Chinese instruments- personal experience

[Greg Lecewicz]

I was visiting Warsaw, Poland- my home town. I had a chance to attend some rehearsals of brass bands there. A lot of musicians use the Chinese horns since it makes sense from the economical side. Anyway I had an opportunity to test most of the horns Jinbao makes. Naturally I didn't have enough time to dissect each and every instrument but I could test them enough to say some words about them. I've tried 3, 4 valve tubas, 3, 4 valve euphoniums and some trombones. As we all know they are direct copies of the big names except for some savings in the metal usage. Exactly what I mean: They are ALL much lighter and fragile than the original brands. There are differences in the braces ( different look at the attachment points) but make no mistake- they stand the beating very well to the contrary to what some of the forum members stated about the horns falling apart- nonsense ! The valves ( all configurations) are acceptable- a little " paper thin" feel in them. NO, THEY DON'T MAKE NOISE ! They are absolute bargain for the super sound they deliver for the dollar amount. The intonation in the low/ mid register ( this is where most people operate) is excellent, posing only the usual problems as in the name brands. The high register is very uneven thru various horns of the same model. It could be great but it could be very slippery, without a correct slot. I think this represents a lack of precision in the placement of the lead pipe but I'll leave it to the experts to discuss. The finish on the horns is acceptable compared to a finish on the student horns in the USA. The lacquer lasts for a long time without "bleeding" nor peeling but it's just sort of " rough" looking- needs polishing to get a proper luster. It wears out at the contact places just the same as any other brands. The silver finished horns have the same " thin" look of the plating justified by the price. The silver seams to wear out quicker at the contact points. My general remark is: Excellent. All they have to do in China is to use heavier metals and to use better finish or thicker plating to come up with some fantastic horns. Attention to detail is so important in this case. If they'll tweak the horns internally to improve the high register they will be really very good. I would pay an extra 500-600 dollars on top of what they sell them for now for such an instrument with a superb finish and intonation. I think it's possible to accomplish. My disappointment was the trombones I've tried but I haven't tried the most expensive ones Jinbao makes so I better remain quiet in this department till I'll get a chance to test the top dogs.

[Michael Bush]

.

[JayWesley]

If Jinbao or some other Chinese mfr decides to use thinner, lower quality metal, or does not do as detailed a job on the plating/polishing/lacquer, I can live with that given the price of these instruments. However, the thing that gets me is their inability (or lack of desire) to manufacture high quality pistons. I have encountered STICKY and WAY prematurely worn/discolored pistons on EVERY single Chinese/Taiwanese brass instrument I've tried from cornet to tuba. I have heard a lot of hype about them getting better, which I take with a grain of salt considering my recently purchased new Chinese instrument still has the same valve problems. I'd rather they totally blow off the finish and even soldering than make crappy valves that don't last even 6 months. You CANNOT skimp on the valves. They are the core of a mechanically sound instrument and are among the most expensive and difficult to fix if there's problems.

Anyone who's owned Chinese rotary instruments for extended time (say 2+ yrs) have anything to say about their rotors? Hopefully those are better although the rotors on one Chinese tuba I tried were completely frozen (again, not impressed).

[vlatuba]

Ah, Chinese rotors... I've seen a lot of these in the past year on both tubas and french horns. Instruments from a few years old to brand new - mostly from the same factory but with different names on them. There are good reasons why some techs won't touch these instruments. The valves are dreadful. Often the rotor edges are so sharp they could cut your fingers. Also, there is something about the brass used for the valves that just seems to promote corrosion. Combine that with kids (and adults) who let it sit unplayed for say two weeks (the regular school holiday length here) without oiling it beforehand and the valves are frozen.

Here's some of the valve issues I've encountered in the last 12 months:
- ball and sockets that are too loose and clatter.
- ball and sockets that are too tight and don't move.
- screws that were not inserted properly at the factory because the holes were not tapped correctly.
- screws that fall out because they are too small.
- screws that fall out because the hole is too big.
- screws that break
- bumper plate screws lacquered onto the instrument so that the slot is sealed and the screw wont move anyway because it's glued onto the horn by the lacquer.
- different screw thread sizes on the same horn
- I have seen ONE stop arm that fits properly (kudos to BMB)
- hinge tubes of spatula assemblies that are grossly oversized to the hinge
- spatula assemblies in which the hinge tube is too short between the hinge posts
- a rotor that is so far off alignment that using the largest bumper I could on one side and cut down to the holder on the other did not get it into alignment.
- alignment marks that are so far off to be useless
- differen thread size linkage components on one instrument.
- bumper plates that are undersized
- bumper plates that won't hold the bumper
- bumper plates that that don't alingn with the stop arm
- undersized bracing holding the spatula assembly to the horn that it is only a matter of time until it breaks
- I won't even get into the fit of the rotors and bearings...

Also, I've seen:
- a main tuning slide with the waterkey on the wrong side!
- metal filings in the instrument.
- horrid tuning slide alignment
- when siting down the second slide towards the rotor I see the tube coming out of the rotor with massive hanging burrs and a severe crimp in it.
- air leaks at joints (once with no solder at all)
- unsoldered braces
- slides ends cut unevenly and sharp

So, I agree. The metal quality and finish are moot points if the mechanics are poor.

Not all Chinese instruments are created equal, of course - both BMB and sometimes Wessex buck the trend. Funny that the best rotor I've seen is on a piston horn... Chalk that up to better quality control on the ditributors part, perhaps.

I too hear that improvements are being made but until I see some consistency in those improvements, I'll recommend only a select few tubas from China.

Ed

[JayWesley]

Lol. So basically every single component that could possibly be manufactured/assembled wrong might be and every single raw material that could possibly be made from lower quality starting materials might be. Really makes you think if they're that much of a bargain. Maybe I was right to stick with pistons since they seem to be much simpler in theory.

I've also heard the pistons can be chemically treated to not prematurely "go bad." If a relatively inexpensive chemical treatment can yield valves that last (say at least 5 years of medium to heavy use), they may be worthwhile considering at least the slides on the Chinese horns I've tried operated fine and there were no solder issues (e.g. the other big mechanical issues). Anyone have experience on this?

Agree with Bloke. All Chinese horns I've seen seemed to be of regular thickness. Not sure about the plating as I'm very careful with my horns. Their valve pearls and corks seems to fall off prematurely possibly due to being cheap on using glue/rushed assembly (again something you can live with if the valves are good). Intonation can be iffy but no horn is perfect and again for the price, something I can live with being a non-pro musician.

[bisontuba]

Their valve pearls... seems to fall off prematurely possibly due to being cheap on using glue/rushed assembly (again something you can live with if the valves are good).

Must have copied Meinl Weston...

+1

[Michael Bush]

Anyone who's owned Chinese rotary instruments for extended time (say 2+ yrs) have anything to say about their rotors? Hopefully those are better although the rotors on one Chinese tuba I tried were completely frozen (again, not impressed).

Not fully two years yet, but 19 months with a Mackbrass (Jinbao) 186 CC clone. I have had no problems with the valves (edit: ...that are not the same as problems, solved the same way, as I've had with German and eastern European tubas).

And the idea that the brass is "thin" is absurd. If anything it borders on being too thick. Nearly every other tuba I've owned, made on whatever continent in whatever decade, has been made of thinner brass, and not one has been thicker.

The only Chinese tuba that has passed through here that I noticed had a poorly made valve was an old, early "Schiller" branded Hirsbrunner clone I bought used maybe four years ago. A tech was able to solve that issue with a little creativity and less than an hour of shop time. (That tech was one of the several who have worked on my instruments regardless where they were made; I've never met this mythical tech who "won't touch" an instrument. If you ever do happen to encounter one, his or her competitor will be glad for the business.)

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

When I was a wee lad, my school had Jupiter tubas. The only thing I remember about them was that they were horrendously out of tune at all times and extremely fragile. The brass was paper-thin. I've never been so upset with an instrument. I'm sure that the best Chinese tubas are maybe comparable to the worst German ones, but the fact that a Chinese company such as Jupiter would make such a bad instrument as the ones I've played shows their attitude about manufacturing instruments: they aren't interested in fine craftsmanship. They're interested in selling you something that will wear out fast enough for you to have to buy a new one. A company like Meinl-Weston, Miraphone, or Willson, on the other hand, will sell you an instrument that you can use for 50 years. I think we all know which is the better investment.

