Talk:Tuba

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Echo has identified Tuba as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the Serbian language Wikipedia.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Musical Instruments, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Musical Instruments articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

Contents 1 Why it's called BBb 2 Include pictures of some of the different keyed tubas 3 The Eb tuba becomes a C tuba when concert pitch music is read 4 Bombardon 5 Major changes to Types and Construction 6 Links 7 cleanup 8 Playing range 9 Discussion of valves 10 Tuba in different languages 11 Notable Tubists 12 Vote: Proposed changes to the Notable Tubists section 13 Compensating system 14 Types and Constructions 15 Justin Williamson 16 Tuba Eating 17 Cimbasso 18 Drawing vs. Picture 19 BB♭, BBb, etc. 20 One of the largest low-brass instruments? 21 Tubists or tuba players? 22 Giant tuba? 23 Treble clef tuba 24 Very little relationship to Wagner tuba 25 Tenor Tuba? 26 Too much information? 27 Several general edits

[edit] Why it's called BBb

Can we please add a note about why it's called BBb? I got a decent explanation from my band teacher, but I figure I might want to let someone with more expertise handle it so that I don't confuse anybody. MToolen 03:31, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Done, 12-20-05, Rick Denney 05:25, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Include pictures of some of the different keyed tubas

It may be good to also include pictures of some of the different keyed tubas-- BBb, CC,Eb and F. It would also be good to have pictures of both the upright valve type, as already pictured, and the front action type.

Also, The hélicon may need to be mentioned with a picture as well.

Done, 12-20-05, Rick Denney 05:25, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The Eb tuba becomes a C tuba when concert pitch music is read

This is not true, unless somehow the tuba grows extra length of tubes.

It is true to say that in concert pitch different notes will be written for the sound, but the instrument itself remains the same. The author has misunderstood what the phrase "Eb tuba" means.

A C tuba is a minor 3rd below an Eb tuba when they play their fundamental. This is compensated, in concert pitch writing, by the use of different fingering (a C is played open on a C tuba, but 1/2 on an Eb). NigelHorne 12:35, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps this is supposed to refer to the idea that an Eb-pitched treble clef instrument can relatively easily play bass-clef concert pitch music as if it were treble-clef music, only adjusting the key signature? --Rschmertz 23:54, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Let's examine this to expose the whole story. Remember that Eb tuba music that is written in bass clef is written on concert pitch--just like F, CC, and BBb horns. However, Eb tuba music for converted trumpet players is written in G-clef, and is written a 13th higher than it sounds. It is like Baritone Saxophone music. So, if one were to see a "C" written on the first ledger line below the staff--middle C, one would play it open. What would sound would be the Eb on the first ledger line below the bass clef staff (I'll explore this more momentarily). Were one playing a CC horn and saw middle C written in G-clef, one would play it open as well, suggesting the equivalency. Unfortunately, the intended Eb would NOT come out; what would come out would be the C two ledger lines below the bass clef. The bottom line is that the stated equivalency is NOT true.

Getting back to parts written in G-clef for Eb horns, we can see that were one to read these parts as if they were in bass clef (and not transposing), one would play the intended pitches! One needs to remember to add three flats to the key signature, and there can be some tricky accidentals involving B, C, E, and F. I've had to play bari sax parts on tuba and alto sax parts on trombone, and it truly impresses those who don't realize how easy it is to do on the fly. --Weyandt 20:28, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bombardon

I think there's a problem in redirecting 'Bombardon' searches to the 'Tuba' article. I'm not saying that every esoteric and antique instrument should have an article, but uninformed readers might conclude that the bombardon was actually just a tuba. It might be right to write a few words about the ancestors of the tuba, or the use of the general name "tuba" for many instruments, and drop a word about the bombardon there. I'm just visiting from the hebrew wiki, working on musical articles there, so I don't want to push myself here. Udi Raz 17:34, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

put some susaphones in your site

I did :) [1]Udi Raz 21:53, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Major changes to Types and Construction

I have significantly revised the Types and Construction section to address a range of issues. The effects of valve type and finish are the subject of endless debate without authoritative conclusion, and I've reworded them to reflect that fact. I've clarified the length of the bugles, the meaning of the valves, and the reason why the instrument is sharp when the valves are used in combination. I've added a touch of history, the origin of the doubled letters (BBb and CC), and a range of other details including a mention of the helicon category and the sousaphone subset of that category.

Mainly, I expanded the statements about what pitches of instruments are used in what applications. The previous article was heavily based on a American practice and was not accurate for other parts of the world, and I have provided additional description.

The authority for the changes I made can largely be supported by The Tuba Family by Clifford Bevan (I have both first and second editions), A Treatise on the Tuba by Donald Stauffer, and thousands of communications both in person with well-known professionals and collectors and in the Tubenet forum. Rick Denney 05:25, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I've always understood that the double letters (in eg, BB♭ tuba) generally refer not to the pitch (an octave lower) but to the bore of the instrument (ie, BB has a wider bore, and hence a different tone). Is my understanding wrong? If so, to what extent? 195.217.52.130 19:48, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

My understanding comes from woodwinds, but I believe the octave interpretation is standard (i.e., B♭ bass clarinet, EE♭ contra-alto clarinet, BB♭ contrabass clarinet, EEE♭ octocontra-alto clarinet, and BBB♭ octocontrabass clarinet). Powers 12:36, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I've obviously had a mental aberration. I've long known that the same holds true of organ builders' names for organ pipes (eg, Middle C = 2' (because it's approx. 2 feet in length) = c'; Tenor C (the octave lower, despite what Wikipedia says) = 4' = c; Cello C (lowest string on the cello, two ledger lines below the bass clef) = 8' = C; 16-foot C = CC; and 32-foot C = CCC). Having now done a bit of research (OK, Googling), I've come across the following: http://oak.cats.ohiou.edu/~smithj10/Methods/week1b.html, which clearly explains the difference in pitch transpositions of the E-flat (octave and major 6th) and BB-flat (two octaves and a tone, or an octave and major 9th) tubas; in other words, the BB♭ is a fourth lower than the E♭, and explains the difference between bass and contrabass tubas. It now strikes me (somewhat belatedly, I admit) that all of these desciptors (ie, brass, woodwind and organ) are in line with Helmholtz's pitch notation method (under which the three octaves scale from Middle C downwards would be written c' b a g f e d C B A G F E D CC BB AA GG FF EE DD CCC). Perhaps this clarity could be included in the article? - it's sadly rather lacking at present IMHO. 195.217.52.130 19:45, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Links

Folks, please do not remove links for web pages unless they no longer exist. If there starts to be an issue where fans of specific pages start removing the links to other pages, I'll make it my mission in life to keep all the links off the page. You know who you are.Rick Denney 03:30, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] cleanup

This article could use some partitioning. There's a huge block of text for the one section, and that really needs to be divided into smaller sections by somebody who knows more than me about this insturment. --TexasDex 12:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I took a stab at it. The information is pretty comprehensive and hard to subdivide further than I did. Powers 14:50, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

There still appears to be some duplication (eg, the bit about C being the standard US instrument, with different instruments in the UK and Europe, is repeated more, though mainly less, verbatim a couple of paras later in the long "Types and construction" section. Can someone who knows about these things sort this out, please? Good luck!195.217.52.130 19:48, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Playing range

The playing range shown in the article does not state for which pitch of tuba it applies. For BBb tuba in the Brass Band repertoire it is quite often required to play below the concert Eb indicated in the article. A range down to the concert F two octaves below the bass clef stave is sometimes required (written as the G one and a half octaves below the treble clef stave in Brass Band notation). Eg The Night to Sing by Bramwell Tovey, published by Winwood Music, 2005. As the playing range is fundamental to an understanding of the instrument, perhaps a more extensive playing range should be indicated in the article or the playing range indicated for each pitch of tuba. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Harrisoc (talk • contribs) .

