Difference in MAW valve?

[tjrwls907]

I am planning to wear MAW's valve on the 2165 of the current melton.
Can you tell the difference between the original valve from the instrument company and the valve of MAW??
Currently I'm considering buying this.
If you know any differences, please let me know!

[OhioTubaGuy]

I can’t help, but would love to hear some answers too.

[OhioTubaGuy]

A helpful video was posted by Chris Olka on a different forum:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?si=qdQUgtD ... 5nnjVxlzEE

[Lee Stofer]

Martin Wilk noticed, like many of us, that manufacturers have compromised piston valve ports in order to create shorter-stroke
valves - a notable exception being the old York 91 6/4 BBb, where Martin noticed that the stroke was a little longer, and the ports
were all fully-round throughout the piston, and he also really liked the sound and response of full-round ports. So, he developed the
first truly different tuba piston since Conn's short-action valves. instead of Conn's intentional non-round ports, Martin created a hard
nickel center port, open like a rotor port. With the port being very hard, he could then insert slightly longer upper- and lower ports,
and ball them out round, going around the center port instead of bulging into it, and he had built a valve that had both the desired
stroke and full-round ports. The immediacy of the response is enough different from that of a traditional valve that there is a slight
learning curve, although it is exciting to learn to play your instrument as a much better instrument.

On my Stofer 4/4 CC tuba, I have been using the MAW pistons and the MAW rotor as original equipment for several years now. The pistons
enhance the basic qualities of the instrument, and the MAW rotor opens up the lower register unlike anything else I've ever played. If
I were buyng a new piston-valve tuba, I would definitely want to have MAW valves in it if possible.