resonance v projection (also: what is warmth and where are my overtones)

[splat]

Sometimes I see tubas (and mouthpieces!) advertised as having resonance and/or projection and/or having a warm sound.

There is a little bit of subjectivity around what "warmth" is (I say this objectively).

Is it the case that resonance and/or projection are more scientific and able to be measured? I assume it is something to do with overtones and decibels. If you think they're measurable, how would you measure them?

In your experience, have you found there to be certain characteristics of instruments (or mouthpieces) that can produce more resonance or more projection? Do you think there are some instruments (or mouthpieces) that have both great resonance and great projection?

Sometimes I feel like a tuba section can sound lovely and big and warm close up (good resonance?) but not really sound much from further away (bad projection?).

Love to know what you think!


(obviously these concepts can only be attributed to instruments and mouthpieces and have nothing to doing more practisng or using more air or using better air!)

[UncleBeer]

Re: "resonance", the Brass Instrument Analysis System defines this as the amount of acoustic energy which bounces back from the bell (or beyond, actually; google "acoustical end effect") to the mouthpiece, back to the bell, back to the mouthpiece, etc. This sets up a 'standing wave' inside the instrument, fortifying the tube length's fundamental and overtones. A poor design will produce around 15% 'resonance', and a great design will produce as much as 55%.

[Mary Ann]

I'll tell you what I learned from a horn teacher once, that I think applies to all sound, not just instruments.
He had a lovely sound from the hall, exactly what you would want to hear. But up close -- his sound was downright harsh with "too many high frequencies" to be pretty. But the highs "fall off" first on their way out into the hall, so they aren't there in the sound you hear. From that, I learned that if the sound is "very pretty" up close -- likely in the hall it sounds "very muffy."

[tubanh84]

TO ME, resonance and projection are the same thing. They are both concerned with how much sound is thrown out into the performance hall. And I mean sound vs noise. Noise is easy. Blow hard and stop caring. People will hear you. Sound, though, is hard until you get it, and then you can't not do it. The nice thing about resonance is that the more resonant your sound is, the quieter/easier you can play and still be heard within the group.

It's something that you can only really learn by studying with/listening to a player with a huge, resonant sound. I've never heard a recording that accurately captures the size of the sound that world class players produce. I have countless stories of myself and others thinking they had a good sound until they heard a polished, professional caliber player live an in person. Most recently a HS trumpet player I gave a lesson to, who had a beautiful sound. And then I spent some time with him on breathing, posture, and gave him permission to both relax and also not be afraid of any amount of sound that came out of his instrument. And he in the moment realized there was an entire world of sound that he didn't know existed.

Overtones depend on the shape of the horn - In general, German rotary/kaiser style tubas will have more low overtones; American piston tubas will have more high overtones. You can tweak this ever so slightly with mouthpiece selection (bowl/funnel/bores), but the horn will largely dictate that.

The cue I always use to ensure I'm letting the horn resonate, is to tank up on air, relax, and simply try to vibrate a standing wave from my body into the horn. I have a tendency to get strained and over-aggressive with my playing, and that cue lets me bring myself back into playing in a way that produces the sound I want.

[catgrowlB]

I think there are many different ways to describe sound...

When I think of a 'warm' sound, I think of a sound that has good body and depth to it, with roundness and overtones and a mellow quality to it.

You can even describe sound with food/taste.
There are some tubas where I would describe the sound as 'chocolatey', some as 'gelatinous' and so on...

A lot of the time you see 'dark' or 'bright' for sound descriptions. And they are fine, but not as descriptive as other terms because those mostly describe fundamental and overtones proportion in sound.
Sound is much more complicated than that...

When I think of resonance v projection, I think of 'resonance' being a part of sound that is full-body that fills its immediate space. 'Projection' is a part of sound with carrying power, and 'reaches out' so people can hear it better from greater distance. Denser sounds tend to project/carry more.

[gocsick]

I think you need to also include responsiveness into discussion as well. My "engineeringish definitions

Resonance - How strongly the air column “rings” at its natural modes (high acoustic impedance + low internal loss). Think high-Q peaks that support clear standing waves. How it feels/sounds: Centered pitch, easy lip-bend into slots, rich overtone content; the horn seems to “light up” at certain notes.

Responsiveness - The instrument’s transient behavior—how quickly it speaks and how little input it needs to start/shape a tone. It’s about efficiency and low latency, not loudness. How it feels/sounds: Instant attack at pp–mf, clean articulations, facile slurs; valves/slide and embouchure changes yield immediate acoustic results.

Projection - How well sound carries and stays intelligible at distance and in a mix—driven by directivity and overtone balance (especially upper-mid partials), not just loudness at the bell. How it feels/sounds: You may not feel it as “loud” behind the bell, but listeners out front hear clear core that rides over ensemble.

[1 Ton Tommy]

A test we did for RADAR maintenance in my Army days was a spectrum analysis of the transmitter tube output. It showed the main frequency and the odd order harmonics out many multiples of the main frequency. Later I used this to analyze the effects of computer power supplies on the mains. It was not good. Still later I used it for vibration analysis and audio sound production analysis.

Using a microphone and an oscilloscope with a FFT feature it will visually display the harmonic characteristics of any sound the microphone can pick up. So if one cared to and had the time, one could record various tubas being played by the same player and view the harmonic series each produced and capture it. Likewise various players on the same tube, or mouthpieces or any other variable you can think of.

Somewhere in some computer file, I have captured photos of dozens of vibrations including the notorios vibration of a British BSA single cylinder motorcycle -- but alas no tubas.

[Mary Ann]

(off thread...) If it was a BSA 441, I got to drive one of those back in the day. WAY back in the day. It had its own sound like no other. As did all the bikes back then -- now I can't tell them apart.

