Page 1 of 1

Lacquer vs silver vs raw brass

Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 5:56 am
by bigbob
Well is this the way it should have read?? I tryed the archives and the only responce was my other question about silver Vs Brass Is this a better question?? bigbob http://www.rgisculptures.com" target="_blank

Re: Lacquer vs silver vs raw brass

Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:55 am
by pierso20
bigbob wrote:Well is this the way it should have read?? I tryed the archives and the only responce was my other question about silver Vs Brass Is this a better question?? bigbob http://www.rgisculptures.com" target="_blank" target="_blank
There was a topic on this quite recently, in fact. Unfortunately, with the high number of words required for a search, it may be difficult to locate the topic.

Even so, I'm sure there will be MANY responses to this...people seem to enjoy this topic... :P

Re: Lacquer vs silver vs raw brass

Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 7:33 am
by EdFirth
Silver is metal, laquer is like paint. So some believe that silver enhances resonance and laquer damps it down. Raw brass is what it is. It makes your hands green, smells bad, and isn't the most asthetically pleasing but many people like it. It's also good if you are tweaking an older horn, cutting slides, moving stuff around, because it doesn't scar like the other two from soldering. Personally, I just want the thing to sound and play great and let the color be whatever. For what it's worth, I have noticed that most of the "top of the line" stuff is silver these days.Ed

Re: Lacquer vs silver vs raw brass

Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 11:20 am
by Alex C
EdFirth wrote:Silver is metal, laquer is like paint. So some believe that silver enhances resonance and laquer damps it down. Raw brass is what it is. It makes your hands green, smells bad, and isn't the most asthetically pleasing but many people like it. It's also good if you are tweaking an older horn, cutting slides, moving stuff around, because it doesn't scar like the other two from soldering. Personally, I just want the thing to sound and play great and let the color be whatever. For what it's worth, I have noticed that most of the "top of the line" stuff is silver these days.Ed
Took the words right out of my.... keyboard. Succinctly done, Ed. I wholeheatedly agree.

The one thing about lacquer is that it is easier to take care of, squirt some Windex or Pledge on it and wipe it off.
---

I always like to refer to research done at UNT about ten years ago. Five Miraphone 188 tubas were in the test: 2 silver, 1 gold (red?) brass, one lacquer and one used unlacquered (if I remember correctly).

The audience consisted of music majors because it was thought that they would have more finely attuned hearing. Tone was the only thing to be judged.

The result: the audience's rating had the two silver tubas on opposite ends of the grading scale. The other tubas were a jumble in the middle with no clear order.

The Determination? The finish doesn't matter to an audience. The gold brass made no difference either.

Maybe some of the old UNT tubists (you know who you are...) were involved in the test and can elaborate.

However, it seems to be a strongly held personal choice.

Re: Lacquer vs silver vs raw brass

Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 4:09 pm
by toobagrowl
I prefer silver plate because it looks great and I always think of it as sealing up all the joints just a touch more. It's metal-on-metal. I really dig the old frosted or satin silver tubas of decades ago that have "rubbed down" to semi-highly-polished and still have over 90% silver plate intact. My two main tubas are old silver plated horns. The newer silver plated tubas wear down to bare brass patches in less than a decade on contact points.

I have played on a few really nice raw brass tubas but I think raw brass is kinda ugly. Have not really seen a pretty "patina" develop on a raw brass tuba. Just not crazy about that dull greenish-brown color :?

I like nickel plate and think it looks nice; it kinda looks like pewter. It's a dark gray-silver color. I think a "brushed" nickel finish on a tuba would look cool. :tuba:

Lacquer looks good but it peels and flakes off over the years. I'd rather wipe and polish silver plate.

Re: Lacquer vs silver vs raw brass

Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 6:29 pm
by Wyvern
I remember playing a brass band owned almost new silver plated Besson at an outside gig. We were under a tree and a bird messed onto the tuba. I wiped the mess off at the first opportunity, and it removed all the silver plating from the spot. That rather put me off silver plating!

I like the ease of cleaning a lacquered tuba, so have always bought my own instruments in lacquer.

I think modern lacquer is generally more durable than modern super-thin silver plate.

Re: Lacquer vs silver vs raw brass

Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 6:36 pm
by bigbob
tooba wrote:I prefer silver plate because it looks great and I always think of it as sealing up all the joints just a touch more. It's metal-on-metal. I really dig the old frosted or satin silver tubas of decades ago that have "rubbed down" to semi-highly-polished and still have over 90% silver plate intact. My two main tubas are old silver plated horns. The newer silver plated tubas wear down to bare brass patches in less than a decade on contact points.

I have played on a few really nice raw brass tubas but I think raw brass is kinda ugly. Have not really seen a pretty "patina" develop on a raw brass tuba. Just not crazy about that dull greenish-brown color :?

I like nickel plate and think it looks nice; it kinda looks like pewter. It's a dark gray-silver color. I think a "brushed" nickel finish on a tuba would look cool. :tuba:

Lacquer looks good but it peels and flakes off over the years. I'd rather wipe and polish silver plate.
Ahhhh Nothing like the smell of raw brass in the morning <s>BB

Re: Lacquer vs silver vs raw brass

Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 9:13 pm
by SousaSaver
The real honest answer to this question is: Line up a few horns, play them all and take the one you like best. Lacquered instruments are typically cheaper and the maintenance of the finish is easier. Lacquer also protects the outside surface of the metal. Silver will tarnish easily but is pretty when it is polished.

Re: Lacquer vs silver vs raw brass

Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 10:05 pm
by GC
Looking at antique instruments, only rarely do you see an old lacquered instrument where much of the lacquer is intact. There are tons of old silver-plated instruments where the silver is worse for wear, but it's still intact. I see a lot of horns where the silver has worn through to the underlying brass, but that seems to be down to personal wear patterns or chemistry that the horn has been exposed to. Silver seems to last the longest as a general rule, lacquer seems to last the least. Epoxy finishes seem to be inconsistent regarding their durability.

Re: Lacquer vs silver vs raw brass

Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 10:13 pm
by skeath
Alex C wrote:Maybe some of the old UNT tubists
Ten years ago? Old? They are still just kids. :tuba:

SK

Re: Lacquer vs silver vs raw brass

Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 10:39 pm
by gilmored
I haven't played too many tubas but I would say that it is just your preference. I played my school's lacquered 5J for a while and the lacquer was really easy to take care of. The tuba that I now own is raw brass and all I have to do is wipe the oil off and get all of the water out so that it doesn't drip. Not having to worry about shining is great.