TubeNet

Something I have seen in reference to newer horns (or more to the point relatively new manufacturers to the wider market) is the question of longevity. People may say " yeah that is a nice sounding horn, and it seems well constructed but we will have to see how the horn stands up over time". A fair and very relevant question.

My question is: Are there examples of horns in the past that were well received initially but proved to be complete duffers over time? Did they degrade into an irreparable state? Fall apart? Did parts become unavailable? What causes the decline of solid sounding instrument make/model apart from fashion and disfavor, poor reviews, and evolution?

What were the horns that did not stand up over time?

chronolith wrote:What were the horns that did not stand up over time?

I wonder how many Cerveny-made Sanders tubas that were bought for schools back in the 80's are still in use, versus Miraphones, Kings, etc. Everything in schools gets hopelessly abused these days, and maybe nothing has survived. But I bet those ultra-soft Cervenys were the first to become unrepairable. I had to fabricate new linkages to replace the crappy ones that were on this instrument, but that was relatively easy. It would have been harder, perhaps, had I wanted to use original parts--the factory was still behind the Iron Curtain. But at least I knew who and where the factory was.

And I'll bet that when a rotor shaft wears out on an unimproved St. Petersburg, it will be really hard to find a replacement. Or when the nickel plating on some St. Pete models peels after the instrument is dented and repaired.

My own Holton was new in 1970 or so, and survived decades in a school before being bought by a premiere military-band player in anticipation of converting it to C. He sold it rather than carry out that plan, and that's how it came to me. It show many scars from where dents and bell crunches have been rolled out, but it plays wonderfully and the pistons were still rebuildable even though the tooling for that instrument was destroyed ages ago. Unlike many instruments, it was worth the cost of those repairs to keep it in a state of good maintenance so that it can be used with confidence.

Rick "just some observations" Denney

Any Jupiter tuba or sousaphone. They bend just picking them up.

I have not seen a single Yamaha that did not have to have the valves completely rebuilt after only a few years, both rotor and piston.

iiipopes wrote:I have not seen a single Yamaha that did not have to have the valves completely rebuilt after only a few years, both rotor and piston.

I've yet to see one at all. I've been selling them for almost 10 years, working with over 12000 rental instruments of which around 70% are Yamaha and I, myself, spent $XXXXX on my last piston valve Yamaha instrument. Your experience does not reflect the norm. Yamaha valves are tight, yeah.
You gotta baby them (i.e. oil them every time you take the horn out of the case) for the first 6-8 months until they break-in, but I doubt that (unless you lap them or do things you're not supposed to to the very well machined pistons) those valves will ever leak in your lifetime.

iiipopes wrote:Any Jupiter tuba or sousaphone. They bend just picking them up.

Yup... They used to.

the elephant wrote:

bloke wrote:Of those of you that shopped or are shopping for a mate, which of you went looking for a good "sturdy" woman ?

What did you "shop" for? :p

Trade-in Value

80s Mirafones. Talk about soft metal.

I think the St Petersburg earliest imported models fit that bill, too. Nice playing horns but they were the opposite of what I'd think a good Soviet tuba would have been.

I appreciate that there are those of you who have Yamaha instruments that have served well for you. In addition to my observations, my tech tells me that, at least with regard to school instruments, that the vast majority of his work is re-rounding Yamaha piston casings and fixing broken valve guides, taking more time than repairs on all other brands of instruments put together.

iiipopes wrote:I appreciate that there are those of you who have Yamaha instruments that have served well for you. In addition to my observations, my tech tells me that, at least with regard to school instruments, that the vast majority of his work is re-rounding Yamaha piston casings and fixing broken valve guides, taking more time than repairs on all other brands of instruments put together.

Please ask him a few more questions...

Their repairs take less time because of their valve guides. Maybe he does more of them... But the reason the other models aren't taking up his time is because the valves are looser and can take similar knocks without the piston being effected. Also... The Yamahas probably outnumber the other instruments that your tech's customers own. I do hope your tech can be a little more objective when he's talking about these products. And, Yamaha products serve me as well as nearly every of the literally thousands of customers I've sold, rented and recommended these instruments to. There was a time that your tech's opinion was prevalent but slowly but surely, the R&D department at Yamaha is earning their respect.

I invite you to re-ask your questions of your tech and/or re-investigate your opinion. The many, many technicians I deal with on a regular basis are the ones who inspired my penchant for recommending Yamaha to my students, friends, family and, of course, customers. When I started in the business, my opinions were similar to yours. Experience has since changed those opinions.

