PT-3 v. the Pig

[circusboy]

I'd love to hear from anyone who has had enough time playing on both the B&S PT-3 (or3P) and Cerveny Piggy to do a little compare-and-contrast, including both objective measures like intonation and subjective areas like feel, playability, timbre.

PT-3: .748"-.825" graduated bore; 16.5" bell
Piggy: .827" bore; 15.75" bell

I've gotten to play on a few Piggies, if only briefly. I've never even seen a PT-3 in person.

Thanks.

[bort]

I played a rotary PT-3 in college, and found it to be a very capable and efficient instrument. A very good all-around tuba, and very easy to play. Excellent build quality, and very comfortable to play. I've only ever seen one or two piston PT-3's, and haven't played any. I think they are funny looking.

I've tried a few Piggies before, and just never got comfortable with them the same way -- they are so short, your head is extremely close to the bell, and to me, I didn't like the experience. Build quality is so-so, and playing-wise some are good and some are not. They have thinner metal, so the response is much different, it can either feel hollow, super resonant, or pretty normal. One tried had a leadpipe (factory installed) so close to the bell that there was no room for your head. Valve linkages are a toss-up if it's an older horn. Then again, some people have "good ones" and swear by them, and I could imagine that on a Piggy where everything went 100% right, it might be a very good horn.

Blindly, I'd say go with the PT-3 rotary. However, if you can find a Yamaha 661, that would also be a similar horn to consider.

Frankly, if it were me, I'd pick a Miraphone 186 over either tuba. It has its own issues, but I prefer them over those two horns.

[circusboy]

Thanks, Bort.

Anyone else?

[cjk]

A Cerveny Piggy CC was the first tuba I owned.
I can't remember playing a PT-3.
So, for me, I'd have to say PT-3, no contest.

[bort]

A Cerveny Piggy CC was the first tuba I owned.
I can't remember playing a PT-3.
So, for me, I'd have to say PT-3, no contest.

[Mark Horne]

I own a PT3, but have never played a piggy, although I have owned a Cerveny 681 that was a nice horn.

The PT3 plays bigger than any 186 that I have tried and the low end is surprisingly strong. I believe that the valve set is the same as for the Neptune except for the 5th valve wrap. I find its playing characteristics are similar to the Neptune but the PT3 is better centered. As you would expect the PT3 is not as open in the near-pedal range. The most significant intonation issue for me is the open G at the bottom of the staff is quite sharp and I need to play it 1-3. The G an octave above is also sharp.

An interesting observation - I had been using the PT3 for my outdoor 4th of July gigs and was planning to use the Neptune for the indoor concert coming up this week. At last week's rehearsal I found that the Neptune wasn't centering on pitch and resonance as well as I would like and therefore I wasn't getting a real big sound. Guess I had gotten used to the PT3's tighter slots and slightly more resistant blow. So the PT3 goes to the dress rehearsal tonight and we'll see how is sounds in the hall...

[Doug!]

My first CC that I actually owned was a PT3. I absolutely regret selling it. I have played several Cerveny Piggies. Some were stinkers. Many were acceptable. One of them as a really really great 4 valver. It had no pitch issues for me and just really sang. To be clear, it was a really old horn and was actually stenciled with the name Zeiss on the bell. My point is that there may be another great Piggy out there, but the build quality is so inconsistent you should not consider one unless you actually get a chance to sit down and play it. Some PT3s are better than others, but they are all pretty darned good if that is the kind of horn you are looking for.