Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Vibration, damping, and weight


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Rick Denney on August 20, 2001 at 01:35:44:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Vibration, damping, and weight posted by js on August 20, 2001 at 00:55:44:

So, if they are all the same anyway, why DO you keep buying and selling (and converting) CC tubas in search of the perfect horn?

The fact that Charles Daellenbach is not as good as the very best players is not particularly important in the grand scheme of things. I have had the frightening experience of playing next to him on stage in a public performance. He's good enough for me.

Two facts: 1. The great players can make beautiful sounds on a hosephone. 2. Some tubas are good and some tubas are not so good.

I don't see the connection between these two facts. Nor is it factual or fair to insist that the best players could not be that little bit better if their horns were better, just because they are better than any of us without those improvements. Great musicians can poorly understand physical processes and misattribute physical effects as easily as not-so-great players, and maybe more easily, because they automatically work around them so easily. Many world-class triathletes make foolish decisions about their bicycle equipment, and would make different choices if they understood the science. It may save them a few seconds or a few minutes. The fact that I'm hours behind them has no bearing on the issue.

There must be a reason why 2. is true. And that reason must be physical, because tubas are physical machines, not spiritual beings, however we may react to them. And if it is a physical effect, it can be explained, if we are willing to understand it, and if we know how.

What is it you are doing do that York Master? You are attaching and removing all sorts of stuff to make into something it wasn't from the factory. Why are those modifications any more or less valid than any other modifications? If removing tubing length can change the pitch to something more convenient, then why is it de facto false that, say, adding weight can change the projection or response to something more convenient?

Rick "back to logic 101" Denney


Follow Ups: