Professional Grade Tubas

[ghmerrill]

I am entertained and confused by several points and consequences of the elephant's post. But the one that I like the most is that apparently what is wrong with Chinese tubas is not that they are bad copies of good German tubas, but rather that they are good copies of bad German tubas. This may explain a lot ... or not.

[UTSAtuba]

I am entertained and confused by several points and consequences of the elephant's post. But the one that I like the most is that apparently what is wrong with Chinese tubas is not that they are bad copies of good German tubas, but rather that they are good copies of bad German tubas. This may explain a lot ... or not.

I understood Wade's post.

"Good copies of bad German tubas." I do not think that the Miraphone 186 CC is a "bad" German tuba at all.

[bort]

Well, lucky for me, I don't spend much time or money on other "pro grade" stuff. My tubas seem pretty dang good to me, so I'm blissfully ignorant.

Back to the OP, it might also be the case where they already have enough low-end stuff to sell right now, and can't justify another low profit horn taking up floor space.

How much do you want for it anyway? I've dealt with Dillons a lot in the past year, and they are straight up dollars and sense people. I considered a trade in with them, and decided against it because it was too much lower than a private sale. 100% understandable, and makes complete sense, they need to turn a good enough profit on it. No vague language, no misunderstandings...

[Z-Tuba Dude]

I think that one of the possible complicating factors in perfecting a tuba design, is that there are so many different types of tubas, to cover so many diverse playing situations.

The expectations for a trumpet's sound is fairly clearly defined, while tubas are expected to be a bear, put a "floor" under an 85 piece concert band, be the voice of an "oxcart driver", pretend to be an ophicleide, a string bass, a serpent, play background parts, be a soloist, play for a half-time show, play high, play low,....etc.

A trumpet is expected to sound like a trumpet.

Given the fact that most tuba players (in sheer numbers) only own one horn, due to the prohibitive expense involed with buying multiple tubas, it is very difficult to design a tuba that will surfice for all situations.

[PMeuph]

Further, I am comparing what we sadly consider to be pro grade (because it is the best we have) to actual pro quality horns, meaning that they play really, really well. We have but a few of these. But by and large we have a load of braying donkeys when it comes to pitch or response. We have to make all sorts of excuses for our horns when such comparisons are drawn. So I say we have (with a very few notable exceptions) no pro grade tubas.

The Thor is, by my trumpet player standard, the ONLY really great tuba we have right now. We have about five or six that are almost there. We have many that are high school horns that cost far too much money.
.

Great Rant!

I agree that there is not really a "pro" tuba like there are "pro" trumpets. But, however, the reasons for this are many....(and are not all because of the lethargic attitude of tubaists)

Some of these are quite obvious...

1. Tubas use a lot more material to build.... not only are they bigger but they have more "precision" parts (i.e pistons and slides)
(every seen a professional use a 3 valve tuba in an orchestra... Trumpet players can use 3 valve horns almost exclusively... (there is the 4 valve piccolo horn...)

2. The debate over ideal design in the tuba world is far from settled... (Tubas have top valve, front valve, a plethora of issues concerning bore sizes, leadpipe shapes, construction material, different mouthpiece sizes and styles....) Trumpet players have some of these issues too, but never to the same extent as tuba players... (ever seen a trumpet player in a US orchestra play a rotary valve trumpet?)

3.The sheer size of the trumpet market is at least 4 times bigger than the number of tubists... (And since trumpets are relatively cheaper, many amateur players can own great horns... Nobody will own a Thor to play in a community band, while somebody owning a schilke or a bach is a more common sight)

4. Lastly, Acoustics on a tuba are more precarious... If a partial is off by one hertz on a trumpet, it is easier to lip up and to correct (probably without even noticing to) but on a tuba that kind of difference with be significantly more noticeable..

[toobagrowl]

So, for example, if you were looking at getting something like a small (3/4) BBb tuba, what would be the quality comparisons among Yamaha, Jupiter, and the current mainland Chinese instruments?

I have never liked the sound of the small 3/4 Yamaha and Jupiter tubas.....*shudders*.
If you like a small, bland, farty tuba sound then you might like 'em. The little Jupiter BBb not only has that "sound" mentioned above but was really stuffy and didn't play as cleanly as one might think for such a small tuba. The little 'baby' 1/2 Amati BBb is even worse than the little Jupiter BBb. Say what you want, but I'd still take the little 3/4 King 1140 over those tubas any day. At least the 1140 has SOME richness/smoothness to the sound and has decent response and pitch for being a 3/4 BBb. Keep in mind these are all more or less small tubas made for middle school use.
And I'd stay away from the Chinese tubas YMMV.

Professional grade tubas? All opinion.....like everything else here. There are some tubaists that think the little Yamaha 621 F and CC tubas are "professional" because they play well with good response and pitch. However I would not consider them "professional" at all because of the sound they produce, even by pros. On the flip side, many tubaists do not consider any old American Eb or BBb tubas "professional" (even with mods done on them) because of "difficult" intonation or response, despite their full gorgeous colorful sound and impeccable craftsmanship/build.

In short, most tubaists these days look for "point and shoot" tubas.

Flame on!

[Dan Schultz]

FYI... the Conn-Selmer repair parts website lists the following tubas as being 'professional'...

King 1135, 1140, 2251, 2340, 2341 (old detachable bell version), and 2341

Conn 5J, 12J, 14J, 15J, 52J

Not saying I agree. Just sayin'.

[kamakazekiwi]

This is completely incorrect. The extra valves are specifically for tuning issues. 4th extends the low register to a usable degree with pulls/alternates. 5th is a cute add-on just for that missing note one half step above the fundamental and *to give the player useful alternates for intonation issues* and 6th is simply the same for 2nd as 5th is to 1st.

Plus, I am addressing the OPEN horn and the overtone behavior on each valve combination.

Trumpets are FAR easier to make than tubas, pitch-wise. The errors that are so easily correctable on the trumpet are horribly magnified in our octave.

Perhaps you misunderstood my argument?

Sorry, what I was really getting at is the openness and response of the horn through 6 valves. I mean, for orchestral trombone, you put on one rotary valve, and people don't like the response. So trombone players go to Thayer, Hagmann, Greenhoe, or other much more open valves. You take a tuba with 6 standard rotary valves (or a number of piston valves), you're going to get some added resistance, especially when the valves are depressed.

What my main point is, is that trumpets are just a lot simpler and easier to make than tubas.

And one thing I'm wondering, if no one has made a truly great professional tuba, how do you know that it's even possible to make one? What if the properties of a tuba prevent it from playing as well as a great trumpet?

[MikeMason]

I'm really starting to see the charms of a 186.Yes,mine's a clone.I played a real "new"model a couple years back and i remember it being just about the same,but with better valves and slides.I really have never spent any time seriously considering a 186.I was always looking for bigger york style horns.I'm starting to rethink my position.A lot of things are better and easier on a 186.still haven't played it with a large ensemble yet.And,oh yeah,economics are a part of every decision.Maybe not the #1 thing,but always a part of the decision.and no,I'm not the player Bloke and Wade are.But I do make part of my living with the tuba and people in my part of the world see me as"the" tuba player for paying gigs.And, oh yeah, somebody buy my Thor!

[Rick Denney]

Actually... Yamaha is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Their instruments just a couple of decades ago left a lot to be desired. Some of the Yamaha stuff is pretty respectable these days.

Longer ago than that. I bought my 621 F tuba 20 years ago, and I doubt it was sold to many who did not have at least some commercial aspirations for its use.

What makes a "professional" tuba? The only answer that comes to my mind is a tuba that might be marketable to professionals.

Rick "professional amateur" Denney

[MartyNeilan]

Maybe the answer is just the particular model the OP was trying to trade - the M&M TU 400 (JBCB-400) CC has a reputation for bad intonation and only has 4 valves, so is not considered a professional tuba. There is as a result little market for such.

In contrast particularly the Dillon DCB-410 (JBCB-410) CC that is for sale has reputation as one of the best Chinese tubas and with 5 valves is considered a professional model.

So maybe not so much to do with manufacturer as the desirability of the particular model? Remember dealers only want to take used tubas they think they can sell.

BINGO.

[NDSPTuba]

Actually... Yamaha is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Their instruments just a couple of decades ago left a lot to be desired. Some of the Yamaha stuff is pretty respectable these days.

Longer ago than that. I bought my 621 F tuba 20 years ago, and I doubt it was sold to many who did not have at least some commercial aspirations for its use.

What makes a "professional" tuba? The only answer that comes to my mind is a tuba that might be marketable to professionals.

Rick "professional amateur" Denney

My opinion of Yamaha is from my experience as a Horn Player. But it basically goes like this. If is had a 600 or 500 number range don't touch it, if it was in the 800's it is most likely a great horn. The 800 series ( Custom ) was and still is a coveted line of horns in the Professional ranks of horn players. You just don't see them up for sale very often and when you do they are 100% of new price or more( Yamaha doesn't make them anymore ). So for me, I just apply that to tuba's, 800 series are definitely worth a look, 600 not so much but you might find a player.

[NDSPTuba]

I completely agree with Elephant on this. I wouldn't own a Chinese made instrument for all the reasons he stated. And the claim of 3 board members playing them professionally is dubious at best. As they are playing them professionally only after they started hocking them. All you have to do is look into the not to distant past and see that they didn't have a Chinese made instrument in their stable. That is until they started selling them.

[Rick Denney]

When Wade goes on a rant, fun always ensues.

Let's understand a few definitions, which are central to his argument, but that establish what that is different from what Dillon's probably meant.

Wade's definition of "professional" is that the instrument has the playing characteristics that top professionals should expect. The instruments should be in tune and be consistent in sound, scale and projection up and down the instrument. Their sound should be characteristic of the instrument type. By that I mean a big tuba should sound like a big tuba, consistently up and down the scale, and a small tuba should sound like a small tuba.

Wade's definition does not mean that Player X will like what that instrument produces, or that the instrument in question will fit his sound concept. Trumpet players, who have these great instruments from which to choose, still bounce around a lot looking for the one that fits their concept and objectives. So, to the person who complained that the Yamaha 621 can't be a professional instrument because he doesn't like the sound, I can only say that that's one man's opinion.

Dillon's definition (and I didn't ask them so I'm guessing, but with perhaps a little care) is an instrument that they can sell to professionals or those with professional aspirations. They are not looking to fill up their limited used-tuba space with cheapies that have no margin and that they can only market to 7th-graders or community band players who have too little to spend. They can have a few of these, but they also need room for the instruments that support their core business. That's just good business sense and should not be taken as an insult by the OP. Note that the business decision for stuff they sell new and for stuff they sell used is different. They can have an example or two of the new stuff in the showroom, rather than finding space for more used tubas at the same price point. This is a decision that would be made case-by-case, as Dale suggests.

Now, my definition. I think we get into trouble when we use the term "professional" when we mean "good". There is nothing about a tuba that makes it a professional tuba. A real pro would not buy the most expensive or even the best-made instrument, but rather than instrument that most efficiently produces the desired product, and that has a low cost of ownership. A cheap tuba can be a professional tuba because it just happens to work really well in a professional scenario. Lots of pros have earned money with a Cerveny Piggy, and one of the most famous tuba players in the world (at least among non-tuba-players) is Chuck Daellenbach, who plays a Yamaha (and has played a Yamaha with a few interruptions for at least 30 years). Wade plays an old Holton, and also a 621. Wanna claim that he's not a pro? Not me. I think Tony Clements has performed recitals on a Yamaha 621, and I know Tom Holtz has. Tom has also performed on a beat-up old Eb helicon. Is that a professional instrument? Well, he's a professional, and that's the instrument he used, so I guess it is.

Also, we have to be careful not to limit the definition of "professional" to orchestral tuba playing. I'll bet a large percentage of the money made by tuba players was made using a Miraphone 186.

I myself was paid to play a Yamaha 621, and it's the only instrument I own that has paid for itself. I guess that makes it a professional tuba (this example just makes me snicker). If I can be a professional, then any qualitative association with that word loses all meaning.

So, my only beef with Wade's rant is that he is using "professional" as a term of instrument quality. His description of what that means is spot-on, of course, but I would rather find a term that means quality directly, and not just a pay arrangement.

In many areas of life that are driven solely by price point, it has become impossible spend more and get something that works better. We know the Chinese can make decent products when they know how, but they are targeting a price point more than a quality model. The only way a quality manufacturer can compete with that is to focus on the quality model. Hence, a range of new Miraphones that are NOT being cloned by the Chinese. This has been happening a long time. Schwinn as a mass-production manufacturer is long gone, but the best artisan-made and mid-production bicycles are still now made in North America. Lots of the big names on bicycles in the Tour de France, for example, are on bikes made in the U.S. (Trek) or Canada (Cervelo). A quality model may require that dealers focus on the quality level consistent with their business model.

Rick "thinking lots of trumpet players are buying craptastic instruments just because they are cheap, too" Denney

[tubaforce]

I completely agree with Elephant on this. I wouldn't own a Chinese made instrument for all the reasons he stated. And the claim of 3 board members playing them professionally is dubious at best. As they are playing them professionally only after they started hocking them. All you have to do is look into the not to distant past and see that they didn't have a Chinese made instrument in their stable. That is until they started selling them.

Hi!
I sell a couple Chinese Tubas and a Euphonium that a "Pro" can make sound "Pro" ! That does not make them "Pro" horns!
There are many more Tubas with decent scales available now than ever before, and in every price range. The many models we revere had/have some terrible pitch issues, especially the 6/4 models. Some of these issues can be addressed by a handfull of Craftsmen during restoration or cutting, many are just part and parcell of being a Tuba.
Someone like the Elephant has an ideal perch to make his observations from. Trumpeters, Hornists, and other Brass Players ARE miles ahead of Tuba players in the availability of "Pro" instruments. Obviously, Trumpets have a proportianally shorter adjustment for sharp partial notes. Trombones Have a slide. French Horns play higher up in the harmonic series than Tubas...4th valve eliminates what would be a long throw (picture what a contrabass Trumpet might look like, and imagine someone with hands and fingers big/long enough to work the hook and ring). Long 1st. 5th. valves can be very usefull in the meat and potatoes range, eliminating the need to ride one's 1st. valve slide...
But the Bugle is what has been neglected in Tuba developement! I know we have many Tubas that sound wonderful, yet no one has figured out how to engineer the Bugle to mitigate the problems inherent in the harmonic series! Makers seem content to copy designs from decades past, settling for an out of Tune Tuba that sounds good. There are Tubas put together with the same degree of craftsmanship as your Monet Trumpets, but is the bugle in tune to the degree the Trumpet is? Is this possible? I think we have a long way to go! Look at my 186 clones. What seperates them from the real deal, other than price? They have the same shape and dimensions. Both play in tune. The Miraphone has a proven track record going back to Cerveney (yes, the 186 is itself a "clone"). Miraphone, IMHO, has surpassed Cerveney in consitency, and fit & finish. JinBao's don't have that tradition of pride and craftsmanship Miraphone or Cerveney posses...The "real" 186, IMHO, is only a "Pro" horn due to its construction/assembly and fit & finish, and its proven longevity! I mean, is the original Velvet Elvis legitimate "Art" compared to the paint by numbers kit at your neighbor's yard sale...?

Al

[sousaphone68]

Now, my definition. I think we get into trouble when we use the term "professional" when we mean "good". There is nothing about a tuba that makes it a professional tuba. A real pro would not buy the most expensive or even the best-made instrument, but rather than instrument that most efficiently produces the desired product, and that has a low cost of ownership. A cheap tuba can be a professional tuba because it just happens to work really well in a professional scenario. Lots of pros have earned money with a Cerveny Piggy, and one of the most famous tuba players in the world (at least among non-tuba-players) is Chuck Daellenbach, who plays a Yamaha (and has played a Yamaha with a few interruptions for at least 30 years). Wade plays an old Holton, and also a 621. Wanna claim that he's not a pro? Not me. I think Tony Clements has performed recitals on a Yamaha 621, and I know Tom Holtz has. Tom has also performed on a beat-up old Eb helicon. Is that a professional instrument? Well, he's a professional, and that's the instrument he used, so I guess it is.

Also, we have to be careful not to limit the definition of "professional" to orchestral tuba playing. I'll bet a large percentage of the money made by tuba players was made using a Miraphone 186.

I myself was paid to play a Yamaha 621, and it's the only instrument I own that has paid for itself. I guess that makes it a professional tuba (this example just makes me snicker). If I can be a professional, then any qualitative association with that word loses all meaning.

So, my only beef with Wade's rant is that he is using "professional" as a term of instrument quality. His description of what that means is spot-on, of course, but I would rather find a term that means quality directly, and not just a pay arrangement.

