Unhooking Joe's BBb Leash…

[PlayTheTuba]

Here is the video from the Japanese Tubist I mentioned earlier. Lots of different tubas.


16:53​ Meinl Weston 196 "Fasolt" (Bb-tuba)



19:46​ Meinl Weston 195 "Fafner" (Bb-tuba)



Regular YouTube link if the timestamped ones do not work correctly.



A little off topic thought.
The Meister Walter Nirschl 450L Rotary BBb and the Thein C5R-GK Rotary CC are unique. The Nirschl to my eyes looks like a 4/4. I wonder if that is what the HS Musical tuba bases it's design from...

[kingrob76]

@Rick Denney's 5/4 BBb Hirsbrunner is *the* best BBb tuba I have ever played. It's a rare bird, but it's the only BBb I ever seriously considered purchasing. I've not sampled a LOT from this side of the buffet, but, that one stood out. Chasing down one of those rare birds wouldn't be easy but could fit your needs. It's an excellent tuba, not just a large tuba.

[the elephant]

the Hagen 496 is an absolute dream of a tuba. I like my eastman, but the Mirpahone is a step above in every way.

It's also more than double what I paid for my Eastman.

[Tubeast]

Well, I guess "The Elephant" is all set with information he already had composing his original post, then.

It seems to boil down to a decision between 5- and 6/4 variants of closely related models.

All it takes now is an appointment at a large tuba place for test-playing the basic models to set the aim.
And then lurking around for suitable specimen on 2nd hand markets, which might enclude those very tuba places.

Every time I try Fafner/Fasolt or Hagen 496/497, I am pleased by their low weight, ease of valve operation and effortless sound production. These guys just seem to suck pure joy out of my torso. Then I drive home, grunt as I lift my horn on my lap, and my smile returns, reassured I STILL believe the Willson is the horn for me and now is not the time to swap horns.
That time may come when I´ll retire from engineering in 10 years or so, by the time I´ll be 65-67 and may be looking for a tuba to play in band until I can´t.

To add some (hopefully) entertaining information for people OTHER than The Elephant:

My Willson RZ6400 has 5 valves and was custom-made for me at a time Willson didn´t advertise that model anymore.
It was recommended to me by a former german symphony tubist and professor for tuba as well as wind band conducting.
He chose that very model and version as his main axe to play in the Augsburg Symphony.
I have put it to intense use over the past 16 years.

The sum of its specs catapults that model out of the OP´s ballpark:
3rd partial F fingered 13 is the only intonation fix my stupid amateur ears demand, there may be more I simply ignore.
At 15kg/33 pounds, this is not the horn to approach retirement with.
A 19mm bore (tiny for a 5/4 tuba) makes it appear stuffy upon first contact, either. But with time, one realiszes this provides control at all volumes and tonal altitudes.
Valve action is slow unless lubrication is perfect and fingers are strong.

[Thomas]

I add my comments as it might be useful when scanning the high grade 5/4 to 6/4 BBb rotary market which I understand is the thread openers idea.

I can second this:

A 19mm bore (tiny for a 5/4 tuba) makes it appear stuffy upon first contact, either. But with time, one realiszes this provides control at all volumes and tonal altitudes.

A 5/4 or 6/4 BBb does not necessarily need an ultra large bore.

My 1930/40s Graslitz-origin BBb (500mm bell, straight vertical MTS) features exactly the outer bow measurements and shape as the 6/4 Bohland and Fuchs but with a 19,5mm valve set.

Intonation is almost flawless with standard fingerings. This and surprisingly especially the lower register resonance with the bonus of a perfect 2-4 B and a very usable low E convinced me to change to this particular instrument, playing an Alexander 164 before. Both those large Kaisers share the very accessible high range, the Graslitz tuba having the advantage not needing alternate 1-2/2-3 fingerings for D/Db and the saggy high F.

I know several of the high grade 5/4 Kaisertubas (most of them are great, it's a matter of taste) discussed here and also personally owned an early GR51 for some years which did not convince me finally.

Offtopic as it's a piston and british style bugle: My 17" Besson New Standard 3-1 BBb is a keeper since more than 20 years and will be. For me and my playing, the GR51 could not stand against this instrument regarding tone consistency, playability and intonation.

[peteedwards]

Hey Wade,
Totally unsolicited advice here, but you should do what you do best and build your own!
We are all jonesing for a new epic Elephant build thread!

[je]

LOL...
Threw shade on the 195..."better for amateurs"

guess:
This person sells tubas and owns a 196.

