TubaForum.net

Posted: **Thu Apr 21, 2022 10:29 am**

bloke wrote: ↑Thu Apr 21, 2022 9:09 am The bell circumference at the insertion point is 19 inches, so the diameter is going to be 6 inches.

Since this tuba is about 40 1/2 inches tall – and many of the typical 6/4 tubas are 37 inches tall,
adjusting somewhat for that consideration would define a circumference of at least (if not more) 19 3/4 inches with a diameter of about 6 1/4 inches.

Thanks! A little larger than mine, I'm at 18.5 circumference, like 5.88 inches or something. You bell *looks* bigger, but perspective be damned, in isolation they all look perfectly normal sized.

Posted: **Thu Apr 21, 2022 11:59 am**

bloke wrote: ↑Wed Apr 20, 2022 4:15 pm
Ricardo wrote: ↑Wed Apr 20, 2022 2:59 pm
bloke wrote: ↑Tue Apr 19, 2022 10:19 pm
I did fork over some dough to get this thing, and it's nice to get something - something quite special - for having forked it over.
So your saying, for the price, it’s good?

But we all know, in absolute terms, it’s great!
yeah...I'm not sure that (factoring in inflation) it's the most I've ever paid for a tuba, but it's just about there...and I'm glad that (after a few days of review) I'm feeling no "buyer's remorse" whatsoever.

fwiw...Here's a 4/4 - 5/4 - 6/4 picture:

I missed the "J S" in the tuning slide of the Holton until just now. nice!

Posted: **Thu Apr 21, 2022 12:05 pm**

YorkNumber3 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 21, 2022 9:12 am I don’t get the aesthetic criticism of the 4th wrap (or the rest of it either). Looks good, sturdy, and functional to me.

I don't recall there being an aesthetic value judgment--nobody said it looked bad. But it does look weird. Weirdness is simply a matter of not fitting what we normally expect, or what we think it needs to look like to work well.

But reputation notwithstanding, I'm no theorist--if it works, it's right.

Rick "who could tell this was an awesome tube in 10 seconds of actually playing it" Denney

Posted: **Thu Apr 21, 2022 12:17 pm**

bort2.0 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 21, 2022 10:29 am
bloke wrote: ↑Thu Apr 21, 2022 9:09 am The bell circumference at the insertion point is 19 inches, so the diameter is going to be 6 inches.

Since this tuba is about 40 1/2 inches tall – and many of the typical 6/4 tubas are 37 inches tall,
adjusting somewhat for that consideration would define a circumference of at least (if not more) 19 3/4 inches with a diameter of about 6 1/4 inches.
Thanks! A little larger than mine, I'm at 18.5 circumference, like 5.88 inches or something. You bell *looks* bigger, but perspective be damned, in isolation they all look perfectly normal sized.

The Rudi 5/4 isn't quite as large in diameter as a typical 6/4 grand orchestral tuba, but it's damn close, and within the range where other differences will dominate.

The Siegfried also didn't seem to me quite as large as a traditional "orchestra grand bass" design like the York--Joe could measure it and know. It seems to me it's a hybrid design--a lot of grand orchestral BAT influence in a traditional large-bore rotary design. But bore size is misleading--this tuba resonates so easily it feels like the lips are working into an moderate and consistent impedance, which is what is lacking in a lot of instruments with a really large bore. A lot of instruments seem to have such low impedance that it sucks the power out of the player. Impedance is resistance, sure, but resistance at a relevant frequency, not just friction, and a low-friction system can still have the correct impedance at the frequency in question. That usually means the energy goes into the signal and not into friction. This tuba seems to have little friction, but an appropriately matched impedance so that the buzz establishes the resonances easily. Grand orchestral tubas are in no way consistent on this issue, and players of all calibers are in no way consistent on what instrument impedance they prefer.

But then that's the kind of stuff I say that gives me a reputation for being a theorist. :)

Rick "no clue" Denney

Posted: **Thu Apr 21, 2022 12:38 pm**

I've always thought of the Rudy 5/4 tubas SOUND (not their FEEL nor their BORE) as being a lot like the SOUND of a (fixed upright bell) Conn 36J...

...except lacking the uselessness of the Conn's 3rd partial pitches.

Posted: **Thu Apr 21, 2022 10:09 pm**

Another thing (that I continue to forget to mention about this bizarre Miraphone instrument) is this “luxurious anomaly” - whereby it does not require the player to “lip”/favor the low range at either end of the dynamic spectrum.
Just “play with the ‘best’ quiet/moderate/loud embouchure - for the ‘best’ resonance”, and the pitch level remains the same throughout the low range’s dynamic range.

Posted: **Fri Apr 22, 2022 6:12 pm**

sorry for the redundant gushing...

I just spent at least a couple of hours playing (not scales/arpeggios trying to "learn" this instrument, but) SONGS...vocalises...

In the past - when I've owned "gigantic" tubas, I've NEVER enjoyed playing "songs"...too much work...too athletic...

...just now: It was difficult to stop !!!

I haven't (really) "practiced" in MANY months...just shown up for gigs and played (as - sorry for truth, but...) it really doesn't require that a tuba player be at the very top of their game in order to cover "tuba parts". That having been said, I believe I'm ALREADY back on a "practicing kick".

I already know where all of the individual pitches are, and (again, luxuriously) they aren't squirrelly; if I put the slide HERE, "X" pitch will ALSO be HERE.

Posted: **Sat Apr 23, 2022 3:15 am**

Exactly that.
Those rare moments in my life when I picked up a tuba and got lost having fun, forgetting that I was trying out the horn; that's when I knew I had a winner in my hands.

Posted: **Sat Apr 23, 2022 11:53 am**

NON-problematic anomaly:

The 1st valve pitches (G♯/A♭ overtone series) are positioned FARTHER OUT - on the #1 slide, than are the 1st-and-2nd valve pitches (G♮ overtone series) with this instrument.

Mathematically/physically, that's bass-ackwards.

Posted: **Sat May 14, 2022 12:49 pm**

Tuba players don’t generally think of Rhapsody in Blue as an important excerpt - and this piece, frankly, I was given short shrift this week in the rehearsal schedule, but I noticed some things about this huge B-flat and what it does.
This is a very old school piece, and asks the tuba to do with the tuba does.
Every size of tuba in various lengths has its strengths, but a big old really resonant (remarkably resonant) B-flat tuba does something for down beats that no other tuba does.
A 4/4 tuba sounds like “baah”, a 5/4 like “bahh”, a 6/4 C (3/4” bore) like bow” (long O), but this thing – with just the right slide setting and just the right embouchure frequency - can do “WHUMP!!!”, and I’m not sure that any of the others can quite do that… (and without the bass drum or timpani covering it up, btw).
…and it IS the instrument, and NOT the player.

It’s really easy to recite “It’s the player and not the instrument“, but that’s not always the truth.

Posted: **Sun May 15, 2022 6:12 pm**

(sidebar: hail storm, right now - no power…one bar of cell service, and no Wi-Fi)
———————
topic: the last B-flat “stinger” of the Gershwin

My bass trombone buddy turned to the 2nd player and asked, “Wow! Did you hear that chord?”

My many-decades buddy (the 2nd bassoonist - who was playing tenor sax on the Gershwin) knew exactly what made it ring like that, and turned around and winked at me.

Put a pretty-good player (who’s beginning to learn the ropes on “God’s B-Flat Tuba”), and ask the tuba (and it’s pretty-good player) to pop out a perfect fortissimo “open” B-flat (after sustaining the same pitch for two full measures), stick it underneath a really fine orchestra, and something borderline-magical is likely to occur.

Posted: **Mon May 16, 2022 8:56 am**

bloke wrote: ↑Sun May 15, 2022 6:12 pm (sidebar: hail storm, right now - no power…one bar of cell service, and no Wi-Fi)
———————
topic: the last B-flat “stinger” of the Gershwin

My bass trombone buddy turned to the 2nd player and asked, “Wow! Did you hear that chord?”

My many-decades buddy (the 2nd bassoonist - who was playing tenor sax on the Gershwin) knew exactly what made it ring like that, and turned around and winked at me.

Put a pretty-good player (who’s beginning to learn the ropes on “God’s B-Flat Tuba”), and ask the tuba (and it’s pretty-good player) to pop out a perfect fortissimo “open” B-flat (after sustaining the same pitch for two full measures), stick it underneath a really fine orchestra, and something borderline-magical is likely to occur.

^^^This^^^ is THE STUFF... THE THING...

It's also one of the many examples of why a 6/4 CC is NOT always the best-and-only choice for every stinkin' damned thing that exists in tubadom.

Posted: **Mon May 16, 2022 9:15 am**

People are tired of me expressing the same opinions about the same things over-and-over, but – again – if someone actually required/coerced me into using a 6/4 C tuba at some full-time or semi-full-time job (ie. a job that pays at least more per year than one of those tubas costs), it would be the Yamaha 826. I believe it’s a little smaller than most of the others, the intonation is more accessible, and everything about it is easier than any of the others…also, the workmanship and the clever porting that Yamaha incorporated into the pistons.
I just believe that for the size, the 16 foot bugle is just a little too short to make an instrument that large really work and resonate like one would hope, and that may be why they tend to be fitted with a conservative three-quarter inch bore size.
Even some of the first (which were more than one -off instruments – the Holton ones) were challenging to play (if C), whereas the B-flat ones tend to be the ones that might play quite well in tune – though inconsistent – and offered a truly resonant type of sonority.
I guess I’m saying that when a tuba is built to those proportions, I believe they work out better when they are longer.
This particular rotary model:
- odd looking
- unconventional
- sort of a hybrid cross between central European orchester-Kaiser and American band tuba
…looks like it should be a disaster, but I have never encountered anything as good, including the more normal-looking model that followed it - a few years later.

