TubeNet

There were a couple of very long threads discussing cryogenic treatment of tubas on the older version of the TubeNet. The consensus seemed to be that it was a very good treatment for making money for the company doing it. Any value to the sound of a tuba from doing this was questionable.

harold wrote:The only thing really achieved with cryo treatments is that the player tends to become several hundred dollars lighter.

This doesn't work from a physics standpoint.

Do people play better after the treatment? Probably, but not a result of the treatment.

On the other hand, you may not be wiling to admit that you just spent that much money and have nothing to show for it.

When I bought my (french) horn it had already been cryo-treated. It doesn't seem to play noticibly different from any other horn of that make and model; but it made a HUGE difference when I put another bell on it. Much more difference than any of the entire box full of mouthpieces I've tried. From that I learned to use a mouthpiece that makes the instrument easiest to play, and use a bell that gives the sound you want. Of course horns are available in screw bell, unlike most tubas. And the new bell of course was never frozen, and won't be while I own it.

For the curious: old bell was very thin unlacquered gold brass; the new bell is considerably thicker lacquered ambronze.

MA