Hey, it sounds like you know a lot about it, and have valid reference material to boot! Now would be a great time to try editing an article yourself. If you have any questions, feel free to ask! Powers ^T 14:50, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment. I have downloaded the image file of the playing range and modified it however I am not sure of etiquette. Should I upload the file to replace the original file or discuss first with the creator of that file. Harrisoc 10:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. Well, the current file is over on Wikimedia Commons, so if you want to replace it, you'll need to go over there. That's not necessarily a bad thing; everything on Commons is released with a free-use license, and that includes the right to modify it. So no notification is necessary, assuming the new image is of similar quality. =) Just make sure that you update the description to say that you modified commons:User:Mezzofortist's image, what you changed in it, and maybe how you did it. Powers ^T 14:01, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I have modified the playing range image file of commons:User:Mezzofortist's (Range_tuba.png)and called it Range_tuba_extended.png (the original Range_tuba.png still exists in commons). I extended the lower range to pedal F and have followed the convention of Mezzofortist and displayed the F as a smaller note to indicate the possible lower range depending on type of instrument (eg BBb tuba). Harrisoc 12:45, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion of valves

I'd like to suggest deleting most of the "valves" section; that more appropriately explained in Brass instruments (or a Valve (brass instrument) article, if it exists, haven't checked). I think discussion on valves in this article should be limited to discussion that relates specifically or primarily to tubas. --Rschmertz 01:30, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Most of this section is fairly specific to tubas (thought trumpets and horns also have competing valve types). Those needing buying research will face this topic with tubas of even student quality, unlike other brass players. The only section that might be removed is the part that describes the oiling/maintenance of the two valve types. Rick Denney (talk) 07:36, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tuba in different languages

Is there a particular reason to list the names for Tuba in different languages? I don't see this done in WP articles on non-brass instruments (I've checked violin, viola, oboe) -- or of non-musical subjects, so why the brass instruments, particularly?

It is useful for classical musicians to know the names of the major instruments in a few languages: English, French, Italian and German -- that's probably it. That's the only possible justification I can think of for having this list at all. Adding any languages beyond that, and we're basically duplicating the "articles in other languages" list. Thoughts?--Rschmertz 04:21, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notable Tubists

Did some cleanup of the "notable tubists". This is by no means thorough, just an easy first step: Google search all the red-linked names (save the ones I already know) and eliminate the ones that return no results or only someone in some college ensemble.

This list probably needs to be pared down a lot more. The hard part will be figuring out who is truly notable. --Rschmertz 04:22, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I was just thinking the same thing. I've browsed through other instruments (Trumpet, Piano) and I've not seen any which include such a list on their page. I'm thinking it should be reduced and wrote in a paragraph form explaining what makes them notable (influential) and potentially make the list into another page (as in a List_of_et cetera page). akuyume^T_C 02:41, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vote: Proposed changes to the Notable Tubists section

I've created a draft of the notable tubists section, and I would like to submit it to a vote before making such a major change. The current draft is Talk:Tuba/proposedNotableTubists. Also, please add any tubists you feel are truly worthy and remove any you might feel are not. Mostly I've only removed redlinks and people whose bios barely mention the tuba. akuyume^T_C 02:36, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Support akuyume^T_C 02:36, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Support, and require some sort of documentation for further additions once implemented. Powers ^T 23:53, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Seeing as no one rejected this, I've made the change with Rschmertz (talk · contribs)'s addition [2].

akuyume^T_C 01:00, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

The notable Tubists section seems to me to be very US-centric. With the exceptions of Chuck and Walter Hilgers (and of course, Fletch) there are no non-US tubists on the list. Surely some mention should be made of e.g. Patrick Harrild (Principal for the LSO and arguably the best living British tubist)?

