TubaForum.net

It's really easy to raise people's dander, which discussing inexpensive equipment, and discussing what is widely encountered - in the repair shop - encourages anecdotal/single/individual reports (only involving one instrument owned by one person) that both agree with and contradict reports of wide general experience. I would encourage anyone to keep that in mind, when reading this.
===================================
With brass instrument valves (whether piston or rotary) there are a handful of requirements:
- reasonably airtight
- quick motion
- reliable motion
- (for most users/performers) quiet motion

All of these requirements depend heavily on manufacturing tolerances.
Regardless of where a piece of equipment is manufactured (and today, a tremendous percentage of all sorts of products are made in Asia), if design, tolerances, and materials are all superb, there is less likelihood of problems. "Fast" manufacturing doesn't necessarily equal "bad" manufacturing, if "fast" is ALSO nearly perfect...and there are some people who do nearly-perfect work who are also fast at doing it (simply because they do JUST what is absolutely required - no more, and no less...as either "more" or "less" could easily destroy that which they are fabricating).
Specifically with brass instrument valves, when these standards are kept consistently high, this eliminates most problems - other than damage and contaminants (lime, dirt, foreign substances, improper lubricants/cleansers, etc.)

Observation tells me a lot of money has changed hands via the sales of low-build-tolerances sub-$2XXX tubas (replicas of $9XXX instruments), and even some of the same build quality in the (replicas of $16XXX instruments) over-$5XXX price range.

Having agreed to do work on quite a few of these instruments sold to people who live within two or three hours of my shop (bought - typically - from online outlets), I see (and funny to use this word) "consistent" epic slide alignment issues, inside-outside slide tolerance issues (as wildly misaligned slides probably cannot be inserted nor extracted unless the individual pairs of tubes' fit is very loose), and (much more impacting than slide tolerance issues) valve tolerance issues.

I remember (two or three decades ago) when both the piston and rotor tolerances were "consistently" unacceptable from certain identifiable outlets/overseas manufacturers. As they are simple cylinders, the pistons seem to improved more (with the low-end Asia-made instruments) though the quality of the porting (brass tubes which pass through the hollow piston bodies) often continues to pull hard at my eyebrow.

The low-end Asia-made instruments' rotary valves continue to cause headaches and - via sympathy for those who've purchased these instruments - cause me to tend to undercharge for the amount of time spent to attempt to make them run reliably (as there really is no proper "repair" other than "replace" - with something such as a complete set of Meinlschmidt rotor assemblies...for an "upgrade" cost roughly equivalent to the "new" prices of these complete instruments, but - even were that done, the epic tuning slide issues...loose-fitting tubes and wildly-off alignment...would continue to exist, so... )

Again, poor tolerances go hand-in-hand with inconsistent results, with some consumers encountering little-to-no problems, and others encountering very "consistent" (again: an ironic word to find myself using) problems. When removable bearing rotor bearing plates are even only .0005" too tight, it becomes very difficult to micro-adjust both their "tilt" and their in/out position - in relation to the rotor body, because - well - it's difficult to "micro-adjust" something when (ok...) "beating the crap out of it" is what is required to cause it to barely budge.

Another issue with hurriedly-manufactured rotary valve assemblies is "on center" issues. When lathes are worn, not the best, and/or their bearing are not maintained, machining "slop" becomes an issue, and things that need to be perfectly circular and perfectly symmetrical end up not being so. When that is the case, the only way for a rotor to turn in its casing is loose lateral (left/right) bearings fit. Since valve stems fitting loosely is not an option (too immediately-apparent to consumers) the other option is to make the center holes in the removable "back" bearing plates oversize...thus rendering those back bearings as only "for show" and not actually functioning as bearings. When all this is the situation, the valve stem becomes the only real bearing and (yikes!) the interior large surfaces of the valve casing itself become the defacto other "bearing". This being the case, even a sub-.001" wobble in a rotor valve stem quickly becomes a +.001" or even +.0015" or (whoa!) +.002" wobble down at the bottom end of the rotor body (against its casing wall) and - guess what...?? - that inconsistent improper friction between the rotor body and the casing wall = intermittent/inconsistent hanging rotors, with hapless consumers regularly contacting an (eye-squinting, yet sympathetic) bloke.

