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

 
 

1999-09-28

 
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 17:57:52 -0500
From: bonnie&Oscar <bgyoaw@swbell.net>
Subject: Tuba
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

Tuba is a latin word referring to an instrument believed to be about
two feet long. Tuba and brass naming gets VERY confused.

Note:  At T.U.B.A. meeting 1, in Bloomington IN., Arthur Benade
gave a presentation.  I am eternally  grateful to the organizers for this.

He said then that he had made a mouthpiece for his clarinet
that overblows an octave, not a twelfth.  The mouthpiece, Lips,
are also very important.  The bore shape does not completely control
the way the pipe overblows!

Further - note - Many tubas have a strong usable resonance between the 'nominal'
fundamental and the nominal 'first overtone'. Eb is a good open tone on many BBb tubas.

The 'Fundamental' on most brass instruments is phony. The true primary resonance is rather lower.

So - bottom fishers - there are resonances below the 'Fundamental'.  See if you can find them!!

Oscar
---------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 17:43:38 -0500
From: bonnie&Oscar <bgyoaw@swbell.net>
Subject: Re:
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

Last time I tried, a Mirfone BBb with F attachment was good for
20 Hz.  About as bass as you can get!
Of course it was a Square wave...
---------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Izzo" <jeanvaljean@ntsource.com>
Subject: Re: Everything
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 19:22:28 -0500
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

Adam,

> >From Adam
> The most notable cylindrical brass instrument is the
> English baritone, which has been used in British bands
> and can be heard on many of the late-sixties Beatles
> recordings during their "Brass Band Phase." Sovreign
> (by Boosey and Hawkes) makes onw, it is sold
> relatively well-priced in WWandBW.
 

I don't think so, the English Baritone is still a conical instrument. The
Trombones & Trumpets are more Cylindrical than any of their Valved
counterparts.
 

Tom

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

From: "Tom Izzo" <jeanvaljean@ntsource.com>
Subject: Re: Tuba
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 19:28:58 -0500
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

> Tuba is a latin word referring to an
> instrument believed to be about two feet long.
>
> Further - note - Many tubas have a strong
> usable resonance between the 'nominal'
> fundamental and the nominal 'first overtone'.
> Eb is a good open tone on many BBb tubas.
>
Yes, the 5th is often stronger than the root on many instruments.

> The 'Fundamental' on most brass instruments is phony.
> The true primary resonance is rather lower.
>
> So - bottom fishers - there are resonances below the
> 'Fundamental'.  See if you can find them!!

Yes, & it largely depends on the wrapping of the instrument. Case(s) in
point. Tubas & Trombones can easily produce a "double pedal", whereas even
the fundamental 1 on a (Soprano) Trumpet or Cornet is nearly impossible for
many players.
Tenor Trombones, much easier than Bass Trbs, can even resonate a "triple" pedal.
"Pedal" referring to the so-called "fundamental" tone.

Tom
>

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

From: "Aaron Rabushka" <arabushk@cowtown.net>
Subject: Re: Tuba
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 18:52:55 -0500
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

Yes, I've always been somewhat confused by the use of "tuba mirum" to mean
"distant trumpet," and even further confused (although quite gratified) to
run across the German and Swedish renderings of biblical herald-instruments
as trombones (my former instrument).

Aaron J. Rabushka
arabushk@cowtown.net
http://www.cowtown.net/users/arabushk/

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

From: "Mats Öljare" <oljare@hotmail.com>
Subject: Contrabass trombone work
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 23:50:43 GMT
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

Is anybody interested in a work written for contrabass trombone(s)?And if so
with what kind of ensemble?I´m very interested in writing for it if i can
get it performed.I would then like players advice on how to use it.I also
considered a serpent ensemble,consisting of(as an example)1 contrabass,2
bass and 2 tenor serpents.

Mats Öljare
http://www.angelfire.com/mo/oljare

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

From: Opusnandy@aol.com
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 20:58:15 EDT
Subject: Re: musical interests
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

In a message dated 9/26/1999 11:06:07 PM, lokibassoon@yahoo.com writes:
<< the Heckelphone is not "rare." If rare is defined by "few
people own one" then yes, it is rare. But it is still
mass-produced by Heckel >>

A correction to make: Heckel does not mass produce heckelphones.  According
to my recent correspondence with Heckel, only 115 heckelphones have EVER been
made.  I'd call that pretty rare!