Both sound like "him playing the tuba".
tuning/attacks: (both tubas) curious

Maybe, sometimes I'm playing about like that (such as four months of repair work with very few gigs and no practice).
I'd beg off making a video.

tonal characteristics: ' interesting what (on various cups, but including the "regular deep" cup mouthpieces - such as Helle' 120 depth with various interior contours) what RETREATING from something like barn-door 8.5mm throat to a (reasonable?) 8.1mm throat does for control/ease of playing/centered tone/accessibility of extreme ranges (particularly with really large tubas, but also with other contrabass tubas).

anyway...kudos...Anyone who plays the tuba on the internet has guts.

bloke "throwing shade...?? maybe, but also at myself."

After seeing your apparent misunderstandings of the video, I went back and watched with English subtitles to see how far off the translation is. Aside from some confusion due to mistranslating "Tuben" as "tubes" (should be "tubas"), it was pretty straightforward to extract the content from the subtitles. Anyway, to clear up some misconceptions:

• He does not, as far as I know, directly sell tubas. He mentions a promo code with affiliate kickback at the end of the video, but he is not otherwise associated with the shop where the video is made.
• He does not seem to own a 196. Rather, he likes having the 4th circuit slide on the back side because that's what he's used to, and he seems to have a personal preference for darker tone.
• He says that the 195 is easier to play (narrower slots), and makes the case that this might be a swaying factor for people who don't have any strong preferences between the brighter sound of the 195 vs the darker sound of the 196. He spends considerable time calling out how the tubas are different, rather than better/worse.

As for throwing shade, I don't think it's productive to pick nits with Raimund's playing. It sufficed to demonstrate the differences between the instruments (with decent speakers, anyway; the miking left something to be desired in this particular video), and in general it suffices for his target audience, which seems to primarily be pre-college tubists. His technique videos are probably too basic for most of the people on this forum, but I've learned quite a bit from his interviews, first and foremost our own @Kontrabasstuba, and also regarding e.g. oils and rotary valve maintenance, non-compensating valve systems, etc. He explains things very well, and his interview technique is quite good.

[bloke]

So you're telling me that in his own language he did not say that the 195 is better for amateurs?

Where did I criticize the persons playing?

Yeah I guess that he might own a 196, but I didn't state that he did, because I don't know that he does.

[BramJ]

he says "overall I think the Fafner is more of an instrument for amateurs than the Fasolt". He does not say the Fafner is an amateur instrument.

[JC2]

.

[bloke]

So you're telling me that in his own language he did not say that the 195 is better for amateurs?

Where did I criticize the persons playing?

Yeah I guess that he might own a 196, but I didn't state that he did, because I don't know that he does.

Both sound like "him playing the tuba".
tuning/attacks: (both tubas) curious

Bloke’s depth charges. Complete disregard for any balance, blend or musicality with what the other musicians are doing…. Curious.

Can you dish it out and take it?

Yep.
I purposely/intentionally played that way so that the tuba could sonically be other than something that just gets sucked into the timpani and max-volume low organ pipe sound, and is actually heard for itself, particularly since the arrangement (and other arrangements played at that service) was/were extremely fanfarish in style. Notable is that the job (as that it's one of the more generously-paying ecclesiastical venues) paid pretty well, I asked the music director in the rehearsal if it was too loud or if he liked it, I got a thumbs up , and - during the rehearsal break - was given a even better-paying job there in December.

You know, the whole point of that post and linking the video was "check out how loud I'm playing on this set of pieces of music this church chose for Reformation Sunday, and how much burn I'm getting in the tuba resonance." (ie. "This is unusual; this is an exception." etc.)

back to the actual topic...(not me nor someone's "yeah, but you..." comments)
I don't ever find that one person playing two quite similar tubas on an internet (particularly a compressed audio YouTube) video is going to demonstrate much of anything aurally to anyone else (okay, at least not to me), unless the demos were recorded with some extraordinarily expensive equipment with a very high sampling rate, and those listening to it are listening with some remarkable audio reproduction equipment. Mostly, a person is most likely going to hear how that tuba player plays the tuba.

When Gene first had his final version of the Yamaha 826 (after them sending him two or three previous prototypical versions that were all - in his opinion - too big and too tubby) he did one of those pre-concert on-stage lecture things for people who were actual patrons of the Chicago Symphony (and not just people who buy tickets). My lesson had just ended with him, he talked to someone with the authority to make an exception, slipped Mrs bloke and me onto the mezzanine, and (the topic of his mini lecture-recital) played several excerpts with the old York tuba and the new Yamaha tuba - back to back. Even live in a great hall, I more heard "Gene Pokorny" than I heard two different tubas. To my senses (as in the five senses) it was more of a visual than an audio demonstration. Mrs bloke said she liked the sound of the Yamaha better. She likely has more critical and discerning ears than do I.