Further (as there is a great deal of torque applied to rotor valve stems) that upper bearing tends to wear more quickly, whereas the bottom (removable) bearing wears very slowly. I have some old "junk" Miraphone (several decades of school use) rotors which date back to the 1960's, and their lower-bearing wobble is still-to-this-day only slight, whereas new hurriedly-manufactured-in-Asia rotors bearings often offer so much wobble as to allow the edges of the bearing plates (when tilted this-way-and-that with fingers) to touch the rotor bodies themselves...so yes: 50-year-old school-worn Miraphone rotors are often still completely reliable, whereas new hurriedly-manufactured rotors are often completely unreliable.

When I try to help someone with these issues, I simply cannot be getting on my lathe, manufacturing them a new set of removable bearings, and charging them (??) $500 - $800, as [1] such a repair is out-of-proportion with the new acquisition cost of the complete instrument, and [2] "perfect"/tight bearings would not allow these rotors to rotate (as -again - they are so often built "off-center")...so I do some "hail-Mary" lapping, cleaning, inspecting of surfaces for "where do these parts tend to inappropriately rub against each other the most", etc. ie. "b.s." ...
...and BECAUSE the only financially-appropriate remedy is "b.s.", (again) I tend to undercharge for my time, because I feel somewhat guilty charging for short-term remedies which are not actually repairs...

...so the wide distribution of this equipment tends to be lose-lose (lose for the consumer, and lose for the repair-guy), with the only winners being the importers/retailers of these items.
- The consumer ends up with shiny/unreliable equipment with "potential" (ie. "if only this instrument had valves and slides which worked", etc...)
- The repair-guy ends up undercharging out of sympathy, and is made to look bad because they are unable to completely remedy problems which are not able to be properly remedied (again, without swapping out complete valvesets).

OK...yes: I sell some Asian products...but not all Eastern Hemisphere instrument manufacturing is equal (just as all Western Hemisphere manufacturing is not equal). I feel quite certain that - buying through another company that actually purchases the instruments from the factory - I'm paying a fairly heavy wholesale mark-up over "dock" pricing, but - that having been said - I'm only selling instruments that (based on experience) I can drop-ship to customers - if necessary - straight from the warehouse (without me having to unpack and "check" them), and - 99 times out of 100 - they are issue-free - with pistons/casings, rotors/casings, inside-outside slide tube fit, and slide alignment that all closely resembles (under deep scrutiny) central European manufacturing standards.

I don't believe (??) that I'm an "equipment snob". Rather, I'm a few other things:
- I'm LAZY, because I just want to SELL a new instrument, NOT attempt to "pre-repair" it, and NOT hear about its issues (perhaps continuously/relentlessly) from purchasers. Further, I do not care for the proposition of disingenuously reciting platitudes and blather/gobbledygook to people who deserve my complete candidness (particularly when I actually do know something about the cause of the problems they're experiencing).
- I hear my long-departed Dad's loud-@$$ voice in my head constantly, about "golden rule" sorts of issues. I'm just as tempted to make quick/easy money as anyone, but - well - "that voice" could make it difficult to sleep at night, and - when I have strayed from that voice, in my life (Who hasn't...??) that "voice" becomes VERY loud and VERY angry.

...and I've bought "cheap" stuff too: cheap-lawnmowers, cheap-drills, cheap-rakes, cheap-this, cheap-that. Every once in a while, "cheap" was also really good. More often, though, "just a little bit above cheap" (maybe even only "double the cost of cheap" - which was STILL only "HALF the cost of expensive) has pleased me a great deal.

Feel free to lump the Russian rotor assemblies in there as well. Pretty much the same reasons.

matt g wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 9:28 am Feel free to lump the Russian rotor assemblies in there as well. Pretty much the same reasons.

I could, if we're referring to ancient "no-name" Russian tubas (those with little more than some small trademark-y thing stamped on them).

Per two of my mentors in the repair/design trade, Bill Kendall (formerly Walter Lawson's valve man) and Walter Lawson, himself,a good rotary valve an casing should be tapered, not cylindrical. This also goes for the shafts and bearings. That way, as the tapered valve is lapped into the tapered casing, there is little chance for leakage as the rotor and the casing assume each other's shape making for a tighter fit.

yes...The rotors - to which I refer - are a bit conical, but just not completely/absolutely symmetrical.

I have a 55 year old Miraphone that spent 35 years in public schools. The rotors are perfect.

Also have a Conn sousaphone of a similar age, and it’s valves are great.

Anecdotes with low sample size, as bloke points out.

Personally I avoid expensive items that are cheap for what they are: you rarely get what you don’t pay for, and he who buys cheap buys twice.

