TubeNet

The Kalison manufacturers are a little notorious for inconsistencies between horns: sometimes they made great horns, sometimes not-so-great. Personally, I've never had a problem with the high Ab on my DS.
I've played two Pro 2000s while trying out horns, and the ones I played basically feel like a jumbo-sized DS. The sound is a little bigger and darker, there is a little less resistance, and the horn takes more air. I think the good ones can hang with most of the 5/4 horns in circulation today.

.02

Wade’s posting is interesting for me, as I didn’t know about the missing and/or problematic notes of these Kalison models. This type of problem occurs in odd places. Mostly among low-end horns, but also in high end instruments.

Some small/medium Bach Stradivarius trombones don’t have the 9th partial Bb in 3rd position, which is very impractical for the upper trombone parts in pro level big band charts.

The Geyer wrap double horns often don’t have the high written Bb on the Bb-side (12th partial on 1st valve).

Horns often are built with too short valve loops so that players have to pull their slides accordingly. That leaves two short portions of the valve loops with an augmented bore. These wider sections are entered and left over sharp steps. Especially the retrograde steps are prone to create turbulences. Many horns and some trumpets have “reversed” tuning slides to avoid retrograde steps.

One person in the horn community (I don’t remember whether maker or repairman) measured the pulls of the slides on a given Geyer type horn. He then cut appropriate lengths of tubing to fill the wider gaps in the valves. Voila! The high Bb was there ready to be played.

Wade traces the Kalison problems with some notes to the valve section, because it is identical on the two models with bad notes. The problem actually may be in the valve section, but to me there is one even more likely culprit, which also is shared between these two Kalison models:

The tuning slide in the leadpipe!

The standing waves are established in the mouthpiece and in the leadpipe. Placing a variable like a tuning slide in this area never can be a good idea.

Some players tend sharper or flatter in pitch than others, so that their tuning slide pulls vary accordingly. Have there been taken notes about a correlation between which pulls are more prone to cause problems than others?

Only one of my several low brasses has the tuning slide in the leadpipe, the de Prins saxhorn basse en Si bemol with 3+2 pistons. Interesting for several reasons, but not my best instrument.

Along the road I have had to play small brasses also, among these an Eb cornet and several flugelhorns with tuning leadpipes. I am no fan of too much resistance. Especially in the Eb cornet I sensed some resistance coming from turbulence also affecting the sound. I undercut/chamfered the leadpipe tubing at the end opposite the receiver. The cornet became much more playable and the sound became cleaner.

Some repair people also chamfer all male slide branches, when they do aftermarket improvements on tubas.

As I never had any Kalison instrument in my hands this posting only can discuss matters in a general way. It would be interesting to get feedback from Kalison players trying to change some of the parameters mentioned. Messing with the tuning slide pull will offer a fully reversible test situation with no physical damage to the instrument.

Klaus Smedegaard Bjerre

I really like the 2000. I have access to one and a DS and find them both easy to play and able to make a wonderful sound. The sound lights up on both. The 2000 simply has a much broader voice to it.

About the "bad" notes: I do not buy it. At least with the horns I have owned/tried. My band-owned Nirschl has more problem children than they have.

I owe my career to a Pro 2000 - I won my audition on one. If I did not have a government horn to play I would still have that instrument. I still miss having valves that functioned every time. The Kalison valves I have tried were simply the best IMO.

One thing I would look for when trying this instrument is if all the screws that hold the leadpipe and valve section on are present or accounted for. I imagine with Kalison being DOA getting replacement screws would be a nightmare. Having new ones machined locally would be a possibility but a bit of an effort.

If I was looking for a large used CC and did not have a money plant growing in my backyard, I would really check out a 2000.

Edit: Spelling error. It's Sunday. Beer me Marge.

Cameron Gates wrote:One thing I would look for when trying this instrument is if all the screws that hold the leadpipe and valve section on are present of accounted for. I imagine with Kalison being DOA getting replacement screws would be a nightmare. Having new ones machined locally would be a possibility but a bit of an effort.

Having two systems of threading, what we call inch versus mm screws, is annoying. However the better repairmen here have stocks of both. I guess the same would be the case in the “inch"-part of the world.

Klaus Smedegaard Bjerre

There was one on Ebay a while back, might still be there, price was steadily going down. Almost bought it, got my B&S instead. Thanks mom!

the elephant wrote: Marty Neilan currently has one and loves it.

I actually own a K2001 that previously belonged to tubnetter Walter Gomes.
I have not spent enough time with a 2000 to give an unconditional recommendation on one. My experience trying other Kalisons in the past has shown that they can be inconsistent, with the good ones being very good and the bad ones worthy of tubenet folklore.
The 2001 is a somewhat different horn from the 2000; bigger bell, larger bore 4th and 5th with a 5th rotax instead of traditional rotor, different wrap and valves at a differnt angle. Funky high Ab is traded for a funky high C (that works fine with alternate fingerings.) Sizewise in the same ballpark as the PCK; dwarfs a MW 2000 or a Mirafone 1291/2 but not quite the Holton/2165. Big sound but NOT foghorn. These horns were passed over by some players when they first came out becasue of their high price at the time and the inability to blow an open high C in tune.