Jonathan Carreira
Wondering where the other 114 are
---------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 21:04:49 -0700
From: "Timothy J. Tikker" <timjt@awod.com>
Subject: Re: [Contra digest]
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

>>Lelia Loban, Timothy Tikker, or anyone, help me out!!!!! Why is the organ's "Pommer" or "Gedacktpommer" stop nothing like the true pommer instrument???  According to you list people, the pommer is a low shawm, which is a reed instrument.  Yet the organ stop is not a reed rank. It's just a stopped flue rank.<<

I think I saw an explanation of that years ago, and I actually forget what it was.
Actually, I'm not sure that "Pommer" was used this way in organbuilding before the
20th century... If I ever come across the explanation, I'll let you know.
 

>>And, like I said, a German foreign exchange student told me that "pommer"
translates into English as being some sort of device between 2 train cars
that keeps them from colliding into one another.  What does this have to do
with shawms or stopped flutes???

Utterly nothing, of course.

>       A bombarde is what the bassoon used to be before some person decided
>that it'd be less cumbersome folded up, which he did, and that became
>the modern bassoon.

...by way of the curtal, of course...

Actually, it's worth noting that the Bombarde is also a shawm in Brittany (Celtic
region of France).  I have one, a high-pitched one in Bb (same range as the chanter of
a Scottish bagpipe, and about as loud, criminy!).  But they are made in lower pitches
too -- I've seen them in the Lark In The Morning catalog, and heard them on a CD.

Interesting:  Bombardes can be played with the Breton bagpipes, the Biniou.  I have
heard a recording of traditional Breton tunes played with bombarde and bagpipes (I
forget if this is the biniou or another bagpipe, if they have one)... and the bombarde
always plays an octave lower than the bagpipes.  As an organist I find this very
interesting, since in French organ terminology, a Bombarde is a trumpet-class reed
stop pitched an octave below unison pitch (i.e. at 16' pitch)!

>>You "bombard" something with projectiles; did this term come from the war
canon, as well?<<

As I recall, the tenor shawm -- I think that's the size the French called the
'Bombarde" -- was said to resemble some piece of artillery!  Must look that up...
might be in Baines' Woodwind Instruments and Their History.  BTW, Gregg, you should
get that book if you don't already have it -- the Dover reprint is fairly cheap.
Baines also had a book on brasses which was pretty good.

>>Why would the pipe organ's Doucaine stop be cylindrical like a clarinet,
rather than conical like the actual "Dulzian" instrument?  After all, isn't
"Doucaine" the French corruption of Dulzian?  How do the Bombarde, Dulzian,
Sarrusophone, and Bassoon all fit into the low double reed instrument
development story?  All these early instruments confuse me!<<

Actually, "douçaine" can also refer to a cylindrical double-reed, capped or
uncapped... the Neumans of Oregon City make excellent ones.  They're kind of like
straight crumhorns, and the tone tends to be softer.  In modern organbuilding, though,
"douçaine" is understood to be the equivalent of the German "Dulzian".

As to why the organ stop is cylindrical when the prototype instrument isn't... that's
just one of those historical anomalies.  The fact is that there were many German
baroque Fagott stops which were also cylindrical -- Schnither & his school, for
instance.  It must be just that the stopname was generally suggestive of the type of
tone, rather than meaning the stop really tried to imitate the prototype instrument
literally.

I have noticed that the French organbuilder Cavaille-Coll's Basson stops sound very
much like the sarrusophone -- especially as the latter sounds in the Paul Winter
recording at St John the Divine NYC.  But I've never actually seen an organ stop
called sarrusophone.

- Tim Tikker

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

From: "Chip Owen" <cowen@whitleynet.org>
Subject: Re: musical interests
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 20:32:58 -0500
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

I have a very hard time with the concept that Heckelphones are
mass-produced.  Consider that Heckel's "volume" product is bassoon, of which
they make about 50 per year.  Their second volume comes from contrabassoons
at 5-6 per year.  I didn't ask Ralf Reiter how many Heckelphones he makes
but I would guess it at 2-3 per year at best.

And Heckelphones are certainly unique instruments in multiple ways.  Earlier
this year I had two Heckelphones in my shop at the same time.  In addition I
had 3 drawings by Heckel of Heckelphone keywork.  All five were
significantly different from each other.

This is not a "mass-produced" instrument!