I'll take you at your word about the lack of non-US. Maybe we need a better clearinghouse. There is a List of classical trombonists; maybe we could have a similar list of tubists from which we could make a better selection. Just as a note, I wouldn't want to see the list get beyond 25 (10 might even be a better number), so we might have to cull out some of the Americans on the basis of "notable, but not quite notable enough", which is difficult. --Rschmertz 16:20, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Good point. Well, if people use appropiate categories, I was thinking that cat page could serve as a general list of tuba players in general, and then maybe another list of "somewhat notable" tuba players could exist, and then the most notable of them could be listed on this page. akuyume^T_C 01:41, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Compensating system

I think something about the compensating system for some tubas should be included, but past additions i have made have apparently not made sense so ill leave it to you..

Im not sure whether this just applies to EEb tubas but a compensating system means a better tone and pitching tool for the Tuba by adding extra tubing. This may be similar to 4th valve scenario but may be worth putting in, unsure.

-- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TubaEEb (talk • contribs) .

Compensating systems are already mentioned in the article; do a search for "compensat" in the article. Does that answer your question? --Rschmertz 18:29, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Thats fantastic, sorry, must of missed it.. TubaEEb 21:08, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Types and Constructions

What's your opinion on rewriting and seperating the section Types and Constructions? It really looks too long and should probably be split and written more concisely. akuyume^T_C 02:14, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree it is very long and not so great. I need some time (like maybe a wikibreak) to think about what exactly should be done (but if you go ahead and do something, you probably won't hear me screaming (unless you are in the tri-state area ;-))) --Rschmertz 05:42, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Well to take some of the pressure off, I've reached the conclusion of making a draft page so the community (read: you, me, and who ever else cares) can work on it. Here's what I've done. akuyume^T_C 00:16, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Things to do: write a new Types section, consolidate Valves and Finish subsections to the Construction section

[edit] Justin Williamson

I noticed that this man's name had been added. While he was known for his new style of tuba playing (arko playing)i'm not quite sure how good of a concer tubist he was. Still he should be kept.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.152.38.185 (talk • contribs) .

[edit] Tuba Eating

A person at BVSD continues vandalizing this page. They add in a bunch of false information about eating tubas, with a recipie and names of certain famous people, and the links are linked to pages such as homosexuality and Bob the Builder. This person uses different IP addresses from the school. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ockenbock (talk • contribs).

I have requested that this page be semi-protected. Nationalparks 02:31, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Which was denied. Nationalparks 04:39, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cimbasso

Should the Cimbasso article be related to this one? The Cimbasso article in Wikipedia is very short, and should be beefed up in any event.--Weyandt 15:15, December 4, 2006 (UTC)

Were you thinking in the "See Also" section, or in the "Related Instruments section of the sidebar?

Good question, anyway. I'd be more open to it being in the "See Also" section than in the "Related Instruments" box, but I'm not even sure about that. It does make me realize, though, that the article is pretty short on history. Ideally, there would be something in the article itself like "In many parts of Europe, the cimbasso was used in preference to the tuba for many years before the tuba became established blah blah blah". --Rschmertz 20:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I was referring to the "Related Instruments." I'm not a historian, and wasn't aware that cimbassos were more popular than tubas. This is surprising as well, given how "abrasive" a sound comes out a cimbasso (in my humble opinion).--Weyandt 20:28, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

In article about Tommy Johnson it's mentioned that he played cimbasso on many sessions, and was apparently notorious for doing so. One conductor asked him, "Tommy, are you playing that Italian horn? ... Well, don't!" So perhaps a related instrument or see also link wouldn't be unwarranted? — WiseKwai 06:49, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Drawing vs. Picture

I noticed that in the infobox there is a drawing of a tuba there. In my opinion, it also could be a baritone, euphonium, tenor horn, or alto horn, depending on the scale. It really isn't all that good - I mean, its a good drawing and all, but for an infobox at the top of the page (that everyone is going to see), wouldn't a tuba picture be better? Rick, I'm asking that you release the best pic of your York so we can have a good representation of a generic (albeit very nice) tuba. Thanks. NDCompuGeek 06:34, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] BB♭, BBb, etc.

