Contrabass Digest
To subscribe or unsubscribe, email gdgreen@contrabass.com

 
 

1998-07-22

 
list                           Wed, 22 Jul 1998           Volume 1 : Number 38

In this issue:
 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 18:35:42 -0400
From: tyrthegreatandpowerful@juno.com (Michael J Effenberger)
To: list@contrabass.com
Subject: Re: Serpent

When you find out, please tell me.  I've been interested in obtaining a
serpent for a while, also.
-Mike

On Tue, 21 Jul 1998 15:10:46 +0000 Kilmer <mc17@duluth.infi.net> writes:
>Just want to say before I get started,
>my message is NOT about stereo photography!
>
>I have a sort of extra interest for the more classical and medieval
>instruments. I've constructed a couple myself out of instructions,but
>there's one I'd like to get/create.
>The Serpent.
>Does anyone know if anyone MAKES Serpents?(i'm sure they aren't
>exactly
>in mass-production).
>Does anyone know HOW you can make a serpent(measurments,hole
>placement,mouthpiece type)?
>And finally,are there any sites on the ineternet about this instrument
>or how to make it?
>
>Thank you
>
>-John
>------------------------
>

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 00:53:47 CDT
From: "Gregg Bailey" <greggbailey@hotmail.com>
To: list@contrabass.com
Subject: Many-a-low-topic

Hello, fellow low people (not status-wise)!  I have just rejoined y'all,
and am now 16.
Hey--are there other people on the list close to my age?????  I
apologize for the length of my email, but I have been off the list for
so long that it just all built up!  Anyway...
        Can anybody produce the lowest note on a 4-valved tuba (32' CCCC with
wavelength 64') with clarity and brilliance?  If anyone has ever gotten
to hear the lowest notes on the 32' ContraBombarde or ContraTrombone
stops on the organ, this is what I'm talking about.
        Why weren't brass instruments designed with a good lowest octave?  It
seems like such a waste--on all brass instruments, notes below the 2nd
harmonic of the valve combination being used don't sound with any
clarity.  In fact, doesn't a double french horn contain 32' of tubing,
just like the 4-valved tuba?  Yet notes start to sound ridiculous down
around GG, and below CC or maybe BBBb, the notes are virtually
impossible to produce.
        Brass instruments are coiled as a matter of convenience, yet they are
made twice as long as necessary for the intended use.  I've never
understood that one.
        Does anybody else agree with me that in general, Bb and Eb clarinet
parts are too high, and the music sounds too shrill?  If the composer
wants those high notes to be emitted by a clarinet instrument, why don't
they write for the tiny octave clarinets to play in their lowest range,
so that those high notes will have nice timbre?  Then, the Bb and Eb
clarinets can play much more in their lowest registers, where the notes
have much more centered, controlled, and pretty sound.
        I play low clarinets.  The reason I am drawn to clarinet instruments is
for the impressive square-wave tone produced by their lowest register.
(Hope I didn't get above anyone's head)  Yet most music for these
instruments have the clarinet instruments play in their 2nd and 3rd
registers, where this quality in the sound is gone completely.  It
frustrates me, because it contradicts the very reason for me playing
clarinet instruments (the low ones mainly, of course).
        Another thing I want to know is why the bores of all clarinet
instruments lower than the Bb clarinet are so relatively narrow.?  By
the time you get down to the BBb contra, the bore of the thing is so
incredibly narrow compared to the length that the lowest notes emit only
a wealth of upper harmonics and no fundamental at all.  The only reason
you hear the pitch of the note is because all these (relatively) high
harmonics beat with each other to produce the lowest harmonics.  But,
since the lowest ones aren't ACTUALLY produced with any comparable
strength, the walls of the room don't rattle as they do with organ pipes
of the same pitch.  When I play on a contra clarinet, it sounds like I'm
playing on a comb with tissue paper wrapped around it.
        If that didn't convince you, then just think about how the notes of the
lowest register of the Bb clarinet sound--so beautiful, rich, liquidy,
and not buzzy at all.  Now think about how the lowest notes on a bass or
contra clarinet sound--VERY buzzy, with no richness or liquidiness at
all.  When I say buzzy, I'm not referring to being able to hear the
individual slaps of the reed.
        I still play these horns because I like the IDEA of the instrument.
But I'm not impressed with the sounds they emit like I am with the Bb
clarinet.  BELIEVE ME--I am probably the most contra-nut of any of us.
        Another topic.  The concept of the bassoon is just that of a really big
oboe.  They're both wooden, both have a conical bore, and a narrow one
at that, and both are double reed.  All this makes for the same timbre.
Yet the bassoon is very awkward to play (tho I've never played one
myself, but I've heard from other sources, and I've seen the keywork),
and the finger patterns aren't very logical as they are on all other
woodwinds.  Supposedly the bassoon is the only woodwind that hasn't
undergone fingering/keywork improvement.  So why, OH WHY, doesn't
SOMEBODY simply adapt oboe fingering for the bassoon?  After all, the
BBBb octo-contrabass clarinet has the EXACT same fingering system as the
tiny octave C clarinet, with the exception of the extended range, of
course.  I know that the oboe and bassoon are actually 2 different
families of instruments, because they were developed seperately, but
they basically have the same relationship as do the extreme clarinets.
        How was the current fingering system for brass instruments decided
upon?  After all, I'd think that the FIRST valve would be the next
position after open, not SECOND valve!
        As for flutes.  Why are flutes constructed horizontally?  It's such a
pain, compared to holding a clarinet.  I have seen a vertical head
attachment, but it is silly because it still comes out horizontally from
the mouth, and it then angles 90 degrees down for the body.  TALK ABOUT
AWKWARD TO PLAY!!  Seems to me that the mouthplate could simply taper
down into the cylindrical body.
        Does coiling and curving a musical tube, such as the sax and contra
clarinet, effect the sound it produces?
        I'm just gonna have to develop my own line of musical instruments.  (I
also have ideas for pianos, harpsichords, and pipe organs!)
        Future thanks for putting up with this email and answering any of my
questions/replying to my comments!
:>         :}         :]         ^_^        '_'      -_-
:)        +_+    =_=
        -Gregg Bailey

