Posted by Rick Denney on November 20, 2002 at 18:49:37:
In Reply to: St.Petersburg-again posted by Collin on November 20, 2002 at 17:51:08:
Here's the deal: St. Petersburg tubas are manufactured in Russia by factories that still suffer from decades of central planning, with no connection to market forces and no concept of customer service.
The design of the St. Pete is not bad, though it is sort-of old-fashioned. I've played one that was at Baltimore Brass and I didn't have much problem with how it played or sounded.
But the execution of that design is, by all accounts, less than wonderful. The importer claims to replace many mechanical parts, including the valve machine, but we also see reports from repair techs on this forum that the remaining parts are made of poor materials and made inconsistently, so that they break often and even if spare parts were readily available (which they are not) they'd probably not fit. Also, the brass is reported to be thin and soft.
Therefore, the instrument may play reasonably well, but it may not work very well mechanically, or at least not for a long time. But the problem is not intentionally bad workmanship, the problem is zero quality control, so you might get one that is put together well enough so that the poor materials don't get stressed and break, or it might use a batch of parts that were made on a better day.
For an adult who knows what they are getting into and is willing to take the risk (and take excellent care of a fragile tuba), then they can be a reasonable choice. For kids, I think they are a poor choice, because they won't survive any abuse at all.
That said, I have problems with them being marketed to schools. I also have problems with them being marked up to the point where the price is comparable to better instruments that are much better and more durably built.
When you could get a St. Pete from the fellow in Germany for $1500 with new valve linkages, or $1000 without, they were a good deal for a knowledgeable adult. For the $3000 they are sold for here, they are not, in my opinion, a stellar deal. You'd be better off with a similarly priced (or even cheaper) Cerveny, Jupiter, or better still a VMI. Interestingly, the Cerveny and the VMI are both made in former Soviet-bloc countries, but they have made the transition to western production standards much better. But I'd take a used Miraphone for the same price any day of the week.
I collect and use ex-Soviet photographic equipment, from the Ukraine, Russia, and (former) East Germany. The issues are exactly the same. The Ukrainians make a camera that is a copy of an ancient Hasselblad. Production standards are low, and importers are expected to upgrade the cameras before selling them. Even then, infant mortality is high. But the optics are world-class, and the prices silly cheap for cameras of this type. My Ukrainian Hasselblad copy and ten very interesting lenses cost about $2500, while a Hasselblad and ten lenses of the same focal lengths would easily run upwards of $40 or $50 grand. So what if I have to replace it every couple of years? But I would never recommend such a camera to someone who is not willing to take exceptional care of it and fiddle with it to manage its many little problems, and I would never expect them to pay as much as a more reliable camera would cost. The parallels with second-world tubas are startling.
Know what you are getting into before you make the investment, and make sure the price you are paying is consistent with that risk.
Rick "trying to present a balanced view" Denney