Re: Re: Re: Re: Tuba overhaul web page completed


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Rick Denney on February 11, 2003 at 11:50:48:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Tuba overhaul web page completed posted by Tony E on February 10, 2003 at 22:09:04:

Tony, think of Joe as an agent provocateur. It's annoying sometimes, but usually harmless, and often it pulls out some useful nuggets. And he didn't sign his name, but he didn't need to. Anonymity isn't the same thing as using an alias.

The value in Joe's question was this: There is a different strategy for overhauling an instrument for sale and for overhauling a beloved instrument for its owner. In the former case, economics rule utterly for a repair guy who wants to stay in business, and Dan shows no sign of any less business acumen than he demonstrates in repair ability. But in the latter case, a different standard applies.

We have to be careful about the terms we use, too. "Overhaul" has come to mean making the instrument look new with no sign of previous repair. "Econo-overhaul" has come to mean removing all damage, but not necessarily all signs of the repair. There is a value implication in the use of these terms, but that is not necessarily the philosophical perspective of the instrument's owner who makes that decision. Thus, I decided not to do a full overhaul on my Miraphone. Why not? Cost was part of it, but only a small part; I could have afforded a full overhaul at the time. The main reason was that I wanted to leave it as it was, with the full thickness of the brass, and removing all signs of past repair would have also removed parts of the instrument. Therefore, it was primarily a judgment based on the philosophy of repair, not on economic values.

Joe's question had to do with the economics. If Dan was preparing an old Miraphone for sale as an overhauled instrument, then replacing the bell might well be the better economic choice. If new 186's get what they do, then there's clearly nothing wrong with the new bell, even if it is a bit different. Replacing the bell in addition to replacing the guard mouldings, leadpipe, and other expensive-to-repair pieces might be a good business choice. The buyer of such an instrument will still purchase it, or not, on the merits of that particular instrument.

And that leads me to my question. If the instrument is bring overhauled for sale, such that replacing the guard mouldings and so on is done for economic reasons, then why claim the high ground of using original parts on the bell? Dan answered it well by pointing out that replacing the bell isn't as economical as had been assumed, when finishing work was considered. So, his choice is still a good economic choice, and the questions revealed his thinking. Your information about the price that overhauled Miraphones bring in your area provide further illumination.

For an overhaul of a beloved personal instrument, however, a different metric comes into play. When Dan did the work on your Holton, you weren't thinking in terms of economics, except in counting what you could afford both in time and money. The Holton held a place in your thinking that made it not a choice of economics. And you have invested more in your Holton than it could probably bring in a sale. But who cares? You don't intend to sell it. You do intend to play it, and it's more fun to play and to own when it looks like new (or, actually, better than new). Thus, when you say that your choice would be to keep the old bell for your instrument (which was exactly my choice), you are really answering a different question than the one asked, at least to some extent.

From the repairman's perspective, it's a matter of making a good return on his investment. For an overhaul for sale, the repair person will add the cost of the carcass to the cost of overhauling it to determine if it can be repaired cheaply enough to bring a reasonable profit when it sells. For a customer's horn, the repair technician makes an estimate based on the time and materials required to do a repair without regard to the value of the instrument. The owner compares the cost of repair to the value of the instrument and takes the economic risk.

We all admire Dan's skill in restoring the instruments, and we greatly appreciate his willingness to walk us through the process. Even though I was at home with a slow dial-up, I waited for the pictures to download on all the pages, and never for a minute regretted the time it took. Joe's provocation was to try to understand the economics of the situation as a fellow repairman. It's a question that interested me, too.

Rick "thinking of the difference between fixed-price contracts and time-and-materials contracts" Denney


Follow Ups: