Posted by Rick Denney on February 01, 2002 at 16:32:27:
In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: 52-J posted by Todd Morgan on February 01, 2002 at 15:35:56:
It seems to me much more likely that some construction difference, and not the finish, caused the effect you experienced.
I played a satin silver King 2341 (similar in many ways to the Conn) at the Army conference that I thought was completely uninteresting. It seemed unresponsive and dead. But the lacquered 2341 that I played a couple of months ago at Baltimore Brass was lively and lovely. The world of difference between these two instruments has nothing to do with the finish, I'm sure.
That said, one respected repair dude suggested to me that the satin finish is actually the cheapest finish to manufacture, because the cost of silver is much less than the cost of prepping the brass for lacquer or bright silver plating, which further suggests (to him) that the shapes are not as carefully worked out because faults will be hidden by the satin finish.
And there have been reports of things like solder blobs and other manufacturing defects here and there that might adversely affect any one instrument. The King, being at a much lower price point, might be more subject to these than the Conn, but even the most expensive instruments in the world have this sort of variability.
Rick "trying to connect cause and effect" Denney