New Matt Walters creation!!

[MartyNeilan]

"This forum" is pretty tame...

This is madness!

THIS IS SPARTA!

[bort]

What does it really matter who made the parts? I'm sure Matt wants the horn to be viewed and played as a whole, finished product. What parts manufacturer he uses should matter little. Also, I'm pretty sure that Matt is confident that this is a good instrument. If it was not it probably would not see the light of day.

I would imagine that the parts used are good parts. I don't think Matt would spend all that time and effort (only 2 a year!!!) building a tuba out of crap. Using new, available parts is a great idea due to the fact that he can produce the exact same instrument at a later date. Only so many old bells and bows anymore. If he found something that works that can be made again, more power to him.

Yeah, I started this whole mess. I mistakenly thought this was a Gnagey-style reconstruction based on old parts (partially, because of the 2 per year note). Curious more than anything. I'm not in the market so it's really no matter to me!

[royjohn]

Hi All,

I was curious about this horn, so I called Matt today and he had a few minutes while a horn was in the acid bath . . . . he said he was only going to build two of these per year and that the cost would be about $12K.

We ended up talking about a possible Eb for me instead. Very nice guy, Matt and very knowledgeable about tubas . . . . but I guess you knew that.

[joh_tuba]

Gronitz has had excellent success doing exactly this. Selectively choosing parts from various manufacturers and arranging them to suit your needs isn't a bad strategy.

Honestly, as far as I can tell the B&S factory does this for nearly everything they produce. ALL the PT designated horns have the same exact valve sections. All the rotor B&S tubas even from 30 years ago easily interchange main tuning slides and I'm nearly certain that my old PT-3 had the same exact bell as my PT15.

Another great example of reusing parts on multiple horns is the Yamaha 621 series.

I'm also inclined to believe that taking the time to assemble an instrument carefully and free of tension can significantly improve an already well designed instrument... another reason Gronitz is successful.

I guess I'm just trying to say that even in the new instrument manufacturing world this isn't an unusual phenomena and Matt very well could be on to something special.

Joh "stating the obvious" tuba

[T. J. Ricer]

I'm also inclined to believe that taking the time to assemble an instrument carefully and free of tension can significantly improve an already well designed instrument... another reason Gronitz is successful.

I think this is the secret. Any tuba regardless of design benefits from this.

As Mark said earlier, if this tuba is anything like the Lyon and Healy hybrid that Matt built a few years ago, this will be one of the best instruments in the world.

YMMV, of course,
--T. J.

[J.c. Sherman]

That "?" equaled "Are you serious? I had no idea Matt Walters was fabricating his own parts."

I Google Translated your attitude towards my post...eh, you can imagine the results.

Joseph "I had no idea questioning people's post meant getting attitude in return...should've realized that coming from this forum "

Dude! Typing a "?" isn't a question, it's a question mark. Mind reading isn't a skill many will want to practice to "get" you.

Seriously, learning some basic communication skills will make your life easier.

"This forum" is pretty tame...

I'm with the questioner here... while an unclear post (though I got it), I don't think it earned the "snarky" responses. And this forum can be very unkind, especially, I've found, to people who dare to ask a question that has ever been asked before on this 'net without searching old posts.

J.c.S. (who knows that the tooling required to turn a tuba bell made a "?!?" a fitting response)

[TubaTodd]

When I was in college (97-01), it seemed like there was a custom Matt-o-phone @ Dillons pretty regularly. My studio-mates purchased a few of them (one York, one Conn [looked REALLY close to a 56j] and one Buescher). For a number of years I hadn't seen or heard of too many Matt-o-phones available through Dillon. I'm glad to see Matt still has the creative juices flowing. Sweet!!

[rodgeman]

Are there any pictures of the finished tuba?

[Wyvern]

Honestly, as far as I can tell the B&S factory does this for nearly everything they produce. ALL the PT designated horns have the same exact valve sections. All the rotor B&S tubas even from 30 years ago easily interchange main tuning slides and I'm nearly certain that my old PT-3 had the same exact bell as my PT15.

I bet all manufacturers do this to reduce production costs? Why design a new part with new expensive dies, if an existing one will do the job satisfactorily?

I have noticed that the main tuning slides on my Neptune and PT-15 are identical (except the Neptune has reversed sleeve on one leg). Interestingly the slide on the PT-20 is different (smaller bore outer leg).

I also think the PT-15 and PT-3 share the same bell design.

I believe that the same components are often used between Meinl-Weston and B&S tubas - for example the same bell on the Thor and GR-51