourth valve (per usual) can certainly be tuned to play the two pitches a perfect fourth below the second and third partials much better in tune than a non-adjusted 1-3 valve combination, but the pitches a semitone below those two pitches (2-4) remain terribly sharp, and the common length of the fourth circuit is not particularly helpful for the extended low range at all, as far as filling in the chromatic gap.

It seems to me that - were a fourth circuit tuned to a tritone (augmented 4th), the two pitches which are an augmented 4th below the "open" second and third partials could be (nearly) spot on in tune, and then a first circuit - which maximizes slide length (such as on the old Holton 345 Bb 6/4 tubas) - could be pulled out to in tune for 1-3, 1-4, and 1-2-4.

2-3-4 is already fairly close to an in tune valve combination for a pitch, and 1-2-3-4 would be fairly close to in tune for another very low pitch, which would define that the very low range (though still not completely chromatic and still not perfect, but what is perfect?) would be a little bit more usable with only four non-compensating pistons - compared to the predominant (99.99999%) system.

Some of us are probably already playing the pair of perfect fourth pitches with 1-3 (while pulling the first slide out), and leaving the 4th slide always pulled out enough for the 2-4 pitches to be properly tuned (which is basically halfway towards the system suggested in the previous paragraphs).
---------
... Some of the rhetoric above might be a little bit awkward and difficult to read, but I don't quite know how to express what I did above without using the type of rhetoric I did and risking being inaccurate.

[gocsick]

That is basically how I have the Holton Eb set up. 3rd is tuned so as a compromise between 1+3 Bb (in staff) and F... 4th is pulled long so that 4+2 A (slightly flat) and 4+1 Ab (tad sharp) are close .... it works that 4th ledger line F is also slightly sharp with 1+3+4 E natural is lippable as 1+2+3+4.

Basically I play it as a 3 valve until the low register.

[Kevbach33]

As you know, this is exactly what King had in mind with the 2280 euphonium: the 4th valve can be tuned to something other than a perfect 4th (all the way to a low Eb, a perfect 5th). One still needed to manipulate the 3rd slide on some of the pitches, though, and it never did stand well on its bell. However, if the compensating system didn't exist, this model could be more popular than it is.

This is the same idea as having a flat semitone 5th valve on BBb, no? Something to easily fix the tritone pitch on the 2nd and 3rd partials.

On some of their models, Cerveny offers both flat semitone and flat whole tone tuning for the 5th valve, for those that prefer either option.

Gronitz, as I recall, offered a tritone extension for the 5th (rotary) valve on its piston F and (rare) Eb models. Same idea: make the tritone pitch in tune.

The big detractor to all this is, of course, added weight.

If young scholars could be taught how to manipulate the 1st slide to make certain pitches in tune, perhaps the system could catch on. But I guess not because euphoniums exist, and I surmise most euphonium players choose not to abandon perfect 4th 4th valve tuning because of the compensating system featured on higher end models.

Just some rambling from a former young scholar who did what he could to take care of school property and play in tune, and who wishes the 4th valve of his B&S tuba could pull to tritone length.

[bloke]

I do like mashing buttons more than I like pulling slides...
...but the topic limits itself to four valves that aren't compensating.

Just to be clear, I don't disagree with either of the sets of responses offered so far, and - yes - it's a quite a lot to teach somewhat reckless pre-adults to work their instruments in this manner, in addition to not damaging the first slide - which would need to fly like the wind with this system.

Mostly, I'm just relieved that the rhetoric that I had to use is clear enough that people were able to read and digest it. When I reread it, it really seemed pretty wonky.

[LeMark]

I've done both the 4 valve compensating system and the 5 valve non compensating. I greatly prefer my 5 valve King for low range playing

[bloke]

Of course, but "What's the best bang for the buck with only four non-compensating pistons?" is the topic.

4th valves add the most weight per feature (to brass instruments), whereas fifth valves had the most expense per valve.

Were we not all accustomed to the first three fingerings (past nothing) being the same pattern as a recorder or a flute, there may well be a better system (with only four non-compensating valves) than the one that I suggested...

[Mikelynch]

You’re in good company, Bloke. Bill Bell’s King Eb, and his F (that he used for the US premiere of the Vaughn-Williams) both had a tritone 4th valve (and were both 4v horns).

