Lacquer or Silver?

The bulk of the musical talk
tubadude08
bugler
bugler
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 3:29 pm
Location: FL

Lacquer or Silver?

Post by tubadude08 »

Im looking into buying a Thor, and was wondering if anyone has played both the lacquer and silver horns side by side, and could give some insight as to how the play differently if they do at all. I have played a lacquer one, and was just wondering if anyone has found any differences. But to open this up just a little more, when dealing with horns in general, do you find a great deal of difference between the lacquer and silve?

Thanks
Ryan Sorenson
Warburton sales rep
MW Thor - Warburton Oviedo V8
B&S Symphonie - Laskey 28f
User avatar
CTAYLOR
bugler
bugler
Posts: 74
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 3:24 am
Location: Houston, Tx

Post by CTAYLOR »

Its all a matter of which one you think looks better! i know some people will argue. I'd go with silver. I never can tell a difference in the sound between lacquer and silver plate tubas.
Conn-Man
User avatar
Wyvern
Wessex Tubas
Wessex Tubas
Posts: 5033
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 7:00 pm
Location: Hampshire, England when not travelling around the world on Wessex business
Contact:

Post by Wyvern »

This is a subject that used to be regularly debated with never a consensus being reached. The difference in tone is likely to be minimal and is effected more by many other factors, so is largely a matter of personal preference. Only way is to play before you buy and decide.

Silver looks great if you are prepared to regularly polish, but personally I would prefer to be practicing to polishing, so go for lacquer which requires no more than an occasional wipe over with a lacquer cloth.
User avatar
rascaljim
pro musician
pro musician
Posts: 319
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 5:40 pm
Contact:

Post by rascaljim »

I recall asking a similiar question to a prominent east coast player when I was looking into the Miraphone 1291 a few years back. I was told it doesn't matter, but this particular person preferred silver due to how quickly his sweat had eaten through lacquer on other tubas.
MikeMason
6 valves
6 valves
Posts: 2102
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 1:03 am
Location: montgomery/gulf shores, Alabama
Contact:

Post by MikeMason »

I just played mine(lac) back to back with a silver one last week.No sonic difference.Lac. is lower maintenance.Silver is more permanent.I believe silver would be better for long term resale value.My current polishing consists of a wet washcloth followed by a dry washcloth.About 5 minutes...
Pensacola Symphony
Troy University-adjunct tuba instructor
Yamaha yfb621 with 16’’ bell,with blokepiece symphony
Eastman 6/4 with blokepiece symphony/profundo
User avatar
Maurice
bugler
bugler
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:09 pm
Location: Southeast

Post by Maurice »

I played both when I purchased mine (silver). Both sounded pretty much the same but, the sliver horn seemed to respond just the slightest bit quicker. Truth is I would have referred the lacquer horn, I hate to clean sliver.

This is the frist time that I have had the opportunity to play both in the same model at the same time. Up until then I would not have believed there to be a difference. When I commented to Rodger that the lacquer horn felt slower, like it was trying to expland (breathe) as air was introduced his explanation was the lacquer coating itself. I don't know, all I can say is for me there was a small but perceptible difference.
tofu
5 valves
5 valves
Posts: 1998
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: One toke over the line...

Post by tofu »

:tuba:
Last edited by tofu on Mon Mar 09, 2009 6:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
rascaljim
pro musician
pro musician
Posts: 319
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 5:40 pm
Contact:

Post by rascaljim »

As far as the lacquer responding slower than the silver, there are other factors at play. I'm no expert on horn building, but I know I recently had my bell resoldered to the upper bow of my 2165. It turned out that a previous repair had not been completely soldered at the brace as it should. I had Lee do it right, and all the sudden the horn went from handling like a Mac Truck to a sport sedan
User avatar
ZNC Dandy
4 valves
4 valves
Posts: 742
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 4:59 pm

Post by ZNC Dandy »

I have played both. I preferred the silver hands down. It seemed to have more core to me. It also appeared to play more evenly top to bottom than its lacquer counterpart. I couldn't care less honestly about what its covered in, as long as it sounds great. I personally prefer the look of raw brass.
User avatar
Mojo workin'
4 valves
4 valves
Posts: 784
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 1:44 pm
Location: made of teflon, behind the bull's eye

Post by Mojo workin' »

If shopping INTONATION, I would look for the Thor with the HIGHEST 5th partial and the LOWEST 2nd partial.
Are low 5th partials and high 2nd partials intonation tendancies of the Thor?

CC tubas?