Every now and then someone goes and changes the way tubas in different keys are notated in this article. We need to strive for consistency, and set a policy. Thus, I'll lay out the possible ways that a tuba key can be notated, with some comments on each, using "Double-B-flat" as the example:

• BBb - easy to write, and common practice for people writing about these things.
• BB-flat - also easy to write, though longer. I've seen the "-flat" notation used in other places, but never with a double letter, so while it may be used to indicate the key of a musical work, I'm not sure it's ever used to indicate the pitches of brass instruments.
• BB♭ - more accurate than BBb -- it's not really a little B, after all, it's "flat". Hard to type -- I don't know how to create it myself, only to copy-and-paste it. I also don't know if it will show up in all browsers.
• BB ♭ - same things as above apply, but with a space between the letters and the flat symbol. A minor stylistic difference currently used in most of this article, and in some other articles as well.

If anyone can think of other ways to do this notation, please add them to the list, right in-line (I reserve the right to take them out or modify them, though :-)). I'd vote for the "BB♭" option (flat-symbol, no space), and suggest that we recommend the "BBb" option for those who don't have the ability to create the flat symbol -- we can clean those up later.

That said, please don't make these sorts of stylistic changes without providing a reason. --Rschmertz 18:24, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

The Manual of Style has details for this; it prefers "BB-flat" or "BB♭" options over the "BBb." Hope this helps! MToolen 04:49, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Aha, I suspected there might be guidance on this somewhere out there. Unfortunately, it doesn't say whether we should forge ahead with the symbols that are unreadable to some (including me sometimes, depending on what computer I'm on) or stick with the "-flat" notation. --Rschmertz 05:18, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

-The flat sign for the signature DOES NOT show up on all browsers, instead showing up as a box. This may be confusing for the musically illiterate- Apr. 25 2007

The Manual of Style has been updated to allow use of {{music|flat}} or {{music|♭}} which improves browser compatibility for displaying the Unicode flat (♭). See Template:Music for more details.--Dbolton 17:04, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I noticed that all the flat symbols in the article displayed incorrectly except the unicode flat. Even in the other articles no music, the flat symbol is inconsistently displayed in my browser (Mozilla Firefox on a system with an excellent selection of fonts). For this reason, I have edited the article to consistently use the written "flat" instead of the symbol. It doesn't look as good, but it looks a lot better than an empty box.Rick Denney (talk) 07:53, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Did you try the templates described above to see if they render well in your browsers? --Rschmertz (talk) 08:17, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] One of the largest low-brass instruments?

The article begins, "The tuba is one of the largest of low-brass instruments". Is there a larger one? — Rico 02:00, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps this should be edited somehow to reflect that it is the largest of brass instruments in the modern symphony. While contrabass varieties of trumpets or horns may exist, they are rarely used. Ngaskill 22:24, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but they DO exist and are referred to in the article. 25 April 2007

While larger instruments may exist, they are very uncommmon. Besides, if you want to count the big trumpet's or the big French Horns as well, there are still the extremely large tubas discussed in the article. These are bigger than any pictures of the trumpets or horns i could find on google.

[edit] Tubists or tuba players?

Removed cfdnotice, cfd has completed. --Kbdank71 16:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC) In fact, the discussion covers whether the main category and all of its sub-categories should be Category:Tubists or Category:Tuba players, and so on. Please take any views you have to the discussion page there, not here. Bencherlite 09:35, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I think that people that know what they are talking about should comment, because there are things being written like, "'tubists' seems clearly incorrect ... to judge by the ... comments."
In the absence of knowledgeable discussion, an outcome based on ignorance can result.
I'm not getting the impression that most of the participants are serious tubists. -- Rico 21:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Giant tuba?

Is this a contrabass tuba? Or a subcontrabass tuba? http://www.oddmusic.com/gallery/om14710.html 131.123.231.143 18:04, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

This would be one of the Gustav Besson subcontrabass referred to by the article. Here's another [3]. akuyume^T_C 07:34, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Treble clef tuba

I have corrected where treble clef tuba sounds. Parsifal1961 19:29, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Very little relationship to Wagner tuba

What tubas and Wagner tubas have in common:

• a) some letters in their name (a, b, t, u)
• b) both are brass instruments

That's all.

Based on a), the English horn should be listed in the the "Infobox Instrument" of French horn. Which clearly makes no sense at all.

Based on b), the trumpet, trombone, French horn etc. should also be listed in Tuba infobox.

Listing the Flugelhorn would actually make much more sense than listing the Wagner tuba, because it actually belongs to the same subgroup of brass instruments as the tuba and the euphonium do, because they both have the same, wide flare ratio. As opposed to French horn and Wagner tuba which have a medium flare and the trumpet and trombone, which have a small flare or (nearly) conical bore.

The Wagner tuba is NOT a tuba. It is a misnomer. It is basically a baritone French horn. It is even built so that you have to finger its valves with the left hand - like those of a French horn. It is played with a French horn mouthpiece by French horn players and belongs to the French horn section of the orchestra.

Glad we cleared that up. --Cancun771 17:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

The wagner tuba is neither a french horn, neither a tuba, it’s a wagner tuba!!! It’s related to the french horn because it is played with a french horn type mouthpiece. It’s related to the tuba because it has the same bore (or "wide flare ratio" as you name it) than a tuba. The wagner tuba is not a baritone french horn. The E♭ bass wagner tuba has (approx.) the same range of a E♭ bass tuba, and the B♭ tenor wagner tuba has (approx.) the same range of a B♭ euphonium. Ten Islands 18:23, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tenor Tuba?

I take issue with this statement:

The euphonium is sometimes referred to as a tenor tuba (the only practical difference lies in the presence of vibrato, which is traditional for euphonium, but is to be avoided on parts scored for tenor tuba)

It is my understanding that the tenor tuba is a different instrument, even if its parts are almost universally performed on euph. Concerning the use of vibrato, I'm completely unfamiliar with the idea that euphonium parts have vibrato, while tenor tuba parts don't. On the contrary, I've played many "euphonium" parts in a band setting without vibrato (like most instrumentalists, I avoid it in ensemble playing).

Take a shuftie at this, mate: Talk:Euphonium#Holst.27s_The_Planets--Cancun771 16:34, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I suppose I should have read a little farther down the paragraph, which gives more specific use of the term 'tenor tuba.' Still, I think the above passage is misleading. --Tjonp 18:11, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I eliminated the paranthetical note on vibrato, and rearraged the paragraph. --Tjonp 15:30, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Too much information?

Following the paragraph on intonation problems without additional valves, I have considered adding the following sentence:

"Such problems also occur an octave up in the euphonium and baritone horn without extra valves."

Would that be too off-subject for the article? I'm still not good at being bold. Thanks in advance! MToolen (talk) 17:03, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Several general edits

There were several items in the article that showed "citation needed". I have attempted to provide sufficient discussion to confirm the statement or I've removed the apparent opinion.

One opinion I removed was that there is consensus about lacquered instruments have a brighter (or less bright) sound. There is no such consensus, and I've heard it argued both ways.

I added a short history section. The regional preferences for pitches and valve types make a lot more sense in the historical context.

I also added octave designations where practical, and specific frequencies, to clarify the discussions about pitches. I revised the discussion about false tones and moved it further down in the article.

In order to standardize on something, and in order to make the article display correctly on my browser, I edited all the flat symbols to the written word. If we decide to go another way, we can just search on "flat" and change it.

Nothing jumped out at me as an obvious way to divide up the types and construction, but I agree we ought to think about it. Rick Denney (talk) 08:01, 27 February 2008 (UTC)