Chip Owen
Columbia City, IN
cowen@whitleynet.org

> Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 21:20:21 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Adam Kent-Isaac <lokibassoon@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: musical interests
> Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com
> Stu...
>
> Yeah, I do see where you're coming from. But the
> Heckelphone is not "rare." If rare is defined by "few
> people own one" then yes, it is rare. But it is still
> mass-produced by Heckel, and if somebody makes
> something, and you have the money to buy it, then that
> thing is not rare.
>

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

Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 02:41:35 +0100 (BST)
From: Dafydd y garreg wen <mavnw@csv.warwick.ac.uk>
Subject: EEb tubas/low resonances
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

Sorry about the awkward formatting- I'm having to do this using Telnet
from home, to where my University mail is forwarded, but, because I'm
subscribed at Uni, then I can't post from home.
Anyway, enough rubbish.

Arnold Myers:

I stand corrected(again!) Just how many of these lists are you on,
anyway?:) I found in a cupboard the other day a book entitled 'Brass
Bands' by Trevor Herbert, and an appendix on the development of
instrumentation by you, which , if I remember correctly, covered your last
reply in some detail plus much else. Very informative and helpful.

Tom Izzo;various others:

Triple pedal - do you really mean 64' C? Is there a special technique for
hitting these sorts of notes on Trombone? Double pedals I can do down to
about F or Gb (c. 48'), but this is something else. My nose just gets in
the way of the mouthpiece! Is there a way of determining which extra tones
will vibrate nicely on which instrument. For example, on tuba, the perfect
4th above the fundamental goes well, but on Euph, this won't work, and
sounds instead as about a major 3rd higher (D on a Bb instrument). On
trombone it's different again, with the perfect 5th working well, but this
feels more like a low 2nd harmonic than a high 1st which is what the
others feel like. This is perhaps borne out by the fact that the octave
below works also. I don't know nearly as much about this as I would like
to, so feel free to be technical (to me if not the list). Bear in mind
also that I am studying (not the right word, I'm sure)for a Maths degree:)

Dave Taylor
 

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

From: "Tom Izzo" <jeanvaljean@ntsource.com>
Subject: Re: Contrabass trombone work
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 22:15:08 -0500
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

> Is anybody interested in a work written for contrabass trombone(s)?

You bet!

And if so
> with what kind of ensemble?

I lead several groups that use Contrabass Trombones.
A Bass Trombone Quartet (4 Bass Trb's, 1 Bass doubling Contra)
A mixed TRombone Sextet (of Altos thru Contra)
and a large Trombone Choir. Usually of 8-16 part, with one sometimes 2 Contra parts.

I´m very interested in writing for it if i can
> get it performed.I would then like players advice on how to use it.

Post me back off the list.

Tom

I also
> considered a serpent ensemble,consisting of(as an example)1 contrabass,2
> bass and 2 tenor serpents.

Doug Yeo might be interested in this mailto:yeo@yeodoug.com
 

Tom
http://www.Geocities.com/Vienna/Studio/7875
 

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

From: "Gregg Bailey" <greggbailey@hotmail.com>
Subject: Cylindrical brass
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 00:11:57 CDT
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

> The most notable cylindrical brass instrument is the
>English baritone

 If it is truly cylindrical, then it would have to overblow only
odd-numbered harmonics.  Is this the case???
 Someone once told me that the cornet is cylindrical.  It's not, is it?
 -Gregg

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

From: "Gregg Bailey" <greggbailey@hotmail.com>
Subject: Low brass resonance!
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 00:21:23 CDT
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

>He said then that he had made
>a mouthpiece for his clarinet
>that overblows an octave, not
>a twelfth.  The mouthpiece, Lips,
>are also very important.  The bore
>shape does not completely control
>the way the pipe overblows!

 That doesn't make sense to me.  Did he play this setup for y'all??

>The 'Fundamental' on most brass instruments is phony.
>The true primary resonance is rather lower.
>
>So - bottom fishers - there are resonances below the
>'Fundamental'.  See if you can find them!!

 Well, the so-called "pedal tones" are the lowest; these are what you get
when you put a reed instrument mouthpiece on the horn and play.  For the
tuba, the lowest possible true note is 32' CCCC (16 Hz).  The other day, I
put my bari sax mouthpiece on a concert tuba; what an experience!!!  Lelia
and Timothy, I made a true ContraBombarde/Contraposaune sound!!  I don't
understand why low saxes can't have that kind of resonance and oomph.  The
resonance was astounding down to 16 Hz.
 In case you can't tell, I love low notes!
 -Gregg

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

From: "Gregg Bailey" <greggbailey@hotmail.com>
Subject: Low Square?
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 00:23:26 CDT
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

>Last time I tried, a Mirfone BBb with F attachment was good for
>20 Hz.  About as bass as you can get!
>Of course it was a Square wave...