In many areas of life that are driven solely by price point, it has become impossible spend more and get something that works better. We know the Chinese can make decent products when they know how, but they are targeting a price point more than a quality model. The only way a quality manufacturer can compete with that is to focus on the quality model. Hence, a range of new Miraphones that are NOT being cloned by the Chinese. This has been happening a long time.

Rick "thinking lots of trumpet players are buying craptastic instruments just because they are cheap, too" Denney

I would like to chime in and say that Rick mad a few good points I have highlighted one for the sake of brevity.
The term Professional Instrument is at best a short hand marketing tool designed to imply that a model possesses certain qualities of design and manufacture.

IMHO a professional anything will always buy the cheapest thing that will get the job done professionally whether its plumbing supplies or musical instruments.

Some pros may decide to buy very expensive instruments for many reasons varying from their tone,design or it fills a need their other tubas don't fill.

Now I consider myself to be the target market for those "craptastic" Chinese horn I an a fairly committed amateur player that has in the past had the opportunity to be taught and play with excellent professionals and aspiring professionals. I never had aspirations myself and was content to fade away into amateur bands once I reached 21 and no longer met the age bar for the national youth orchestra.

I had wanted to buy a besson 981 but was unable to find one as in the UK and Ireland they are much prized and rarely come to market second hand and I did not have the money for a new one.
So I bought a JinBao 700 and for the first time ever had a tuba that was new. It took awhile to play in but now meets my needs.
Would I call it a professional instrument I don't know as I am not a pro. Many pros use the model on which it is cloned from and I have played a 981 and think that the Jinbao matches it in its sound and its pitch characteristics it falls slightly short in overall finish quality and the valves are not as quiet as a 981.

I am a little tired of such descriptions such as Craptastic and the amount of abuse that the site sponsors are taking for daring to sell these horns to the people that want them or need them.
I would still be playing my 1970's narrow bore Besson New Standard while waiting on an affordable or available 981 instead I am enjoying the freedom and power that comes with the new bigger bore of my JB700 it plays well and I have had no complaints from the 3 professional musicians that conduct the different bands that I am in.
Some of the design points that other people have raised in this thread I had hoped would have surfaced in the pulling slides thread that I started.

[Wyvern]

And the claim of 3 board members playing them professionally is dubious at best. As they are playing them professionally only after they started hocking them. All you have to do is look into the not to distant past and see that they didn't have a Chinese made instrument in their stable. That is until they started selling them.

Just to clarify, I was not referring to anyone selling Chinese tubas (that would not count!), but professionals* using such of their own choice.

Myself I am still principally playing my wonderful B&S Neptune and PT-15, although may well start regularly using Chinese tubas when I have a couple free from stock as I want to find out for myself how they stand up to daily use so I can advise customers from knowledge.


*as in people playing music for income

[Lingon]

...And the claim of 3 board members playing them professionally is dubious at best...

Well guys, I am not playing tuba professionally but bass trombone. So I am not qualified to say that I use a Chinese or even professional model of tuba to earn my money. However, I have now for four years used a JinBao bass trombone for not everything, but where it was/is applicable, to earn my living. I also use American made instruments by Bach and Holton plus German instruments when suitable, everything dependent of the music at hand and what the others play. The Jinbao that, in my case is labelled Fasch, has worked in a professional context for four years now and I used it for example for the production we did today. The other guys in the section used Bach 36Bs and the tubaist played a B&S large BBb tuba, I do not know which model. These instruments worked very well together.

Many said when I bought the JB/Fasch trombone, OK let us see how it holds together in a couple of months. As said, now it is four years, and no sign of breaking down. On the contrary, it plays better and better... I did buy that instrument long before joining the Tubenet so I am not influenced of the discussions here and it is not the model sold by Biggbottom, Mack or Wessex but it is a Jinbao. I also drank the Tsingtao beer when it first came to Sweden in the good old days.

Now for the label professional instrument. An instrument that is played by a professional. How is that?!

We did long ago use the Yamaha 3xx series trombones and thought that they played better than the custom series. Today may the situation look different though. But do not just look at what the company making the stuff says. Try for yourself, and you may many times be surprised.

There is a very important point in what Elephant says. We should not accept and pay so much for instruments that even as open horns without any valves and extra tubes engaged could not play in tune with itself. Regarding trombones there are horrible examples from at least one maker of very expensive instruments and also from other costing not so much. At last then I will better buy some very cheap instrument that not play in tune than a very exclusive one that is out of tune. But what if the cheap instrument plays better or at least not worse than the expensive ones?!

Now when some of the Tubenetters have direct connections with the makers in China and with the ability to speak Chinese, please do work with them to better the instruments and quality control, for example the stuff Al told us about the bearing not centered in a new instrument should not happen etc, not many more models that is not more than copies. I believe M&M does, but there is place for many more. Among trombone makers there are for example Shires and Rath. Just think of it regarding the tubas that now are good copies, a version 2 that is a lot better than the original but at competitive prices. If making copies, make them better than the stuff they are modeled after. Then the exclusive makers must make theirs even better to compete. Then things are running again and the exclusive may lead because the must make better playing, professional , instruments not just more expensive.

The Japanese started with copying, then bettered the copies and eventually made their own designs. Are we afraid that this should happen with other Asian made stuff too, or what?!

[tubaguy9]

Someone like the Elephant has an ideal perch to make his observations from. Trumpeters, Hornists, and other Brass Players ARE miles ahead of Tuba players in the availability of "Pro" instruments. Obviously, Trumpets have a proportianally shorter adjustment for sharp partial notes. Trombones Have a slide. French Horns play higher up in the harmonic series than Tubas...4th valve eliminates what would be a long throw (picture what a contrabass Trumpet might look like, and imagine someone with hands and fingers big/long enough to work the hook and ring). Long 1st. 5th. valves can be very usefull in the meat and potatoes range, eliminating the need to ride one's 1st. valve slide...
But the Bugle is what has been neglected in Tuba developement! I know we have many Tubas that sound wonderful, yet no one has figured out how to engineer the Bugle to mitigate the problems inherent in the harmonic series! Makers seem content to copy designs from decades past, settling for an out of Tune Tuba that sounds good. There are Tubas put together with the same degree of craftsmanship as your Monet Trumpets, but is the bugle in tune to the degree the Trumpet is? Is this possible? I think we have a long way to go!

I have to heavily agree with Wade on this. I also have to say the thought on "Tubas put together with the same degree of craftsmanship as your Monette Trumpets" is bull. I think that as was said, no one puts in the R&D for tubas that is really needed. I've gotten to play test 2 Edwards trumpets, and 1 Paxman horn...the Edwards horns practically played themselves with an amazing tone, and I don't really know whether or not the pitch really matters as much. As someone else said, the kick rings/saddles aren't there just for looks. Even Monette puts them on his horns for a functional purpose, and they put more time into everything than I bet any other manufacturer does. Trumpets are small enough to be able to make small changes that make a huge change in tone and playability. French Horns, custom makers have taken the time to nit pick, modify, and do the R&D. Trombones have a slide they're constantly moving, so pitch is almost irrelevant. Euphs and tubas are the only ones that I haven't heard of a boutique maker for or anything like that. The closest tuba I've played to what is wanted IN MY OPINION, was a 5/4 Rudy Meinl. The other horn that I've liked close to that much is the 70's Mirafone that I own. I've tried a Thor, and a YCB-822. Both of them had the same issue; the sound was too bland for my tastes.

There is no tuba that we have that practically plays itself with a gorgeous tone and perfect intonation. And buying everything from the lowest bidder will not encourage this to happen. I think that is what the issue is that some people have with the Chinese copies.

[Matt Walters]

Hey Tubenet gang and OP,
Sorry I didn't read this post sooner as the title didn't grab my attention. It's real simple about not wanting that particular horn as a trade-in. I don't have beginner caliber players wanting to buy a CC tuba. The JBCB-400 CC rotor tuba (regardless of brand name engraved on it) has only 4 rotors of a smallish .708" bore and is somewhere between 3/4 and 4/4 in size. I have played two examples of that model and consider "beginner caliber" to be kind. My typical CC tuba buyer is a BBb player of some ability going off to college and has already been playing on something superior to the JBCB-400 CC tuba. That model horn does not fit any marketable niche that I can see and is not of the caliber that Dillon Music would put our name on it.

There are some good Chinese built horns out there that do the job at a great price. I feel that way about the Dillon brand tubas I sell. Please keep in mind, a tool that doesn't do the job is no bargain at any price.

Anyone who knows me knows my awesome York CC is only 4 valves so I am not just talking 4 vs 5 valves.