TubeNet

I recently purchased a horn that's finish is raw brass. The horn plays great and is lightweight. I'm concerned that applying lacquer will have an adverse effect on it's response. Any thoughts of this?
It's a Marzan B&M BBb 4 piston.
Blessings.

I've had several discussions with Instrumentmakers about this and they opinions in almost 100 % is that the Raw Brass's sound quality is much better, 'cause opposite to the lacquer finish it wont stop the resonance of a part of the soundwaves.

Cheers

A concern about leaving the raw finish would be the effect on the life and condition of the horn. Is there any info or opinion concerning this?
Blessings

zangerzzz wrote:A concern about leaving the raw finish would be the effect on the life and condition of the horn. Is there any info or opinion concerning this? Blessings

We talked on the phone a bit ago about this but I thought I would also share my thoughts on the forum....

Of the ten or so horns that I generally have in the 'stable', my preferred finish is raw brass. I've played lots of horns in silver plate, lacquer, and nickel plate. There have been several studies and debates over which finish is best but my opinion is that there are so many OTHER things that can affect the performance of a horn, the finish seems to me to have little to do with anything. My raw brass Marzan (B & M) piston BBb SEEMS to be VERY resonant. But... I don't have a silver and a lacquered one to compare it to. Even if I did, there are many, many physical differences even between the same make and model horn that a true evaluation would be impossible.

That being said.... Why then do I prefer raw brass horns? Simple...
1) They are easy to care for. Just let them develop a bit of patina and clean them once in a while. When I want to 'spiffy' the raw brass finish up a bit... I use a non-abrasive scouring pad and a slurry of Dawn mixed with a bit of the white automotive polishing compound. This method leaves behind a nice 'gold-ish' glow. I don't buff raw brass as a method of cleaning. Also, it helps to keep the horn in a case or bag.
2) Silver finishes require lots of care to keep them looking good and often result in 'black' hands. The horn HAS to be kept in a case or bag between uses... especially during periods when gas heat is in use in the home.
3) Lacquer finishes are prone to ugly scratches. Although I don't abuse my horns, I don't 'baby' them, either!
4) Nickel finished are OK and can be polished vigorously without damaging the plating. However... if the nickel flakes off (and it eventually will!)... it can't be spot-replated.

I don't like raw brass. From my reading and experience, I doubt that lacquer makes all that much difference but I bow to Reynold Schilke who would only make trumpet in raw brass or silver plate, never lacquer.

There's no way to have a back to back test on a horn lacquered and unlacquered... however a comparison test was done a UNT some years ago with 5 Miraphone 188's: two silver, one stripped to raw brass, one lacquered and one gold brass lacquered. The test audience members were all music majors being asked to compare the five tubas for quality of sound. The tubas were behind a screen and the same player played the same thing on all five tubas.

The audience put the two silver plated 188's on opposite ends of the scale with the other tubas somewhere in the middle. In other words, there was less difference between lacquered horns and raw brass than there was between two horns with the same finish.

Admittedly, the variables are endless. Still, it's always good to keep an open mind.

I warn any who may be tempted to strip their tubas of lacquer, the re-sale price may drop.

Alex C wrote:I don't like raw brass. From my reading and experience, I doubt that lacquer makes all that much difference but I bow to Reynold Schilke who would only make trumpet in raw brass or silver plate, never lacquer.

I don't believe the Schilke test (which had a number of testing flaws, but no matter--Schilke was an instrument maker and trumpet player, not a scientist) really applies to tubas. Trumpets, like horns, are more affected by the sibilance of the brass than are tubas, whose active frequencies are far below the frequencies that might be damped by lacquer.

And lacquer is thin and hard to the point of being brittle. It's damping effect might actually be less than the brass itself.

When I look at top pros who have new instruments, they are nearly always silver plate or lacquered brass. There are a few guys who have stripped off their lacquer, and if I did that I would probably have convinced myself that it made a difference. But most raw brass tubas are such because they have had repairs, and it was cheaper to just strip off the old brass than to try and make the brass perfect enough to look good with fresh lacquer. Doing that often requires lots of sanding and buffing, and that is far more likely to affect the tuba than the lacquer itself.

I've compared by lacquered Yamaha 621 to a number of silver ones, and I have found no systematic difference. Some of the silver 621's had a brighter sound, some more closed and damped, just as with any group of instruments one might try out.

Rick "who wouldn't want to subject an old Marzan to all that sanding and buffing" Denney

Rick Denney wrote:...... There are a few guys who have stripped off their lacquer, and if I did that I would probably have convinced myself that it made a difference. But most raw brass tubas are such because they have had repairs, and it was cheaper to just strip off the old brass than to try and make the brass perfect enough to look good with fresh lacquer. Doing that often requires lots of sanding and buffing, and that is far more likely to affect the tuba than the lacquer itself..... Rick "who wouldn't want to subject an old Marzan to all that sanding and buffing" Denney

My sentiments exactly! Anyone who signs up to an 'overhaul', depending on the original condition of the horn, is going to have returned to him a different piece of metal. I know of a very pretty 20K that resides on the wall of a storage room simply because the metal is too thin for it to be handled!

