TubeNet

http://www.amati.cz/english/production/ ... b_682g.htm

To my eyes, the wrap on this Cerveny 682 CC is a bit, uh, strange. Anyone see any special logic in the way they put this thing together?

I've always thought it to be a neat looking horn. I personaly however would never play one like that because I am positive I would end up smashing or bending one of those slides that are all over the place. Probably a real player but I doubt that it is going to win any durability test.

It looks like Cerveny has defied the normal pattern of a long whole step or a long minor third in the 5th valve.

To me it rather looks like the 5th valve lowers the main bugle with a perfect fifth.

That set-up has owned itself some merit in French tenor tubas and Saxhorns basses in either C or Bb. Only the French were smarter: they didn't place such a long valve tubing early in the bore progression.

Klaus

I think the 5th valve wrap looks like an engineering change! ... an add-on that is functional but not thought out real well.

The 5th valve on the 682 is indeed a quint valve (their specs page used to state that ... not sure why they deleted it). The 682 is essentially a 681 with a drastically-lengthened 5th valve, as you can see here (it'd be nice if the pics were the same height, but I've forgotten how to resize pics in HTML) (it'd also be easier to see if they were side-by-side):



I've always been surprised that they'd design it that way -- it does seem very vulnerable! (wouldn't want to take it to pep band, for instance)

By the way, they also make a BBb version ...

It looks like a ritarded monkey designed this thing!

FWIW, I love the quint valve on my Cerveny F and would not want to go back to playing an F tuba without one. However, on the F the quint valve is on the other side of the tuning slide and a significantly larger bore, so it helps to open up the low register besides reducing the number of valves being pressed. I am not sure how much of an advantage a quint valve located before the other valves and of the same bore would be on a contrabasss tuba.

As far as water issues on the tuba pictured above, its nothing a couple of Amados couldn't inexpensively fix.

MartyNeilan wrote:As far as water issues on the tuba pictured above, its nothing a couple of Amados couldn't inexpensively fix.

Well, here's Jorge:


and this guy's name is Luis:


But I'll be danged if I can guess what they can do for the tuba.

Chuck(G) wrote:

MartyNeilan wrote:As far as water issues on the tuba pictured above, its nothing a couple of Amados couldn't inexpensively fix.

Well, here's Jorge:


and this guy's name is Luis:


But I'll be danged if I can guess what they can do for the tuba.

That's the key question, isn't it?

Kevin Hendrick wrote:That's the key question, isn't it?

Maybe, but only if that sort of reasoning held water...

True -- probably best to cork it (for now, anyway) ...

Kevin Hendrick wrote:True -- probably best to cork it (for now, anyway) ...

I'll let that one slide...