Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Sander 4 valve


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

Posted by Klaus on June 05, 2002 at 19:21:47:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Sander 4 valve posted by Rick Denney on June 05, 2002 at 09:48:00:

"who thinks older Cervenys had more unique character in their appearance"

I can only tell of about two changes in the Cerveny tuba appearance. After all Cerveny rotary tubas are based on the original design of that species. Which was made by the founder of the Cerveny company. So basically Cerveny's are no copycats.

And when they are, they appear to be bad ones. I easily can understand, that they left their original S-links for copies of the B&S ball & socket system. But why did they make their version in brass? The original in nickel silver is much more durable.

The original Cerveny bell was a cone with almost straight profile lines. Next to none flare. I have discussed this feature with another boarder, and we are both leaning towards the assumption, that this was more a matter of production capabilities, than of acoustic ideas. By adhering to an almost perfect cone, the shape could mainly be based on a not too complicated cutting from the brass sheet. Not much need for hydraulics or spinning.

I recently acquired (yeas, on German ebay) a book telling of the band music history of Franken, the northern part of Bavaria.

From the illustrations it is clearly to be seen, that almost al tubas of the eras up to WWII are of the "perfect" cone type. Even if most of them more likely were made by small local workshops, than by Cerveny.

Klaus


Follow Ups: