Against the "cloned instrument" idea

[Wyvern]

I realize that the Miraphone 1291 copy, for example, does not say "Miraphone" on the bell, nor should it. But not like that's fooling anyone.

It does not fool the tuba 'experts' on this forum, but my guess is that if you took one of the 'clones' around bands, that not a fraction of the tuba players would recognise on what model it is based. Lets face it, most players would not know a 1291 from a Thor if it was not for the engraving on the bell

Jonathan "who thinks it is very easy to assume that what is obvious to oneself, is obvious to everyone else"

[pgym]

And what, precisely, would that be?

I haven't had the time to look at Dan's comparison, but to me the design looks copies. One can patent manufacturing dimensions, thus the shape / look can be patented (and thus variation in shape be a loophole). If the manufacture could atribute a facet of bore taper to a characteristic of sound, then one could patent a bore profile.

Sorry, it ain't that simple.

The applicant would have to DEMONSTRATE to the satisfaction of the issuing authority that the facet is NEW, NON-OBVIOUS, and DOES, in fact, do what the applicant claims it does.

Again, I haven't looked into this, and i am no expert- you asked what i think is fishy, and I think the two horns are too similar at a glance. I haven't taken serious look at either horn.

Sorry, but mere visual similarity, in and of itself, does not constitute a breach of any legal principle.

Pgym, "who thinks it's more than a little ironic that someone would complain about the legality of cloning a non-patented item but doesn't have a problem engaging in what is, at the very least, a technical violation of an existing copyright."

[sloan]

Personnally - I smell something fishy with these clones legally...

And what, precisely, would that be? Can you point to a component on a tuba, euphonium, trombone, or other bass instrument that is currently protected by a valid patent that is being copied by cloners?

Do you mean to imply that *patent* law is all there is?

[tbn.al]

"who thinks it's more than a little ironic that someone would complain about the legality of cloning a non-patented item but doesn't have a problem engaging in what is, at the very least, a technical violation of an existing copyright."

Ouch! That's a bit brutal, no?

[Todd S. Malicoate]

Ouch! That's a bit brutal, no?

It's not "brutal" at all. It's an appropriate observation germane to the discussion and, as pgym put it, "ironic."

Live by the sword, die by the sword. If you're going to point out something "smells fishy," it would be best to have your own house in order first.

[Todd S. Malicoate]

Meh... I own it; while techically true, I'll claim fair use.

Fair use? How does that even remotely apply here?

Todd, who thinks the person who makes a PDF copy and sends it to someone else is in much more trouble than the person claiming they "own it."

[bort]

One should remember that this is exactly how Yamaha got it's start, wasn't it?

Yamaha did more loosely based "interpretations" of well known instruments and less "replication." The Japanese tend to think that their copies of anything with be improvement upon the original. Anything less would be a failure. The Chinese are satisfied to copy closely (or "close enough") and sell, sell, sell, cheaply...

YES, that's my point exactly! With the clones, there is no intention of progress...only the hope of making something the same as what already exists.

Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery, yes. Stealing your idea to put money in my own pocket...not so sincere.

I realize that the Miraphone 1291 copy, for example, does not say "Miraphone" on the bell, nor should it. But not like that's fooling anyone.

It does not fool the tuba 'experts' on this forum, but my guess is that if you took one of the 'clones' around bands, that not a fraction of the tuba players would recognise on what model it is based. Lets face it, most players would not know a 1291 from a Thor if it was not for the engraving on the bell

Jonathan "who thinks it is very easy to assume that what is obvious to oneself, is obvious to everyone else"

I fully understand that as well. But I also think most tuba players would see a name they don't recognize on the bell, and then begin to question what just in the heck this thing is.

[Uncle Buck]

Pgym, "who thinks it's more than a little ironic that someone would complain about the legality of cloning a non-patented item but doesn't have a problem engaging in what is, at the very least, a technical violation of an existing copyright.[/url]"

Your signature claims you are a lawyer. You should know that patent law and copyright law are apples and oranges. Your non-sequitor says more about you than it does about someone who asked for help in a (clearly fair use) pinch, and then DARED to express an opinion on a separate topic.

[Todd S. Malicoate]

...someone who asked for help in a (clearly fair use) pinch...

Again, I'm stymied. How is it "fair use" for someone to create an illegal copy on their computer and send it to someone else? It's not the same as loaning someone a physical copy at a gig, at least by my interpretation of copyright law.

Am I completely wrong in thinking it's illegal to create a computer copy of music and then transfer it to someone else? Fair use doesn't seem to have anything to do with this...it's not for the purpose of criticism, review, or educational purposes.

[ZNC Dandy]

There have been a LOT of posts recently about in praise of the progress (and early success) of "cloned" tubas. Seems like there area a LOT of supporters in this front. I am not one of these people.

You own a Marzan, correct? If I remember correctly, that was a clone of a Sander design was it not? I own and play a Schiller CC clone. I bought it because that is what I could afford. It fits my playing needs perfectly, and provides the ideal vehicle for the sound I have in my head. I hope they continue to produce and improve their instruments. More options and competition drive a free market economy. Things like exclusive distribution rights, monopolies, tariffs, and other things like that stagnate the economy. That isn't good a good thing last time I checked...

[bort]

There have been a LOT of posts recently about in praise of the progress (and early success) of "cloned" tubas. Seems like there area a LOT of supporters in this front. I am not one of these people.

You own a Marzan, correct? If I remember correctly, that was a clone of a Sander design was it not? I own and play a Schiller CC clone. I bought it because that is what I could afford. It fits my playing needs perfectly, and provides the ideal vehicle for the sound I have in my head. I hope they continue to produce and improve their instruments. More options and competition drive a free market economy. Things like exclusive distribution rights, monopolies, tariffs, and other things like that stagnate the economy. That isn't good a good thing last time I checked...

I have one of the B&M-made Marzans. I can't say with any certainty, but I think that B&M knew what was going on when Fred Marzan started having horns made with his name on them. It wasn't a matter of opening up eBay one day and seeing a magic copy of another tuba. I know little about the idea of stenciled tubas, but I don't necessarily believe they are done by surprise or without consent.

If you have it, and it fits your budget, playing needs, etc., then great. I'm happy for you (really am, I'm not being sarcastic here). These tubas have already been manufactured, and they deserve to be played.

But I can only take so many more surprises of "hey look, here's a copy of a [tuba manufacturer] [model number]."

[Barney]

Finally, as someone who recognizes the merits of Hirsbrunner rotary BBb tubas, Miraphone 186 CC tubas, Miraphone 1291 BBb tubas, Miraphone 191 BBb tubas, VMI 101 BBb tubas, etc. - but is not-in-the-least interested in purchasing any of these models for my own use - it's difficult to muster much emotion regarding this issue.

I'm curious, who makes the decisions on what horns to copy? These are not near the top of my list, either.

Mr. Jinbao, if you and your staff are listening.... *I* think a 5/4 CC tuba, for under 3 grand, that plays even remotely close to the way a Thor model does, might just have a lot of people reaching for their wallets...

...It might also get some people worked up that the resale value on their expensive European tuba was just compromised.

[imperialbari]

The whole development of our low conicals has happened by a combination of almost-cloning and small improvements.

Europe had two cultures in brasses, Bohemia-Saxony and France-GB. The first was strong in rotors, the second in pistons.

There were lots of cross inspirations between these cultures and each had its followers. Italy was influenced by both. Spain used to be heavily inspired by the German-Czech approach, as were Norway, Sweden, and Denmark.

Within each culture there was a lot of copying. Often the copyists even bought their parts from the original makers.

The US had makers coming in as immigrants from wherever, so everything European, maybe except piston compensators, used to be common in the US, which even had its own approach to top action rotors until shortly before 1900. The US has contributed the sousaphone and the front action piston block to brass designs.

All the areas mentioned had a shared basic music culture, which provided a kind of mind-frame for making the copies work.

The problem with especially mainland Asian copyists is that they are not saturated with the same musical culture. They don’t understand our brasses, and they don’t care for anything but our money.

Klaus

[TUBUD]

The real problem I have with the knockoffs is the unsuspecting, musically ignorant parent who thinks they are buying something close to the original for their child only to find out it's not nearly the quality they expected and the student blames themself for mistakes the horn is making.Some people who should know better buy these tuba shaped objects and don't want to appear stupid and never admit that they were taken and what a bad instrument it is. I work at a music store and hate when the chinese/indian made instruments come in for repair. Our repair tech does the best he can with them but when you can't get parts and your afraid to bend or straighten keys for fear of breaking them you can't always do whats necessary for repair. The customer sometimes gets mad at us but there's nothing we can do.

[TexTuba]

The real problem I have with the knockoffs is the unsuspecting, musically ignorant parent who thinks they are buying something close to the original for their child only to find out it's not nearly the quality they expected and the student blames themself for mistakes the horn is making.Some people who should know better buy these tuba shaped objects and don't want to appear stupid and never admit that they were taken and what a bad instrument it is. I work at a music store and hate when the chinese/indian made instruments come in for repair. Our repair tech does the best he can with them but when you can't get parts and your afraid to bend or straighten keys for fear of breaking them you can't always do whats necessary for repair. The customer sometimes gets mad at us but there's nothing we can do.

Tuba shaped objects? Hmm....you didn't happen to work for Brook Mays, did you?

[TUBUD]

No, but I'll stickup for anybody who defends quality instruments and music education.

[ArnoldGottlieb]

Interesting points. To me, at 42 years old, I have the horn I need and don't expect to buy anything more than a sousaphone sometime soon. I would buy a Thor if it had better valves, but I know MW won't do any improvements, so I'm not holding my breath. I do think the Chinese made horns will put the German's and the Swiss out of the tuba making business in no time at all, and then the folks who are 10 years old now can complain or not about not having any new developments or any new horns. They will also probably not care or even know what a tuba is, or was, and who knows? Maybe they'll think this all in Chinese........
On the other hand, I own 2 recently made in the USA double basses that smoke any Chinese piece of greenwood out there, and at a similar price.
Peace.
ASG

[imperialbari]

To my knowledge the Japanese tradition for Western style ensembles, especially military wind bands, is older than that of the Chinese. I will not deny the existence of extremely gifted Chinese soloists, but the Japanese have a wider foundation for understanding, what Western instruments are about.

The problem with ‘unsuspecting’ (grand)parents buying bad instruments is mostly with those buyers not seeking advise. When i taught I made it totally clear, that it was a firm condition for studying with me, that I had the last word in any acquisition process. Whether the buyers fully understood my demand for quality or not may be an open question, but it was well understood, that I passed on my professional rebates.

Klaus

[cjk]

I think the real "ethical" question when it comes to buying a Chinese-made instrument (or anything made in China, for that matter) has to do with how the price is kept so low.

How are the workers in the factory treated? What are their working conditions? What is their salary? What kind of impact does the factory have on the environment (air pollution, water pollution, energy use, etc.)?

Certainly, things that are made in China (or other Third-World countries) are often significantly cheaper than things made in Western countries. But in the end, who pays for that cost? If it is paid by poor, exploited laborers or by future generations that will have to deal with the effects of environmental degredation, perhaps we should think twice about whether or not "cheap" is really a good thing after all...

Sam F.

I really don't mean any offense, however ...

Here's a fun exercise, go into your closet. Look at all the tags on your clothing. Walk around your residence and look at were your possessions were made, especially electronics.

Is a tuba made in China any different than a laptop made in China?? Or a jacket made in Vietnam? Or a shirt made in Sri Lanka?

Do you really think about workers' rights for ALL the stuff you own or just when it's convenient to 'discuss'?

[funkhoss]

Here's a fun exercise, go into your closet. Look at all the tags on your clothing. Walk around your residence and look at were your possessions were made, especially electronics.

Is a tuba made in China any different than a laptop made in China?? Or a jacket made in Vietnam? Or a shirt made in Sri Lanka?

Do you really think about workers' rights for ALL the stuff you own or just when it's convenient to 'discuss'?

I don't mean to "brag" when saying this, but...

I haven't bought any "new" clothing in years. On the few occasions that I have purchased clothes, I have shopped at thrift stores (as buying second-hand does not support the existing clothing manufacturers, and does not require any new raw materials).

I've worn the same pair of shoes daily for almost three years. They are made by SAS, which is the only company I know of that makes shoes entirely in the US. These shoes have been repaired three times now (including a new layer of rubber on the outer soles) and are still going strong.

I try to avoid Wal-Mart and Target if at all possible. Generally, when I have to buy anything(besides food), I try to buy second-hand as much as possible (for the same reasons as above)--this includes music-related purchases (instruments, mouthpieces, etc.). Most importantly, I try to buy as little as possible in the first place.

I've had the same cell phone for six years, and the same computer for almost five. I don't plan to replace them until they are no longer operable. I haven't watched TV in almost six years, and I try to use electronics as little as possible (though, the internet is tricky--why am I typing this, after all? ). I have no iPod, portable CD player, PDA, etc.

In short, I do think about these things, and try to implement my thinking into my everyday life. There is always MUCH more that I could do...but there is a difference between taking continual "baby steps" and doing nothing at all (much less, not even considering these sort of things).

I am constantly aware of my shortcomings and failings. That is why these things bother me so much.

Humbly,

Sam F.