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 01:44:06 -0500
From: Matthew Hanson <mchanson@infohwy.com>
To: list@contrabass.com
Subject: Re: Many-a-low-topic

In response to your section on low clarinet bore size being to small, I
must in general disagree.
Granted, The Leblanc BBb contra has a bore size that is probably a
little too narrow for most players' harmonic taste, but I have found
that their Eb contra bore is actually TOO big, as it is the same as the
BBb contra's. I feel that the bore of their Eb needs to be reduced about
as much as people think the BBb contra bore needs to be expanded.
Selmer's BBb Contrabass clarinet bore is 1.333", pretty big compared to
the Leblanc BBb contra's 1.182" bore.
The Selmer has an incredible sound, but can sometimes, for some people,
be a bit more sloppy and hard to handle technique-wise compared to the
Leblanc. Fundamentally, the Selmer rocks!
I find just the opposite with Eb contras, where the Selmer has a smaller
more agile bore (.988") and the Leblanc has the huge 1.182" bore with
desent long tone sound.
Other than extending the low range, plating, and the obvious switch to
automatic register keys, Leblanc really hasn't changed much on their
contras at all since their introduction in the middle of this century.
It is probably safe to assume that the BBb contra's smaller bore size
has something to do with the initial concern for air support. We must
also remember that these intsruments' invention and patent by Leblanc
were experimental and very revolutionary for that time.
Now that I think of it, Leblanc really hadn't changed much on any of
their low clarinets until recently modifying the basses and adding
tuning sleeves to some of the alto models.
Selmer has had SO many bass clarinet designs while Leblanc has
essentially had one.
I don't mean to sound like I think that since Leblanc hasn't changed
much on their low clarinets in a while that they NEED to.
They are simply satisfied with the designs where Selmer never has been.
I'm not too sure Selmer's countless efforts at modifications and total
redesign are all good.
I'm not too fond of the very bright sound of the 35 bass. The intonation
is out of this world, but I feel they lost that "sweet, intimate sound"
in the timbre (circa Series 9). Now it is very dry. Sorry, just my
opinion.  I was hoping it was just the first two I played on, but no...
Sorry for the tangent.
I do hope this has been an at least somewhat constructive message.
If you are unsatisfied with the bore size of one brand, try another :)
Matthew Hanson
http://www.infohwy.com/~bkburks/mch/music_m.htm
PS- There is an old picture of me on this webpage. You can click on it
to see from the instrument neck that the Selmer Contrabass has a larger
bore.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 07:33:59 EDT
From: <SEMarcus@aol.com>
To: list@contrabass.com
Subject: Low Notes on Tuba (was Many-a-low-topic)

