Gronitz BBb ???

[iiipopes]

Have you searched these threads as well as the old Tubenet?

[Rick Denney]

Have you searched these threads as well as the old Tubenet?

Which threads?

I recall questions similar to this one: What's a PBK like? The answer is, nobody really knows. I don't recall ever seeing a first-hand description of a PBK, or that anyone who has posted on Tubenet has even seen one in person.

The PCK is an unqualified success, so one assumes the Bb version would be excellent. So far, though, nobody has been prepared to shell out the $9000 (or whatever--possibly more now) it takes to buy one, and then wait six months to take what you get.

Bb tuba players often have more disposable income than professional musicians who play C, merely because they have other careers that provide more discretionary income. But C-playing pro is buying a tool for his trade, while the Bb-playing amateur is buying tool for his hobby. That imposes a different set of priorities.

The Gronitz PBK is modeled on an American tuba design with front-action pistons. Thus, I don't think it will be popular with German orchestral professionals who use Bb tubas in their work. They tend to go with the traditional German rotary tubas, such as the Meinl-Weston Model 195, the Rudy Meinl, Alexander, and so on.

Rick "who thinks the PBK has great potential based on the PCK, for someone prepared to speculate" Denney

[hubert]

Last year I have visited the Gronitz workshop and played their tubas. Of course you have to try yourself and be your own judge, whether such an instrument would fit you or not.
What I feel entitled to say is this: the Gronitz Bb belongs to the top segment of custom tubas (where you find Hirsbrunner, Melton, R. Meinl, Mirafone, Willson and the like). Their price is rather modest, compared to their quality and most of their "competitors". Could be a reason to visit Hamburg
Hubert

[iiipopes]

What I meant was, on this forum there are two search engines. One at the top right for current threads, and one at the top left for archived threads of the older version of this forum. I sincerely hope everyone will use them first to save duplication. For example, I recently had a question on old PT mouthpieces. Instead of starting a new thread, I searched, and found my answer.

[Lew]

Bb tuba players often have more disposable income than professional musicians who play C, merely because they have other careers that provide more discretionary income.

This has to be one of the funniest things I've read here in a long time. I literally laughed out loud!

Is that because it's true?

[Joe Baker]

Bb tuba players often have more disposable income than professional musicians who play C, merely because they have other careers that provide more discretionary income.

This has to be one of the funniest things I've read here in a long time. I literally laughed out loud!

I must be missing the joke. Why would this strike you as funny? It so obviously true that you surely don't find it ridiculous -- do you?
__________________________________
Joe Baker, who usually gets the joke, but not this time...

[Donn]

I must be missing the joke. Why would this strike you as funny? It so obviously true that you surely don't find it ridiculous -- do you?

Maybe delightfully ironic. For ridiculous funny, someone could gather informal statistics on income vs. key, and post it here as advice when people ask "Bb or C?", "Eb or F?", etc.

In the hope of making any very modest contribution to the nominal topic - Gronitz features a couple of "Kaiser bass" models on their web site, a rotary BZK along with the PBK. Their roster of players shows 3 PBKs and 0 BZKs, though.

[Rick Denney]

Nothing sinister was implied. Just found it humorous!

I'm sorry if my lack of precision caused you to spray your morning coffee.

But allow me to pursue this:

Excepting those who have family wealth or who include income from their spouses, and excepting income from other sources, how many professional tuba players have an income greater than, say, $120,000 a year?

My guess would be zero or very nearly so.

How many BBb tuba players have a net income greater than $120,000 a year?

My guess would be significantly greater than zero, in terms of numbers. Percentages don't matter--Gronitz will only make a handful of tubas every year in any case.

Pick your own threshold, but the second number will always be greater than the first, if for no other reason than BBb amateurs vastly outnumber CC pros.

Sure, there are BBb amateurs who are on the other end of that scale, including some who can barely afford any instrument. But I wasn't talking about them. I was talking about who would likely put up $9000 for a tuba.

But even though I stand by the accuracy of that call, I still said that CC pros will spend more for their instrument, because it's the tool of their trade and gets a much higher priority. That was my explanation for why there are no PBK's on which to base first-hand opinions by the Tubenet Freak Jury.

Rick "who would not pay $9000 for a tuba, especially sight unseen" Denney

[Daryl Fletcher]

[Rick Denney]

I think you should buy a PBK, strictly for scientific research (try getting that past the wife) and report back to the group. You'll have to take delivery in Hamburg to be sure it is a good example. There's other great shopping over there along the way, so she may see the benefits (I know mine does).

Understand, no coffee was sacrificed in the name of BBb tubas.

I'm glad to hear your coffee was safe.

My interest in science is based on love, not money (except what I do at work), so I would be happy to conduct the test, but only if you pay for it.

Remember, I'm the one who paid a little over $4000 for a tuba with years of abuse written all over it. That took more than a little wifely indulgence.

