TubeNet

We all know that appearance plays a factor in finding a mate. That mutual attraction is the one of the most fundamental of primal instincts.

This same "ooooh preeeetttyyyyy" factor is also used when picking out cars, houses, clothes and other material objects. How much does that physical appearance weigh-in when you select a musical instrument? For guitarists and bass guitarists, there are a whole host of woods, shapes and paint jobs that can be selected when making a purchase. Appearance is clearly a factor there.

What say you tubists and eu-phoney-ites? Do you find your self being a sucker for the pretty silver finish? How about a really "pretty" design? Has physical appearance been a factor in your purchase? Will you admit to picking the "pretty" horn vs the "ugly" horn when finalizing a purchase decision?

I like the "pretty" horns and in the past have fallen for the shiny is better factor, but at the moment I've gotten to the point that I care more how the horn plays vs. the looks; at least to a point. Considering that I bought my latest acquisition (Conn 28K sousa) in part based off of how it looks I'm not totally one way or the other, but I did play test it before we closed the deal and it plays well

What is pretty to me is the smile on my face when I hear what comes out of the bell.

I will buy the tubas that make that smile, and then have it prettied up if necessary. But I don't need nor expect my tubas to look new and shiny.

Rick "who has always been more concerned with what's under the hood" Denney

I like to have both: great player and great looking. I always wonder what kind of problems will result in the future from a horn that has been abused/neglected.

Over the years I've had...

New - Cerveny 681-5MR CC (TRADED IT after 3 years)
New - Kalison Daryl Smith - Silver (TRADED IT after only 14 months)
Used - Meinl Weston 2165 - Lacquered (TRADED IT after a couple years)
New - Yamaha 822F - Silver (Sold it for financial reasons. I miss it)
New - Conn 56J - Sat. Silver (Sold after 8 years)
Used - Meinl Weston 2165 - unlacquered (Not the same as previous horn)

After looking at that list it has dawned on my the the only horn I actually cleaned (used Pledge) was my first horn. All of the others I let tarnish. I've ALWAYS kept the slides, valves and body of the horns VERY clean and properly lubed, but I never really spent time making them look pretty. My current 2165 isn't "pretty" in the beauty queen sense (the raw brass patina is uneven in spots [partly my own fault]). To me it is pretty in that it has no dents (thank you bloke), the slides and valves move EXTREMELY well and it plays great. It's kind of like that girl in college who wore no makeup, a t-shirt and sweat pants to class, but was a knock-out.

[I hope my wife doesn't read this thread. She'll kill me. Good thing I'm taking her out to a nice dinner tonight.]

TubaTodd wrote:To me it is pretty in that it has no dents (thank you bloke), the slides and valves move EXTREMELY well and it plays great. It's kind of like that girl in college who wore no makeup, a t-shirt and sweat pants to class, but was a knock-out.

Well, I relate to that - real beauty doesn't need nylon stockings etc., and indeed for me in a tuba it doesn't need perfect lacquer or a mirror polish. But that's not the analogy you're pointing at in the preceding sentence. The slides and valves, plays great ... that's not the girl who was a knock-out, it's the one who took care of herself, looked all right, and was talented and personable.

I'm not going to pretend that looks don't make any difference to me. Helicon vs. sousaphone, a lot of that is about looks. I really don't like a real shiny, new looking tuba, seriously. I don't like the way some American tubas route the 4th valve tubing around the 2nd bow (if I remember right.) Silver plate is good. Stuff like that would influence me in a purchase, maybe not deciding factors (my favorite instrument is a lacquered late '50s King baritone saxophone, you know that's not going to be pretty), but ... I wouldn't get a tuba to play in my bedroom, it is for show.

If you wanna be happy for the rest of your life......

I've had my Boosey for 24 years.

I blinged it out about 2 years ago with some gold plated touches on slide ends and valve caps, and use a gold mouthpeice mostly for show, butit still plays purty too...



ken k

Bill Troiano wrote:If you wanna be happy for the rest of your life......

LMAO!!! "Yeah....but she sure can cook!"

In case some of the younger ones among us have NO IDEA what we're talking about...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1ZJiBHh-Yw

I bought my 188 new, with a couple of dents and scratches in it. Chances are more than a few people on this board have played my horn as it made it's rounds to the various shows that WW&BW went to. I love it and play the piss out of it, I've put many more dings in it and scratches. My main scratch generator is button down shirts, cuff links, tie tacks, and lapel pins. It doesn't bother me that much because at least I'm not letting it sit and look pretty. I've considered stripping it and never dealing with the light scratches anymore but I'm a lazy tuba player that doesn't need to be accosted by my peers for stripping a new horn. I know my 21J is going to look pretty crappy when I finish it but that doesn't bother me at all, as long as I can toot on it. My Conn 72H is stripped and polished recently, but it's starting to tarnish and I'm going to let it happen. I just like playing my horns too much to let them sit around and look pretty forever.

I have never been able to afford a new tuba, so I don't have pretty. The closest I have come to it is the retrofit upright St Pete nickel plated bell on my BBb 186. Now, from the audience, which can't see the rest of the horn because of the rest of the band sitting in front of me, when I shine up the bell getting ready for a concert, it looks pretty good.

What's ugly? Ugly is an attitude, not an appearance.