 How is it a square wave?  A Mirofone isn't cylindrical, is it?

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

From: "Tom Izzo" <jeanvaljean@ntsource.com>
Subject: Re: Low brass resonance!
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 01:39:59 -0500
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

> >So - bottom fishers - there are resonances below the
> >'Fundamental'.  See if you can find them!!
>
> Well, the so-called "pedal tones" are the lowest; these are what you get
> when you put a reed instrument mouthpiece on the horn and play.  For the
> tuba, the lowest possible true note is 32' CCCC (16 Hz).

Huh?
Which Tuba are you referring to?
Tubas are pitched in Bb, F, Eb, CC, BBb, etc. Not ALL of them share the same
"lowest" note.

Tom

 The other day, I
> put my bari sax mouthpiece on a concert tuba; what an experience!!!  Lelia
> and Timothy, I made a true ContraBombarde/Contraposaune sound!!  I don't
> understand why low saxes can't have that kind of resonance and oomph.  The
> resonance was astounding down to 16 Hz.
> In case you can't tell, I love low notes!
> -Gregg
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
> ----------------------
> end contrabass list
>

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

From: "Tom Izzo" <jeanvaljean@ntsource.com>
Subject: Re: Low Square?
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 01:42:10 -0500
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

----- Original Message -----
From: Gregg Bailey <greggbailey@hotmail.com>
> >Last time I tried, a Mirfone BBb with F attachment was good for
> >20 Hz.  About as bass as you can get!
> >Of course it was a Square wave...
>
> How is it a square wave?  A Mirofone isn't cylindrical, is it?

Mirafone Contrabass Trombone (what is referred to above), yes, is
cylindrical. As is Mirafone Bass Trumpets, Bass & Tenor Trombones, etc.
Mirafone Orchestral Horns, Euphonia, Baritones, & Tubas are not.

Tom

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

From: "Tom Izzo" <jeanvaljean@ntsource.com>
Subject: Re: Cylindrical brass
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 01:43:44 -0500
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

----- Original Message -----
From: Gregg Bailey <greggbailey@hotmail.com>
>
> > The most notable cylindrical brass instrument is the
> >English baritone
>
> If it is truly cylindrical, then it would have to overblow only
> odd-numbered harmonics.  Is this the case???

No, and the English Baritone is not cylindrical. Like the Cornet it's about
50% cylindrical, 50% Conical.
 

> Someone once told me that the cornet is cylindrical.  It's not, is it?

Nope. Again, Half & Half.

Tom

> -Gregg
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
> ----------------------
> end contrabass list
>

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

From: LeliaLoban@aol.com
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 12:46:15 EDT
Subject: Re: "contrabass" definition?
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

  Gregg Bailey wrote,
>   I like to associate wind instrument pitches to organ stop pitches.  >

I do too, but it's dangerous.  Check into the various available dictionaries of pipe organ stops and you'll soon discover a linguistic nightmare.  Some of the confusion results from faulty or misunderstood translations, some from disputes over what should be defined as the *real* pipe X, and some from ... what, sheer perversity, maybe?!

For instance, "Bombarde" can refer to the old mouth-blown reed instrument family or it can, as someone here already suggested, refer to military ordnance: basically anything deep, loud and booming.  Some dictionaries define "contra-bombarde" as 16' bass reed pipes on the Great, or 16' reeds on the Pedal, or 32' reeds on the Pedal, or 32' reeds on the great, or open flue pipes (of either length, on either Great or Pedal) with a distinctive, hollow "boom" to them.  I've seen spec sheets with contra-bombardes on the Positive and even in the Swell, although not on the Choir yet...!  ;-)  That would be some choir!  ("Coro Diaboloco"?)  In the early 20th century, some organ makers started calling their bourdon basses "bombarde" just to try to make the point that *their* bourdons didn't cough up a 12th the way the earlier bourdons often did, especially on old mechanical organs modified to use electro-pneumatic wind chests with increased wind pressure.  And there's way less confusion about bombardes than there is about many other stops.  Try sorting out the Rohrflutes sometime.  About the only thing they've got in common is the chimney.  Usually.