[Michael Bush]

I think we all know which is the better investment.

Yes, that would be none of them. If you're looking for an investment, buy an S&P index fund. You will not be sorry.

If you're looking for an investment tuba, you'd be no worse off playing the lottery. You would be extraordinarily fortunate both in your choice of instrument and in your life span to make a profit in inflation-adjusted dollars. For the end user, a tuba is like a car, an expense, not an investment. With the price differential, and other things being equal (like regular maintenance and care, and comparing new with new and used with used), you can wear out quite a few *good enough* Chinese tubas before you would have been better off financially buying German.

The best reasons I know of for not buying Chinese are (1) you don't want to reward their political economy, and/or (2) you will always have a little voice telling you the instrument is "downmarket" so maybe you are too. I see those as legitimate reasons. But quality point per dollar is not a good reason, in my view.

On the other hand, you are right about Taiwanese instruments. It has been remarked on this board a number of times that it lacks seriousness to whine about Chinese quality and then turn around and buy Taiwanese, which often have worse problems.

[JayWesley]

Can someone care to explain exactly what this valve chemical treatment is? What compounds are involved and how long does it last? I'm skeptical about it too (sounds too good to be true it usually is, but not always), but it has been recommended by a very well known/respected repairmen that I have high opinions of. As such I have not given up hope on this.

[JayWesley]

To be fair, the brass thickness issue by OP is not completely absurd. The handful of Chinese horns I've tried, most were of respectable to even good thickness. However, there were also ones that were very thin. Not sure if this was part of the initial design or just pure cost savings. One of thinnest ones I've played is also one of the most responsive and free blowing ones, but I didn't test intonation with a tuner. Of course the valves on that one were also prematurely worn/discolored but still worked fine, which puzzles me as others stick quite badly.

[Lingon]

...Anyone who's owned Chinese rotary instruments for extended time (say 2+ yrs) have anything to say about their rotors?...

Bought my Chinese rotor valve tuba used 2010 and do not know how old it was then. All valves have worked flawlessly since the day I got it and show no signs to retire. Bought a Chinese bass trbn 2 rotor valves new 2007, valves have worked flawlessly since then, with the exception of that I had to tighten one of the screws for one of the bumper plates once, and like the tuba does not show any signs to need replacement. Metal is not paper thin instead it feels thicker, than many European or American instruments, which may or may not be a good thing.

A German high price tuba "that I have heard about", not as old as 2+ years, was in the case for two weeks off and then the valves were frozen. So, is that instrument worthless?

It might be as simple as normal maintenance to have your stuff working because not maintained things would cease to work irrespective of origin.

[Ulli]

To be fair, the brass thickness issue by OP is not completely absurd.

Hmm- my Chinese tuba Dalyan Ensemble5 (Neptune F Tuba, a Mirafone F80 copy) is really heavy.
I've had never any problems with it.

BTW: The valves of my Conn 20J are often frozen while playing...

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

I think we all know which is the better investment.

Yes, that would be none of them. If you're looking for an investment, buy an S&P index fund. You will not be sorry.

If you're looking for an investment tuba, you'd be no worse off playing the lottery. You would be extraordinarily fortunate both in your choice of instrument and in your life span to make a profit in inflation-adjusted dollars. For the end user, a tuba is like a car, an expense, not an investment. With the price differential, and other things being equal (like regular maintenance and care, and comparing new with new and used with used), you can wear out quite a few *good enough* Chinese tubas before you would have been better off financially buying German.

My thing with Chinese/Taiwanese instruments is that, from my personal experience, I can say that they seem to require more upkeep/repairs than a solid German instrument. It seems that there is usually very premature lacquer/valve wear, and they often need to be cut or lengthened because they are so out-of-tune. I've actually played school-owned Yamahas with the same kinds of problems, but that's a topic for another day. At any rate, I'm not trying to advertise for Meinl or Miraphone, but I can tell you that, in my experience, they last a lot longer than JinBao or Jupiter instruments. So no, no tuba is really an "investment," but why worry about lots of unstable, quasi-unusable Chinese instruments when you can worry about one good German one? Also, you are correct that one of my reasons for not buying Chinese is that I much prefer financially supporting old German companies than young Chinese ones. I do admit to some personal bias.

