TubeNet

.

TheHatTuba wrote:.....Which do you guys think is the best (sounding, playing, looking, etc.)?

Those are all good choices but I would think paramount would be to select the one that works. The flare, taper, and overall length are going to affect intonation.

.

Don't bother, it'll still be a 52J.

Bob Kolada wrote:Don't bother, it'll still be a 52J.

,

Leave the vintage horns alone. Just get Kanstul to make you a bell - they make those "special alloy 'York'" bells you'd prolly like.

Why is York getting so many more votes? Honestly, they don't sound THAT much (if any) better than the others listed...
Dammit A.J.

.

TheHatTuba wrote:

tooba wrote:Leave the vintage horns alone. Just get Kanstul to make you a bell - they make those "special alloy 'York'" bells you'd prolly like.

Ordinarily I'd agree, but what use is an out of tune, three valve, top action eb with a gorgeous bell? The kanstul bells sound nice and I think it would be cool to have one with an elaborate conn engraving, but that costs more money!

Well ya got me there. I can understand using the bell if it is from a very out-of-tune 3 top piston Eb. The poll numbers are "interesting". Don't get me wrong......I love the vintage York sound. But I also love the vintage Holton and H.N. White/King sounds too.

Having used many York, King, & Holton bells and bottom bows on my conversions I've come to prefer the Holtons. They seem to have a slightly darker character with great projection. The Kings are quite rare and may have the best potential for remaining in Eb. Yorks are also quite good with a little more edge to the sound. The Conn, Martin and others havent' worked out for the projects that I undertake.
If you're seriously interested in making the comparison I currently have an example each of pretty much identical York and Holton belled CC horns for sale. Your welcome to come visit my shop and try them for yourself side-by-side. Contact me by PM or email to set that up.

Sam Gnagey wrote:Having used many York, King, & Holton bells and bottom bows on my conversions I've come to prefer the Holtons. They seem to have a slightly darker character with great projection. The Kings are quite rare and may have the best potential for remaining in Eb. Yorks are also quite good with a little more edge to the sound. The Conn, Martin and others havent' worked out for the projects that I undertake.

Pretty interesting I agree that the old Holton and York belled tubas sound fairly similar. But in my personal experience, the Yorks always sound mellowest/most velvety and the Holtons have a slightly more husky or meaty sound with a tad more bite/edge to the sound than the Yorks...
Most of the H.N. White belled tubas & sousaphones have a warm & sweet centered sound. All of the above (York, Holton, H.N. White, Beuscher, Conn, Martin, etc) sound good - it's just a matter of personal preference.

@TheHatTuba

What kind of sound are you going for?

.

TheHatTuba wrote: I want a bigger (NOT heavy) meatier sound than the one I'm getting. I also want it to be less foggy and more colorful.

Big (NOT heavy), clear, meaty sound that is colorful = Holton
The Yorks also have those qualities, but with more mellowness and less "meat" than the Holtons, IMO.
The big Conns sound the most heavy & foggy and least colorful to me from your list. Probably why I am not as crazy about 'em as some here. But I still recognize them as good and some people really dig em.
The old Kings have the sweetest and most centered sound.
I don't have enough experience with the others as I have only heard them each played maybe once or twice..

My opinions

The original prototype horn of the Conn 5Xj's made by Dillon's had a 20" H.N. White King Bell. Replacing your Conn bell with a King bell would be the easiest solution because the you will not have to expand or contract the smaller part of the bell. It should fit directly into the bottom bow. Other bells may be longer or shorter which will affect the intonation.

One of the stories told about the 52J, when it was originally marketed, was that Conn put up some conditions for the design, one being that the bottom bow should be the one used for the old King 2341 BBb. I guess because tooling for bottom bows is expensive. So a King bell fitting that bow wouldn’t surprise me.

Klaus

imperialbari wrote:One of the stories told about the 52J, when it was originally marketed, was that Conn put up some conditions for the design, one being that the bottom bow should be the one used for the old King 2341 BBb. I guess because tooling for bottom bows is expensive. So a King bell fitting that bow wouldn’t surprise me.

Klaus

The Holton and York bells fit that King BBb bottom bow also. And the bottom bows from those monster Ebs will mate up with the King top bow. I like to use the original bottom bows when they're in good enough condition. FWIW

May I understand you as the old 2341 bottom bow itself was a ‘recycling’ from the King monster Eb basses?

Going far out on a limb: Did American makers buy parts like the bottom bows from each other? At least during the early stages of hydraulic forming? I might have ideas about the directions of such flows, but my foundation is too weak to be specific.

Klaus