Adam Kent-Isaac wrote (on "Re: Everything"):
>>well, keep in mind that back in those days=85let's just face it, people weren't as smart as we are today. They didn't really care what something was called. The technique of "just name it something that sounds good" has been carried over to today's cheaper electric keyboards, whith settings like "Electric Guitar" that sound like a harpsichord, or "Cello" which sounds like a tenor sax, etc.>>

Oh, we're just as dippy as our ancestors.  The pipe organ confusion continues to this day.  No use fighting it.  The pipe names are, at best, no more than rough guidelines to what the pipes actually sound like.

In writing Passacaglia and Fugue (a novel in progress), I had to design a large, fictional tracker organ -- only on paper, I hasten to add.  I couldn't build a pipe organ if my life depended on it.  But I needed to put together one of those disposition lists, the type that appear in liner notes of organ recordings, for my own use.  I may attach the list to the manuscript as an Appendix.  What a mess.  I spent weeks "building" that wretched machine on paper and ended up with about 50 footnotes explaining what these pipes actually do on this particular (fictional) organ, as opposed to what they do on other (real) organs.  I sent the draft disposition to my uncle the pro organist (the one who died last month), and asked him for criticisms and suggestions.  He said my list didn't look any weirder than the spec sheets on some of the organs he'd actually played.  Damn!

In self-defense, I ended up having the bass-obsessed organ designer give idiosyncratic names of his own to pipes he considered particularly significant.  I called his biggest stop the "Temporale Gravissimo" ("thunderstorm gravissimo") just so I could quit wading through everybody's spec sheets, comparing Salvatore Forsennato's 64' rank to real ones and justifying this and explaining that.  I mean, there's a limit to how many footnotes a publisher, let alone a reader, if any, would tolerate.  There's a limit to how many footnotes *the writer* will tolerate, even in an Appendix, where one suspends normal rules of narration.  Also, the rank seems more sinister, mysterious and impressive if I don't explain it too much and instead just hint around that Forsennato somehow did things *differently* than mundane people did them.  I strongly suspect that this assertion of the builder's individualism may lie behind quite a lot of the more fanciful *real* pipe organ rank names, too.  (Anyway, since I'm not a real organ designer, a certain degree of vagueness seems only prudent:  The less I explain, the fewer mistakes the reader can pounce on....)

Anybody who wants to wade through organ stop nomenclature might start with these books:
 

Aside from the long catalogues of stops in these volumes, most of the books on organ construction also provide lists of stops as appendices, along with detailed discussions of advantages and disadvantages of some of them.  Morbid fascination in this type of research....  Best of luck in sorting it all out.

Lelia
---------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Izzo" <jeanvaljean@ntsource.com>
Subject: Re: "contrabass" definition?
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 14:19:57 -0500
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

Lelia & all,
>>Gregg Bailey wrote,
>>   I like to associate wind instrument pitches to organ stop pitches.  >

>I do too, but it's dangerous.  Check into the various available dictionaries
>of pipe organ stops and you'll soon discover a linguistic nightmare.

Not just on the Organ, either. A few years back some "genius" labelled the
Bb Flute, a "Tenor" Flute. That means that the Tenor is just a whole step
below the Soprano (in C) & a minor third ABOVE the Alto (in G).
No too smart.

Tom
 

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

Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 11:41:32 -0700
From: Grant Green <gdgreen@contrabass.com>
Subject: *Really* low frequencies...
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

There is an article in the September 11, 1999 issue of New Scientist about very low frequencies found in planetary resonances.  Apparently, the Earth itself resonates at a number of pitches ranging from 2 to 7 mHz (i.e., 0.002 to 0.007 Hz), 16 octaves below middle C according to the article (http://www.newscientist.com:80/ns/19990911/theplanett.html).  The
waves are not caused by earthquakes or aftershocks, and in fact can be detected only during quiet periods between quakes.  The amplitude is so low that the authors estimate the energy of the waves as totalling 500 W for the entire planet.  The current theory is that the waves are caused by variations in air pressure: the Earth as planetary aeolian harp....

Grant

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Grant Green            gdgreen@contrabass.com
                     http://www.contrabass.com
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
---------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 14:46:07 -0400
From: Francois Villon <feodor@informaxinc.com>
Subject: Re: *Really* low frequencies...
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com
 

So ancients were right... 'tis music of the spheres...