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

In addition to the obvious musical enjoyment/usefulness, a carefully researched and purchased tuba can be an investment that will yield monetary returns when sold.

Preach.

[Michael Bush]

In addition to the obvious musical enjoyment/usefulness, a carefully researched and purchased tuba can be an investment that will yield monetary returns when sold.

That is put with great precision. People "can" and in fact do win the lottery several times a year. Does that make it a rational financial plan? No. Unless you are in the business of selling tubas they are expenses, at least for those of us who are not extraordinarily lucky.

[Lingon]

...a carefully researched and purchased tuba can be an investment that will yield monetary returns when sold...

Absolutely, but isn't that true irrespective of origin, "a carefully researched and purchased tuba" I mean? A great instrument is great even if it is made in India or on the moon?

And yes, our brass instruments may not be a good and solid pension insurance. There are other 'instruments' for that. However we can have lots of fun making good music with the brass instruments, that might not be possible with the other type of instruments

FWIW, my old Bb/F trombone from about 1880 has a valve that craves a lot of STP or other thick oil treatment to be usable, and there are a couple of solders that are not really good. No pension insurance but a lot of fun

[Michael Bush]

Think with your bank account more than your urges for tubal gratification.

Yep. I couldn't agree more.

why worry about lots of unstable, quasi-unusable Chinese instruments

I agree. No one should do that. But if a stable, in-tune, completely usable Chinese instrument with good valves etc. is available for 1/5 the price of a stable, completely usable, in-tune German one, and you can live with whatever side issues there may be about politics and whatever else, why be a puritan? Why not make the choice that is best for the bank account?

[Greg Lecewicz]

TL;DR...

Chinese tubas are copies of other tubas, but the OP can't name which tubas were played or copied.

Mostly Yamaha copies in the 3-4 valve euphoniums. Like the 301 and 321. Those were the finest, I'd buy it in a blink if I needed it. A number of " pig's ears" or whatever you call the scrolled ones with the bell to the side- they had the rotors. No issues, no noise, good tone, I don't like the baritones with rotors. In Europe they must like'em more for some reason. Tubas-mostly Miraphone and other "classic" wrap just like it. The valves and the rotors all functioned very well. Nobody had complained about the valves being "crap". I don't have many negative statements about those instruments. I don't want to be misunderstood when I say "light or thin" it mainly applies to the way the instruments are finished ( I've never had checked the actual weight difference). They look way more delicate ( but they are not) as compared to our domestic major brands. They simply look as if the edges of the braces, joints etc would have sharper machine finish without too much time spent on polishing them. I think we have to specify one thing: If I'd be playing a baritone and I'd be comparing a Yamaha YEB-321 at $2700 and same wrap Jinbao at $ 500 ( as I did) I would choose the Chinese for the band work since it's so inexpensive but has a good sound. Yes, this level Yamaha is a better instrument no questions about it but if there are 2-3 euphoniums per part in the orchestra it really doesn't make any difference to the audience it's just your pocket that knows. I'll keep emailing the guys there and post if I'll find out anything about any serious issues that can't be remedied by any repairman. Actually my latest experience had made me very curious about the top models Jinbao makes like the copies of Yamaha or Courtois compensated euphoniums. There is a gigantic price difference and it would be so interesting to do blind testing side by side. To eliminate all this mud swinging if possible. They also make those more expensive tubas that would need to be compared side by side. It would be so helpful if somebody would purchase a copy of the instrument one had for years and play them both on a daily basis. I don't think any of the Chinese dealers in the US have any demo program which would help. To be continued...

[Ulli]

TL;DR...
Chinese tubas are copies of other tubas, ...

Mostly Yamaha copies in the 3-4 valve euphoniums.

OK, but which tuba is the original for the new re-engineered Jinbao F600, also known as Wessex Brahms?