Re: Re: Re: I am looking for an Aleander bell


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

Posted by Klaus on June 22, 2000 at 20:41:24:

In Reply to: Re: Re: I am looking for an Aleander bell posted by Matt Walters on June 22, 2000 at 18:07:52:

Being a bachelor doing my own washing, I will come pretty much through all available clothes before taking the stairs down to the washing facility.

Joking aside: I once was told by a pro tubist that Miraphone at least way back in a former century routinely tested any tuba with 3 leadpipes, by principle identical, by workmanship and material (flaws) less identical, before soldering the best leadpipe to the body.

Through alone my memory of 4 brassy decades I can remember a number of tuba and euph model changes, where the changes have been restricted to exactly the leadpipe and the bell. Makes like Besson/B&H and Yamaha could be mentioned, with a lots of others just escaping my attention.

As your reports on the new Conns are indicating, the major production costs, or let us say the major costs of remodelling, are connected to the valve cluster and the inner tubing.

A way to make a good compromise between the economical considerations of the producers and the individualistic/idealistic desires of players could be to market tubas and euphs as 3 part sets, where the central body was a fixed entity, with the player choosing the for him/her best bell/leadpipe combination.

At least for the larger players in the distribution sector that might be attractive. But the small brass seller in a far outback would certainly have his problems with this approach.

This idea is not an original one of mine. As I understand it, at least one US trombone maker is operating along these lines. And a number of German trumpet makers are doing so as well.

80/20 is a true consideration, but a smaller/larger bell for the 20%, could be cheaper than a whole new tuba.

Thank you all very much for the responses.

Klaus


Follow Ups: