TubeNet

I just bought an Eastman EBC-632 CC tuba for myself. The factory tubas play so much like the prototype I built for them, I put my money where my mouth is. This tuba is just as wonderfully in-tune as my York CC tuba, has a 5th rotor valve and is already lacquered. With a 20" bell, and front action pistons of .687" bore, this 34" tall CC tuba is a very easy to play horn that works nicely in smaller orchestra, community band, church ensemble, quintet, and solo work. Until Eastman offers a "Glamour Photo" of the new Eastman CC tuba, Dillon Music put up a quick in store photo to the link on their website.
http://www.dillonmusic.com/p-21936-east ... -tuba.aspx" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank
This tuba can be ordered through any Eastman dealer so this post is from a fellow TubeNetter, not an employee of Dillon Music. They have one lacquer one left in stock and have some silver ones on the way.

Eastman is one of the higher quality Chinese manufactured brands. It's not the cheapest, but I consider this EBC-632 CC and the EBB-534 BBb to be bargains that punch well above their price point. At the conference it was said several times, "This [EBC-632] plays like an eight thousand dollar tuba." I love a "good bargain" but I can't afford to be "cheap", so I bought one. Any good player looking for an all around CC tuba should put this at the top of the shopping list.

Do I have to change my signature now that I own a new tuba?

Can't see it very well in that photo, but the engraving seems cool. The other interesting difference with this (Wisemann as well) is that this manufacturer engraves THEIR brand on the bell, and distributes THEIR product to US-retailers. I think that's a better business model (and increased consumer confidence) over the usual "no, no, THIS is one of the good ones!" Certainly reflected in the price, but still looks like a good deal.

Plus, Matt is extremely picky about tubas, so if he says it plays well, that carries a LOT of weight with me. Matt, congratulations on finally getting the "Conn 56J" that you conceptualized put into production!

I just heard from Eastman that they are going to be at TMEA and are bringing one of the EBC-632 CC tubas.

The Conn series 5XJ CC tubas had a lot of compromises. My prototype to the Conn 5XJ had 3 different taper ratios in the 3rd branch. The Conn idiots measured the large and small diameters then made a straight tapered mandrel when I warned them what I did. It was so bad and they were too cheap to make a new mandrel that they went to just cutting the BBb branch and using a step ferrule. That large side of the 3rd branch ended up too small and is why the E in the staff is so flat on a 5XJ. The bottom line G being flat on the Conn 5XJ was caused by not following my tapers in the 5th branch. The C below the staff having a subtle slot in-tune but a power slot 40 cents flat is because of the knuckles right after the 4th into the main t/s. Those can be cleaned up to give the horn a safer slot. Also, that bulky 4th valve wrap is because Rob Phillips at Conn was forced to stay with only the crooks he had in stock.
The .750" bore 5th rotor on the Conn was not a hollowed out design so it wasn't a true .750" bore. The Conn's play so much better without the 5th rotor. The new Eastman has a properly made .770" bore 5th rotor and tubing. The Conn uses detachable joints at the leadpipe and the 5th valve that are quick to leak if everything is not perfect. I designed the Eastman to have short slide tubes that give more sealing area at the detachable points.
There is more but I need to keep a few Aces tucked away.

Hi-
It is sad but extremely telling that our own manufacturers in the U.S. couldn't 'copy' or clone a prototype correctly that was designed by a craftsman like Matt who truly does know what he is doing, and that it took the Chinese to copy Matt's work correctly. Very glad to hear about the results. As always, Matt does it again!!
Mark

bloke wrote:G50 fans now have an affordable way to obtain perhaps a better-than-G50 tuba.

This nails it.

The Eastman EBB-534 was done without my 2 cents.

Keep us informed when the friends and family sale happens.

Matt-
Again, great work on designing the CC prototype for Eastman!
Mark

bloke wrote:

Three Valves wrote:Keep us informed when the friends and family sale happens.

too many valves for you.

There was a little three piston front action model there, like a King 1135??

I had the opportunity to play the Eastman CC at Midwest. The Eastman rep and I spoke for a bit and I guessed the origins of this tuba before he told me. I guess I know Matt's tubas pretty well after all these years.

Anyway...

I have played Matt's original prototype CC that he gave to Conn, since Mike Lynch now owns it. I remember thinking that it was one of the best tubas I had EVER played, in any available key or configuration.

This Eastman reminded me immediately of that tuba. It is what the Conns should have been but never were. I seriously want one of these for my quintet instrument.

If this tuba plays at least as good as a Getzen G-50 and is well-made, then it must be a pretty great tuba

And Conn-Selmer wonders why it (and to a lesser extent, Kanstul) don't sell brass instruments like they used to.

jonesmj wrote:Hi-
It is sad but extremely telling that our own manufacturers in the U.S. couldn't 'copy' or clone a prototype correctly that was designed by a craftsman like Matt who truly does know what he is doing, and that it took the Chinese to copy Matt's work correctly. Very glad to hear about the results. As always, Matt does it again!!
Mark

How true!

Say more!

I played one and was very impressed. Matt, would one of these work with a York bell?

I got to try one at Army, after Matt pointed it out. It made me miss my 52J... because this was SO much better (though I miss being able to lay it on it's side!).

I'll need one of these if I win the lotto sometime soon. Threw down on an 834 BMB instead. Perfect all around trunk horn

J.c.S.

Question -- one thing I never really liked about the 56J is how "deep" of a horn it is (that is, the valve section wrap sticks way out the front of the horn). Mostly just an appearance thing, and having never owned one, I was always curious if it made it front-heavy.

Does the Eastman valve section stick way out the front, or is it more "normal"?

bort wrote:Question -- one thing I never really liked about the 56J is how "deep" of a horn it is (that is, the valve section wrap sticks way out the front of the horn). Mostly just an appearance thing, and having never owned one, I was always curious if it made it front-heavy.

Does the Eastman valve section stick way out the front, or is it more "normal"?

Hi-
I'll let you know tomorrow evening after mine arrives ....
Mark

AH! Very cool (you're always one of the first, aren't you...? )

Interesting.
Looking forward to learn more about this one