Professional Grade Tubas

[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.

[Rick Denney]

...Euphs and tubas are the only ones that I haven't heard of a boutique maker for or anything like that....

I think if you looked at the production quantities for C and F tubas, you'd come to the conclusion that very few are not boutique makers.

In fact, boutique makers are in some ways the enemy of R&D. They experiment with things, perhaps, but they lack the means to conduct real testing. Boutique makers really preserve the traditions more than defining the innovations, despite such examples as Monette trumpets and Lawson horns.

I suspect that Bb and Eb tubas are the only ones made in sufficient quantities to really be mass-produced, and the mass-produced models receive the R&D. But the R&D is mostly aimed at the needs of younger players and amateurs, who buy mass-produced instruments at low price points. And the R&D is also aimed at reducing costs to make those low price points possible.

I suspect that the global annual sales of C tubas can be counted in the hundreds, maybe the low thousands (but I doubt it), and certainly not the tens of thousands. Bb tuba manufacture probably exceeds that by a factor of 10 or maybe 100.

But C and F tubas get the bulk of the hand-work. So even though they don't get that much R&D, they might get lots of specialized tweaking--which is indeed the hallmark of a boutique maker. All tubas have some machine-made parts, but no tubas are really machine-made and even the mass-produced models are assembled by hand. Some tubas have more machine-made parts than other tubas, but with no correlation to the qualities Wade describes that I can see, except that the instruments with more hand-made parts get a higher price point and more tweaking can be rolled into the cost. The C tubas might be more likely assembled by the hands of masters and the Bb tubas by the apprentices.

I am not sure we can blame Chinese mass production for killing R&D. There has been more R&D in the last 10 years than at any time I can remember. If anything, competitive pressure from the Chinese is forcing the quality-model manufacturers to make high-priced instruments that work better enough to be worth the money. And the Thor is a good example of that outcome.

Rick "thinking American instrument manufacturing gave up on R&D for the market's high end in the 30's" Denney

[cjk]

In reaction to this:

I suspect that the global annual sales of C tubas can be counted in the hundreds, maybe the low thousands (but I doubt it), and certainly not the tens of thousands. Bb tuba manufacture probably exceeds that by a factor of 10 or maybe 100.

I've often wondered about the production numbers of tubas. I've wondered, but never asked, is my Rudolf Meinl CC 1 of 10, or 100, or 1000? I would strongly suspect it is closer to 100 than 1000.

I recalled this (only somewhat relevant) posting because it posted a production number:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=42123&p=393596&hili ... rk#p393596" target="_blank

Don't know if applicable to this thread but I received a message from Walter Nirschl via my Facebook account... as follows:

Dear tubafriends,

15 years ago, in 1996 we started sales of the Meister Walter Nirschl CSO YORK tuba copy

After more than 2 years of development together with Floyd Cooley the first 3 instruments were sold to Simon Styles, Richard Nahatzki and Floyd Cooley.

15 years later, I have to say that the whole project was and still is a success story, selling 130 instruments !

On the occasion of this anniversary I want to share that success with all tuba players in the world and make the following offer:

15 pieces ”Meister Walter Nirschl YORK Model" tubas with 15 % discount

12.750,00 (normally 15.000,00) Euro net ex our factory!

5.000,00 (normally 6.000,00) Euro deposit with the order and the rest when the tuba is ready.

As usual you can buy direct at the factory in Geretsried, Germany.

You are more than welcome to pick your instrument out of a batch of 3 - 4 instruments and spend a few nice days here in Bavaria.
Pick up service from and to Munich airport and sightseeing tour included.

Looking forward to meeting you in Geretsried.

Please use my e-mail address: walter@walternirschl.de" target="_blank

I'm not drawing any conclusions here. However, I would like to point out that selling less than 9 Nirschl Yorks per year over 15 years is a "success story". The Nirschl York is likely a lower volume instrument than something like a Miraphone 186.


--Christian

[Wyvern]

On production numbers, I was told at the B&S factory that they only make about four Neptune CC per year - so there is likely less than 100 in the whole world

[kamakazekiwi]

Woldn't that be akin to designing a Hummer to run with the same fuel efficiency as a Prius?

That pretty much perfectly sums up how I feel about it...

[basspiper]

On production numbers, I was told at the B&S factory that they only make about four Neptune CC per year - so there is likely less than 100 in the whole world

Just for a little perspective, Wikipedia reports that in 2010, 63 Maybach cars were sold in the U.S., at around $400k apiece. I believe most of them are available on eBay.

Dave

[Dan Schultz]

On production numbers, I was told at the B&S factory that they only make about four Neptune CC per year - so there is likely less than 100 in the whole world

Just for a little perspective, Wikipedia reports that in 2010, 63 Maybach cars were sold in the U.S., at around $400k apiece. I believe most of them are available on eBay.

Dave

I think the Chevy 'Volt' is coming in 2nd.

If you think the automotive and tuba World is goofy... take a look at this: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B003GUNI78/ref ... pe_vfe_dt6

[Mark]

Only GMC trucks are Professional Grade. Howie Long says so and he can whup Sam Elliot and Mike Rowe at the same time.

[sousaphone68]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iu7vySQb ... ata_player" target="_blank