Theoretical question about French tuba in C

[MarChant]

Ever since I've learned of the existence of the French Tuba in C, I have wondered why it has gone 'extinct'.

As I see it, it is more versatile than a Euphonium, since it is able to play much lower. It is also more versatile than a Tuba, since it is able to play high register more easily (and easier to carry...). So why are these two different instruments used instead of just the one?

I do get that modern tubas have gotten bigger over the past decades (and I'm not sure if I am really happy with that development, but that is another discussion...) but somehow I keep wondering...what if instead of using those two different instruments, Tuba and Euphonium, Symphonic Wind Bands and maybe even Brass Bands start using 'French' Tubas in C for both parts?

[notaverygoodname]

I can think of two really good reasons right off the top of my head.

1) Can't match modern day expectations for intonation.

2) Doesn't have the power to carry a band on its own.

[MarChant]

Thanks for your reply.

1) I am not sure what you mean by this. Couldn't (wouldn't) a modern built French tuba in C live up to the 'modern' expectations of intonation?
Have a listen at mr. Carl Kleinsteuber's presentation/demonstration of the French Tuba in C:
https://youtu.be/313HdaUj0iE
https://youtu.be/HGIux_7_baA

Even though he is playing a (albeit slightly modified) period instrument, I don't hear any problems with my expectations of intonation against the modern trombones.

2) most wind bands have more than 1 tuba. Also, even 1 modern tuba in a wind band can go both ways: either too weak or too overpowering. This is of course a player's problem, not an instrumental issue.
Also on this issue, mr. Kleinsteuber seems to hold up pretty well against a modern trombone section, I would imagine he could carry a whole band as well. Certainly if he was backed up by one or two other tuba players.

[highpitch]

Hmmm. Bands I hear never have enough bottom end.

DG

[dsurkin]

[snip] most wind bands have more than 1 tuba. Also, even 1 modern tuba in a wind band can go both ways: either too weak or too overpowering. [snip]

I'm not an expert, but I suspect there are two issues:
first, the compactness of the instrument, i.e., the tightness of the bends coupled with a smaller bore than a modern orchestral F or CC tuba, affects the quality of the tone; and
second, isn't the French tuba an 8-foot horn with additions for the valves? This means that middle C, C4 is the 4th harmonic and C2 is the fundamental. On a CC tuba, the notes from C2 ranging down to Db1 are on the 2nd harmonic, which I think is always stronger and more secure than when played on the fundamental. I acknowledge this may be just my own technical limitation - I feel secure playing C2 on my euphonium but lower than F1 is, well, nothing.

[bbocaner]

1. The reason that British-style euphoniums and American and German-style tubas took off and started getting used in orchestras and bands around the world is that they turned out to be just plain better instruments than the other regional variations.

2. an instrument meant to cover the tenor through contrabass ranges is what I'd call a jack of all trades, master of none. It's got to have a big enough mouthpiece to hit those super low notes, but a small enough bore and bell to have focus in the upper register. Even the French had a slightly different "saxhorn basse" for the paris conservatory solos and such.

3. I think the homogenization of orchestras around the world is a sad thing, and it used to be nice to hear a british orchestra with large bore clarinets or a french orchestra with small bore trombones and a french tuba, but the quality of acoustical development and quality of construction that has gone into these specialty instruments does not approach what has happened with the more mainstream instruments these days.

[tbonesullivan]

Probably the same reason why you don't see many Vienna F tubas with 6 valves either: they found better ways to get the sound with good intonation. Having 6 valves in the circuit is a bit much for many, and also the French C tuba was just a SMALL instrument compared to the range it was expected to have. Like a Viola, it's weak, without the proper resonance. And also, blowing through a whole bunch of valves to get those low notes? NOPE.

[adrian_quince]

2. an instrument meant to cover the tenor through contrabass ranges is what I'd call a jack of all trades, master of none. It's got to have a big enough mouthpiece to hit those super low notes, but a small enough bore and bell to have focus in the upper register. Even the French had a slightly different "saxhorn basse" for the paris conservatory solos and such.

My thinking is along a similar line. The analogy I was going to use was a Swiss Army Knife. I've got one that has a knife blade, small wood saw, and scissors among other things. In a pinch, those are nice to have. Yet, they certainly don't replace their standalone equivalents.

