TubeNet

Is it for aesthetic reasons, or are there acoustical properties that make each finish different?

I believe that the two finishes are offered to encourage senseless arguments on TubeNet.

Really, finish should be one of the last things you consider when purchasing an instrument

Do you mean lacquered brass? Would you beleive I just stripped the lacquer off a SILVER Conn 15J yesterday? (no kidding!) It looks and plays lots better now (just kidding)

Chuck(G) wrote: Really, finish should be one of the last things you consider when purchasing an instrument

Oops. I didn't mean to say finish, but is there a big difference between brass and silver plate?

pulseczar wrote:

Chuck(G) wrote: Really, finish should be one of the last things you consider when purchasing an instrument

Oops. I didn't mean to say finish, but is there a big difference between brass and silver plate?

Not so anyone can tell. Silverplate's, what--about 10-15 microns thick on modern instruments? You'd get a bigger difference if you greased your tuba up with suntan lotion--no kidding.

If you really don't feel strongly about the look of silver vs. brass, save your money. Buy the horn that plays the best for you.

The old lacquer vs silver debate...

This has been discussed to death many times.

1) any difference in sound is so small that nobody will notice
2) most of the difference is perceived, ie. if you think silver sounds brighter, it might be brighter because that's the sound that will be in your head
3) some people think lacquer looks better than silver, some people think the opposite

I would find the following questions more relevant:
1) which finish is more durable? Longer lasting?
2) how does each finish react while under repair? Soldering?
3) which finish keeps a higher resale value?

One thing we know for sure is, lacquer tubas are cheaper than silver plated tubas.

Don't count out raw/bare brass tubas... they might not be pretty, but they still sound as good (or maybe a little better) than lacquer/silver.

I had an old beaten up tuba that had a really bad lacquer job that I had silver plated. When I brought it to play, I was told that it sounded so much better. I was ready for this. I recorded a certain passage on a cassette recorder (this was several years ago) before the work was done and then played it again afterwards, then played them back. No difference. But it sure looked pretty!

It's just a shiney piece of brass.

Or silver . . . .

schlepporello wrote:OK, here's my official "Schlepporello Mis-information Rant".
Disclaimer (All the following information is intended to be taken "Tongue-in-cheek" and has no "real" merit)

1. Lacquer is ALWAYS better than silver.

2. Rotary valves are ALWAYS better than piston valves.

3. All tubas should only be available keyed in BBb because that's what's best.

4. If it doesn't have a Miraphone logo on the bell, it ain't a tuba. It's just a shiney piece of brass.

Which just means that, as a child, Schlep was attacked by a silver piston Meinl CC...

schlepporello wrote:Just don't come crying to me when they corner and taunt you. And they always travel in groups of three.

Two... down... but... the third... just won't ... quit!
Send money... please!

quinterbourne wrote: Don't count out raw/bare brass tubas... they might not be pretty, but they still sound as good (or maybe a little better) than lacquer/silver.

One thing is for certain in my books... bare brass looks better than crummy lacquer any day! I prefer raw brass 'cause I play almost every day and don't want to worry about scratches. My horns spend most of their time out of the bag or case.

TubaTinker wrote:

quinterbourne wrote: Don't count out raw/bare brass tubas... they might not be pretty, but they still sound as good (or maybe a little better) than lacquer/silver.

One thing is for certain in my books... bare brass looks better that crummy lacquer any day! I prefer raw brass 'cause I play almost every day and don't want to worry about scratches. My horns spend most of their time out of the bag or case.

Yeah, and you tend to spend more time playing and less time polishing, wiping fingerprints and being generally over-protective on bare brass horns. Plus, bare brass horns are cheaper than their lacquer/silver counterparts.

bloke wrote:.... I am a director of a Bb band.

I must've tooken a dumb pill this morning. You're gonna have tu 'splain that one to me. I don't git it!

bloke wrote:I think I may have posted it in the wrong thread.

How would you do that? Sounds technical.

bloke wrote:I think I may have posted it in the wrong thread.

I believe that Bloke is cross-threaded:

<img src="http://badattitudes.com/MT/archives/nut_&_bolt.gif">

bloke wrote:... "a bit of detective work regarding this guy's name should sum it all up, as far as you guys are concerned..."

That's naughty

Schilke supposedly built three trumpets as identical as he could and left one bare brass, silver plated the second, and lacquered the third. Not surprisingly (Have you ever seen a lacquered Schilke?), he concluded there was no difference between the bare brass and the silver plate, but that there was a deadening of sound from the lacquer. I want to know how much and how thick lacquer he put on that one trumpet. My tuba also sounds different when I wrap it in a blanket and shove a pillow down the bell as well! New lacquers applied as an extremely thin coat and/or "electro-sprayed," (whatever the real term is) can't have that much effect, if any, on a horn. I must say that the lacquer on my Besson has not been scraped off. It has come off the old fashioned way: 35 years of wear, use, abuse and repairs before I got it!

I go for the sound only, so I have lacuered, silvered, gilded, and raw brass instruments in all sorts of alloys.

The silvered ones go black, the raw brasses go brown, and some of the others stay just about beige. So I guess I am in for playing some Ellington.

Klaus Smedegaard Bjerre,
who went white glowing with rage, when a repairman just "happened" to demonstrate a new impregnated polishing cotton on my Zelenka of Praha large bell flugelhorn, which had come with a 60 or 80 years old very even and very beautiful patina to its raw brass.

Regarding the Schilke thing...

Having lived a previous life as a serious trumpet player, I remember very clearly the differences you get between the sounds of horns of various finishes (or non-finishes). It is much easier to detect on trumpets.

The differences seem to disappear on larger horns though. Anyway even at their greatest effect, the silver vs laquer thing is one of the least important variables on a horn. In a world where you have to worry about bore size, wrap, mouthpieces, bell diameter, valve stroke, etc., there is just no reason to discuss the finish.

I like to tell the story of a trumpet teacher I had way back when named Dave Coleman. He was doing a small ensemble gig and wouldn't you know it, he forget his piccolo trumpet in the car. Well, when the piece came up that had the piccolo part, he picked up his Bb and played it on the big horn. I wish I had taped that, because you could not tell the difference in sound between what he did on the big horn and what the piccolo was supposed to sound like. If I had not been looking right at him, I would have sworn that it was his little Schilke picc. Blew me away. I'll bet it wasn't easy to do, but he did it.

Do you think then that it mattered what finish the horn had? You yourselves as players probably account for 90% of the variables in sound that you produce. Doesn't leave much room for mechanical stuff. Leaves almost no room for talking about finish.

Sometimes I think our preoccupation with the minutia of the mechanics of the tuba is a method we sometimes use to explain away our deficiencies as players. That inludes me too. Sometimes it matters. Most times it doesn't.

Go practice.