TubaRay bought a Rudolf Meinl 5/4 at the Army Conference. I asked Alex Rogge to make a picture of it next to my Holton after the reading session, and I've now inserted that in my comparisons page.
Yup, a 5/4 Rudy is as big (or nearly so) as a 6/4 Holton.
In the eye of the beholder, apparently - to me, the side-by-side shows about the same difference as your Jupiter 582 vs. York Master, or your 1241 vs. York Master.
I had a lacquered 4 valve 5/4 Rudy Meinl CC just like that for a little while, though the lacquer on mine was lacking a lot more than Ray's is based on what I see in the photo. It's nice to see there are more 4 valve 5/4 Rudy CCs out there...mine was the only 4 valve Rudy 5/4 CC I'd ever come across until now.
The Rudy could easily be classified as a 6/4 and is definately interesting to see placed next to the 6/4 that the whole 6/4 designation is based upon.
***Edit: See DP's post re: the term "6/4" and Holton size.
I sold the Rudy to purchase an F tuba, and though I do not regret purchasing the F tuba (great player; played a lot; serious money maker), I wish I would have been able to find a way to have my cake and eat it too by not having to part with the Rudy.
I do feel like I've finally "landed" in my quest for the right combination of tubas (1 CC, 1 F) for me (how many of you can say that?), but I wouldn't mind buying back that one back.
Last edited by Tom on Sat Mar 10, 2007 12:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
Donn wrote:...to me, the side-by-side shows about the same difference as your Jupiter 582 vs. York Master, or your 1241 vs. York Master.
Perhaps. All of these are in the same size class, and are dwarfed by the Holton. The point is that the classes don't mean much. The 5/4 rotary tubas like the Rudy (and perhaps the Cerveny 601, among others) are quite large. In the current big-tuba craze of the last couple of decades, many young'uns get the notion that the Yorkish tubas are significantly larger than the 5/4 rotary kaisertubas. Not so.
Rick "whose Holton was dwarfed by the Rudy 6/4" Denney
Has anybody tried a LOUD mouthpiece on a Rudy? Even though the LM-7 I tried didn't do exactly what I wanted a mouthpiece to do for concert band -- a little too clean and precise, if that can be the case -- I could tell it was a great mouthpiece I could use in a different setting, and its precise nature would probably work well on any large or BAT tuba.
Tom wrote:I had a lacquered 4 valve 5/4 Rudy Meinl CC just like that for a little while, though the lacquer on mine was lacking a lot more than Ray's is based on what I see in the photo. It's nice to see there are more 4 valve 5/4 Rudy CCs out there...mine was the only 4 valve Rudy 5/4 CC I'd ever come across until now.
FWIW, Wes Jacobs played a 4v 5/4 in Detroit for years prior to buying his Yorkbrunner. It was always a challenge trying to match his sound in the studio with my Cerveny/Sanders 186.
"The only problem with that tuba is, it does everything you tell it to!" - Robert LeBlanc
gregsundt wrote:FWIW, Wes Jacobs played a 4v 5/4 in Detroit for years prior to buying his Yorkbrunner. It was always a challenge trying to match his sound in the studio with my Cerveny/Sanders 186.
Sounds like my experience playing a similar Sanders in the few lessons I had with Mike Sanders. He played his Alex.
But it didn't matter what he played. When he played my Sanders, he made it sound like his Alex. My challenge was to match the sound of the neighbor's bloodhound.
Rick "with never a hope of matching that sound" Denney
Rick Denney wrote:I've also appended some stuff about Dave Schaafsma's new York on my Old vs. New page. Turns out, his York Master is more like a York than mine is.
Rick, I still hope to take more photos. I have been totally swamped lately.
There is one error in your update though... my York-Master has NOT been restored, it is in original condition. It has been VERY well cared for by the original owner and I am carefull with it too. The original owner bought it new in 1955 to play in the Cities Services Band of America under Paul LaValle. He later got into local politics and I don't think he played it often after that, hence it's very fine condition. It does appear that the music store that sold it for him on eBay did remove a few minor dents on the outside of the wrap using a dent eraser. But there are no other signs of work being done on it.
Bandmaster wrote:There is one error in your update though...
Thanks for the correction. I've changed "beautifully restored" to "beautifully maintained".
It's interesting that yours is older than mine, and more similar to the original York than mine. Yet mine is old enough so that it doesn't have the Marzan-inspired improvements of later B&M Symphonic models. Something influence B&M to venture away from the York model.
Rick "who would like to see it in person someday" Denney
I heard backfrom the antique dealer yesterday that I bought the York (Blessing) from on eBay and he passed on an interesting bit of history about the tuba.
By the way, here's a story for you to think about while restoring the Blessing. The antique dealer I originally bought it from was using it as a garden ornament!!! She had the Blessing tuba out in her garden for years and years, with rain and snow and elements affecting it. It survived pretty well, but then who knows what shape it was in before she put it out there!!!!
I am amazed that this tuba is in as good of shape as it is after this treatment. I can't find any damage from it's life out of doors except it's very dark brown patina. There is no green discoloration on the horn amazingly and no signs of rot. Maybe it was lucky that somebody poked a couple of small holes in the bottom bow, it let the rain water drain out. All but two slides move nicely and other than the 4th valve being mishandled by someone trying a repair, the valves are in good shape. They even appear to be fairly tight still, no leaks. The horn even plays half way decent as a 3 valve tuba...