> There is an article in the September 11, 1999 issue of New Scientist
> about very low frequencies found in planetary resonances.
> Apparently, the Earth itself resonates at a number of pitches ranging
> from 2 to 7 mHz (i.e., 0.002 to 0.007 Hz), 16 octaves below middle C
> according to the article
> (http://www.newscientist.com:80/ns/19990911/theplanett.html).  The
> waves are not caused by earthquakes or aftershocks, and in fact can
> be detected only during quiet periods between quakes.  The amplitude
> is so low that the authors estimate the energy of the waves as
> totalling 500 W for the entire planet.  The current theory is that
> the waves are caused by variations in air pressure: the Earth as
> planetary aeolian harp....
>
> Grant
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Grant Green            gdgreen@contrabass.com
>                      http://www.contrabass.com
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> ----------------------
> end contrabass list
---------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Izzo" <jeanvaljean@ntsource.com>
Subject: Re: *Really* low frequencies...
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 14:51:50 -0500
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

Hi Grant,

> There is an article in the September 11, 1999 issue of New Scientist
> about very low frequencies found in planetary resonances.
> Apparently, the Earth itself resonates at a number of pitches ranging
> from 2 to 7 mHz (i.e., 0.002 to 0.007 Hz), 16 octaves below middle C
 

Now, THAT.....is low!
Too bad the human ear can't hear it.
We'd have to build a CCCCCCCC Quadruple Double Sub-Contrabass Tuba to even
approximate that pedal tone.

hmmmmmmmmm (rubbing goatee). :-)

Thanks,

Tom
 

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

From: Heliconman@aol.com
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 16:29:16 EDT
Subject: Re: *Really* low frequencies...
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

In a message dated 9/28/99 3:10:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
feodor@informaxinc.com writes:

> So ancients were right... 'tis music of the spheres...
>
>  > There is an article in the September 11, 1999 issue of New Scientist
>  > about very low frequencies found in planetary resonances.
>  > Apparently, the Earth itself resonates at a number of pitches ranging
>  > from 2 to 7 mHz (i.e., 0.002 to 0.007 Hz), 16 octaves below middle C
>  > according to the article
>  > (http://www.newscientist.com:80/ns/19990911/theplanett.html).  The
>  > waves are not caused by earthquakes or aftershocks, and in fact can
>  > be detected only during quiet periods between quakes.  The amplitude
>  > is so low that the authors estimate the energy of the waves as
>  > totalling 500 W for the entire planet.  The current theory is that
>  > the waves are caused by variations in air pressure: the Earth as
>  > planetary aeolian harp....
>  >
>  > Grant

Didn't someone record some of these deepest frequencies from space and
transpose them up several octaves to record an album in the 1970s? Never got
to hear it, but I remember a review of it.
---------------------------------------------------------

From: Heliconman@aol.com
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 16:43:48 EDT
Subject: Re: *Really* low frequencies...BBBb Tuba
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

In a message dated 9/28/99 3:01:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
jeanvaljean@ntsource.com writes:

> > There is an article in the September 11, 1999 issue of New Scientist
>  > about very low frequencies found in planetary resonances.
>  > Apparently, the Earth itself resonates at a number of pitches ranging
>  > from 2 to 7 mHz (i.e., 0.002 to 0.007 Hz), 16 octaves below middle C
>
>  Now, THAT.....is low!
>  Too bad the human ear can't hear it.
>  We'd have to build a CCCCCCCC Quadruple Double Sub-Contrabass Tuba to even
>  approximate that pedal tone.
>
>  hmmmmmmmmm (rubbing goatee). :-)
>
>  Thanks,
>
>  Tom

AND you'd need a REALLY BIG set of chops and lungs to play that tuba! I had
the chance to play the Besson BBBb tuba in the Harvard University Band room
this year  and found that hyperventilation came very quickly. I was using my
own regular size mouthpiece with a sousaphone neck as an adapter as the
subcontrabass tuba mouthpiece has been STOLEN. It is recommended that its
player should be a distance swimmer or marathon runner for the purposes of
building lung capacity!
By the way, if you're in the neighborhood of Harvard Square (Cambridge, MA),
contact band director Tom Everett about visiting the beast. As Tom says, "Be
prepared to be humiliated." It is practically unplayable. I suspect the BBBb
tuba in the archives of Carl Fischer, New York on Bleecker Street is the same way.
The phone number for the Harvard Band is (617) 496-2263. You'll probably need
to make an appointment.
Heliconman@aol.com
---------------------------------------------------------

