TubeNet

You might try it without the dash.

I don't like either. At all. But sizewise the 606 is a bit bigger (not a lot) than a 56J, and the PT6 is about the size of a 1291 (I haven't seen them side by side).
I really don't like the sound of the PT6P at all (the rotary is a bit better, but still not to my liking). Assuming that the 606 is somewhere near the 6's price of 12,000 I think they are both overpriced (Ferguson's has the 1291 C for 8500 and the 4 valve Bb for 7100). I like the 1291 (especially the Bb) better than both, and if I wanted a smaller horn the 56J/2341 (I think I would like the 18" bell more but have not seen one yet).

The PT-6P is a large 5/4 tuba just one step down from a 6/4 and seem to be quite popular with orchestral tubists - a number of top pros use one, such as Carol Janisch of the Philadelphia Orchestra. The PT-606P is based on an old York 4/4 tuba and is similar in size to the PT-20. They did seem very popular when they first came out with some rave reviews here on TubeNet

I play the rotor PT-6 and -606 on a regular basis and they are two different animals to me. The 6's sound is broader and one doesn't have to work as hard to support a large ensemble. The 606 is an agile horn with ample sound for most groups and when paired with other players, any group can be supported. That's not to say the -6 is clumsy, it's anything but. I just felt more comfortable with the -6 in concert band. The piston -6 I played several years ago had a valveset that was not comfortable to my hands. The -606 is more comfortable and I don't have any problems with hand fatigue or poorly placed thumb rings. If you're looking for a one-horn-does-all, either will work, although the -6 may be a bit large for quintet, unless that's the sound that you're going after. Each of these models has been the "horn de jour" for a time and they each have their following. You'll have to spend time with each to determine if any of these, or none, work for you.

I played both at TMEA and I liked them both, but I found myself preferring the 606 more. It just played better from top to bottom. Here is a pic that I took at TMEA with the 2 tubas side by side.

pauvog1 wrote:Can anyone compair these to the pt- 7?

The PT-7 is a true 6/4, larger still than the PT-6. I recently tried a PT-7 against a piston Neptune. They looked and played like identical tubas except the bell is 20mm smaller diameter than the Neptune (500 v 520mm) giving it a slightly more direct tone (hardly perceivable).

As the Neptune has lovely engraving, gold lacquer and I believe costs less, it appears the better buy

Neptune wrote: The PT-606P is based on an old York 4/4 tuba

The 606P is a very loose copy of the York. I didn't find many parallels at all. The horn wasn't bad, it fits in the 1291-Nirschl4/4-et al niche. Whether you like it or not depends on whether you like it or not. It sounded too dark for me but I only played one.

Alex C wrote:

Neptune wrote: The PT-606P is based on an old York 4/4 tuba

The 606P is a very loose copy of the York. I didn't find many parallels at all. The horn wasn't bad, it fits in the 1291-Nirschl4/4-et al niche. Whether you like it or not depends on whether you like it or not. It sounded too dark for me but I only played one.

As former owner of the copied York C I'll chime in...
The 606P is a fairly faithful copy of the York in bell, bottom and top bows. Beyond that, PT did their own thing somewhat with the wrap. I understand the tapers though are moreorless as-per York.
The York was 4 piston from the factory and that was how Bob Tucci played it for quite a time. Mike Johnson added a 5th after the main slide which worked great. The York valves are at quite an angle but PT showed no interest in copying those so they plonked on their Big-Valves which go on everything
they make.
A lot of folks look at the 606 and think the bell is nothing like those York made but that's how it came from the factory. Interestingly, the York has a detachable bell and came with a larger (22"?) bell-front as well as the 19" upright. It played better with the bell-front for me and some high-level players who tried it. The bell-front was very lightly used and had fairly thick brass but the upright had obviously been heavily filed/buffed in its 1960's overhaul as it was pretty thin around the edges.

Anyway, all this has little to do with comparing the PT6 to the 606P.
IMO they're quite different tubas - try them both and see! That original York had substantial intonation difficulties and the 606 inherited some of those and lacks much of the great sound although both these factors vary from tuba to tuba.

Best of luck!

This is the copied Tuba.
4/4 Factory C with 4 pistons.
Has the bell-front mentioned above.
This horn is back home in the States now with a playing-collector after a spells in Germany and England.

The bell profile certainly looks alike on the PT-606P. Very different to the similar size PT-20.

Peach wrote:This is the copied Tuba.
4/4 Factory C with 4 pistons.
Has the bell-front mentioned above.
This horn is back home in the States now with a playing-collector after a spells in Germany and England.

More pictures of that instrument are here:

http://www.rickdenney.com/york.htm

Rick "who posted these with Mike's permission some years ago" Denney

The picture of the copied York C reminds me of the bell profile on my Kalison...Just thought I throw that in.

Joseph