WTB/WTT for CC tuba

[royjohn]

I am looking for a Mack Brass 410 Cc tuba or something similar for under $3K... for community band. I have a Conn 20J and a Karl Ziess Master Modelle BBb for trade if anyone is interested, but I would buy outright, too.

[BTripp]

I have a Cervaney CC piggy for sale if interested.. See the ad in the for sale section or PM me for details. Good luck.. Bernie

[MKTuba]

A brand new mack 410 CC is about 2k, and for the extra change (to get up to your 3k budget) you could get a nice case, a few mouthpieces and some other accessories for the horn if you wanted. I love my mack 410, but definitely have had my problems with it. As far as Chinese tubas go, the mack 410 is top notch, however I do have my qualms with it.

Not trying to discourage you from buying a 410, they are awesome tubas. If you can find a real 186 go that route, otherwise pick up a 410!

[royjohn]

I found a Mack 410 for sale a while back. A new one was $2400 with tax, and I found one offered for $1500, but opted for another which had been tuned up by a professional repairman...slides aligned and miniball linkages replaced with a better set. The tuba cost $2100, close to what new one would cost, but this one had been selected out of a batch by McGrady, tuned up and played by a professional on his orchestra gigs, so I went with it. MKTuba, I wonder if you'd be willing to say what kinds of problems you've had with the horn. I am enjoying mine with no problems as yet...just can't decide which mpc I like best with it, but that's probably because I'm such a newbie just yet. The valves are a bit loud, that's all...

royjohn

[MKTuba]

Hey royjohn, thats nice to hear that you enjoy your 410! They truly are some great horns, and I am happy that you were able to find one with such great prestiege!

The problems I have had with my horn are only starting to manifest after roughly 3-4 years of owning the horn. I will list them in order of least to most problematic.

Slides are not aligned properly. This has been an issue the whole time I have had the horn. Some of the slides (3rd, and the second 5th slide tucked behind the valve section) are not properly aligned, which makes pulling slides difficult when the lube starts to wear off.

Patchy Lacquer. The lacquer on the horn has been coming off for a long time. It started on the 1st valve slide (my default left hand resting spot to fix some intonation problems) began to wear down less than a year after I bought the tuba. Now, the place where my right forearm rests is completely worn down. The leadpipe also has several areas where lacquer is worn, largely due to my left hand coming up over it when pulling slides. Worn lacquer is not at all uncommon on older tubas, but thats they key: older tubas. My 410 is only a couple years old. The culprit is the cheap Chinese lacquer used on wessex, schiller, mack, and other Chinese horns. It is not a huge deal to me, but during longer practice sessions it has started to turn parts of my arm green haha.

Noisy, cheap linkages. This is another issue that has been apparent since the beginning of my time with the horn. Basically, jinbao uses the cheap linkages on their tubas. Instead of the modern mini-ball type linkages that real miraphones use, it is basically like a 2 rods screwed together with a little ring. They work loose, and are super loud and annoying. In addition to this, I think they contribute to the scratchy feel of these valves.

The last problem is definitely the most annoying, but I feel a little in-genuine listing it without admitting that it is largely my fault. Awhile ago my horn suffered from a leadpipe dent which really affected the playability (obviously). I had it repaired, but it still never felt the same. It is definitely better than when it was dented, however it is still not like it was before. I suspect that there is an air-leak in the leadpipe as well, as there are a lot of notes on the horn that just don't center, and I really cannot see any other reason for this other than there being an air-leak somewhere. Again, this is not a problem that all examples of this model will suffer from, but it is definitely a result of the insanely cheap, thin metal used to craft these horns.

Again, I really do enjoy my mack 410. I still recommend it to people looking for an inexpensive, decent quality cc tuba. For less than $2500 dollars, you will almost never find a decent CC tuba. If you want this to really be an exquisite horn, there are several modifications I would recommend. Convert the tuba to miniball linkages, potentially buy leather wraps to protect the horn from lacquer wear (totally optional, only if you want to protect the appearance of the tuba). My last recommendation is one I honestly don't have experience with so I can't vouch for how well it will work, but I would suspect that purchasing a replacement leadpipe would do wonders for how this horn will play.

The mouthpiece topic is a whole different can of worms. My favorite mouthpiece for my Mack is the classic pt88. I have tried about a dozen different mouthpieces in this tuba over the years, and I keep returning to the pt88. I am tempted to try a pt44 or pt50, but for now I will likely stay with my pt88 for awhile.

Hope this helps. Cheers!

[royjohn]

Thanks for your reply, MKGTuba. As I said in my earlier post, I bought this 410 in preference to others specifically because the slide issue and the linkage issue have both been fixed. I was told that the linkages were a compromise fix...better than the original, but not as good as real Miraphone linkages would be. The parts cost to install these would be about $200 and then the tuba would have to be drilled out and tapped to receive the Miraphone linkages, which fit differently. I am happy with the rotaries the way they are now. If I improve a great deal and have the cash later, I can upgrade to the Miraphone linkages.

A leadpipe upgrade is an interesting possibility, but I don't know anybody who has done that, so no telling how it might work out. In looking at my horn today, trying to measure the gap, I found that it looke like there is actually a small "reverse gap" and I'm not sure exactly what that means, except that slotting might be loose. It would be possible to put on a different receiver or an adjustable gap receiver and change that, but IDK whether that would be advisable.

I was thinking about a PT-50 for the horn, but I'll add your PT-88 as a possibility.
-royjohn

[MKTuba]

Totally makes sense! I am considering upgrading the linkages on my 410 however it is fairly cost prohibitive- especially since I am planning on buying a new CC soon.

I think that a different leadpipe could improve a lot of things about the mack. Even from a stock, undamaged leadpipe point of view I think that a heavier leadpipe would really solidify the low register and make certain slots a little easier to achieve.

My vote would be really any of the larger PT mouthpieces. They work great in these german style CC tubas, and I am very happy with mine.