TubaForum.net

Posted: **Sun Jan 16, 2022 6:27 pm**

I think the idea of "5/4" is really messy. A PT-6, Willson 3050, Miraphone 1291, and Rudy Meinl 5/4 are all called 5/4 tubas. Like hell they are!

The MW2155 was billed as 5/4, and also as Warren Deck's quintet tuba of choice.

Keep the sizes in mind only as relative within the maker's lineup. Beyond that, it's nonsense.

A Miraphone 1291 actually IS a click bigger than a 186, which is 4/4. So of course they call it 5/4.

Same with the Rudy 5/4... it's one size bigger than their 4/4.

It's all so meaningless and silly, it makes my head spin. But I didn't make it, and we're stuck with it!

Posted: **Sun Jan 16, 2022 6:29 pm**

2155 is mostly "big" because of the really BIG mouthpipe tube.
Otherwise, it's a...tuba.

Not only is "5/4" messy but (being redundant) any fractional sizing of tubas is "messy", as there are so many variables.

>> MAKE/MODEL suffices.

Posted: **Sun Jan 16, 2022 7:23 pm**

bort2.0 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 16, 2022 6:27 pm I think the idea of "5/4" is really messy. A PT-6, Willson 3050, Miraphone 1291, and Rudy Meinl 5/4 are all called 5/4 tubas. Like hell they are!

The MW2155 was billed as 5/4, and also as Warren Deck's quintet tuba of choice.

Keep the sizes in mind only as relative within the maker's lineup. Beyond that, it's nonsense.

A Miraphone 1291 actually IS a click bigger than a 186, which is 4/4. So of course they call it 5/4.

Same with the Rudy 5/4... it's one size bigger than their 4/4.

It's all so meaningless and silly, it makes my head spin. But I didn't make it, and we're stuck with it!

So you don't think a PT-6 or Willson 3050 are 5/4's? What are they then? Baby 6/4?

They surely aren't 4/4's..

Posted: **Sun Jan 16, 2022 7:25 pm**

3050 or PT-6 are the definitive 5/4 to me. 1291 is too small, Rudy is too big for that name.

Posted: **Sun Jan 16, 2022 7:26 pm**

I think 5/4 just means "bigger than..." Bigger than what...? That's the question.

Posted: **Sun Jan 16, 2022 7:26 pm**

If you wanted to buy a truck at a Ford dealership, and there was no designation (Ranger, Maverick, F-150, 250, 350, 450...etc...) and you just said "Give me a Ford pickup, my buddy recommended them" would you not have a size in mind or care if they brought out a topkick F-750 with air brakes when you were thinking more of something you could park in your driveway like a 150? "Make&Modelslivesmatter"

Posted: **Sun Jan 16, 2022 7:27 pm**

bort2.0 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 16, 2022 7:26 pm I think 5/4 just means "bigger than..." Bigger than what...? That's the question.

than a 3/4 and a 4/4 size tuba...what else? This is why my horn and the 188 model Miraphones perplex me so badly. They are clearly (using the traditional sizing methods not a 4/4 and not a 5/4, hence why I mentioned the 4.5/4 sizing option.

Posted: **Sun Jan 16, 2022 7:48 pm**

KingTuba1241X wrote: ↑Sun Jan 16, 2022 7:27 pm
bort2.0 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 16, 2022 7:26 pm I think 5/4 just means "bigger than..." Bigger than what...? That's the question.
than a 3/4 and a 4/4 size tuba...what else? This is why my horn and the 188 model Miraphones perplex me so badly. They are clearly (using the traditional sizing methods not a 4/4 and not a 5/4, hence why I mentioned the 4.5/4 sizing option.

Totally get it!

And without spilling the beans, you know what my upcoming tuba is, and where it fits in all this nonsense. :)

Posted: **Sun Jan 16, 2022 10:46 pm**

From now on, if I sell some unbranded tuba, it's going to be designated at 6/4...because it's GOT to be "CONSIDERABLY bigger than" somethin'...eh?

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2022 4:46 am**

Wow, eleven pages discussing how useless it is to give tubas a size wherein a bulk of the conversation has been kept alive by some of TF's most knowledgeable members.

And it's not the first time. Or the first forum.

So....I guess I'll join in...again.

I'm happy with the tuba fraction system. Yes, it's meaningless, unless everyone agrees that it, however vague, means something. More or less.

So if it means nothing to you: STAY AWAY. It's pretty confusing. A Miraphone 1291 is often referred to as a 5/4. So is the 496. The 496 has a bit larger, broader, more open sound when compared back to back. But they basically are both usable for the same type of work.