In a message dated 7/21/98 11:54:04 PM, Gregg Bailey wrote an interesting
series of contra-related questions, including:

<<Can anybody produce the lowest note on a 4-valved tuba (32' CCCC with
wavelength 64') with clarity and brilliance?  >>

A piece for solo tuba written by William Kraft, entitled "Encounters II," was
considered "on the edge" when it was first published and performed in the
1960's; now it's considered de rigeur in auditions for major tuba positions
and even on senior recitals.  Written in it is an extended CCC (the C below
the lowest C on the piano).  There are a few commercial recordings of this
piece, including two by Roger Bobo.  FWIW, I can play that note on my tuba,
but certainly not as loud and solid as Mr. Bobo et al!!!

Kindest regards,
Steve Marcus (SEMarcus@aol.com)
Director of Sales, THE BEAUTIFUL SOUND, INC.
 (630) 325-9999
http://www.uwm.edu/~mcmahan/profiling/profile.80.html
http://www2.qrsmusic.com/qrsmusic/mrktng/dealers/Beautsound/BeautSound.htm
http://www.steinway.com
http://homepage.interaccess.com/~sberg/pbb.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 08:16:45 -0400
From: "RJ Carpenter" <emerald1@megsinet.net>
To: <list@contrabass.com>
Subject: Re: list V1 #37

Woah; check out that contrabass pic... look closely at the "reed
contrabass"; see how thick that neck is and how wide the entire instrument
is...  I could be mistaken... but isn't it possible that that's a curved
contrabass sax???  It has the same shape as the one in the sax patent
drawings; and seems to have the same demensions!!!  It probably isn't; but I
thought it was a possibility worth looking into...

>During a random webcrawl, I ran across a site for Musikmesse, a Frankfurt
>DE music company (of some sort).  My German's a bit rusty, but the first
>page (http://www.blasmusik.de/musikmesse/messe.html) has a series of
>thumbnail links, apparently from a music show.  One of the pictures is of
>ORSI's contrabass sax being played by a woman, with a reed contrabass on a
>stand behind her.  There are a few other interesting shots, including a
>double-belled *trombone*.
------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 11:54:25 -0700
From: mgrogg@juno.com
To: list@contrabass.com
Subject: Re: Many-a-low-topic

>Hello, fellow low people (not status-wise)!  I have just rejoined
>y'all,  and am now 16.
>Hey--are there other people on the list close to my age?????  I
>apologize for the length of my email, but I have been off the list for
so long that it just all built up!  Anyway...
>       Can anybody produce the lowest note on a 4-valved tuba (32' CCCC
with  wavelength 64') with clarity and brilliance?  If anyone has ever
gotten to hear the lowest notes on the 32' ContraBombarde or
ContraTrombone
>stops on the organ, this is what I'm talking about.

Most CC tubas are 16' long, and BBb tubas are approx 18' long.  Lowest
written note in the mainstream solo literature is in the Kraft
Encounters.

>       Why weren't brass instruments designed with a good lowest
>octave?  It  seems like such a waste--on all brass instruments, notes
below the 2nd
> harmonic of the valve combination being used don't sound with any
clarity.  In fact, doesn't a double french horn contain 32' of tubing,
just like the 4-valved tuba?  Yet notes start to sound ridiculous down

The french Horn is approx. 12 feet long on the F side, and 9 feet long on
the Bb side.  Same lengths as an F tuba and a Bb trombone or euphonium.
Roger Bobo has a 16 foot CC bass horn that he has recorded a few things
on.
 

Has a lot to do with practical maters like being able to move the
instrument.  For the tubing to be in the right proportions to provide a
strong fundimental, you would need tubing through the valve section on
the order of 4 inches in diameter.  Most of your tubas top out at around
.840 through the valve section.  Such an instrument would be increadibly
heavy, and a 32' tuba would be huge.  There were a couple of EEEb tubas
built, came out about seven feet tall, and needing a cart to move them.
I belive Harvard U. owns one of them.
 