So the guy in the video shared here seemingly really doesn't like the 195, refers to it as an instrument for amateurs (I personally don't like the piston 195 version, and I don't have much memory of playing the rotary model (very long ago when they first came out and only for about 1 minute), so maybe my preferences would be the same as his...?? ie. towards the 196... but I've never played in 196, so I can't really know).

Something else I believe I've ascertained is the person in the video is a friend of yours, because you've responded to my comments (interpreting them as criticism) with fists a-blazing.

...so I said a few things that you really couldn't ignore in response to your responses to my observations and suppositions, and - not appreciating that I was being a matter of fact - you changed the subject (assuming I was attacking your friend, you decided to attack me). I'm quite familiar with that emotio-rhetorical tactic; I'm creeping towards 70 years old. I'm also aware that I'm talking to the internet and not a real person. Most people don't behave the same face-to-face as they behave behind their telephones. https://www.facebook.com/reel/25208187228812461

[arpthark]

Mostly, a person is most likely going to hear how that tuba player plays the tuba.

Yep. This is why 99% of the time, I find audio demonstrations for “the way the tuba sounds” fairly useless. Chris Olka is playing this thing? Okay, so it’s going to sound amazing regardless.

I guess the one thing they do is showcase the instrument’s intonation, which is important.

[bloke]

Mostly, a person is most likely going to hear how that tuba player plays the tuba.

Yep. This is why 99% of the time, I find audio demonstrations for “the way the tuba sounds” fairly useless. Chris Olka is playing this thing? Okay, so it’s going to sound amazing regardless.

I guess the one thing they do is showcase the instrument’s intonation, which is important.

...and not even necessarily intonation, if the player is pretty good at favoring pitches.

Tubas are large, fragile, thus risky to ship, and expensive to ship. These (in addition to high cost ) are what make tubas difficult to sell, and thus people trying to demonstrate them online. Again, online videos are mostly visual, and almost always feature compressed audio.
Most people who do these demos are not impeccable, and - even when those doing demos are impeccable - we're still mostly seeing and hearing the person's playing and not really much about the instrument's sound. Somewhere on the internet is a video from quite a few years ago of some Buffet rep. demonstrating a fairly expensive tuba.

Something that sort of causes me to make a face is that so many people who demonstrate tubas in videos crank out a bunch of harsh low sounds, fast (C or B-flat) scales, and high squeaks. It's not too often (and quite gratifying when it actually occurs) that someone actually playing a song in a tuba demo is heard. Further, the videos tend to feature 98.99% jibber jabber (mostly all stuff that someone can look at the tuba and ascertain for themselves) and less than 1% playing.

Wade (the actual topic of this thread, along with his possible odyssey) knows all of this. He's not going to buy something based on some video.

[BramJ]

The main reason I posted the video to begin with is because he explains the differences between the models.
Melton only mentions a bigger bell on the website but there are more differences.

The 195 was the first model, then they modified the bugle to fit a piston valveset to create the 195p (apparently by request of Gene Pokorny? No idea if that is true) . That modified bugle was then used to create the 196. It features the same bore valveset as the 195 but a shorter leadpipe, also the bore on the large side of the tuning slide is bigger. The bore throughout the 196 opens up faster.

I think @the elephant mentioned that he didn't like rotor tubas that were modified to fit pistons (such as the the 195p). So maybe the 196 is not for him either?

And again, he doesn't say the 195 is an amateur instrument, he says that, if an amateur was in the luxury position to have to choose between the two, he thinks the 195 is the better option.

[bloke]

OK...
I'm not sure if that's a distinction without a difference, but maybe it is, so maybe I misunderstood.

When bassoonists (professional players, salesmen, or salesmen who play) say, "So-and-so bassoon manufacturer's long bore model professional-quality bassoon is probably more suited to amateurs than So-and-so bassoon manufacturer's short bore professional-quality bassoon", I know what the unspoken part is.

...but just because I just presented this analogy about the bassoon doesn't mean that I'm doubling down. I'll restate that I may have misunderstood. I also realize that the statement is translated from another language.

I would like to play a rotary 195 again and for more than one minute. I'm also aware that there are hybrid versions of the 195 that particular European orchestra musicians have had Buffet make for them - in addition to the 196. I believe one of the Viennese orchestra musicians had Buffet make them a hybrid version of the 195... maybe something about the bell, and maybe some other difference.