Your mileage may vary. This is my experience. As I said before, for those who have had good service from their Yamaha instruments, I am glad to hear that. If I am ever in a position where the purchase of another tuba is in the picture, I will review the current state of the art of all the manufacturers, like I did some years ago when I previously purchased a tuba. I would like to agree with the above posts, but I cannot at this point. Maybe in the future I will.

I know things do change. Many people around my age had their first exposure to Conn instruments during the unfortunately dark MacMillian years, and never had the opportunity to play good Conn instruments until the company reconstituted. I can only hope that sometime in the future Yamaha will do the same. Maybe they have already done so. But I personally have yet to see an instrument as such. If anyone would like to drive out to where I live, bring their Yamaha tuba that they think that highly of, and provide me the opportunity to "test drive" it, I am more than open to consider the instrument on its own merits, and engage in positive discussion as to whether the instrument is reflective of the current state of the art of manufacturing as a whole.

I don't know why I get so defensive when it comes to broad statements placed on any particular manufacturer... I think I'm just (and most probably in vain) trying to battle the damage general statements make to companies on the interweb.

Anyhow, I can entirely appreciate your opinion knowing you're open to changing it if you experience proof sometime in the future. Thanks for being a good sport in being the target of my misplaced ire!

All the best.

Mirafphfones are always listed among "stands up over time" but what about all the older ones with leadpipes (and more) that are red-rotted out, and bells full of spider cracks???

Stryk wrote:

MartyNeilan wrote:Mirafphfones are always listed among "stands up over time" but what about all the older ones with leadpipes (and more) that are red-rotted out, and bells full of spider cracks???

I have a 70s 186 that was totally abused and crushed in a high school - had it pretty much straightened and the tears in the bell leaded and it is the best playing 186 I have ever had my hands on. So, I guess it has stood up - but was pretty much a junker when I got it.

Likewise. My 186 is from @ 1971, and has been rebuilt, and plays great for me. The rebuilding amounted to taking out dents from the bugle and retrofitting an upright detachable bell. The valves didn't need anything, even the S linkages.

In college, we had two sets of Sousaphones for marching band -- an old set for "practice," and a new set for "performance." (Well, it was as much of a practical matter as anything else, since the rehearsal field and the music building were about a mile apart.)

My practice horn was an old Conn naked lady sousaphone (not sure which model). Dings, dents, field-repaired bell creases, who-knows-when oiled valves... and that thing still played great. I have less than 0 practical use for a sousaphone now days, but if I did need one, I'd want that horn back.

My King Eb (pictured on here a few times) is 97 years old, still looks great, sounds great, has great valves (don't know the history on that), and still has the same lousy intonation.

The Conn has a flat third and a good fourth and fifth. Low Eb and D are fine. It's not as free blowing as the King and almost seems very slightly muffled. Low range is fine. The King is in slightly better shape.
The King has somewhat "interesting" intonation. It is super free blowing, so easy to play, and has a wonderful low range. It also has a fantastic, colorful sound. Fwiw, I was able to manage the intonation as my only horn as a performance major; my Conn Giant didn't work as well.

So yes, it has better intonation but there are several noticeable differences between the two.

Very slightly. If you search my posts (I'm on a tablet now) you should be able to find a picture of them side by side. The Conn looks like a smaller big York Eb.
I seem to now remember you sending me a pm and me not responding. Sorry!

iiipopes wrote:I appreciate that there are those of you who have Yamaha instruments that have served well for you. In addition to my observations, my tech tells me that, at least with regard to school instruments, that the vast majority of his work is re-rounding Yamaha piston casings and fixing broken valve guides, taking more time than repairs on all other brands of instruments put together.

Maybe it's because so many school Yamahas are 321's with narrowish bell flares. They are not stable on their bells, so they fall over. And all it takes is a slight tweak on the outer branch of a top-action tuba to bind the valves. Usually not a valve problem, and probably reseting the braces is all that is required to let them relax back into their correct shape.

I haven't played nearly as many notes as has Wade, but my 621 F's valves have never needed rebuilding. I did polish them once, and they are picky about valve oil. Personally, I think they are set up too tight, like trumpet valves, when tubas are subject to general stress beyond that of instruments. My Holton valves are more finiky, though, and require more frequently cleaning and care.

Yamaha brass is indeed a little soft. Mine is not nearly as soft as my old Sanders/Cerveny was, but it's easier to dent than my other tubas. But unlike those other tubas, Yamaha supplies them in a hard case.

Rick "whose Yamaha F tuba was a first-batch production, #72, older than Wade's, and did service for a year as a show-circuit demonstrator before coming to me" Denney