3 vs 4 Valve Tubas/Euphs Pedagogical Use

[russiantuba]

Over the years of teaching all low brass, I have had students start with trigger trombones, and some even get 4 valve instruments early on (moreso for tuba because that is what their school had). I am a big proponent in all trombones learning on peashooters to force them to actually learn 6th and 7th position, but I was thinking on tuba and euphonium about if 3 valve instruments even serve a purpose anymore.

There are some 3+1 non compensating euphoniums, and some smaller 4 valve tubas. It used to be that the 3 valve instruments were significantly cheaper, not as well made as they were "student" models, and thus the investment risk wasn't super high if the student quit or caused damage.

Fast forward to 2025, where one can get a 4 valve euphonium or tuba from a Chinese manufacturer for about the same as other instruments, instead of spending twice as much for an "intermediate" model. Besides the tubas being physically lighter and maybe the inline vs 3+1 on euphonium for finger rests, I can't justify a reason for any band program to buy a 3 valve instrument, and would encourage use of a 4 valve instrument even for beginners.

Discuss!

[gocsick]

Let me play devil's advocate for a minute...

4th valve circuit adds a lot of weight to tuba.. So for early middle school players... especially young girls... there is an advantage to 3/4 3 valve tubas.


I think a big question is going to come down to how well inexpensive Chinese instruments hold up on a band program. I know or middle school has 40 year old 3 valve King Baritones/Euphoniums they are a little rough but make good home instruments. My daughter has an old Yamaha YBN-103 from the middle school for home use ... I never looked up the serial but it has the metal valve guides .. so pretty old.. And it is in good playing shape. I would be surprised to see my Schiller Euphonium last 40 years on a school program.

In terms of tuba rep... how much elementary and middle school lit goes below F?

[russiantuba]

Let me play devil's advocate for a minute...

4th valve circuit adds a lot of weight to tuba.. So for early middle school players... especially young girls... there is an advantage to 3/4 3 valve tubas.


I think a big question is going to come down to how well inexpensive Chinese instruments hold up on a band program. I know or middle school has 40 year old 3 valve King Baritones/Euphoniums they are a little rough but make good home instruments. My daughter has an old Yamaha YBN-103 from the middle school for home use ... I never looked up the serial but it has the metal valve guides .. so pretty old.. And it is in good playing shape. I would be surprised to see my Schiller Euphonium last 40 years on a school program.

In terms of tuba rep... how much elementary and middle school lit goes below F?

My one thought was the weight, but also the newer Chinese horns I’ve noticed aren’t as heavy as older horns. Euphonium also came to mind first on this. Schools are also buying more of the Chinese brands for the high schools as they are easier to replace WHEN they are damaged (the replace over repair mentality, not what I prefer, coming from someone who uses a 40 year old microwave daily when things were made to last).

The other concern is that I see it all the time, woodwind players ask about brass questions in music education groups, and what is keeping them from buying 3 valve tubas for high school, which I’ve seen.

Could this be a long term solution to students not having the “I can’t have a tuba at home” issue? When I was in 7th grade when I switched to tuba, 4 valves on a Cerveny/Miraphone 186, which is what they had, weren’t an issue. I remember there was a guy who was super short and slender, (3 years younger), he was so short he had to lay the 186 to the side, and he was one of the top players in the middle school region in DFW). At least at the time, they didn’t start anyone on tuba—it was purely an instrument that people switched to after a year. When I was in 7th and 8th grade, I did experience low Fs and Es in music as well.

[TxTx]

I remember there was a guy who was super short and slender, (3 years younger), he was so short he had to lay the 186 to the side, and he was one of the top players in the middle school region in DFW). At least at the time, they didn’t start anyone on tuba—it was purely an instrument that people switched to after a year. When I was in 7th and 8th grade, I did experience low Fs and Es in music as well.

Curious where and when in the DFW area. When I started on tuba in 7th grade at Hurst Jr High in 1980, I was short - probably second shortest boy in my class - but not particularly slender. They started us on Sousaphones, but they were the fiberglass Conns with the four short action valves, and we sat in Sousaphone chairs. We had two of these Sousaphones for the school. I had to get a couple of thick phonebooks out of the band director’s office to reach the mouthpiece, which I think was a Bach 24AW. We also got a home Sousaphone, which were the brass ones.