Posted: **Mon May 16, 2022 9:46 am**

bloke wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 9:15 am People are tired of me expressing the same opinions about the same things over-and-over, but – again – if someone actually required/coerced me into using a 6/4 C tuba at some full-time or semi-full-time job (ie. a job that pays at least more per year than one of those tubas costs), it would be the Yamaha 826. I believe it’s a little smaller than most of the others, the intonation is more accessible, and everything about it is easier than any of the others…also, the workmanship and the clever porting that Yamaha incorporated into the pistons.
I just believe that for the size, the 16 foot bugle is just a little too short to make an instrument that large really work and resonate like one would hope, and that may be why they tend to be fitted with a conservative three-quarter inch bore size.
Even some of the first (which were more than one -off instruments – the Holton ones) were challenging to play (if C), whereas the B-flat ones tend to be the ones that might play quite well in tune – though inconsistent – and offered a truly resonant type of sonority.
I guess I’m saying that when a tuba is built to those proportions, I believe they work out better when they are longer.
This particular rotary model:
- odd looking
- unconventional
- sort of a hybrid cross between central European orchester-Kaiser and American band tuba
…looks like it should be a disaster, but I have never encountered anything as good, including the more normal-looking model that followed it - a few years later.

I played the 98 when it first showed up on the show circuit. It was quite a while back, but I remember having a really good impression. I'd like to try one again. I recently played the more normal-looking cousin, and I really liked it. It caused me to wonder (and I still do occasionally) if I shouldn't have purchased the normal-looking cousin or the one like yours that was for sale in Europe for about the same asking price as yours. Playing one again will ease my mind, whether I ever buy one or not.

It's unfortunate that this model hasn't gained more attraction. I'm quite sure that the looks deter many players here and in Europe, and the sticker price doesn't help. It seems as though the Fafner usually gets the nod in Europe, Germany in particular. You just don't hear of Miraphone BBb's occupying too many back rows of orchestras. Of course, the Fafner is not really 6/4, but it is a really fine large BBb tuba nonetheless. To be certain, I am not dissatisfied with my normal-looking's little brother, but I occasionally yearn for a bigger, wider presence, although all other large BBb attributes are spot-on with very nice intonation.

Posted: **Mon May 23, 2022 4:15 pm**

fb just showed me this picture of (possibly...??) the first time I ever play-tested a model 98.

(8 years ago: Bloomington, Indiana)

I recall that - rather than my typical 15 to 30 seconds - I actually play-tested that instrument for two or three minutes.

I also recall that I thought,
- "How can something this huge, weird-looking, and long (ie. B-flat), and with such a large bore size play so easily and so well?"
- "I wonder if I should consider one of these?"

I have no idea who took the picture...I believe I stole it from someone's else fb timeline.

Notice the TWO small arrows that had drawn from the label:

Posted: **Mon May 23, 2022 4:39 pm**

Well that's settled -- Behemoth no more!

Posted: **Mon May 23, 2022 10:05 pm**

poll edited, and vote-changing allowed

bort2.0 wrote: ↑Mon May 23, 2022 4:39 pm Well that's settled -- Behemoth no more!

Posted: **Fri May 27, 2022 4:35 pm**

bloke wrote: ↑Mon May 23, 2022 10:05 pm poll edited, and vote-changing allowed

bort2.0 wrote: ↑Mon May 23, 2022 4:39 pm Well that's settled -- Behemoth no more!

You can edit polls? And change your vote?

Dogs and cats, living together?

(and none of my name suggestions were added? What were they again? I'll take a page from Granny Weatherwax, and suggest you name it "Tuba")

Posted: **Sat May 28, 2022 8:22 am**

Or perhaps...

Walrus

that'd be a fine name.

Posted: **Sat May 28, 2022 9:35 am**

humBell wrote: ↑Sat May 28, 2022 8:22 am Or perhaps...

Walrus

that'd be a fine name.

When it's played, you should see how they run like pigs from a gun.

TubaForum.net

Miraphone model 98 B-flat playing characteristics and learning curve - VIDEO added on PAGE 10

Re: POLL !! - XCVIII (best pics: page 4)

Re: POLL !! - XCVIII

Re: POLL !! - XCVIII (best pics: page 4)

Re: POLL !! - XCVIII (best pics: page 4)

Re: POLL !! - XCVIII (best pics: page 4)

Re: POLL !! - XCVIII (best pics: page 4)

Re: POLL !! - XCVIII (best pics: page 4)

Re: POLL !! - XCVIII (best pics: page 4)

Re: POLL !! - XCVIII (best pics: page 4)

Re: POLL !! - XCVIII (best pics: page 4)

Re: POLL !! - XCVIII (best pics: page 4)

Re: POLL !! - XCVIII (best pics: page 4)

Re: POLL !! - XCVIII (best pics: page 4)

Re: POLL !! - XCVIII (best pics: page 4)

Re: POLL !! - XCVIII (best pics: page 4)

Re: POLL !! - XCVIII (added on p.5 [5-23-22] a picture from 2014)

Re: POLL !! - XCVIII (added on p.5 [5-23-22] a picture from 2014)

Re: POLL !! - XCVIII (added on p.5 [5-23-22] a picture from 2014)

Re: POLL !! - XCVIII (added on p.5 [5-23-22] a picture from 2014)

Re: POLL !! - XCVIII (added on p.5 [5-23-22] a picture from 2014)