Most specifically, with the contrabass tubas, the breadth of the fundamental and strength of the overtones can't be matched by a French tuba in C or euphonium playing the same pitch. I've played next to tuba players whose overtone series was so strong it was actually hard to play out of tune with them. That foundation has become so ingrained in the modern concert band sound that I don't think there's any going back.

[ghmerrill]

Yes (I suppose to repeat), mostly:

This

The reason that British-style euphoniums and American and German-style tubas took off and started getting used in orchestras and bands around the world is that they turned out to be just plain better instruments than the other regional variations.

and this:

Most specifically, with the contrabass tubas, the breadth of the fundamental and strength of the overtones can't be matched by a French tuba in C or euphonium playing the same pitch.

In short, it can make the pitch, but it can't make the sound.

Also, it's French.

[notaverygoodname]

Thanks for your reply.

1) I am not sure what you mean by this. Couldn't (wouldn't) a modern built French tuba in C live up to the 'modern' expectations of intonation?
Have a listen at mr. Carl Kleinsteuber's presentation/demonstration of the French Tuba in C:
https://youtu.be/313HdaUj0iE
https://youtu.be/HGIux_7_baA

Even though he is playing a (albeit slightly modified) period instrument, I don't hear any problems with my expectations of intonation against the modern trombones.

2) most wind bands have more than 1 tuba. Also, even 1 modern tuba in a wind band can go both ways: either too weak or too overpowering. This is of course a player's problem, not an instrumental issue.
Also on this issue, mr. Kleinsteuber seems to hold up pretty well against a modern trombone section, I would imagine he could carry a whole band as well. Certainly if he was backed up by one or two other tuba players.

We live in an era where compensating Euphoniums have slide triggers. The C Tuba works in a way similar to the Bass Trombone where it's intended to play below its natural range, but it doesn't have a slide to make up the difference. All the lower register has to be lipped in tune and all you get to help is the piddly 5th valve. If you could compensate for both the 4th and 6th valve to make the horn play correctly in CC, it would be alright, but I'm not sure how you'd accomplish that in a practical manner. Maybe vienna valves and just be ok with a 30lb horn? I like blow to pitch horns, but I'm a hobbyist nobody. Pros pull slides.

As for power, the issue is that 1 on 1, the C Tuba can't match a 4/4 Contrabass Tuba. You could modernize the C Tuba, or have more players, but it's still less convenient and you don't get much in return.

I have a really small Eb Tuba (12.25" bell, .604" bore). I love the thing to death, but there's no way I could support more than 10 or so players in a brass band without sounding terrible or passing out. In a collection of over 20 horns, it's probably in the top 5 quietest.

[MarChant]

There are some valid points made by all. So in conclusion, the French Tuba in C is only practical for those purists who need to play the French repertoire as intended? It really isn't useful for anything else?

[adrian_quince]

There are some valid points made by all. So in conclusion, the French Tuba in C is only practical for those purists who need to play the French repertoire as intended? It really isn't useful for anything else?

Out of curiosity, I've been reading Carl Kleinstuber's written dissertation. His argument, in short, is that the unique color of the French tuba should be preserved so that the intent of French composers who called for it can continue to be realized. Kleinstuber argues that in Berlioz, Ravel, Poulenc, etc., the bigger tubas (bass in F and Eb and contrabass in C or Bb) are wholly inappropriate, which his dissertation videos demonstrate.

From the dissertation:

The French tuba proliferated in late nineteenth- and early twentieth century Paris partly because French composers sought an orchestral ensemble full of strong individual timbres, each with its own clear aural identity. This attitude contrasts a more Germanic/Austrian approach to ensemble sonorities such as that of Anton Bruckner, where the entire group is meant to combine, often entering as tutti instrumental groups and even emulating the pipe organ. The Cambridge Companion to the Orchestra says that “...lack of blend was particularly marked in French orchestras, in which individual instruments tended to be quite distinct from each other in tone-colour.” This same source goes on to describe the tonal colors of French brass players as “pungent” which to the experienced listener seems an apt description. Virgil Thomson once wrote of the French orchestral approach to timbres that “the French orchestral style is one of equilibration (sic), of clear balances and clean colors, of poetic luminosity rather than of animal warmth. And the whole repertoire of French music composed since Berlioz is designed to profit by this delicate performing style.” Leonard Bernstein in his renowned Young Peoples’ Concerts described the French orchestral sound as “thin, transparent, delicate.” Henry Dutilleux used the term sites auriculaires – or “points of beauty for the ear” to describe the French approach to orchestration.