[splat]

Using a microphone and an oscilloscope with a FFT feature it will visually display the harmonic characteristics of any sound the microphone can pick up. So if one cared to and had the time, one could record various tubas being played by the same player and view the harmonic series each produced and capture it. Likewise various players on the same tube, or mouthpieces or any other variable you can think of.

Re: "resonance", the Brass Instrument Analysis System defines this as the amount of acoustic energy which bounces back from the bell (or beyond, actually; google "acoustical end effect") to the mouthpiece, back to the bell, back to the mouthpiece, etc. This sets up a 'standing wave' inside the instrument, fortifying the tube length's fundamental and overtones. A poor design will produce around 15% 'resonance', and a great design will produce as much as 55%.

I'm not 100% across the exact capture and analyis tech (my brain is too small), but I see that the world famous Rick Denney has done some measurements and put a few results up.

https://www.rickdenney.com/the_tuba_sound.htm


As a non-scientist and non-professional-muso, I find it very interesting to try and understand the 'facts' behind the sounds. Also reading about "difference tones" and how fog-horns and some pipe organs work with "psychoacoustic" tones is pretty neat.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combination_tone

(maybe this will one day help me find a mouthpiece that magically makes me sound better)

[prodigal]

(off thread...) If it was a BSA 441, I got to drive one of those back in the day. WAY back in the day. It had its own sound like no other. As did all the bikes back then -- now I can't tell them apart.

Great bike, that is a killer single cylinder. A wild one to kickstart, too!

[prodigal]

My old 74 Triumph Trident made some killer vibrations too, especially when the spark plug wire would fall off riding. That was 25 years ago. Don't miss that bike, but sure wish I had the Symphonie from back then.

[Mary Ann]

(off thread...) If it was a BSA 441, I got to drive one of those back in the day. WAY back in the day. It had its own sound like no other. As did all the bikes back then -- now I can't tell them apart.

Great bike, that is a killer single cylinder. A wild one to kickstart, too!

At the time I owned a 350 Duke single, and I "could" start the BSA, but not all the time! Both had a pressure release for the cylinder, so at least you could get the piston in the best possible place to have the longest stroke available to start it. Previous owner of the Duke had gone over the handlebars once because he locked his knee at the bottom of the kick.

[prodigal]

They were infamous for throwing you on the kickstart.

Everyone should learn to drive on a proper British motorcycle with no electric start. You learn to shift like your life depends on it, because it does.

I rode before smartphones, I'm too scared by humanity now to ride, even though my Dad has a new Royal Enfield that he got for me. With a wife and 4 kids, I stick to F150s.

An old BMW with a sidecar would make a really cool looking Mirafone delivery truck though.

[1 Ton Tommy]

Wow! I had no idea there were so many closet bikers on this site.

Yes, indeed it was a 441 Victor. It wouldn't have been so hard to start had BSA not cheaped out with the Energy Transfer charging system that pretended to be a magneto. I now have a Matchless 500 single with a proper magneto and mechanical brakes. It can sit for months and with fresh gas will start on the 3rd kick without drama lest you forget to retard the spark. Without hydraulics, the brakes always work; there is no problem with them absorbing water and seizing up, likewise my bicycle.

I hope the tech bros don't convince tuba manufacturers to add hydraulic or electronic shift technology ala. bicycles to tuba valves. After last night's rehearsal, with some very fast passages and tired fingers, I need something to speed up my action but not more technology. Maybe finger exercises or lighter valve springs. Trumpet was way easier on the Messiah than 3rd trombone parts on tuba. And now the director wants that high register to be piano if not pianissimo. I could play the same notes on a C trumpet and everyone would be happier. We're short two horns and maybe when they show up it will save me from a terrible fate.

[Grumpikins]

When I was in college my teacher had Dr. Young come and teach a class. He talked about all the research he did on sound waves, etc (tuba specific). I really cant remember much about it because it was very scientific, a lot of graphs and charts and big crazy words... but, what he was talking about applies specifically to this topic.

Maybe someone here has a connection to someone who has that research.

My question, is Dr young still alive? He was a really special guy.

[bloke]

Words to describe music and sound are difficult to apply and confusing... I believe that's why there is music, and not just words about music. That's probably also why it's good to have a studio teacher who's also a good player and not just a wordsmith.

[splat]

Words to describe music and sound are difficult to apply and confusing... I believe that's why there is music, and not just words about music. That's probably also why it's good to have a studio teacher who's also a good player and not just a wordsmith.

absolutely! i agree words are not the best - what i currently like is the science measurable stuff that gives reasons as to why we hear things the way we do.

[UncleBeer]

what i currently like is the science measurable stuff that gives reasons as to why we hear things the way we do.

Google "psychoacoustics".

[1 Ton Tommy]

Wikipedia has an excellent article on the subject insofar as human perceptions of sound are concerned. But it does not address issues of sound production involving harmonics and intermodulation found in musical instruments. The audio application cited a few posts ago seems to do that well but I need more time to study it. I am more familiar with spectrum analysis having worked with it for many years, though that is not the end all and be all of sound analysis -- good enough for radar transmitters though.

[Mary Ann]

Thursday at band rehearsal the conductor was telling the xylo player which mallets to use on which piece; he is a percussionist and doesn't piddle with the sound of most instruments, but the percussion -- welp, they get told how to do it! With gusto, always; this conductor is a riot to play under. What's interesting is that I can hear the difference he is talking about, with the different mallets, (the xylo is taking the place of the marimba on the one piece that has marimba, because of transport and stage space problems.) But I wouldn't piddle about the mallets any more than he piddles about my reeds.