TubaForum.net

.

tofu wrote: Wed Nov 27, 2024 8:32 pm
slide pulling extravaganza.

I've never played a size four ( defacto 5/4) C of those that was easy to play in tune. I owned one for a few years and actually ended up as a finalist with that thing at auditions a couple of times but - boy - did I have to practice and (to) work out the use of crazy fingerings. I was also trying to play it with those M0 and M1 mouthpieces back then - that some of you claim you like(d). They just weren't doing anything good for me. I sort of consider that era in my tuba playing so-called career to be a detour, and discouraged me from even purchasing another contrabass tuba for several years, once I sold it.

I'm pretty sure that I stated this in the thread earlier, but the easiest one of any size (intonation) that I've ever owned/played was the really large one that they call a size five (defacto 6/4) in C with five valves and a second slide trigger. I reduced the capillary portion of its mouthpipe to a more manageable size, which didn't change the sound and no longer made me feel as though I was the Big Bad Wolf trying to blow down a brick house.

I also owned a size three one in C with five valves (defacto /4), which was easier to play in tune than the size four but still had some of size four intonation quirks, just not as serious.

...so I've owned all three 5-valve C versions, as well as a 4/4 (size three) B-flat and spent significant time with a 6/4 (size five) B-flat. I tooted on the 4/4-size piston C once. Its owner is very fond of it.

I've not encountered either of the F tubas.

If the Rudy F cimbasso is any thing like the Chinese copy of it, the bore size is w-a-y too big. I've been told that the bell of the genuine RM F cimbasso sounds more mellow than the Jinbao knockoff. If that's accurate, I would consider that as an additional drawback, regarding the RM version.

RM50 and PT7 side by side.....