Also -- one scratch, ding or dent is a scratch, ding or dent. A whole bunch of them that don't affect the performance of the horn is called "patina." Go figure.

jonesbrass wrote:I like to have both: great player and great looking.

I think that very much mirrors my feelings. Obviously how it plays is the most important factor, but if the tuba is an object of beauty as well, it gives me additional pleasure every time I get it out, or walk into my practice room

I have rejected tubas in the past on their physical condition, even when they have played well.

Not gonna lie, I love a silver finish, but in the end it's all about how it plays.

Well, I'm more of a "sound" pretty, than a "visual" pretty. My 186 is unlacquered, and kinda dull, but it has a very sweet sound, sweeter than many lacquered horns Ive played

My observation from hearing and seeing a number of international orchestras in London would be that in general European players seem a lot more concerned with the appearance of their instruments. I have been surprised to see the tubas of visiting American orchestras almost black, or brown with tarnish, while such is rare with European orchestras where they often gleam.

To me keeping your tuba clean and polished is about good presentation which surely a paying audience deserves? You may say it is just the quality of music making that matters and not appearance, but people do hear with their eyes too. Otherwise why bother with concert clothes?

Given the choice, I like a nice shiny silver finish (for both looks and function) - and the two tubas I bought
new are both silver. But, I don't spend any time *polishing* them. Keeping them clean, yes; polishing, no.

But, finish is the tie-breaker for me, not the main issue. And, most of the time, there isn't a tie. You
either want the tuba, or you don't.

So, the 1895 Eb helicon appears to be nickle, the EEb (highly modified) Besson is half disappearing lacquer and half raw brass. Bloke took it a few steps further along to fully raw brass - but only by cleaning and smoothing it out, not because I asked him to intentionally remove any lacquer. There's still some there, if you look closely enough.

And, the Conn 36J is a full lacquer job (in such good shape that I wonder if any of it is "original, 1933 issue").

I do appreciate "well tended, but not polished". From a purely functional point of view, that seems easier to achieve with shiny silver - which is why that's my tiebreaker. But, notice that out of 5 horns sitting in my basement, only 2 are shiny silver - the two where I had the most (any) choice in the matter. I don't think I would *ever* consider "fixing" any of the others by re-finishing in silver; for that matter, I have no plans to re-lacquer the Besson. And, as Todd will attest, my silver King is about as far from "polished" as you can get (as in, I've *never* polished it). I might be tempted to clean up (remove ) ragged lacquer, and may go after a few ugly patches on the bell of the 36J. But, you know ... my goal in life now is to use the 36J enough so that its finish begins to approximate that on the Besson, just from normal wear and tear. My heirs can sell it to Joe and he can re-do it as satin silver with gold accents.

And then, there's the horn Patrick Sheridan is appearing with these days - multi-colored rainbow. But, I think you have to play like Pat to get away with that look.

TubaTodd wrote:How about a really "pretty" design?

I know that playing ability, sound and shear popularity lead to many of the "flavor of the week" horns (ie Conn 5xJ, Miraphone 1291/2, Thor, other NKOTB horns), but something tells me that the fact that these horns are a) popular b) new/cool designs c) come in a variety of nice finishes d) sound good....has a big effect on purchasing trends. Like the saying goings "nothing attracts a crowd....like a crowd."

"Johnny has the new 'Tuba 5000.' Must be good. I have to have one." or the alternative version....

"<insert famous tubist here> plays on a <insert tuba model here>.....I've gotta have one."

I've had friends and colleagues who thought that way.......AHEM!!




[I'll save bloke the trouble and illustrate my own post]

Neptune wrote: . . . but people do hear with their eyes too . . .

Exactly my point. Not to mention the motivating fact of firing up a nice-looking horn. Kind of like wanting to drive a nice, shiny muscle car vs. the same muscle car in a "bondo-buggy" exterior . .

jonesbrass wrote:

Neptune wrote: . . . but people do hear with their eyes too . . .

Exactly my point. Not to mention the motivating fact of firing up a nice-looking horn. Kind of like wanting to drive a nice, shiny muscle car vs. the same muscle car in a "bondo-buggy" exterior . .

I agree with this point...BUT I think there are 2 kinds of people in this world. *

1. Those who like to "save" things and treat items like museum pieces. These folks may also wear a single pair of sneakers until they are old and ready for retirement.....even though they have a new pair waiting on a shelf. I think these people are more likely to play a less visually pretty horn so that the pretty one can remain pretty. (This is me)

2. Those who save nothing. These folks use things immediately upon purchase even if a previous item may still be in very good shape. They play the pretty horn immediately and often (This is pretty much my wife)

I think their is a socio-economic influence for these behaviors.

*Views expressed by the TubeNet poster may not be the views of TubeNet and its affiliates. This analogy is simply a rough example. If you have a problem with this generalization, do not read this post.

bloke wrote:Use it. Take care of it. Enjoy it ...and if you're very, very lucky indeed: Wear it out!

I agree with those sentiments! Very much how I work with cars and most things and would like to with tubas (once I have fine tuned my roster).

My mother was in the 'keep things for best' camp and died with enough unused clothes to fill 80 sacks! Which has taut me to use and enjoy anything new and not hold back for 'best'.