MG

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 12:19:57 -0500
From: Matthew Hanson <mchanson@infohwy.com>
To: list@contrabass.com
Subject: Re: Many-a-low-topic, BSN

>I know that the oboe and bassoon are actually 2 different
>families of instruments, because they were developed seperately, but
>they basically have the same relationship as do the extreme clarinets.

Gregg,
I don't understand how you can say this, having never played a bassoon.
Perhaps if you knew more about the instruments, you would better
understand them :)

>The concept of the bassoon is just that of a really big
>oboe.  They're both wooden, both have a conical bore, and a narrow one
>at that, and both are double reed.  All this makes for the same timbre.

Double reeds are grouped together because of the fact that they have two
reeds, not because they sound the same, which they don't.
The sound characteristics of each instrument are very different and
while they are both _double reeds_, the actual construction of the two
reeds are very different.

>Yet the bassoon is very awkward to play (tho I've never played one
>myself, but I've heard from other sources, and I've seen the keywork),
>and the finger patterns aren't very logical as they are on all other
>woodwinds.

Ummm...
The fingerings for bassoon are very logical indeed, and about as logical
as they're gonna get.  It works.
I can see how it may seem/look a bit confusing to a clarinetist, which I
am also, in addition to playing bassoon.
There are actually keys on the bassoon (as on oboe) that we don't use as
often and that a lot of player could do without, while on clarinet there
are several alternate keys which ARE needed, thus, IN A WAY, making the
bassoon a bit simpler (octave mechanism aside!).

An oboe is an oboe, and a bassoon is a bassoon. While they are similar,
they are two completely different instruments.
There *are* low pitched members of the oboe family and they are much
different from bassoons in many ways other than fingering.
I can understand your curiosity, but the concept is much like the idea
of wanting to put a double reed on a saxophone-like object. It has been
done and that makes it another individual instrument.
As far as your curiosity about the small bore size of reed end of a
bassoon, it works. If the bore were larger there, it would make the
instrument less agile and it would be a bit difficult to fit a reed on a
bassoon bocal with a bore of .5" . Since the reed is a double reed, the
bore must be a bit small on that end to permit vibration to continue.
This is why even on the contrabasson, the opening of the bocal is so
small.
I don't know where you got the idea that if you increase the bore size
the instrument will sound better. This idea is useful in improving some
instruments, but not all.  Low clarinets sound the way they do in the
low register because they are low... as all low woodwind instruments
begin to sound this way at the bottom of the range. It is a matter of
the nature of sound and depth, not bore size.
Maybe this will help...
Think about the extreme low range of contrabass woodwinds and how
similar they can all sound to some people. In addition, the same natural
occurance happens with the extreme high range of soprano and sopranino
woodwinds. Waves far apart and close together have this in common.
I hope this helps,
Matthew Hanson

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 13:57:49 EDT
From: <SFTrombone@aol.com>
To: list@contrabass.com
Subject: Re: Serpent

In a message dated 98-07-21 16:10:37 EDT, you write:

> I have a sort of extra interest for the more classical and medieval
>  instruments. I've constructed a couple myself out of instructions,but
>  there's one I'd like to get/create.
>  The Serpent.
>  Does anyone know if anyone MAKES Serpents?(i'm sure they aren't exactly
>  in mass-production).
>  Does anyone know HOW you can make a serpent(measurments,hole
>  placement,mouthpiece type)?
>  And finally,are there any sites on the ineternet about this instrument
>  or how to make it?
>
You may find some info on serpents on Doug Yeo's website at www.yeodoug.com

Steve Ferguson

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 12:16:05 -0700
From: Grant Green <gdgreen@contrabass.com>
To: list@contrabass.com
Subject: Re: Many-a-low-topic

At 12:53 AM 7/22/98 CDT, Gregg wrote:
   ***
>       Why weren't brass instruments designed with a good lowest octave?  It
>seems like such a waste--on all brass instruments, notes below the 2nd
>harmonic of the valve combination being used don't sound with any
>clarity.  In fact, doesn't a double french horn contain 32' of tubing,
>just like the 4-valved tuba?  Yet notes start to sound ridiculous down
>around GG, and below CC or maybe BBBb, the notes are virtually
>impossible to produce.
>       Brass instruments are coiled as a matter of convenience, yet they are
>made twice as long as necessary for the intended use.  I've never
>understood that one.

