Posted by Joe S. on April 19, 1999 at 23:42:26:
In Reply to: Re: Re: older Wm. Bell tuba posted by Steve Marcus on April 18, 1999 at 23:28:30:
We digress, but Steve, you are correct. I made several technical errors when referring to the big old Conn tubas. Steve is correct about the different #'s after the "2" in their various model numbers having referred to the quantities of valves and bell angles. Further, the valve section bore sizes are a little different in the big fat short-action 20K sousaphones and the big fat 20 "series" tubas: The sousaphones' bore size was .734", and the tubas' bore size was .770". I suspect that Conn used their tube drawing mandrel for the large side of the sousa main tuning slide to make all of the valve slide tubing for the tuba. I did run string around corresponding points on the body parts of a 20 series Conn sousa and a 20 series Conn tuba today, and they do line up dimensionally. This little exercise paid off -- I guy walked in about an hour later, saw the tuba laying out, and bought it. I still think of all of these big 6/4 size tubas with approximately 3/4" bore valve sections as large sousaphones in the shape of a tuba, and I still really like them, and I like the smaller William Bell Meinl-Weston, too.
**********************************************
Steve, this is a new topic, and should probably be a fresh post, but: Is there a gentleman in your town (maybe with the last name Robinson [? - sorry]) that owns a Nirschl York model? If you know this gentleman and have played his instrument, would you comment as to the characteristics of its intonation, especially as compared to Hirsbrunner Yorks, Holton Yorks, Meinl-Weston Yorks, and Gene's York-York ? I hear a lot of raves about this new instrument (as we heard about all of these others when they first came out) but no one ever seems to offer comments as to how hard they have to work to keep these instruments in line. I am particularly curious about the (often problematic on others) third partial on this particular biggie: the common (flat) G and maybe F#, or if there are other different problems on this new York model. If it is as good as people say, and the reason that they are not talking about these problems is because they don't exist on this horn, I may have to pay Mr. Nirschl a visit someday fairly soon.
Thanks for the corrections.... As to amplifications: Nothing amplifies more efficiently than a big 6/4 tuba!
Regards, Joe S.