In short... an acceptable 'overhaul' is going to start with a very solid horn... without a lot of deep scratches in the brass.

I agree with these two points.

Rick Denney wrote: But most raw brass tubas are such because they have had repairs, and it was cheaper to just strip off the old brass than to try and make the brass perfect enough to look good with fresh lacquer.

Alex C wrote:I warn any who may be tempted to strip their tubas of lacquer, the re-sale price may drop.

When I see a raw brass instrument that is normally available in lacquer, I assume that I am looking at a tuba that has been repaired.

I don't much like raw brass. It stinks and makes my hands green.

There are situations when unlacquered is the only option. I have an old B&S F tuba that has no lacquer. As far as I can tell, it never did. I would have preferred it to have lacquer, but one really can't buy an old B&S with a decent coat of lacquer. The lacquer from that era was terrible. It just flaked off after a few years. Old Alexanders had no lacquer most of the time IIRC.

Many manufacturers will sell new unlacquered horns. They cost less than lacquered horns. Putting on a coat of paint is work that costs money. IMHO, if you take the lacquer off, you are reducing the amount of money that many others will pay for it.

Back in the wild days of youth, I stripped the lacquer from my B&M Marzan slant-rotor CC.

I swore that I could both feel and hear improved response and sound.

Perhaps I did, but I couldn't tell you if it was only a localized sensation, or actually made it's way into the hall.

The main thing is, if you think it does, and it allows you to play better, and with more confidence, then who cares if you paint it with camo?

(BTW, great job yesterday gentlepersons!)

windshieldbug wrote:..... I stripped the lacquer from my B&M Marzan slant-rotor CC....

Mine's silver. And I can't tell the difference between mine and yours. 'cept it's a BBb.

Let me put it this way:

Some people say lacquer has an effect on a horn, and some say it doesn't....but no one can say with 100% certainty. If you like the way your horn plays, why bother??? It'll cost money, you'll be without your horn for at least a few days, and leaving it unaltered definitely won't affect the way it plays. As long as you maintain your horn properly (keep it clean, keep it in a case when you aren't using it, don't use it as a cat litter box, etc. etc...), you'll be fine. Enjoy!!

I'm sorry to make the assumption that you are not a professional horn manufacturer or even severely talented repair person, so be careful because you can really mess up the quality of the horn doing this yourself. If you are planning to take it to a facility to have this done, consult with the manufacturer (if they are around) and they will tell you whether or not it is a good idea. My personal experience has not been good with either horn that I have had this done. MY personal preference is an unlacquered horn.

just my .02

Jeff Keller wrote:I'm sorry to make the assumption that you are not a professional horn manufacturer or even severely talented repair person, so be careful because you can really mess up the quality of the horn doing this yourself. If you are planning to take it to a facility to have this done, consult with the manufacturer (if they are around) and they will tell you whether or not it is a good idea. My personal experience has not been good with either horn that I have had this done. MY personal preference is an unlacquered horn.

just my .02

All of the Marzan tubas were originally lacquered (if they weren't silver-plated). The manufacturer was Boehm and Meinl, now Nirschl, but I doubt they would have an opinion. They would probably not want the instrument sanded and buffed. My York Master (of the same make) has no lacquer left but it originally came with it. The forward bell still has the lacquer. The brass on that tuba is really thick and heavy, but I still would not want it sanded and buffed. I have had major repairs done to several tubas, but always with the instruction to avoid sanding and minimize buffing. If lacquer was applied, it was mostly to make a repaired part match the rest of the instrument from a distance, but still with a minimum of buffing.

Rick "suggesting that the sanding and buffing have the effect, not the lacquer" Denney

TubaTinker wrote: 2) Silver finishes require lots of care to keep them looking good and often result in 'black' hands. The horn HAS to be kept in a case or bag between uses... especially during periods when gas heat is in use in the home.

Natural gas? I think our furnace vents outdoors pretty well, but a gas range would be a different matter. You'd expect silver tarnish problems after a conversion from electric to gas stove, where said stove is used daily?

I know some people have it much worse than others, but I thought it might be just too much meat in the owner's diet, leading to corrosive waste acids.

You were trying out some fancy protective film treatment for (otherwise) raw brass, some ways back if I remember right. How did that turn out?

Donn wrote:

TubaTinker wrote: 2) Silver finishes require lots of care to keep them looking good and often result in 'black' hands. The horn HAS to be kept in a case or bag between uses... especially during periods when gas heat is in use in the home.

Natural gas? I think our furnace vents outdoors pretty well, but a gas range would be a different matter. You'd expect silver tarnish problems after a conversion from electric to gas stove, where said stove is used daily?

I know some people have it much worse than others, but I thought it might be just too much meat in the owner's diet, leading to corrosive waste acids.