I have cut and paste info form a previous post:
First off, disregard the specs on the 'change website; they are wrong.

Real Specs:

K2001 - Bore: 20mm (0.788"), 4th-5th valve 21mm (0.827")
Bell diameter: 495mm (19-1/2")
Height: 95cm (37-1/2")

Pro2000 - Bore: 20mm (0.788")
Bell diameter: 470mm (18-1/2")
Height: 90cm (35-1/2")

Pro2000: funky Ab on top of the staff. K2001: Open C above the staff 1/4 tone flat.
K2001 is VERY ergonomic. Both are a very conical design. Both horns are sized between a (real) 5/4 and 6/4 and do NOT have that "foghorn" sound that some BAT's are notorious for.

Either is MUCH bigger than a D.S.

Completely Honest Opinions on my personal K2001:
Plus: There is enough clarity, focus, and color in my K2001 that I would not have a problem playing it with a smaller ensemble if necessary, or even the right quintet. The intonation excepting the "piano middle C" is not perfect but very workable. "Piano middle C" tunes fine first pushed all the way in instead of open. The horn seems to be well constructed and the brass it not excessively thin as some notorious D.S.'s were. Valves are very smooth and do not hang up (tolerences are not the extreme Yamaha look-at-them-funny-and-they stick.) All tuning slides move very freely without extensive aftermarket work. Leadpipe and entire valveset can be removed for cleaning or repairs. Long pull on 4th slide available, all slides except 5th very accessible. Huge Rotax rotor blows very free, as does extremely open wrap fourth valve. Horn is very responsive and requires minimal effort to play, but can take everything you throw at it without breaking up - the best of both worlds. With the trend towards "small 6/4's" (i.e. PCK, 6450) this horn should be big enough for any application.

Complaints: 5th slide cannot be manipulated while playing without having a pullrod added. High C unusable open. Despite factory water keys water still accumulates in third slide requiring a pull-and-dump. Valves not factory vented. High register will start to go flat if you "relax" too much up there. Makes people think you are loaded because the horn looks like it cost $30,000.

NEW COMPLAINT: People thinking you are a good player because you have a big silver tuba. Although I have my shortcomings as a player, tone has always been one of my obsessions (in hindsight, too bad sightreading wasn't ) The horn is an amplifier. It is much easier for someone to discount thousands of hours of practice and point to what is in your lap.


My KaliBAT:

the elephant wrote:

Cameron Gates wrote:About the "bad" notes: I do not buy it. At least with the horns I have owned/tried. My band-owned Nirschl has more problem children than they have.

I agree, somewhat. I have only played on two or three DS tubas that had this problem, and they were built pretty close together in time. I have always assumed that these horns with the bad high Ab (or whichever pitch it is) had had a design modification or an alteration in the production process that was causing it.

Not to take this too off topic, but I wonder how much "funny notes" are part of the player's physiological makeup as much as the tuba? The previous owner did not have a high C (aka piano middle C) issue with the horn, and neither did the gentleman who helped design these horns.
Wade and I have corresponded about the Mirafone 181 F I bought, and he always mentions the low B as being uncentered. Slots like a dream for me. BUT, the low D seems to be the fuzzyiest note for me, with the dreaded "German F tuba low C disease" being very mild for both of us.
Would a root canal / nose job / ??? fix the open high C on my Kalison? who knows?? (who cares!!)

Bob1062 wrote:Marty, did you buy a new horn (181, not the Kali!)?

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=26750
This replaced the 6 valve Cerveny F I never should have sold.

tubashaman wrote:When I look at a horn, if it has a amazing sound, feel, etc. I go by that, not so much tuning. A player can adjust tuning easily by using alternate fingerings or bending the pitch with the lips

If you like the way the horn sounds and feels, then by all means use it. My F tuba has a few funky notes, but i have learned to adjust, the sound which it produces is amazing and an alternate fingering here and there isn't going to kill me

All of course true, however as owners of Alexander horns tend to say, they love the sound but knowingly have to work a bit harder...no-matter how worth it to get the sound...Sometimes it's more worth it to to not have to work so hard all the time to adjust tunings...especially since not all tuning problems can be solved with alternate fingerings. Not to mention when using a horn that is a bit disobedient, you have to constantly have it on your face so you don't "forget" how to handle it.

Sound and feel is important, but sometimes awkward fingerings or overly careful placement of the lips for intonation can be a HUGE hassle........

Off to practice land.

Cheers