I've noticed that the "tuba community often"(my opinion/observation) uses the fractions to describe a tubas "functional" sound. (When looking for an orchestra tuba avoid travel tubas: too specific).
3/4 for small tubas with a small sound (kid size, quintet size)
4/4 for medium sized tubas are all around but "might" be a lot of work for most people when used in a large ensemble. Great for quintets, big bands, combos. For years often used in orchestras and still are to this day.
5/4 for the modern day all around, small to large ensembles. Also easier to use when one is the only bass player in a group.
6/4 large ensemble work and "bass player" work. Most people find them to be a lot of work air wise so make sure it works for you.

And that's what goes through MY head when I see fractions. I basically think; "oh yeah, more or less that size of sound"
More or less

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2022 9:21 am**

The first time I ever saw an attempt the apply the bowed string instrument sizing system to tubas, I laughed.

One of the fun things about tubas is that there are so many configurations, sizes, and combinations of features. This stuff defines that there can be no system which describes their “size“ accurately, so why can’t we describe their size inaccurately, in order to be more accurate ?

- really small
- small
- medium
- big
- really big
- huge

…??
‘ still six (now: word-based) modifiers, but they are more vague - and more appropriate for instruments which vary so much…also discouraging those who would attempt (and fail - as always) to scientize this from attempting to do so.

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2022 9:50 am**

I didn’t bother reading all 11 pages of this, so I don’t know if this has already been brought up, but technically all tubas of any “size” are really the same size if they are the same key. For example, all BBb tubas have to be 18 feet of tubing in order to be BBbs. Appropriately shorter for the other keys. The small, large, etc. thing is all a product of what the designer of the tuba actually does with all that tubing- bore, tightness or looseness of wrap, and amount of bell section expansion/flare. Trying to apply violin style fractional sizes doesn’t really apply. Those violin sizes aren’t literal, that is a 1/2 size violin isn’t really half the size of a full size. And they get acoustically shorter as they get smaller. That’s the whole point. The smaller violins enable the smaller children to do the necessary finger stretches because the notes are closer to each other on the strings. By contrast, the acoustical length of the tuba changes not one bit regardless of the size. I would propose that instead of 3/4, 4/4, 5/4, 6/4 we come up with a system of descriptive words based on the intended use or tradition- for example “student model” for 3/4, “regular ensemble” for 4/4, “large ensemble” for 5/4, and, because of history/tradition, either “Kaiser” or “Monster” for 6/4.

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2022 9:56 am**

Violin sizes probably aren’t literal, but at least they mean specific things.
As volume of objects often decreases faster than length, it just might be that violin sizes are nearly literal…(??)

Perhaps one of our subscribers - who attempts to approach everything in a scientific or engineering type of way - could figure that out for us, report back, and then we would know.

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2022 9:58 am**

I was thinking

about this framed in the context of flugelhorns, as they share a similar rate of tubing growth from one end to another.

I’ve never seen these sized, other than by bore and bell diameter. Comparing Benge, Schiller, Bach, Couesnon, and Yamaha, anyone can see how the bell taper rates can be wildly different (e.g. the Benge) and how that changes the sound considerably. Much more so than when trumpet players make claims of differentiating between a 37, 43, and 72 bell…

Anyhow, they don’t size flugelhorns and it doesn’t really matter.

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2022 2:22 pm**

pjv wrote: ↑Mon Jan 17, 2022 4:46 am Wow, eleven pages discussing how useless it is to give tubas a size wherein a bulk of the conversation has been kept alive by some of TF's most knowledgeable members.

And it's not the first time. Or the first forum.

So....I guess I'll join in...again.

I'm happy with the tuba fraction system. Yes, it's meaningless, unless everyone agrees that it, however vague, means something. More or less.

So if it means nothing to you: STAY AWAY. It's pretty confusing. A Miraphone 1291 is often referred to as a 5/4. So is the 496. The 496 has a bit larger, broader, more open sound when compared back to back. But they basically are both usable for the same type of work.

I've noticed that the "tuba community often"(my opinion/observation) uses the fractions to describe a tubas "functional" sound. (When looking for an orchestra tuba avoid travel tubas: too specific).
3/4 for small tubas with a small sound (kid size, quintet size)
4/4 for medium sized tubas are all around but "might" be a lot of work for most people when used in a large ensemble. Great for quintets, big bands, combos. For years often used in orchestras and still are to this day.
5/4 for the modern day all around, small to large ensembles. Also easier to use when one is the only bass player in a group.
6/4 large ensemble work and "bass player" work. Most people find them to be a lot of work air wise so make sure it works for you.

