Posted by K on October 22, 2003 at 13:26:16:
In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: BAH! posted by js on October 22, 2003 at 12:09:28:
The bends lately in the airpath of sousaphones are not necessarily an evil. Even if just about all sousaphone models, maybe the more recent ones from Asia excepted, have been designed in pre-computer-calculated ages, then I am quite sure that even the empirical design methods managed to adapt the overall designs to the wanted visuals.
I cannot compare any of my sousaphones to their raincatcher or helicon equivalents. Such ones may exist, but not within my reach.
So I will refer to a comparison made between the bell-up and bell-front versions of the same tuba model.
A private correspondent of mine told that he was surprised, that the bell-front version was much better in tune, than his by then sold bell-up version had been.
As the owner of a specimen of the bell-front version I had again and again wondered when reading reports on the intonation problems and the less than smooth legato of the bell-up version.
So my reply to my correspondent said, that I strongly believed. that this tuba model had been conceived with the bell-front. And I suspected, that all the evils came out of the bell-up, which only had been added as an option because of visual snobbery.
By chance this correspondent had another tuba from the same maker with an identical detachable bell up. He then put the bell-up on the tuba discussed here. And all the evils were reintroduced into its playing.
My belief is, that helicons, sousaphones, bell-up, and bell-front tubas all are equally valid concepts. On the condition, that each instrument has been carefully designed on its own terms. And is used on these terms.
In the other end of the scale: the most ugly tubaplaying I ever heard has been done on an Orsi BBb sousaphone, on a rotary BBb helicon of unknown origin, and on a B&H Imperial 3+1 comp Eb tuba with the old 15" bell. But in all cases, the culprits were the players.
Klaus