Eric

[Snake Charmer]

Weight is one concern and another one may be ergonomics. Most 4 valve tubas are made for large hands and on euphoniums it depends on where the 4th valve is placed (or hidden in the good(?) old Besson tradition). But I still prefer teaching beginners on four valves, so they learn better intonation and don*t have to change fingering patterns later.
For the trombones I think the valveless are better for beginners, it has proved troublesome to teach the far out positions later when a student started (too young) on a trigger trombone.
Btw: no flute student starts on a keyless flute...

[Thomas]

For the trombones I think the valveless are better for beginners, it has proved troublesome to teach the far out positions later when a student started (too young) on a trigger trombone.

As low notes fingerings change fundamentally with the 4th, the same is true for beginners who have to add the 4th valve to their playing later on.

With the availibility of reasonably priced used or chinese build 4-valve instruments, both in the very low 4-digit €/$ range (no notable difference to any comparable 3-valve instrument) it's an unnecessary obstacle for both, the ones choosing the professional path later on and for players in amateur bands where a not aligned section of 1-3 / 4 players adds additional and severe intonations issues with effects to the whole low brass sectiona and therefore the whole band/orchestra.

For the tenor instruments / euphoniums, I think this is even more true. A solution for non-pros are the British 3-valve compensators or (as played by the professional Bohemian groups) 3-valve tenorhorns with main tuning slide trigger. But those instruments are either rather old and rare (3-valve comp.) or expensive.

[2nd tenor]

I suppose it all depends on what the teacher wants to achieve … and whether they see the much broader picture or not.

As an adult player and when I was a teenage learner three valves have been - or would have been - sufficient for my needs and teaching people to get by with three has merit. Are four valves better? That’s a bit of a mixed bag. I do use my fourth valve, on occasions it is useful, but don’t find it helpful to always replace the 1+ 3 combination with it and the added range it offers is rarely used.

Is intonation important? Well notes that are noticeably mis-pitched do throw other things out. That said for a lot of folk putting the right note in the right pace at the right time are much bigger issues.

I’d have thought it best to learn how to play really well on three value instruments first. If someone wants to advance to undergraduate level studies then that would be the time to introduce a fourth valve, but in music for either recreation or school tuition I just don’t see the necessity and I certainly do see the added costs.

With respect to Trombones I think the situation is different, whilst a straight trombone has merit adding a valve to it can make the instrument significantly easier to play - unfortunately it also adds a lot to the price too.

[russiantuba]

I should have stated, what originally started the topic was thinking of euphoniums. I’ve had college students arrive with 3 valve instruments because that is what their beginner band had them buy. Euphonium has been a weird one here in Ohio because some districts make them buy them, others provide. The euphonium legend Dr. Paul Droste used a YEP 321 for a large part of his career because it was easier to play and had a good sound.

These “intermediate” level instruments are good enough to start players on in many cases, especially for euphonium, even if the player doesn’t use the 4th valve if they can’t reach (or get a Chinese 3+1 non compensating set up clone)

For tuba, there is a Cerveny that is a very small bore 4 valve, which after playing, I talked to the shop that carries them about how it would be a great middle school tuba, and they said they agree and thought that was the best marketing strategy.

Curious where and when in the DFW area. When I started on tuba in 7th grade at Hurst Jr High in 1980, I was short - probably second shortest boy in my class - but not particularly slender. They started us on Sousaphones, but they were the fiberglass Conns with the four short action valves, and we sat in Sousaphone chairs. We had two of these Sousaphones for the school. I had to get a couple of thick phonebooks out of the band director’s office to reach the mouthpiece, which I think was a Bach 24AW. We also got a home Sousaphone, which were the brass ones.

Eric

Early 2000s in the southern Dallas suburbs.

[arpthark]

Regardless of how you cut it, the 3 valve version is always going to be cheaper than the 4 valve version.

4 valve Chinese horn is cheaper than the 3 valve Yamaha/King/etc.? Yes, but the 3 valve Chinese horn will be even cheaper than that.

[Mary Ann]

When I have observed adult amateur horn players in bands who obviously came up through a band program, i see them using inefficient fingerings because that is what they learned in 5th grade. For that reason, for anyone who can afford it, i would start them on as close as I could get to the valve setup that allows them to learn more than one pattern. I have seen this in even really intelligent players who never got the concept that there is more than one way to play quite a few notes, especially on a double horn.

[prodigal]

Great subject!

I really started on a 184 BBb, so I grew up with 4 valves, but I was taller/heavier than most in 7th grade, so that horn size was never an issue.

