Posted by Jay Bertolet on October 19, 2001 at 22:54:46:
In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: OK, I did it - update posted by js on October 19, 2001 at 16:36:20:
In a strictly theoretical sense, I believe there is a flaw in your logic in this post and another further down. Both posts deal with the idea of thin versus thick metal gauges and how that effects the tuba. The point you made at the end of this post I'm responding to was the one that really stands out to me. What makes you think that a tuba will vibrate more if you use a heavywalled mouthpiece? I don't think that if a heavywalled mouthpiece actually does put more signal into the tuba (which I believe it does), that causes the horn to vibrate more. I believe these things are closer to set numbers for each variable and you address each one as it needs to be addressed. For example, I know that I'm going to lose so much sound energy to sympathetic vibration in the mouthpiece. There will also be some loss in the horn, as it vibrates. But dampen the mouthpiece and you reduce that variable, leaving more sound energy to come out the bell. Same with the gauge of the metal. If the tuba doesn't vibrate as much as others, less sound energy is taken from the amount projected out the bell. The variations in the myriad mouthpiece/tuba combinations explains to me why certain tubas don't benefit as much from some modifications as others do. Now add the player variable and things really get complex. I don't know, maybe how a player plays also effects how much the variables will effect the overall product. I'm just trying to isolate as many hard factual variables as I can and try to ascertain what adjusting those variables will do to the overall effect.
My opinion for what it's worth...