6/4 CC York / Nirschl Tuba RARE custom instrument! ENDED

Chuck(G) · Post by **Chuck(G)** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 5:18 pm

A strange instrument--why nickel plating on the York branches? York didn't nickel-plate their horns.

Matt G · Post by **Matt G** » Thu Jun 10, 2004 9:43 am

In all honesty, it looks like a regular old Rusk-cut Holton CC.

The bell may be new, but there is no real visual indication of it being Nirscl from those pics.

The valve set does not look like a Holton set, so maybe this is a Nirscl (looks like the old Bohm-Meinl) unit.

While I know that ebay is a fairly cheap way to get lots of exposure for a horn, I think that horns like this, of a highly specialized nature, are best sold on consignment at a large volume instrument dealer.

Also, i have a feeling that playing this horn would be of similar action to playing an accordian.

cjk · Post by **cjk** » Thu Jun 10, 2004 5:16 pm

The person selling it and the owner are two different people so I think the description might be a bit lacking.

I know the owner, but I've never played the horn.

The bows don't look nickel plated to me, rather brass, but parts of the valve section appear to be nickel. The ferrules (sp.?) definitely look York in the not-so-hot pics.

In all honesty, it looks like a regular old Rusk-cut Holton CC.

All the Holtons, Yorkbrunners, Meinl-Weston 2165s, and Nirschl 6/4s LOOK pretty much the same to me until you look at them real close.
A close comparison between an actual Holton and Jamey's tuba will show you that the ferrules and bracing are totally different.

What a tuba LOOKS like and how a tuba PLAYS are two totally different and unrelated things. It's funny that lots of folks on this board say crap like "that looks like a nice tuba". IMHO, there's an awful lot of shiny stuff out there that plays terribly.

Also, I have a feeling that playing this horn would be of similar action to playing an accordian.

That's a neat talent you have there! You can identify the pitch problems on an instrument through lousy pictures? Wow!!!!!

Rick Denney · Post by **Rick Denney** » Thu Jun 10, 2004 5:23 pm

Matthew Gilchrest wrote:In all honesty, it looks like a regular old Rusk-cut Holton CC.

Bohm & Meinl; definitely. But that doesn't make the listing a misrepresentation. The valve and valve branch arrangement is identical to my York Master except for the routing of the fourth valve and the general shortening to make it a CC. Thus, the valves likely did come from a York, just not a Grand Rapids York. I can't think of anything wrong with that, either. The valves on my York Master are dreamy compared to the clunky valves on my Holton, and the bore is the prescribed 3/4".

I suspect that from this distance it would be impossible to distinguish the bell and bottom bow from a Holton, York, Nirschl, Yorkbrunner, or even MW 2165. But the bell of this instrument seems to have even a larger throat than my Holton and less bell flare.

I'm suspicious only of the claim that the valve body is nickel-plated. The outer slides of York Masters were nickel-silver just as they are on many other German instruments. I don't know why someone would confuse the two, but it's possible. All the other claims seem entirely plausible.

The big question is how the instrument plays. There are lots of 6/4 conversion tubas out there, and their effectiveness varies all over the place.

Rick "who'd want a chat with Bob Rusk first thing before even contemplating a bid on this instrument" Denney

Chuck(G) · Post by **Chuck(G)** » Sat Jun 12, 2004 2:45 pm

The pre-WWII 6/4 Yorks and Holtons used the same large branches and bell (York made them for Holton). I've had a chance to inspect several Yorks and Holtons made between 1914-1935 and other than the valve section, braces and ferrules, you can't tell the difference.

The ferrules look York, the valves look B&M and they're plated with something--it could well be nickel.

The bell looks fat beause it might be patterned after a trimmed-down 22.5" York bell--this one looks to be about 20".

As for playing characteristics, who knows? I'd question the extent of Mr. Rusk's involvement in this--I can't believe that he'd advocate nickel-plating anything.

UDELBR · Post by **UDELBR** » Sat Jun 12, 2004 4:21 pm

I'd be willing to believe it's a Rusk job. The only horns you see with 2nd branches (the one after the top bow) that high are the Rusk "telescoped branches" conversions.

Chuck(G) · Post by **Chuck(G)** » Sat Jun 12, 2004 6:28 pm

I wonder if the large branches came from a Rusk-cut, with the bell, bottom bow and valves changed later. Ã

Adam C. · Post by **Adam C.** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 10:46 pm

The description is accurate as far as I know.

I've played the horn- it has quick response, a huge fluffy sound, and the intonation is just as good as my PT-6P.

The horn's history came partly from Dave Fedderly, who I believe originally sold it to the owner. I'm sure Floyd Cooley would be able to give more insight for those who doubt the accuracy of the information provided in the Ebay auction.

The instrument plays as well or better than other "6/4" tubas I've played.