Looking at the argument for broader application of French tuba in band music, the reverse would be true. The standard in American band music, dating back to Sousa, has been contrabass tuba in Bb. The blend and balance conceptions present in American band scores would be severely distorted by a French tuba. The pitches may be the same, however the breadth of sound and color would be completely different. It would be the same for the English-speaking and German-speaking worlds at large.

The issue is similar with the Euphonium in band music. Listening to Bydlo as played by Kleinstuber, the French tuba takes on character distinct from the euphonium in its upper range. This color would be difficult to manage in the many instances in American and British wind literature where the euphonium is required to blend with the woodwind choir.

Taking the issue in a slightly different direction, in the American band world there has been a similar loss of color in low brass with the predominance of the British-style euphonium. The American baritone offers a distinct color that is what composers in the American band tradition would have expected. This video by Dave of a 1935 double bell euphonium offers one of the clearest examples I can find of an American baritone in the hands of a truly excellent player. Compare it to Dave playing the same piece on his Adams. While the modern compensating euphonium is the most versatile all-around instrument for band literature, to my ear early American band works lose a little color with the broader, more veiled sound.

In a similar vein, a German friend of mine was mentioning to me recently that there's been a trend there of using the Bariton for both Bariton and Tenorhorn parts. Like the American baritone/euphonium issue, the economic issue of not having to own two distinct instruments is obvious. However, again, I can't help but feel that something distinct and valuable is being lost.

[Jonathantuba]

The French C tuba may work in a wind band substituting for a euphonium, if that is all available, but it is a smaller instrument than the modern compensated euphonium and is more difficult to play. It is ideal for playing in an orchestra for appropriate music, mainly French repertoire and I think it would make a good ‘travel tuba’ for the professional orchestral tubist - one that can be used in the concert if required. May also work in brass quintet, although I have not heard in that setting.

For using as bass in a band, forget it - would not have the weight or breath of tone

[ghmerrill]

These kinds of questions -- as is usually the case -- start to resolve along the lines of a distinction between what a composer intended or expected in terms of a particular sound vs. what can be achieved by means of what would normally and reasonably be regarded as the sound of "improved" (i.e., more "contemporary") instruments. On the extremes of this kind of divide we end up with (a) the view that a particular piece "should" be played only by the instrumentation available at the time of its composition and which was (therefore) "intended" by the composer; contrasted with the view that (b) a particular piece "should" be played with the "best" instrumentation available at the time of the performance.

Both of these -- as prescriptive views -- are nutty since they assume that there is some "absolute measure" of "goodness" in music that in fact forms some sort of continuum. And, I think, nothing could be further than the truth. They also, in so far as they're coherent, argue along independent "dimensions" of musical quality and appropriateness. And any such argument is at cross purposes and unresolveable.

If we look back at the original "Theoretical question" we really need to see that it's not a theoretical question at all -- and in fact that there's no THEORETICAL question in the matter. It's a practical question about when it's appropriate, or best, to use one instrument or another. And that practical question needs to be addressed on practical -- and not theoretical -- grounds. And so, in specific (as opposed to abstract or vague) formulations, the answer in those cases seems always to be pretty obvious.

If we MUST address the "theoretical" question as originally posed -- i.e., the "What if ...?" question about using the French tuba as a sort of generic tuba/euphonium -- then the answer to that has to be "No. That's not a good idea. But in circumstances where it works -- or works well enough or you can't do any better -- then go ahead." And as a practical matter, if you choose to employ a French C tuba as your tuba and as your euphonium, you're going to have a lot fewer opportunities and a lot less success.

[franz]

The French C tuba may work in a wind band substituting for a euphonium, if that is all available, but it is a smaller instrument than the modern compensated euphonium and is more difficult to play. It is ideal for playing in an orchestra for appropriate music, mainly French repertoire and I think it would make a good ‘travel tuba’ for the professional orchestral tubist - one that can be used in the concert if required. May also work in brass quintet, although I have not heard in that setting.

For using as bass in a band, forget it - would not have the weight or breath of tone

I used the French tuba in the last concert on December 18th with the wind band instead of the euphonium and I didn't find it more difficult to play, just a little more attention to the intonation of the partials than the euphonium. The tone is similar and the 260 mm bell makes the sound more concentrated.