And that's what goes through MY head when I see fractions. I basically think; "oh yeah, more or less that size of sound"
More or less

You are even making it worse!

Using the volume is an easy method, but taking the size of the sound as standard only makes the discussion go on for another 50 years. What does that mean the size of a sound, how to measure that size?

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2022 2:30 pm**

Rick Denney wrote: ↑Sun Jan 16, 2022 4:32 pm I preferred the classic TubaEuph system, which ranged from “is that a euphonium?” to “big-ass tuba”.

The quarter sizing was ever only there to distinguish products in a maker’s catalog. Comparing across makers presents too many variables, it seems to me.

A Cerveny Piggy is a 4/4 tuba with a larger bore and a compact wrap. An Alex 163 is a 4/4 tuba despite the big sound and big bore. A 186 is the quintessential 4/4 tuba, as is the old King 1241/2341, notwithstanding the smaller bore. The new 2341 is a half-size smaller. Rudi’s line is a half-size larger.

Kaisers are 5/4 by definition, and fat grand orchestral tubas are 6/4 by definition, and deservedly so even just considering the bell throat.

The Rudi 6/4 is in a class by itself.

Instead of measuring, we just need to memorize the list.

Rick “there will be a test” Denney

Kaisers being always 5/4 is somewhat misleading because it was stated that the ore should be above like 21 mm .
Too bad most of Uwe site is gone because there was very interesting info about the bore going up to 23 - 24 mm in the days.
And didn't TheBerlinerTuba say that the mouthpieces they played on these giant tubas were much smaller than we nowadays use?

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2022 2:44 pm**

bloke wrote: ↑Mon Jan 17, 2022 9:56 am Violin sizes probably aren’t literal, but at least they mean specific things.
As volume of objects often decreases faster than length, it just might be that violin sizes are nearly literal…(??)

Perhaps one of our subscribers - who attempts to approach everything in a scientific or engineering type of way - could figure that out for us, report back, and then we would know.

I know lets say about nothing of violins or any other string instrument, but it seems that their size is simply a matter of ergonomics.
I did find some educational links but like I said I'm too ignorant about violins to even make a small summarize.

https://www.violincellomaker.com/2021/0 ... s-matters/

https://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/music/peop ... iolin2.pdf

https://hidersine.com/education/blog/it ... -do-i-need

Some incredible accurate measurements here, eat that tuba makers.
http://www.makingtheviolin.com/Measurements

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2022 3:02 pm**

I didn’t bother reading all 11 pages of this

Me neither (just weighing in...)

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2022 3:26 pm**

peterbas wrote: ↑Mon Jan 17, 2022 2:30 pm Kaisers being always 5/4 is somewhat misleading because it was stated that the ore should be above like 21 mm .

Valve bore may vary independently from size, as you know. I can't think off hand of a 6/4 less than 19mm, but I wouldn't rule it out. We know of 4/4 tubas from 17 to 21mm. It's a conical instrument.

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2022 4:03 pm**

peterbas wrote: ↑Mon Jan 17, 2022 2:22 pm What does that mean the size of a sound, how to measure that size?

Whatever it means to YOU! And that's the point.

The fractional measurements mean nothing, absolutely nothing.

But everybody uses it anyway. And people buy and sell tubas, often starting off with a "hmm, I think maybe if I downsized from 6/4 to 5/4 I'd be able to do the same work with less effort".

And then they proceed and start looking around for what THEY think is a 5/4 tuba.

It's like looking for a tuba with a sweat sound; it means absolutely nothing.

Except to all the player where it does have...to THEMselves.

And that's the absolute beauty of it. A definition that kind of has a general meaning, though different to everyone who listens, which allows use to vaguely understand each other.

Priceless!
I am now going to have a glass of dry red wine with a taste that resembles dried fig, but also has some complex savory flavors.

Dig?

TubaForum.net

Discussion of tuba sizing

Re: Discussion of tuba sizing

Re: Discussion of tuba sizing

Re: Discussion of tuba sizing

Re: Discussion of tuba sizing

Re: Discussion of tuba sizing

Re: Discussion of tuba sizing

Re: Discussion of tuba sizing

Re: Discussion of tuba sizing

Re: Discussion of tuba sizing

Re: Discussion of tuba sizing

Re: Discussion of tuba sizing

Re: Discussion of tuba sizing

Re: Discussion of tuba sizing

Re: Discussion of tuba sizing

Re: Discussion of tuba sizing

Re: Discussion of tuba sizing

Re: Discussion of tuba sizing

Re: Discussion of tuba sizing

Re: Discussion of tuba sizing

Re: Discussion of tuba sizing