We all like a bargain and no one likes to be overcharged, however the admittedly anecdotal reports I’ve had of Asia-manufactured Brass instruments suggest it’s wise to inspect before you spend big money. I believe that a couple of U.K. based companies do rebrand and sell on Asia manufactured instruments and that they do so with high quality assurance procedures in place. I’d rather see and buy a decades old Tuba made in Europe or the USA than a new one made elsewhere.

The one importer - from which I buy Chinese instruments - has most all of its upper-line instruments made in one factory.
The “frankentuba” phenomenon has really grown. Currently, the only tuba in C that they sell is a really nicely-built Hirsbrunner/Adams copy, which features a York-style pistons+rotor valveset. For those who like that particular design, in my opinion they might as well buy one of these.

Completely satisfied with the C tuba that is here, I have no motivation to stick together another one - as these projects are only practical if they are built to keep, because there’s no way to recover the cost of the hours, if built to sell.

That having been said, were I to take on such a project – and as picky as I am – I would be delighted to use one of these - in particular - Asian-made complete (slides and all) valvesets on a 3/4”-bore piston C tuba project. The workmanship is exquisite at this factory, but there are other factories that offer “very good“ workmanship, “pretty good“ workmanship, and some which offer “good enough to sell to someone, and possibly make it through a warranty period“ workmanship. Again: being lazy, it’s easier for me to sell fewer instruments at a little bit higher price point that I can drop-ship from a warehouse without having to individually inbox and inspect them, and without having to day-in/day-out b.s. disappointed/dissatisfied customers in emails and on the telephone.

I’m pretty sure that most people don’t understand how many musical instrument factories there are are in mainland China, and that they were actually multiple copies made of some of the popular Western Hemisphere models.

I own one Chinese-made instrument. I've had it looked over from bow to stern and aside from having the "wrong" pistons the build quality and alignment checked out. This horn is a pre-production prototype that on the outside appears to identical to the production models, but for whatever the ports didn't precisely match up on 1, 3, and 4 (with 4 being the worst). The difference was small, but explained some stuff I had noticed on my own. Even though I bought it used it was still under warranty and Wessex sent me a new set of pistons which aligned perfectly, so I'm calling this an artifact of it being a prototype. I'm pretty sure that being a prototype it got a LOT more attention in assembly.

I have a friend who is relatively well-known, at least in the DC area, for his tuba playing who has purchased several Chinese-made instruments. He bought a Jupiter CC and the valves were terrible. Jupiter replaced the horn and the valves were terrible on that horn, too, so it eventually went back and he got a full refund. He's purchased the 6/4 CC BMB and the smaller (3/4?) CC BMB and those horns seemed ok, build wise, but he did fight some valve issues with the 6/4 at first (which went away after having the horn ultrasonically cleaned).

My Miraphone 1291 (new from the factory) had a piece of a buffing or polishing wheel in the 4th valve circuit from the factory and the 3rd and 4th slides were badly misaligned.

My assumption is a) rarely is something perfect regardless of the source and b) rarely is everything flawed from a given source. But trends DO emerge over time and seem to be relatively valid in what they indicate.

bloke wrote: ↑Sun Jun 27, 2021 7:43 am I’m pretty sure that most people don’t understand how many musical instrument factories there are are in mainland China, and that they were actually multiple copies made of some of the popular Western Hemisphere models.

I believe that you’re correct and, from my instrument buyer/owner/customer perspective the whole situation is somewhat frustrating. From my perspective Tubas are not inexpensive consumer goods but rather significant investments in hardware that should, with reasonable care, literally last at least one lifetime and play well. Part of the investment is the reliably good use that the original purchaser gets (should get) from the instrument and another part of that investment is the (expected good) return gained on eventual re-sale.

From what I see, which may or may not be an accurate reflection of reality, buying a Chinese made instrument isn’t without hazards and the buyer has little real idea of: where the instrument is from, how well built it is and how it will be made to last a lifetime. Of course you can buy a Packer or a Wessex (re-branded Chineses made instruments made by who really knows and to what actual and consistent standard?) and benefit from what influence such re-branders manage to exert on both QA and the manufacturing process. I have my doubts and reservations but for some people such re-brands are probably a perfectly satisfactory way forward ... it all depends what you want and what value you put on things. Maybe a bit of luck and being ‘in the know’ helps with safely purchasing made in China brass instruments, likewise a well informed and trustworthy seller will greatly help, but I prefer to buy second hand European and American instead, YMMV.

Over the years I’ve bought and sold a small number of brass instruments for my own use. None were Chinese, all were second-hand and some needed either repairs or manufacturing defects corrected - obviously the defects should never have been present but ‘stuff happens’. Without excessive difficulty the Brass Technicians who did the work were able to make good repairs / corrections, but they all told me of the typical difficulty / impossibility of repairing instruments made in China. To be fair China makes a lot of good quality high value products (such as TV’s, Mobile Phones and Computers) so one shouldn’t label them badly but with Brass Instruments Caveat Emptor seems to be very appropriate.

At least it’s not those brass instruments made in India.

From repairing a whole bunch of instruments, the largest factory in China seems to offer at least three quality levels, but - in my view - the highest one of those it offers isn’t really quite good enough to satisfy my personal requirements, and nor is it good enough to define that I could simply sell those products to my customers without personally inspecting them first, as I have worked on quite a few of the top level instruments (from that factory) which sport all of the issues that the lower level instruments display, that are made in the same place.
I am not in the least interested in being a wholesale-to-retailer customer of this factory.
——————————
As to the JP instruments - which are made in a different factory, I’ve tried buying around them - a couple of times - to avoid the JP/middleman markup. The problem (buying “around” JP, rather than THROUGH JP) is that the piston assemblies, rotor assemblies, and inside/outside slide tubing fit is all JUST as good (equal to central European quality), but the overall assembly of the components isn’t as good. JP obviously has a standard - met by that factory specifically for JP - which is above that factory’s assembly standard for run-of-the-mill wholesale customers ...so I pay more money, and buy them from JP. Thus, I end up with new instruments for sale which not only have great rotors or pistons and great fitting inside-to-outside slide tubes, but which also offer all of those things assembled and aligned very carefully (and I do understand that most customers who don’t repair instruments can’t see the difference between good-enough-to-sell pistons, rotors, and slide tubes and those fabricated in the JP factory, but - to me - the differences are screaming at me, and I just can’t ignore them).
...Something else is that this is a smaller factory (which manufacturers JP) is not capable of offering as wide an array of models, but with that reality - along with the higher pricing that may cut down on my sales (though our own company’s markup is modest) - I’m perfectly happy to lose additional sales, rather than offering junky mockups of additional popular models made in the west. There are quite a few paths to monetary wealth, but tons of additional money doesn’t do any of us much good, once our lives are over. What does us good DURING our lives is the ability to sleep soundly at night. Part of that - for me - (again) is >NOT< having to put off customers with b.s. rhetoric - due to their routine complaints (related to substandard manufacturing problems), because these are NOT routine problems with JP.

In many ways we can see this in other industries and products.

- Ever tried to get a newish/modern TV repaired?

- Repair a newer vacuum?

- Re-sole a pair of dress shoes?

- Repair a car radiator or rebuild a modern car’s engine?

Many things aren’t designed to be repairable these days. Trash it and replace it, right! Generate additional consumer spending, grow the economy!



I nearly came out of my shoes when our auto mechanic said that the coolant leak on our 2001 Ford F-150 was at the intake manifold and it needed to be replaced rather than just putting in a new gasket since it was made of plastic!

A plastic intake manifold? Say what?

The manufacturers will do what the market will bear (bare? )…

“bloke” wrote: There are quite a few paths to monetary wealth, but tons of additional money doesn’t do any of us much good, once our lives are over. What does us good DURING our lives is the ability to sleep soundly at night.

Probably the most profound thing I’ve seen on this forum, or the previous one.

This thread elsewhere gave me some interesting insights:
http://forums.chisham.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=68817

I thought the history, comments and future plans by Wessex to be helpful, open and honest, not sure how they impact on the brand and sales though. It was good of Jonathan Hodgetts to answer the thread, things like that get my respect.

I like Jonathan just fine and enjoy his enthusiasm.
I just don’t like a particular very large factory’s resultant products (nor the time and fussing around required to get some of those products to function properly), and don’t have the patience to deal with selling them nor the ability to engage in disingenuous rhetoric to apologize for them, once sold to end users...
...and yes, it’s obvious that a lot of end-users are willing to put up with a lot of shortcomings, but it’s just hard for me to put myself in the place of people who accept less than I accept...
A demanding person has to be willing to accept selling things which would not satisfy themselves - in order to become very wealthy, because so many will settle for so very little.