Having recently played a 195P again, I'm pretty convinced that it's not enough like a 195 rotary instrument (as the 195P sort of feels "tight", with its superimposed 3/4 inch bore so-called American style valve section pasted onto it, and who knows what that valve section does to intonation characteristics, as a considerable portion of the capillary bore is so different ) to be be able to compare (in other words making incorrect an uninformed assumptions) the playing characteristics of a ROTARY 195 to my Miraphone model 98. The only vague comparison I have from well over a decade ago is that when I played a 195 rotary instrument (being a 5/4 piston valve c tuba player at that time) I sort of reacted to it by being polite and setting it down, compared to the first time I ever played a model 98 (still of course being a 5/4 piston C tuba player) being shocked at how remarkably well it played (particularly compared to the model 98's goofy appearance...as the first thing that attracts us to most anything is its appearance), and wishing to play it more and more...but now that I'm more adept at negotiating kaiser bore (necessarily rotary) B-flat instruments, I would like to revisit the 195 rotary and see just how wrong I might have been about it... and possibly the 196, though I suspect they're pretty rare in the United States.

[BramJ]

I'm also aware that there are hybrid versions of the 195 that particular European orchestra musicians have had Buffet make for them - in addition to the 196. I believe one of the Viennese orchestra musicians had Buffet make them a hybrid version of the 195... maybe something about the bell, and maybe some other difference.

Thats this one I guess, 195PH, made for Paul Halwax.

https://www.facebook.com/story.php?stor ... 3590795164

[bloke]

' looks to be a 195 fitted with a 197 bell...??

[Tubeast]

I don´t mind people testing horns on YT back to back and find those clips just as useful as comparing several different people demonstrating ONE horn.
If their playing is consistent at all, DIFFERENCES in sound quality between two tubas become accessible if played by the same person.
Also, if played in one and the same setting, you don´t have to try and take into account different rooms and different recording technology.

And yes, Raimund´s primary objective on YT has been to promote his online tuba classes.
At least, that´s what his YT-channel was launched for a couple of years ago, and it may have developed a dynamic of its own.

His target audience are hobbyist tuba players who may not have access to "real life" tuba instruction.
A surprising number of these may be faithful contributors to brass choirs since ages, after having been shown which side of that long tube to blow into by a well-meaning, but non-brass-educated church musician, some time early in their career.

Since most of those people earn their money in real life, some, but not many have the funds to treat themselves to something really nice.
Providing hints to this subset of his target audience is what you see in such clips, and Raimund is putting similar efforts into videos about cheap brands such as St.Petersburg, Lidl, and generic Chinese models as well.
Directing cash burning a hole into a person´s pocket towards something they might actually enjoy later bears some merit, I believe...

[Bob Kolada]

Joe, have you played the size 5 or 6 Miraphone Hagen tubas? I'm curious how they play compared to your 98. I played a MW195 and a 98, at the same Midwest conference I believe, for maybe 15 minutes each (so effectively not at all) and was more impressed by the 98, if only due do the planetary size of it. The 98 seems like a giant 191, what with the layout and the blend between color and projection.

The Hagens seem to be a slightly more German style tuba, compared to the hybrid 98, without going full kaiser tuba with a 17" bell and being taller than most flautists.

Daniel Ridder has posted several videos of the 195 and the 497. With all the issues with a live recording of a tuba, I've still preferred the 497 videos. It seems to have the projection and clarity of the classic big German tubas but with a bit of American tuba color and roundness. The 98 seems a bit more BAT than that, which of course is not a bad thing in of itself.

Also of note is Dillon is listing the 497 and 98 at about 23k. I remember the early 2000s when Brasswind listed pro RMs around 5k and the Neptune was like 8k. Surely things have improved since!
also my formerly $1700 Getzen chainsaw is now like 5k. I could go back in time, buy two and still not be able to buy a new one now.

[bloke]

The 98 is a hybrid.
It's mostly a classic German Kaiser, yet it's got a Holton 6/4 shaped bell on it.
The risk would be that you'd end up with the worst of both, but somehow Miraphone figured out how to forward the best features of both, and somehow with much more workable intonation characteristics than either of those typically offer.
My impression of the 496 is that it's a little too much valve section bore for the size of the instrument, but whatever on that. That's just my personal impression. Most all others view it as a super instrument in just about every way, so I'm way in the minority here.
I've never laid my hands or my face on a 495, but - at least in pictures - it looks like just about the same instrument except with a smaller valve section bore. I'd sort of be interested in trying one out, but I don't need to be buying any tubas.
My guess is that the 495 is more like the GR-51, and I sort of view the GR-51 as being a B-flat version of a C 5450 rotary "Tuono". I've only played a GR-51 me sitting sideways in a van with the door open - ie. outdoors) for a few minutes, but it seemed like a darn nice instrument, and something that I could use, though I'm spoiled by five valves.