Tubas?
User avatar
kingrob76
3 valves
3 valves
Posts: 413
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 10:45 pm
Location: Reston, VA

Post by kingrob76 »

I've played both finishes back to back, in fact, I played 3 silver and 1 lacquer back to back. One of the silver models was the most impressive, followed by the lacquer. The other two silver models were a distant 3rd and 4th IMHO.

I spent significant time on a different lacquer that is STILL the best Thor I have ever played. One of my main criteria for evaluation is how well the horn plays at piano or pianissimo, and how light I it feels in terms of character of sound, not weight of instrument. ALL of the Thor's have the top end in terms of volume and presence of sound, but I tend to like the ones that still sing (to me) when playing delicately.
Rob. Just Rob.
User avatar
4snaver
bugler
bugler
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 8:53 am
Location: Wichita, Kansas

Post by 4snaver »

Copied from:

Schilke Brass Clinic
The Physics of Inner Brass and the Acoustical Effects of
Various Materials and Their Treatment
By Renold O. Schilke



One large point of controversy has always existed between those who prefer a lacquered horn and those who prefer plated horns, either silver or gold, or a third group who prefer their instruments in plain brass without any protective coating whatsoever. Let me give you my findings on the three different finishes of instruments. First, I tried to find myself three instruments that played absolutely identically. One, I silverplated, one I had a very good lacquer job put on and a third I left in brass. Now recall that all three instruments played identically the same in brass, or as close as it is possible to get. I had various players from the Symphony working with me as well as other professional trumpet players in Chicago and they agreed unanimously on the results. The findings were that plating does not affect the playing qualities of brass instruments. That is, the plated instrument and the plain brass instrument played identically. The lacquered instrument, however, seemed to be changed considerably. This instrument, which originally had played the same as the other two, now had a very much impaired tonal quality and the over-all pitch was changed.

To explain these findings as to why the silver and brass instruments played alike and the lacquered instrument did not, let me give you some figures. The silver plating on a brass instrument is only one-half of a thousandth inch thick. In other words .0005 inch. The lacquer that goes on, if it is a good lacquer job, is approximately seven thousandths of an inch thick, or .007 inch. Now to get an idea in your minds as to what these thickness figures represent, an ordinary piece of writing paper is approximately four thousandths of an inch thick so the silver that goes on an instrument is only 1/8 as thick as a piece of writing paper, while the lacquer is almost double the thickness of a piece of writing paper. The silver in itself is very compatible to the brass. The lacquer, if it is a good lacquer and baked on, will be almost as hard as glass and not at all compatible to brass. The lacquer on the bell of an instrument is seven thousandths of an inch thick on the outside and another seven thousandths on the inside which gives you a total thickness of fourteen thousandths or .014 inch. This is already the thickness of the metal of my instruments so the lacquer process would double the bell thickness. As you can see, it is bound to affect the playing quality of the instrument.

You can read the complete Schilke Brass Clinic undated paper here:
http://www.dallasmusic.org/schilke/Brass%20Clinic.html
MikeMason
6 valves
6 valves
Posts: 2102
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 1:03 am
Location: montgomery/gulf shores, Alabama
Contact:

Post by MikeMason »

I believe lacquer is thinner today with electrostatic application.I also believe this effect would be proportionally much less on a tuba than a trpt.YMMV...
Pensacola Symphony
Troy University-adjunct tuba instructor
Yamaha yfb621 with 16’’ bell,with blokepiece symphony
Eastman 6/4 with blokepiece symphony/profundo
User avatar
willbrett
bugler
bugler
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 10:56 pm
Location: Tampa, FL

Post by willbrett »

MikeMason wrote:
I believe lacquer is thinner today with electrostatic application.



How many years has the electrostatic lacquering process been an industry standard? Any differences between manufacturers, or did they all switch over at nearly the same time?
User avatar
NDSPTuba
3 valves
3 valves
Posts: 315
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 8:02 pm
Location: DFW, TX
Contact:

Post by NDSPTuba »

Walter Lawson did a study measuring the resonance of the different metals that F. Horns are made of and the effect that lacquer had on them. He used scientific measuring devices to measure frequency response on the same bell before and after lacquer. The result was there wasn't any appreciable difference measured.
Kalison 2000 Pro
G&W Taku
User avatar
sloan
On Ice
On Ice
Posts: 1827
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 10:34 pm
Location: Nutley, NJ

Post by sloan »

Is n=1 the accepted standard in brass instrument science?
4snaver wrote:Copied from:

Schilke Brass Clinic
The Physics of Inner Brass and the Acoustical Effects of
Various Materials and Their Treatment
By Renold O. Schilke



One large point of controversy has always existed between those who prefer a lacquered horn and those who prefer plated horns, either silver or gold, or a third group who prefer their instruments in plain brass without any protective coating whatsoever. Let me give you my findings on the three different finishes of instruments. First, I tried to find myself three instruments that played absolutely identically. One, I silverplated, one I had a very good lacquer job put on and a third I left in brass. Now recall that all three instruments played identically the same in brass, or as close as it is possible to get. I had various players from the Symphony working with me as well as other professional trumpet players in Chicago and they agreed unanimously on the results. The findings were that plating does not affect the playing qualities of brass instruments. That is, the plated instrument and the plain brass instrument played identically. The lacquered instrument, however, seemed to be changed considerably. This instrument, which originally had played the same as the other two, now had a very much impaired tonal quality and the over-all pitch was changed.

To explain these findings as to why the silver and brass instruments played alike and the lacquered instrument did not, let me give you some figures. The silver plating on a brass instrument is only one-half of a thousandth inch thick. In other words .0005 inch. The lacquer that goes on, if it is a good lacquer job, is approximately seven thousandths of an inch thick, or .007 inch. Now to get an idea in your minds as to what these thickness figures represent, an ordinary piece of writing paper is approximately four thousandths of an inch thick so the silver that goes on an instrument is only 1/8 as thick as a piece of writing paper, while the lacquer is almost double the thickness of a piece of writing paper. The silver in itself is very compatible to the brass. The lacquer, if it is a good lacquer and baked on, will be almost as hard as glass and not at all compatible to brass. The lacquer on the bell of an instrument is seven thousandths of an inch thick on the outside and another seven thousandths on the inside which gives you a total thickness of fourteen thousandths or .014 inch. This is already the thickness of the metal of my instruments so the lacquer process would double the bell thickness. As you can see, it is bound to affect the playing quality of the instrument.

You can read the complete Schilke Brass Clinic undated paper here:
http://www.dallasmusic.org/schilke/Brass%20Clinic.html
Kenneth Sloan
User avatar
sloan
On Ice
On Ice
Posts: 1827
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 10:34 pm
Location: Nutley, NJ

Post by sloan »

Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?
bloke wrote:
4snaver wrote:Schilke's thing
Thanks for bringing that out again. There are a few problems with it.

- It simply isn't scientific. My morning mind doesn't have grasp of my full vocabulary, but there is a word that describes the polling of a random or small group of evaluations rather than those that are scientific.
- He's discussing instruments that are two geometric sizes smaller than tubas that are known in the industry to be manufactured of extraordinarily thin-walled material.
Kenneth Sloan
User avatar
tokuno
3 valves
3 valves
Posts: 270
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 12:51 am

Post by tokuno »

sloan wrote:Is n=1 the accepted standard in brass instrument science?
Sure, as long as it's my horn and I'm the 1 :P

and as we all know, n=1 + Internet = categorical
TubaRay
6 valves
6 valves
Posts: 4109
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 4:24 pm
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Contact:

Lacquer or Silver

Post by TubaRay »

bloke wrote:there is a word that describes the polling of a random or small group of evaluations rather than those that are scientific.
I believe the word is, "unscientific." Many others would agree with your word(above): "random."
Ray Grim
The TubaMeisters
San Antonio, Tx.
User avatar
MaryAnn
Occasionally Visiting Pipsqueak
Occasionally Visiting Pipsqueak
Posts: 3217
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 9:58 am

Post by MaryAnn »

NDSPTuba wrote:Walter Lawson did a study measuring the resonance of the different metals that F. Horns are made of and the effect that lacquer had on them. He used scientific measuring devices to measure frequency response on the same bell before and after lacquer. The result was there wasn't any appreciable difference measured.
Um...disagree on some minor details. What I remember from Walter Lawson's study (which I have posted about before when this topic came up) was that the horn, after it was lacquered, lost ~5% of the high frequencies in the tone. On a horn, this is a slight difference in right hand position, but on a tuba, unless you have an unusual anatomy, you won't have your hand in the bell. I believe what Walter did was to test the same horn both pre-and post-lacquering, but he still had to test it with a real player, which could also affect the results.

That said, individual differences between theoretically identical instruments out of the factory, are generally much larger than the difference due to being silver plated, left alone, or lacquered.

MA, who uses a Lawson lacquered ambronze bell on her E. Schmid unlacquered horn, an it made one whale of a difference.
Post Reply