From: "Tom Izzo" <jeanvaljean@ntsource.com>
Subject: Re: *Really* low frequencies...BBBb Tuba
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 17:26:22 -0500
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

> In a message dated 9/28/99 3:01:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> jeanvaljean@ntsource.com writes:
>
NO! Grant Green typed:

> > > There is an article in the September 11, 1999 issue of New Scientist
> >  > about very low frequencies found in planetary resonances.
> >  > Apparently, the Earth itself resonates at a number of pitches ranging
> >  > from 2 to 7 mHz (i.e., 0.002 to 0.007 Hz), 16 octaves below middle C
> >
> >
I replied with:

> >  Now, THAT.....is low!
> >  Too bad the human ear can't hear it.
> >  We'd have to build a CCCCCCCC Quadruple Double Sub-Contrabass Tuba to even
> >  approximate that pedal tone.
> >
> >  hmmmmmmmmm (rubbing goatee). :-)
> >
> >  Thanks,
> >
> >  Tom
>
> AND you'd need a REALLY BIG set of chops and lungs to play that tuba! I had
> the chance to play the Besson BBBb tuba in the Harvard University Band room
> this year  and found that hyperventilation came very quickly. I was using my
> own regular size mouthpiece with a sousaphone neck as an adapter as the
> subcontrabass tuba mouthpiece has been STOLEN. It is recommended that its
> player should be a distance swimmer or marathon runner for the purposes of
> building lung capacity!

What's your regular size mp?
 

> By the way, if you're in the neighborhood of Harvard Square (Cambridge, MA),
> contact band director Tom Everett about visiting the beast. As Tom says, "Be
> prepared to be humiliated." It is practically unplayable.

hahahahahahaah I'll take that challenge.
It can't be any worse than a Contrabass Digeridoo (16' long 4" ID pipe).

 I suspect the BBBb
> tuba in the archives of Carl Fischer, New York on Bleecker Street is the same
> way.

Horrors! Carl Fischer closed it's doors for good, this year. Where would
that instrument be, now?!

> The phone number for the Harvard Band is (617) 496-2263. You'll probably need
> to make an appointment.

Thanks.

Tom

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

Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 14:58:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Adam Kent-Isaac <lokibassoon@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: musical interests
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com
 
 

 Allow me please, to clarify what "mass-produced"
means (to me.) I admit I should have used a different
word. What I mean is that Heckel is capable of making
Heckelphones, and they make them, even if only several
are produced per year. And that if you wanted one from
Heckel, there is a way to get one. No, it's certainly
not easy, but it is possible. Besides, what's "Mass"
mean to you? Mass is always relative to how many of an
object are there to begin with. There is no set
defenition of "mass-produced." You could say "mass
produced means that they make lots of them" but, then
I'd ask you, "what's 'lots?' If you start with 114,
then making 3 or four a year is lots. If there are
already 1,000,000 Heckelphones, then making 1,000 is
"lots."

-Adam
 

Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
---------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 15:16:58 -0700 (PDT)
From: Adam Kent-Isaac <lokibassoon@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Low brass resonance!
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

 Just a few days ago at a concert, during an
intermission I borrowed Steven's tuba and put my bari
sax mouthpiece on it. My God, it was low. I found it
odd that the embouchure when playing a brass with a
bari mouthpiece must be much tighter than when playing
a bari. Almost like a clarinet embouchure. I couldn't
produce notes on it, really, just a few sounded okay
and the rest were shaky or inaudible.
 Likewise, Steven put his mouthpiece on my bari. It
actually sounded okay; i mean you could hear the notes
and distinguish them as such.
 It was great fun, until (I am not making this up) I
dropped my bari mouthpiece on the floor and broke it.

-Adam
 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
---------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 15:25:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: Adam Kent-Isaac <lokibassoon@yahoo.com>
Subject: Tom Izzo
Reply-To: contrabass@contrabass.com

I can't believe Tom Izzo has been on this list only a
few days and is probably as of now its most important
contributor. I applaud Tom for his inriguing comments
to the List as well as for putting up with stupid
comments about his "trombone addiction."

-Adam
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for f

 
Next Digest ->
Previous Digest <-
Index
Top