TubeNet

For what it's worth, I believe it's common for design credit to go to someone who supplies the initial inspiration for the thing - car, building, etc. - even though it's understood that from there it takes a great deal of engineering to make it work. As long as that original inspiration is recognizable in the end product.

On the other hand, I can't think of a much historical evidence that would make me expect more from something designed by an end user. Whether it's a tuba or a fishing rod, your skill at using it rarely seems to have much to do with your skill at designing it.

Indeed. This has been the way it is in the guitar world since Nick Lowe got his "artist model" Gibson in 1923. They tell the company the tone, feel, cosmetics, or other characteristics they are looking for, and the company engineers and designers figure it out for them.

This is in contrast to my custom P-style electric bass with its fanned fret fingerboard, which I did design, did the engineering math, and hired the folks to build or modify each part of it to the specs I sent them, and did the rest of the modifications, wiring and assembly myself. So most of these guys can only say they are consultants, where I can truly say I designed my bass from scratch, taking design cues from others, but putting the whole thing together myself, with custom fret fanning, a custom neck nut width, heel width and profile to fit my hands, etc.

Now, there is another problem with "designer" instruments. With the exception of Les Paul, most "designer" instruments, including mine, are designed for that particular person. Every other person will have for tubas different embouchure, different breath support, different general physicality (height, weight, etc.); and for guitars, different arms, wrists, hands, etc. So the chances of a "designer" instrument truly fitting another individual is slim to none. For example, how many TubeNetter's can actually play a real Warren Deck mouthpiece, with its 24AW diameter cup, but huge throat? None.

I have always been leery of a "designer" instrument, because most of them don't fit me as a stock item. I don't even like stock Fender Stratocasters, for example, because they were designed for Bill Carson, and he holds a guitar much differently than I do.

I'm not sure instrument craftsmen advertise these as being completely designed by the artist name engraved (or decaled) somewhere on the noise maker. I think it's more of a 'designed for' thing. Certainly, equipment designed for the individual will not perform the same for the masses, but some modifications made by individuals just work (the 'fletcher cut' and blokes f tuba mouthpiece, for example).
I will admit that it seems like a bit of an advertising stunt to me: more so with names of deceased people.

I will also admit that I have bought products with the Tiger Woods (well, that cap was a gift, but I still wore it) and Michael Jordan logos on them.

LJV wrote:In automotive, there were three general phases. [...]
LJ "Been everything but a stylist. Have told many a stylist why their car can't look like a sailboat and go down the road..." V

Well shucks, this whole thread is all upside down now.


I just think it's weird when ____ lets an instrument creator stencil the horn or mouthpiece ____ sounds good on, and ___'s name is engraved on the product. But hey, I own one of these horns, and I like it. I'm not going to complain.