[the elephant]

I was taught by Ted Cox to play my Alexander CC with four valves as a three-valved instrument with 4th tuned for 24 pitches and to use the 1st slide as a trumpeter would. Since I started my musical journey as a fairly successful trumpeter (in all but attitude and, um, "acoustical superstition") this spoke to me at a very basic level and I incorporated it into my way of thinking about this particular tuba. In truth, it works so well that I play *all* my tubas like this, including the stupendous "YamaYork" (low G 13, low F 135, low E 245, etc.)

My Mirafone has its 4th slide jacked out a very long way to get that Db into tune with a tone that matches the open C below it. (Not the bright, thinner tone of an uncentered pitch when you have to lip into tune when the slide is in too far).

This system works very well for me. Some tubas require a lot of adjustment of the 1st slide, and some require next to none.

[bloke]

My behemothic B-flat tuba B-natural (2-4) is not the worst - sharpness-wise (as the 4th valve C (which I do not use) as it is flat - and I use 1-3 instead for C (with 1 pulled).

I do FAVOR the B-natural with the 4th circuit a little bit, and (as - in tuba music - "low" F - is so often requested to be played loudly), I just let that pitch "ride up" to in-tune (when loud), but I'm conscious of it (when requested NOT loud) and might play "low" F (soft) with 1-3 (also with 1 pulled, but not pulled very much).

5-2-3 is wonderful (low E) and the pitches below that vary a little bit in their tuning veracity (not surprisingly, yes?). I don't mind at all moving the 4th slide for a passage (or a key signature), but I'm not willing to frantically reach over and grab it.

My entire 4th circuit is on the FRONT of the instrument (to the player's LEFT SIDE of the rotor stack), and (possibly caused by the previous owner pushing the tuba down into the snug-fitting Winter hard case...??) a couple of the outside slide tubes had "brace dents" in them. I replaced both of those with new, and - at the same time - reconfigured just a bit so as the upper 4th slide is now tremendously long (yet aligned). I don't (yet) have a purpose for that, but (well...) it's there, if one ever occurs to me (such as this very topic/configuration).

summary:
I CREEP towards the configuration (outlined in the original post) but I'm nowhere close to "all the way there" (as I still - mostly - play "low F" with the 4th circuit, and (well...) my B-flat tuba features a 5th rotor.

happily:
When I'm playing at home and randomly "pitch check" the 2-4 B-natural (at various volume levels - while playing music...and not just B-natural alone) I might quickly glance over to the tuner, and I'm usually respecting the B-natural's proper pitch level pretty well...so I suppose I'm reasonably well "trained", regarding this particular pitch.

reminder:
My smaller B-flat tuba's 5th circuit is tuned to an F semitone (ie. NOT the typical "long whole tone")...so what most would think of as a typical "sixth valve", which means that I built that tuba's 5th circuit to specifically address this issue (as - not being a C tuba - I do not need a 5th valve to be a "long whole tone" - simply in order to play a true "low F").
thus...
- B-natural is 5-1-3
- "low" E-natural is 5-4
- "low" E-flat is 5-2-4 (with a 4th valve pull being helpful, and I installed a stop-rod on the upper 4th slide, so as this adjustment can be done without having to be particularly careful)

[iiipopes]

If a player is mostly a community band player, or non-music-major band musician, the only notes that are at issue for a conventional 4-valve BBb tuba are below the staff BBnat and low EEnat. These are lippable with 2-4, especially if you set 4 a little long, but not so long that CC and low FF are out of tune. So for a 4-valve "hobby" or "avocational" player, the point is moot.

Any player in any band that will attempt the Grainger (and a few others) with its exceptionally low range in a few spots is on his/her own.

[bloke]

non-compensating system:
If a 4th valve is tuned to low F - and a person can "lip" a fff non-mechanically-adjusted 2-4 "low E" in tune with "open E" on the string basses, all power to 'em.

In a community band, it's easy: Anyone else playing a "low E" is going to be a mile sharp as well, so - yep - "in tune" (with each other).

[catgrowlB]

Some really old Czech/German/Bohemian tubas have the 4th valve circuit tuned/cut at a M3, equal to valves 2&3 -- a half step higher than the typical P4 4th valve circuit. I find that just as good and effective, especially with BBb tubas.