Physics vs. economics.  First, the physics:
Brass instruments work on the natural overtone series.  From the
fundamental, the next partial is an octave higher - a big gap.  For
illustration, let's say you have a Bb instrument whose fundamental pitch is
the Bb below the bass clef.  The second partial is the 2nd line BC Bb.  If
you have one valve (e.g., the whole-step first valve), you can also play
the Ab (1st space BC) - still leaving quite a gap from the fundamental, and
also leaving a gap between the Ab and the 2nd line Bb.  So add a second
valve, with a half step.  Now you can reach the second space A, between the
Ab and the Bb, and by using the 1st and 2nd valves in combination you can
play the 1st line G.  Still a long way from the fundamental.  With a third
valve (3 half steps), you can play the G with the third valve alone,
combine 2+3 to reach Gb, 1+3 to reach F, and 1+2+3 to reach E.  Still a
diminished fifth from the fundamental.  With an "F" 4th valve, you can play
the F below BC with just valve 4, and play E with 2+4 (probably better in
tune than 1+2+3), Eb with 1+4, D with 1+2+4 or 3+4, Db with 2+3+4, C with
1+3+4, and low B natural with 1+2+3+4.  There!  Well, almost: unless you
have a compensating tuba, the valve combinations with 3 or 4 are likely to
be sharp.  This is because the valves are generally designed (or tuned) to
lower the pitch of the horn (assuming the open bore) by increasing the
length of the bore by a set ratio.  When you add another valve, the bore
length is increased, and now the ratios are off.  To compensate, you have
to either pull tuning slides (common for tubas and trumpets) or make a
"self-compensating" instrument that adds additional tubing for the first
several valves whenever the last valve is depressed (common for
euphoniums).  Or, you have to add several more valves, as Dr. Young did
with his tuba.

Now, the economics:
Every time you add a valve, you increase the amount of work required to
build the horn, and the expense.  Compensating valves have twice as many
ports (the bore passes through the valve twice when the compensating
section is in use), and are thus more complicated and expensive than
"normal" valves.  Manufacturers thus have a trade-off, between having an
instrument that plays easily in tune in the lowest (least-used) octave, and
one that they can sell at a competitive price.

Grant
 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Grant D. Green                  gdgreen@contrabass.com
www.contrabass.com     Just filling in on sarrusophone
Contrabass email list:             list@contrabass.com
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 12:40:15 -0700
From: Grant Green <gdgreen@contrabass.com>
To: list@contrabass.com
Subject: Re: Many-a-low-topic

At 12:53 AM 7/22/98 CDT, Gregg wrote:

***
>       Does anybody else agree with me that in general, Bb and Eb clarinet
>parts are too high, and the music sounds too shrill?  If the composer
>wants those high notes to be emitted by a clarinet instrument, why don't
>they write for the tiny octave clarinets to play in their lowest range,
>so that those high notes will have nice timbre?  Then, the Bb and Eb
>clarinets can play much more in their lowest registers, where the notes
>have much more centered, controlled, and pretty sound.

Apparently some composers like the clarion register...  But it reminds me
of Stravinsky's "Symphony of Psalms", which has essentially full orchestra
(and choir), but no violins.

>       Another thing I want to know is why the bores of all clarinet
>instruments lower than the Bb clarinet are so relatively narrow.?  By
>the time you get down to the BBb contra, the bore of the thing is so
>incredibly narrow compared to the length that the lowest notes emit only
>a wealth of upper harmonics and no fundamental at all.  The only reason
>you hear the pitch of the note is because all these (relatively) high
>harmonics beat with each other to produce the lowest harmonics.  But,
>since the lowest ones aren't ACTUALLY produced with any comparable
>strength, the walls of the room don't rattle as they do with organ pipes
>of the same pitch.  When I play on a contra clarinet, it sounds like I'm
>playing on a comb with tissue paper wrapped around it.

You can change the ratio of higher partials to lower partials a little by
changing the mpc and using a softer reed.  Or finding a wider-bore
instrument.  Like a sarrusophone ;-)

***
>       Another topic.  The concept of the bassoon is just that of a really big
>oboe.  They're both wooden, both have a conical bore, and a narrow one

Actually, they're pretty distinct.  Due to the differences in bore, they
have quite different timbres, even taking into account the difference in
register.  A tenoroon does not sound like an English horn, despite having
the same register.

