TubeNet

It's the inherent bias of "more expensive = better."

"Good for the price" has its uses in places where there's a definite difference in quality between more and less expensive options (cameras and lenses, for example), but I agree that it mostly isn't the cases for tubas.

As soon as you say "for the price," that decreases the perceived amount of "good" and increases the importance of the cost.

It probably depends on where you are selling it and to whom how wordy you get. I sell a lot of student horns that I've fixed up so they are playable. I try to keep the cost low. A lot of parents have no idea what a horn costs new. My "good for the price" 12j at $500 bucks we all know on this forum is reasonable compared to $5500 or so bucks for a new one. Many band parents are unaware of the price of a new horn. They still want to barter though. Always start high, you can always come down

bort wrote:As soon as you say "for the price," that decreases the perceived amount of "good" and increases the importance of the cost.

Well, sure. That phrase is for something that is acceptable, but not as good as alternatives that are much more expensive. If much more expensive tubas aren't typically better, then it doesn't have much application with tubas.

TubeNet doesn't cost anything for most of us.
I think it's GREAT for the money!!

bloke wrote:
an example:
B&S F tubas imported into the USA in the late 1970's were "good".
The fact that they cost only $1000 (adjusted for inflation: $4000) was a separate issue - unrelated-to-and-not-qualifying "good".

It's still amazing to me how pricing for brass instruments has inflated over the years. Even more surprising is that some of the so-called "high grade" brass made in the Jinbao factory are more than double that adjusted for inflation price

I'm still using the Tiger rotary BBb that I snagged off Ebay several years ago. So far I have been able to repair all of the parts that have broken, and I still like it in spite of its ergonomic shortcomings. It's a plastic copy of a Miraphone 191, and it cost me roughly one-tenth of the price of the Miraphone. In my opinion that's good "for the money".
With a few design improvements it could be a GREAT tuba for roughly 50% more money, but I suspect that will never happen.

bloke wrote: This factoid (neither being a seller nor a potential consumer of these products), assuming it's accurate, couldn't possibly be of less concern to me.

Yet, "inflation" was brought into this discussion by someone........
Either way, the pricing inflation of most brass (from "high grade" Chinese to German, etc.) has gotten stupid-crazy over the years.