Now both of my boys want to play tuba, 5th and 3rd grade, so I'll see if I can borrow them a 3/4 BBb to get started. I told them that if they practice hard and, take GREAT CARE OF their borrowed horn, that I will buy them their own tuba someday. (Sorry, I'm keeping my 186CC!)

I'm thinking there will be a want to buy add for a decent 186 BBb in the Baltimore/Philly area in the next few years, maybe two.

[DonO.]

Thank you for starting this thread. The use of 4 valve tubas in particular has been a position of mine for decades. Way, way back in the 1980’s I was advocating for this. Back when I got my Master’s degree (awarded in 1985), because I was candidate for M.M. In Education (not performance), I was not required to perform a full recital or write a full dissertation. Instead, my school had the option of a “lecture-recital”. I also did a research project and wrote a paper. The findings of the research project were presented as the lecture portion of my recital. I had area band directors fill out a questionnaire about how they started beginning tuba players. I found that a pretty large percentage of them only had 3 valve tubas, and switched their tuba players from another instrument (commonly trumpet).I also asked questions about retention. In other words, if a student started playing tuba, did they stick with it? It was my contention that tuba players would be more successful and ultimately be more likely to continue if they started on the tuba rather than something else. I also contended that they should start right off with 4 valves, because the fourth valve is so basic to modern technique.

Unfortunately, these ideals are easier said than done. A fourth valve on a smaller student size 3/4-ish instrument wouldn’t add that much weight. But instrument makers don’t make anything like that! Take Yamaha, the default brand for many music educators. All of their small tubas only have 3 valves. When you move up to a 4 valve marketed to schools, you end up with a YBB 321, which is huge! Way too big for most elementary school children. So there is this attitude with the manufacturers that small “beginner” horns are 3 valves, and bigger “intermediate” or “step up” horns are 4 valves. If a band director wanted to start a student out on a smaller, manageable 4 valve horn, it would be difficult because of the scarcity of an appropriate instrument.

[arpthark]

What evidence is there that there is a deficiency in technique that results from moving from playing C and F as 1-3 to 4, or B and E as 1-2-3 to 2-4? How do you measure that?

That’s really just four notes, and practically really only one common note, one uncommon note, and two rare notes.

What is middle school tuba rep like where it would be a problem? Lots of whole notes and scales. I moved from a horrible 3v Yamaha thing to a Cerveny 4v BBb in the 7th grade. My band director was pretty adamant about using the fourth valve if we had it, so we did.

Almost all sousaphones or marching tubas are going to have three valves at the scholastic level, so for kids who also have to do marching band, it’s not so much a switch as a shift. “Take home tubas” are also going to be smaller, cheaper and by extension likelier to have three valves. They’re just different systems that kids have to learn to deal with.

[LeMark]

most of the schools I teach for use 3 valve yamaha 105 tubas. Hate them, but more so because of water collection issues. Usually I get the directors to get let them use a 4 valve "big boy" horn about the time we start doing Chromatic work at a fast tempo.

Euphoniums always start on 4 valve horns, I haven't see a 3 valve euphonium in texas for any grade since I started teaching almost 40 years ago

Eastman is coming out with a 3 valve compensating Euph, which is great,but I wish they had instead focused on a 3 valve compensating sousaphone. That would have been a hit here in Texas

[1 Ton Tommy]

I'm not a music educator but I will relate my experience as seems germane. In my experience learning to be flexible at an early age has stood me in good stead all my 77 years.

I began playing horn in 5th grade and continued through college. My first double horn was borrowed from the university. That was in the early 70s. In high school (the early 60s) only the first chair got a school-supplied double horn. So in college I had to learn the Bb side of the horn for the first time. And of course 4th horn parts are often in bass clef. Though I didn't play 4th horn, I could have.

I also played both baritone and sousaphone in high school marching band where I learned bass clef. Of course the 3-valve sousaphones were brass at that time; and heavy. So it was necessary for me to learn several sets of fingerings before I ever left high school. Admittedly I learned faster at 17 than at 77. Yet the flexibility I learned at an early age has enabled me as an adult to transpose on trumpet, which every trumpet player eventually has to do; eg. for our current concert I have to transpose the Bass trombone bass clef part, notated in C up an octave for Bb trumpet. Transposing is just learning an alternate set of fingerings for a given piece like tuba players do every day. And it's no news to anyone who's played trumpet that charts show up written for Bb, C, A, Eb and even F. I only have trumpets in two keys. How many players have Eb trumpets?
Then I've had to learn the fingerings for various keys of tubas, as every tuba player does. Then there's the need to read both bass clef and treble clef charts. I had to do that before I left high school too.

I wasn't an exceptional student and I wasn't the only one who had to learn more than one clef and one set of fingerings. So I would say making students learn more than one fingering sequence is a good thing. Of course size and weight is a consideration in the earlier grades but again as one ages. I have big hands yet sometimes find the finger spread on a big bore horn a stretch. So there is a place for 3+1 horns. I sometimes play my Willson that way.

[russiantuba]

What evidence is there that there is a deficiency in technique that results from moving from playing C and F as 1-3 to 4, or B and E as 1-2-3 to 2-4? How do you measure that?

That’s really just four notes, and practically really only one common note, one uncommon note, and two rare notes.

What is middle school tuba rep like where it would be a problem? Lots of whole notes and scales. I moved from a horrible 3v Yamaha thing to a Cerveny 4v BBb in the 7th grade. My band director was pretty adamant about using the fourth valve if we had it, so we did.

Almost all sousaphones or marching tubas are going to have three valves at the scholastic level, so for kids who also have to do marching band, it’s not so much a switch as a shift. “Take home tubas” are also going to be smaller, cheaper and by extension likelier to have three valves. They’re just different systems that kids have to learn to deal with.

I started on trumpet in 6th grade before getting walking pneumonia. First semester, we were already taught how to use the thumb saddle and the ring kicker on trumpet. I switched to a 3 valve euphonium (before I started studying with @LeMark), maybe since it was just at the intermediate school, he never got to see it. The point was, we started tuning and working with intonation as beginners.

Believe it or not, it seems that band directors have started listening to our complaints about the lack of tuba repertoire. So many people are doing Randall Standridge works, who employs the concept that tuba can do anything any other instrument can do, and can learn. One middle school band I worked with last year did a John Henry themed piece, potentially by Boysen, that the tubas had a feature of syncopation, sixteenth notes solo.

Many bands have directors that have no clue about tubas to buy, don't ask colleagues, and trust a salesman or a random group of horns on sale. Even if 3 valve horns are cheaper, a chinese 4 valve will be cheaper than a quality 3 valve tuba. Local music stores will sell their stamped Jin Bao clones for way more than other companies that don't have "contracts" with schools.

[prodigal]

Most teachers have no idea what to buy outside of their own primary instrument, so cheap wins, then cheap gets expensive.

My case in point: Eastman Strings. (Now winds, and of all things, tubas.)

They used to be a good value for a decent fiddle/cello (my favorite is one), but they became basically the Bundy clarinet/saxophone of orchestras, and the quality went down. Their European instruments used to be shipped in the white to here in Md, and finished and sent out, now they are shipped from Europe to China, then on a container across the briny Pacific, and seem to have more and more issues.

Trying to explain that a Miraphone is a good investment vs a Jupiter is a hard in a world of shrinking budgets and students who live in a disposable world and could destroy a block of bar steel with no tools.

When my school was built, we basically were given a blank budget to get what you need. I specifically ordered a 186 BBb, and Fox bassoons and oboes, which none of them are being played now because everyone coming in plays the common instruments, and God forbid we inquire about private lessons to a family. They'll run around playing mediocre travel sports for thousands of dollars a season, but to actually spend money on music is appalling to them.

Just venting, thanks!

[bloke]

All School tubas and sousaphones should be three valve compensating, yet none of them are... and sure: front action - so that the same design valve section could be built for sousaphones and tubas, but I'm sort of in favor of all USA school instruments being B-flat sousaphones, and getting away from this fancy schmancy taxpayer-raping complete set of sousaphones (silver, no less) and complete set of concert tubas.
Sousaphones sound a hell of a lot better than beginner style 3/4 tubas, particularly with little kids playing them.
Even if three valve NON-compensating, three valve tubas with nice long well aligned #1 slides are every bit as good - down to low E, as a four valve non-compensating system, as well as being much lighter weight and much less on-board stuff to tear up.

Having an easily movable and long first slide on a 3 valve non-compensating tuba well not only get students in the habit of tuning for 1-3 and 1-2-3, but will train them to tune other less stark tuning discrepancies.

