Thank you all for the great information. More than I can reply to, that's for sure!
Sounds like some people love them and some people don't... just like anything else. And to whoever said that Kanstul is terrible at advertising, I'd agree with that. I'm not sure what I expect out of tuba advertising, but their Website is underwhelming.
I'll have to try one out sometime.
And for crying out loud, Zig, make a rotary tuba already!
In addition to rotary tubas, I would like to see Kanstul put out a sousaphone, even though I know their main focus is drum corps style marching instruments, I would love to play a sousaphone that is built as well and sounds as good as their marching tubas and contras.
Also, if anyone has any more information/pictures on that new 'flying tuba' that they make, I'd love to see it. It looks very intriguing to me.
the elephant wrote:Back in the day, FE Olds (for whom Zig Kanstul worked) was never really into the idea of producing his own rotary valves. Eventually the company did so, but by then they were headed toward bankruptcy. I think that Zig must have picked up that lack of interest in rotary valves from Mr. Olds or perhaps Mr. Reynolds. (Not sure if Zig ever actually knew Mr. Olds.)
Bernie Marston explains the situation at Olds for decades, and you can see how this might have influenced Mr. Kanstul in his pursuit of piston valves over rotors.
SousaWarrior9 wrote:In addition to rotary tubas, I would like to see Kanstul put out a sousaphone
Whoa... I didn't realize that they didn't have one! Seems a little odd to me, especially if they're going after college marching band dollars. Very few college bands want to deal with contras.
Kanstuls play great, only issues I've had are hearing back from them on getting parts. Also, the screws on my lead pipe need to be tightened every week, and one of them already went missing.
My apologies on the poorly-constructed sentence! Kanstul's manufacturing is in Anaheim, CA. They are selling in China, not manufacturing there.
As for the comparison between the 33-S and the 90-S, I think that the 5-valve CC may respond a little faster than the 5-valve BBb, but I cannot say for sure. I have sold more of the model 33-S in a 4-valve configuration, something that Zig did not want to promote for some unknown reason. The 4-front-valve BBb is simpler, lighter-weight, and I think , responds more freely than the 5-valve version. Personally, if I were going to take a Kanstul out and play it on a gig, my favorites would be the 33-T or 4-front-piston 33 BBb, the standard model 90-S CC, the model 80 F and the Grand CC. I just haven't spent enough time with the Grand BBb or Grand F to evaluate them.
Building a rotor version of an instrument may not seem like a big deal, but R & D usually is incredibly expensive. Mr. Kanstul told me that they had spent $150,000.00 in tooling and labor to bring the first prototype of the model 33-T into existence. From that, they were able to come up with the 66- and 90- series without too much more expense, but building tubas is a very expensive, labor-intensive and not very profitable enterprise. Due to the curiousity of myself and others, I am looking at the possibility of making a one-off, 5-rotor version of my CC tuba in the next year. I will have to get some longer tubes and do a lot of hand-bending and fitting to make a euro-style valveset, and will have to fabricate a number of braces. It is completely a different mindset from building a piston valveset, and there's no guarantee of how it will play. I do not blame Mr. Kanstul for manufacturing what is selling very well now, and not worrying with inventing another valveset.
To respond to the comment about Chinese manufacturing, I realize that they have made significant strides in tuba manufacturing over the past 15 years, going from quality that was laughable to instruments that can now actually be used in serious ensembles. However, I have two concerns. First, my understanding is that they have little or no interest in the western history of manufacture, but are for the most part taking iconic western instruments and reverse-engineering them, figuring out how to use the most modern and efficient manufacturing processes to make parts that look like the older western counterparts, then assemble them into an instrument that looks like a western instrument. They understand valve and slide tolerances, and with that the instruments are now quite playable. However, instead of using the finest (and most expensive) metals for the greatest acoustic effect, and for durability and corrosion-resistance, the alloy choices they are using seem to be based upon the lowest price. One gets what one pays for. I did not realize the difference that the highest-quality alloys make until I owned Rudolf Meinl and Thein instruments. The quality of these instruments was apparent in that they were so corrosion-resistant and durable, and were profoundly resonant with their own signature sounds. I have also found a similar degree of quality and sophistication in vintage instruments by Besson, Alexander, Boosey & Hawkes, York, Conn and Martin. When the Chinese build an instrument that can play like my Martin, I will be really impressed.
Lee, thank you very much for the great information. Reading your posts reminds me of how HUGE the difference is between someone like yourself who KNOWS stuff about stuff, and someone like me who... well, you get the point.
That's a good point about the startup costs involved, and while I know it's expensive, it's not my business, and it's easy for me to say what someone else should do with their money. Point taken... I'd like to think there's a market for it, but yeah, $150k+ would take a lot of tubas to be profitable.
As we've discussed, I'd LOVE to see how your rotary tuba turns out, but unfortunately it's just not in my budget now. Maybe I'll have some kind of extreme financial good fortune by the time you're ready to sell it. Either way, I'd love to at least play test it once you have it built!
One last work about Kanstul, then I think I'm ready to wrap this up -- I have a lot of respect for them to be able to manufacture musical instruments in the USA, and California is NOT a cheap place to do this. I'm glad they've found some recent success, and hope they can keep it up and be a globally relevant company for many years to come.