You were trying out some fancy protective film treatment for (otherwise) raw brass, some ways back if I remember right. How did that turn out?

Vent-free fireplaces are actually pretty common these days. I have one in my family room and another in the greenhouse. They produce lots of moisture (which is good during the winter), but also produce sulfur dioxide... a silver horn's worst enemy. Even though many gas furnaces vent outside, the sulfur dioxide content in atmosphere goes up during the heating season. Pilot lights from cooking stoves and furnaces vent directly inside the house.

The material I was experimenting with is Coricone 1700. It's a sealant for non-ferrous metals. When applied to polished CLEAN brass it does a good job of preventing patina but also dulls the luster quite a bit... to more of a satin finish. Over an already satin raw brass finish it does a fine job.

OK. OK.... this is an edit. You guys have inspired me to do another test on my B & M Marzan BBb piston tuba. It was already raw brass but I took it to the shop, gave it a good cleaning, and wiped it down with Coricone 1700. This stuff is a type of air-dry lacquer but is so thin you can wipe it on. It drys to the touch in just a few minutes. I can't imagine a coating that doesn't have a measureable thickness having any affect on the timber. Mark your calendar and give me a shout in six months to ask how it's doing.

Donn wrote: I know some people have it much worse than others, but I thought it might be just too much meat in the owner's diet, leading to corrosive waste acids.

Acidic sweat comes from what you eat; if you eat primarily acidic food (and the vast majority of Americans do) then your sweat will be acidic and you will get "green hands." Getting away form meat, bread, and dairy, towards fish and vegetables, will not only keep your hands that nice color they started out with but give you a better chance of missing out on many serious illnesses.

MA

MaryAnn wrote: Acidic sweat comes from what you eat; if you eat primarily acidic food (and the vast majority of Americans do) then your sweat will be acidic and you will get "green hands." Getting away form meat, bread, and dairy, towards fish and vegetables, will not only keep your hands that nice color they started out with but give you a better chance of missing out on many serious illnesses.

Heh, you know, I can usually tell who a person is going to vote for, by whether they think eating buckets of meat and wads of white bread is good for you.

I looked up some acid/alkaline lists, and it's not what intuition would suggest. Tomatos, lemons? Alkaline. (Though in the context of stomach distress, they are of course acidic.) Coffee is unfortunately acidic, so I'm doomed. Alcohol, you've probably heard of boozing musicians whose horns tend to rot on them.

Also lots of otherwise healthy food on the acidic lists I'm looking at. Fish, beans, grains - hard to walk away from all that stuff and live on fruit and vegetables, even though it might save you some time polishing the tuba, but the point is not to become unduly alkaline, it's just a matter of hitting a health balance.

MaryAnn wrote:

Donn wrote: Acidic sweat comes from what you eat; if you eat primarily acidic food (and the vast majority of Americans do) then your sweat will be acidic and you will get "green hands." Getting away form meat, bread, and dairy, towards fish and vegetables, will not only keep your hands that nice color they started out with but give you a better chance of missing out on many serious illnesses.
MA

Now I'm not trying to start a fight here , and I do agree with your dietary suggestions as being healthy, but I was under the impression that all living organisms internally internally regulate their pH levels very carefully. I've never found any textbook / scientific literature that associates pH with diet.

evan wrote:

MaryAnn wrote: Acidic sweat comes from what you eat; if you eat primarily acidic food (and the vast majority of Americans do) then your sweat will be acidic and you will get "green hands." Getting away form meat, bread, and dairy, towards fish and vegetables, will not only keep your hands that nice color they started out with but give you a better chance of missing out on many serious illnesses.
MA

Now I'm not trying to start a fight here , and I do agree with your dietary suggestions as being healthy, but I was under the impression that all living organisms internally internally regulate their pH levels very carefully. I've never found any textbook / scientific literature that associates pH with diet.

Good question, and I won't pose as any kind of expert in this matter myself, but my thought on it is that you're right, normal pH is certainly not a passive result of dietary input. Of course, a major part of that regulation of blood chemistry is excretion - kidneys, and (QED) sweat. A meat eater may have a higher incidence of kidney stones, due to uric acid - you can find that in the medical literature, I think. If the medical profession ever wakes up to the problem with silver plated musical instruments, we may see better data on that too.

As a health matter, it does seem to be coming from the alternative world, and it may not really matter on a practical level if the effects are actually due to blood pH, or some other physiological process associated with acidic inputs. And of course it's conveniently tailored to the apparently universal human preference for splitting things into two categories, ideally the good one and the evil one. So take it with a grain of salt (but just one!), it's just something interesting to think about, about the things we eat.

Really, I've heard from a great repairman that laquer doesn't effect the way a horn sounds. Out of many of his experiences, it basically isn't worth keeping the chemicals for it.
So concensus is that finish doesn't matter.
tubaguy"who could offer you the name of that birdie on a PM"9