TubeNet

https://atlanta.craigslist.org/nat/msg/ ... 65775.html" target="_blank

edsel585960 wrote:https://atlanta.craigslist.org/nat/msg/ ... 65775.html" target="_blank

Another post in the general section asks about the difference between the B & S and the Cerveny 'stencils'. This is an example of a Cerveny one with Alexander influence.

Hi Dan,
I understand the Cerveny-built part (1 & 4 valve tubing coming out straight along the long axis of the horn) but what is the Alexander influence?
Thx,
royjohn

royjohn wrote:Hi Dan,
I understand the Cerveny-built part (1 & 4 valve tubing coming out straight along the long axis of the horn) but what is the Alexander influence?
Thx,
royjohn

The bow guards... the backing plates of the attachments... some of the Alex tubas I've seen had bow guards that went inside the ferrules instead of stopping short of them... just a variety of things that weren't common to the B & S-built ones. The routing of the tuning circuits. The B & S 4th wrap has a very wiiiide 4th slide that runs along the backside of the main bows while the Alex tubas are pretty much 'tucked in' like the Miraphones.

As far as strictly identifying the 'Alex influence'... it might be easier to just say "not B & S" because Alexander bounced around with several styles over the years. Sometimes it's difficult to spot an Alex but it's almost impossible for me to miss-identity a B & S 101 'stencil'. About the only B & S variant that's hard to spot in the 'Sanders Imperial' stencil that Custom Music brought in from Asia. Other that some very minor differences in the size of the backing plates and profile of the thumb ring... they can be real 'foolers'.