Manufacturers will absolutely make what educators demand. It's up to you guys, and it's up to you guys (grade school educators) to come around to this way of thinking... and you won't.

school-supplied F attachment trombones...
Again: raping the taxpayers, and more stuff to tear up. Let parents buy that stuff if they think their children need it or have the band boosters (rather than some shyster music store) supply a rental / lease purchase program if they think they can afford to do so. Further, bore sizes for wind bands on trombones shouldn't exceed .525". After that, the majority of kids' air delivery is going to make them sound like English baritones, rather than trombones. A principal player in a full-time orchestra near me has wised up and most often is playing a .525" bore trombone. His sound (though he is a top-level player, delivers plenty of air and has a very well developed embouchure) is more of a trombone sound, these days. The purpose of .547" bore trombones is for two players in a symphony orchestra (or maybe even only the second player) to be able to blow the crap out of the thing and avoid a laser sound - still sounding like a trombone. "Because my teacher has one" is often not a good reason to choose a particular type of equipment.

[je]

I went through the public education system primarily as a euphonium player (grade 6+), added trombone for jazz/pep/marching (grade 9+), and tuba for pep/marching (grade 12+). These days I put most effort into tuba, but y'all know way more about tuba than I do, so I'll focus on euphonium.

Please, please, don't curse euphonium players with 3-valve instruments. Having been on the wrong end of this in 6th grade, I've embraced the rule of thumb that if skilled musicians struggle to make a class of instruments sound consistently good, those instruments should never come near a beginner. Extant 3-valve euphoniums are often "instrument-shaped objects", and even good ones have unnecessary intonation challenges. By a stroke of luck my parents found a used Yamaha YEP-321 for me, which served me extremely well grades 7-12. What made it great for me as a kid? 1) Solid intonation (and close-enough intonation via 24 and 4 fingerings) and 2) a smallish bore, which made the upper register easier to access with a less developed embouchure (especially during the orthodontics years). I assume modern YEP-321 construction is still good (and with less red rot than my 70s-era specimen suffered). A couple years ago I tooted a bit on a couple John Packer JP174IL euhponiums, and they struck me as quite comparable.

There is one thing I would selfishly change about my own experience: Start on a 3+1 configuration rather than 4-up. When I got to university, the school's Boosey & Hawkes compensating euphoniums were a huge step up (my YEP-321 quickly found a new home at a local high school), but it took years to approach the same level of precise timing with signals needing to travel to both sides of my body. So I would start on something like a JP174 (3+1) if I were doing it over right now. But still non-compensating; the larger bore is an extra hurdle that doesn't need to be jumped right away. Anyway, I don't think 3+1 is particularly important for beginners, since anyone serious enough to keep playing after high school will need to become comfortable with a variety of instrument configurations. In fact, I have recently reaped the rewards of starting out on an inline euphonium while adapting to front-action tubas.

@bloke suggests that 3-valve compensating instruments should be the default choice. I think that's a reasonable answer to common intonation issues, but I personally found it quite enabling to be able to access most of the notes below F on the euphonium, primarily for technique exercises (the repertoire made nearly no demands on that range). I suspect the same would be true of motivated tuba students.

On the subject of beginner trombones with/without F triggers, I'm more conflicted than others here seem to be. Recall that we tend not to be fully grown as preteens, which is when many people start playing trombone. Even 6th position is hard to reach for some beginners, and 7th requires contortions even for small adults. I only had a straight trombone as a kid, but I was large enough when I started on it (9th grade) that it was a reasonable choice. On the other hand, my son was much smaller when he picked up trombone in 7th grade, and I'm glad there was a trigger on it (but in retrospect I wish it had been small-bore). In 9th grade he transitioned over to a King 3B for jazz band, and it was no biggie. But yeah, without the later experience of a straight trombone, maybe the trigger would have hampered his long-term development. On the flip side, when he started playing F/G♭ double-trigger bass trombone he quickly embraced the capabilities offered by a second valve.

[bloke]

...I have no objections to band parent organizations and individual parents buying whatever they decide they would like to buy...but I believe taxpayers should be protected (from "we deserve the best, because - well - we deserve the best" band directors) by some sort of a combination of features-and-pricing ceiling (not just with tubas/baritones, but with just about EVERYTHING that schools purchase).

Hey...
I'm the one who gets pissed off when cities/states build (at the expense of taxpayers) arenas and stadiums for PRIVATELY-OWNED spectator sports teams (that charge big-bucks to TAXPAYERS who bought those arenas and stadiums FOR them...
...but (realizing that less than a percent of the population are interested in attending live classical music concerts or even POP music concerts) I have to be EQUALLY against taxpayers (at least in America, where citizens prize their individual sovereignty) being coerced into building concert venues for entrance-fee-charging performing ensembles and soloists...

...but bloke !!!...

...but nuthin'.