[bloke]

Some really old Czech/German/Bohemian tubas have the 4th valve circuit tuned/cut at a M3, equal to valves 2&3 -- a half step higher than the typical P4 4th valve circuit. I find that just as good and effective, especially with BBb tubas.

No way I can do the math laying here on my back with my phone, and of course I can't test it, but I'm wondering if combining that with other valves does just about the same thing as that which I suggested.

Also, I don't pretend to be the first person who thought of what I suggested. I'm probably about the 20,000th... I'm not much of an original thinker.

[bloke]

Redundant but...

I prefer mashing buttons to pulling slides, but - realistically - with most tubas even six valves doesn't solve every intonation problem, so there's always going to be some slide pulling unless a particular instrument's so called "slots" are barn-door wide... a characteristic which puts a tremendous amount of responsibility on the player (as if playing a kazoo... almost)... and actually one of my personal instruments is just as described here. 6 valves, no slide pulling, all pitches are perfectly happy being played within nearly twenty cents either way of their own centers, and requiring epic operator-listening responsibility.

==================

The topic is "how to benefit the most from adding a fourth valve to the minimal three valve system".

I'm convinced that the overwhelming majority of four valve instruments built today - pretty much - are a waste of a valve and some tubing, as the benefit is so very little.

[DonO.]

If a player is mostly a community band player, or non-music-major band musician, the only notes that are at issue for a conventional 4-valve BBb tuba are below the staff BBnat and low EEnat. These are lippable with 2-4, especially if you set 4 a little long, but not so long that CC and low FF are out of tune. So for a 4-valve "hobby" or "avocational" player, the point is moot.

Any player in any band that will attempt the Grainger (and a few others) with its exceptionally low range in a few spots is on his/her own.

Totally agree with this! This has been my experience with my King 2341. One of the descriptors that you read a lot about this horn is that the intonation is “point and shoot”. After I’ve set the open horn to “A=440 (even though it’s a Bb), 1, 2, and 3 come out just a hair each. I set my 4th valve so that it’s a tiny bit flat on its own, but can be lipped up when used on its own. Then in those rare instances when I have to play 2-4, it can be lipped down easily. That’s it! When checked with a tuner, everything else is spot on in the “money register”. This horn is proof that a 4 valve BBb horn can and should be designed as such.

[bloke]

With a modern 2341 valve section, my experience is that the second circuit is about a half an inch too long for a semitone below the open bugle, and the fourth circuit is about 3 inches too long for a perfect fourth below the open bugle. The first circuit is about 1-1/2 inches too long for an in tune whole step down from the open bugle, and the third circuit is perhaps three or so inches too long for 2-3 to be just right for a major third drop from the open bugle... As the king number 3 circuit with the slides pushed all the way in tends to split the difference between the tuning of the low F# and the bottom of the staff F#.

In my experience with B-flat tubas, the length discrepancy between a full board/full sound (really loud, centered, no lipping) low F and low E is about seven inches of additional 4th circuit tubing being required for a really in tune low E vs. a really in tune low F.

Since the King circuits are built too long (and some of us have spent a good bit of time with these valve sections), they make up some of the lack of enough tubing for a good low E (with low F only suffering a bit towards the flat side, with this actually helping the more commonly played 2-4 B natural not suffer so badly), but there are still a few inches of discrepancy. I'm sure the E natural can be pulled down with the embouchure anywhere up to mezzo forte, but an orchestral double forte or triple forte resonance-centered low E would likely ride pretty sharp without some sort of adjustment in the slide tubing.

I agree that King is pretty clever about where they sneak in extra tubing and how much they do it. As an example of other than the 2341 (which is pretty good at sneaking in tubing here and there... though I cut the extra amounts off the circuits when I use their valve sections for other instruments), King's 3-valve sousaphone is probably about the least-badly out-of-tune one there is... but it's still badly out-of-tune.