Rick "without much money in the toy account in any case" Denney

[iiipopes]

Rick, please stick to tuba playing and related issues and leave the socioeconomic analysis to sociologists and economists, so you don't lose your resident genius status. Of the BBb amateurs, of which I resemble that remark, how many are not limited in the pursuit of their career as are the limited number of symphonic tuba positions available? One reason I chose a non-music career is that very issue. Anybody who is qualified to do any number of most other careers have wide open numbers of positions, comparatively speaking, to go pursue it, even if they have to relocate, compared to the number of tuba positions available, which almost certainly involve relocation; probably overall there are even less professional symphonic positions available for all instruments combined than there are in any of the major sports leagues. So, unfortunately, there is no correlation, as the economic variables do not align for comparison, as there is no way to define a control group common to both.

[Rick Denney]

Rick, please stick to tuba playing and related issues and leave the socioeconomic analysis to sociologists and economists, so you don't lose your resident genius status.

You mean I have lost it yet? What's the point of having the status if you aren't willing to risk it? And remember that tubas are a hobby. People pay me to know other things, heh, heh.

Of the BBb amateurs, of which I resemble that remark, how many are not limited in the pursuit of their career as are the limited number of symphonic tuba positions available? One reason I chose a non-music career is that very issue. Anybody who is qualified to do any number of most other careers have wide open numbers of positions, comparatively speaking, to go pursue it, even if they have to relocate, compared to the number of tuba positions available, which almost certainly involve relocation; probably overall there are even less professional symphonic positions available for all instruments combined than there are in any of the major sports leagues. So, unfortunately, there is no correlation, as the economic variables do not align for comparison, as there is no way to define a control group common to both.

Thank you for falling into my point.

Rick "appreciative of the kind words" Denney

[Kevin Hendrick]

If a B-flat tuba is referred to (scientifically...??) as a BBb,

then is a C tuba referred to as a CCc?

¡Si!

[iiipopes]

Rick - I didn't say I made more than an orchestral tuba player (I make significantly less as a trade-off to live where "quality of life" cannot be equaled), only that there were more places to pursue other careers, especially without the need to relocate. If both sides of my family were not in a 50 mile radius from where I live, so my son had ready access to both sets of grandparents, one great grandparent, and uncles, aunts & cousins, to say nothing of one of the least expensive costs of living and great schools, and a growing cultural base, I'd definitely be doing something else, elsewhere. So I stick with my remarks.

[Rick Denney]

Rick - I didn't say...

...anything I disagreed with. My point was that even though BBb players include those with lots more disposable income than CC professionals, they still don't spend the kind of money that would bring PBK's to the U.S. so the rest of us could try them out.

The fact that you were able to choose where you live reinforced my point. So did your statement that the demand for CC professionals is sharply limited by the small number of paying orchestras. But it was a supporting point, not the main point.

Rick "thinking people are trying to apply a general statement to specific individuals against my intentions and words" Denney

[iiipopes]

Your point restated, I understand. As originally stated, that was not what came across when I read it. Let's see what did the redneck sheriff say, "What we have here...is a failure...to communicate."

[iiipopes]

Besides any speculation about why any particular amateur may not be buying the most expensive tubas, there is another reason, looking at it from the other direction, that helps the professional tuba players to buy more expensive instruments: tax deductibility as a tool of the trade. Depending on how you file, and in which country or state you live in, you may be able to deduct the whole purchase price, or may have to depreciate it on a schedule over time, but you still get to deduct it and get a break from the tax man, which most amateurs don't get to do, especially after the hobby schedule was discontinued and all hobby income and expenses had to be listed on a separate schedule C.

[Rick Denney]

Besides any speculation about why any particular amateur may not be buying the most expensive tubas, there is another reason, looking at it from the other direction, that helps the professional tuba players to buy more expensive instruments: tax deductibility as a tool of the trade.

I think it may still be possible for an amateur to deduct the cost of the instrument if it is used exclusively for tax-deductiable charitable activities. Most community bands have that status. I am going on conflicting accounts, and have not done this myself. But it would be a good question for a competent tax advisor.

It would be noted on Schedule A, which includes charitable contributions, not on Schedule C where a pro would list it as a capital purchase (for which the depreciation would be a business expense).

In both cases, the percentage of charitable (or business) use would have to be documented or otherwise justified in case of an audit.

I deduct all my out-of-pocket expenses for participating in my tax-deductible community band, particularly including mileage to and from activities.

There is still a line item on the 1040 for hobby income, by the way.

Rick "curious about this" Denney

[windshieldbug]

"See: CCc See?
¿Si?
¡Si!
¡Si!"

[iiipopes]

Yes, the line on the 1040 is still there, but the schedule is not. I don't know about the tax deductibility of dedicated use, since the amateur still retains control of the instrument, as opposed to donating the instrument, getting a schedule A deduction on the gift, and then using the instrument only at band functions.

Hey -- any Tubenet members accountants or tax advisors who can help on this one?