Personally, I find the bassoon fingerings more logical than the oboe, at
least for the first and second register (e.g., F below BC to D above middle
C).  Above D, one starts using altissimo fingerings, no stranger than the
altissimo fingerings for other instruments.  Below low F is a series of
keys - conveniently located for use by the thumbs ;-) - extending the range
down to Bb.  Most of the fingerings seem more logical than, for example, on
the oboe where you go from A to Bb by adding RH1, and from B to C again by
adding RH1.

>at that, and both are double reed.  All this makes for the same timbre.
>Yet the bassoon is very awkward to play (tho I've never played one
>myself, but I've heard from other sources, and I've seen the keywork),
>and the finger patterns aren't very logical as they are on all other
>woodwinds.  Supposedly the bassoon is the only woodwind that hasn't
>undergone fingering/keywork improvement.  So why, OH WHY, doesn't
>SOMEBODY simply adapt oboe fingering for the bassoon?  After all, the

Actually, someone tried making a Boehm system bassoon, and found out why.
The small tone holes drilled at oblique angles were replaced with large
tone holes placed at the "acoustically correct" positions, operated by
keywork.  The result just didn't sound like a bassoon.  A large part of the
bassoon's unique timbre derives from the long, oblique tone holes.

>       How was the current fingering system for brass instruments decided
>upon?  After all, I'd think that the FIRST valve would be the next
>position after open, not SECOND valve!

I think one uses 1st valve much more than 2nd, and 2nd much more than 3rd.

>       As for flutes.  Why are flutes constructed horizontally?  It's such a
>pain, compared to holding a clarinet.  I have seen a vertical head
>attachment, but it is silly because it still comes out horizontally from
>the mouth, and it then angles 90 degrees down for the body.  TALK ABOUT
>AWKWARD TO PLAY!!  Seems to me that the mouthplate could simply taper
>down into the cylindrical body.

Emerson makes a vertical flute, where the embouchure plate is essentially
centered over the body of the flute (when the head is in place).

>       Does coiling and curving a musical tube, such as the sax and contra
>clarinet, effect the sound it produces?

Yes, a bend in the tube has the effect of making the bore "seem" larger at
that point.  There's also a subtle difference in timbre, which you can
sometimes hear by comparing a standard trumpet with a "pocket" trumpet: the
pocket trumpet has twice as many bends, and tends to have a somewhat
stuffier sound.  Trombones, on the other hand....

Grant
 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Grant D. Green                  gdgreen@contrabass.com
www.contrabass.com     Just filling in on sarrusophone
Contrabass email list:             list@contrabass.com
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 14:34:36 -0700
From: Grant Green <gdgreen@contrabass.com>
To: list@contrabass.com
Subject: Re: list V1 #37 (reed contrabass)

At 08:16 AM 7/22/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Woah; check out that contrabass pic... look closely at the "reed
>contrabass"; see how thick that neck is and how wide the entire instrument
>is...  I could be mistaken... but isn't it possible that that's a curved
>contrabass sax???  It has the same shape as the one in the sax patent
>drawings; and seems to have the same demensions!!!  It probably isn't; but I
>thought it was a possibility worth looking into...

Nope, its a reed contrabass.  I played the horn at ORSI last January.  The
bocal actually isn't as thick as it appears in the image: its closer to the
diameter of a contrabassoon bocal (although still a *bit* wider).  There
are other pictures at http://www.contrabass.com/italy/italy.html and
http://www.contrabass.com/pages/anche.html.

The reed contrabass (contrabasse ad anche) is more like a double reed
ophicleide, or a tuba-sized keyed bugle, than a saxophone.  The fingering
is definitely not sax-like.  On the reed contrabass, each key (alone) plays
a different note, e.g., to play "F", you just press the "F" key (RH4) by
itself, not LH123 RH1234.

Enjoy!

Grant
 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Grant D. Green                  gdgreen@contrabass.com
www.contrabass.com     Just filling in on sarrusophone
Contrabass email list:             list@contrabass.com
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

------------------------------

End of list V1 #38
******************

 
Next Digest ->
Previous Digest <-
Index
Top