With nearly every B flat or C tuba, D/C is flatter G/F - with the fourth circuit, the taper of the instrument having become so distorted at that point. The same thing happens with the 2-3 valve combination which is also a tremendous amount of cylindrical tubing, whereby low F#/G# is nearly always sharper than C#/D#, with the added problem of the next octave F#/G# (not needed with the fourth valve, but needed with 2-3) often being the flattest of all. Trombone players can deal with this because they have a slide, but they have a joke about it - whereby they pretend like they are Pooh and Eeyore talking to each other:
"Eeyore, where is 5th position on the trombone?"
"No one knows, Pooh...No one knows..."

[iiipopes]

Trombone players can deal with this because they have a slide, but they have a joke about it - whereby they pretend like they are Pooh and Eeyore talking to each other:
"Eeyore, where is 5th position on the trombone?"
"No one knows, Pooh...No one knows..."

This is no joke. This is real. In community band this season we have a piece that has a small section in concert E minor, with harmonic content over the bass line playing the rising melodic minor from dominant to the octave tonic. Need I say more?

[Tubeast]

Both my BBb tubas have very accessible 4th slides, much better so than their 1st slides.
I don´t share Bloke´s dislike for slide pulls that much, but negotiating TWO independent slide positions on top of a multitude of valves is where I´m leaving the team.

On the HoJo FA, the 4th slide has a top and bottom bow aligned in a way that suggests an easy-to-install pivot mechanism that would simultaneously extend the bottom slide as one pulls the top slide for maximum effect, easily providing for a two-semitone slide pull.

So why not go all the way and do the following (I´m speaking all BBb-fingerings here):
- set the 3rd valve to four semitones for in-tune Db/Gb (3) and C/F (23) and B/E (123) (this DOES work on my 3-valved Helikon)
- set the 4th valve to provide an in-tune Bb/Eb (4) and see where you´ll end up below that. There still is #1 slide to pull....

[DonO.]

With a modern 2341 valve section, my experience is that the second circuit is about a half an inch too long for a semitone below the open bugle, and the fourth circuit is about 3 inches too long for a perfect fourth below the open bugle. The first circuit is about 1-1/2 inches too long for an in tune whole step down from the open bugle, and the third circuit is perhaps three or so inches too long for 2-3 to be just right for a major third drop from the open bugle... As the king number 3 circuit with the slides pushed all the way in tends to split the difference between the tuning of the low F# and the bottom of the staff F#.

In my experience with B-flat tubas, the length discrepancy between a full board/full sound (really loud, centered, no lipping) low F and low E is about seven inches of additional 4th circuit tubing being required for a really in tune low E vs. a really in tune low F.

Since the King circuits are built too long (and some of us have spent a good bit of time with these valve sections), they make up some of the lack of enough tubing for a good low E (with low F only suffering a bit towards the flat side, with this actually helping the more commonly played 2-4 B natural not suffer so badly), but there are still a few inches of discrepancy. I'm sure the E natural can be pulled down with the embouchure anywhere up to mezzo forte, but an orchestral double forte or triple forte resonance-centered low E would likely ride pretty sharp without some sort of adjustment in the slide tubing.

I agree that King is pretty clever about where they sneak in extra tubing and how much they do it. As an example of other than the 2341 (which is pretty good at sneaking in tubing here and there... though I cut the extra amounts off the circuits when I use their valve sections for other instruments), King's 3-valve sousaphone is probably about the least-badly out-of-tune one there is... but it's still badly out-of-tune.

With nearly every B flat or C tuba, D/C is flatter G/F - with the fourth circuit, the taper of the instrument having become so distorted at that point. The same thing happens with the 2-3 valve combination which is also a tremendous amount of cylindrical tubing, whereby low F#/G# is nearly always sharper than C#/D#, with the added problem of the next octave F#/G# (not needed with the fourth valve, but needed with 2-3) often being the flattest of all. Trombone players can deal with this because they have a slide, but they have a joke about it - whereby they pretend like they are Pooh and Eeyore talking to each other:
"Eeyore, where is 5th position on the trombone?"
"No one knows, Pooh...No one knows..."

Bloke, you are obviously WAY more familiar with the technical aspects of my horn’s design. I am only reporting my experience with it. I play it in tune from low E above the staff up to Ab top line, confirmed with an electronic tuner. I do not pull slides. I DO make a few conscious embouchure adjustments. I PROBABLY make some subconscious adjustments as well. Whatever it is I do, it just works.