Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Who's Copying Whom? (Long)


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

Posted by Rick Denney on June 17, 2003 at 14:00:55:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Who's Copying Whom? (Long) posted by Chuck(G) on June 17, 2003 at 13:15:49:

I quite agree with your point in absolute terms. But in relative terms (each measured against the abilities of a given musician), in fact I believe that some York-like instruments provide real benefits. I certainly sound like a better tuba player on the Holton than I do on the York Master, and the York Master makes me sound more competent than the Miraphone. None are incompetent instruments by any means, and none overcome my lack of skills. And there are times when the Holton is too much. But some instruments are just easier to play, period. (I could say the same about my Yamaha 621 F tuba, and I would be similarly interested in tracing its roots if it was less a hybrid.) That benefit is as useful to pros as to hobbyists, though they take it so much further. It is demonstrably true that I make fewer mistakes on the Holton, and generally get a warmer, more relaxed, and less forced sound on it. Those benefits are available to anybody, it seems to me, and that is what they want to achieve.

But the comparison is only valid for one player. The Holton may allow me to play at my best, but it doesn't at all close the gap between me and any given pro, if that pro is as efficient on his instrument. It is quite likely that any pro could get a warmer, more relaxed sound on ANY instrument than I could on the Holton. Nothing in what I've said, I believe, fits the logical progression you warn against.

I didn't start this thread with the thesis, The York Is The Greatest Of All Tubas. I started with the thesis that the York is an evolutionary step in a general progression of development starting (in part) with the sousaphone and (in part) with band instruments, but in what proportions and by what process? The origins interest me. We think of modern fat piston contrabasses as copies of the York, but the York itself was derived from a Conn, and the Conn was derivative of (?)--that was my opening assertion. Hence the thread title "Who's Copying Whom?"

I don't worry about the readers. They can take care of themselves. If they believe that a magic tuba will cure all their weaknesses, then they'll believe that no matter what I say, and they'll have to learn the truth for themselves. Most of the young readers on this forum are better than me in any measureable technical performance ability, and they know it and I know it. Their teachers will set them straight.

In short, I don't think I missed your point. I think you missed mine.

Rick "who hopes that discussions of instrument technology won't become forbidden just because it is secondary to musicianship" Denney


Follow Ups: