Matte finish laquer

[kingrob76]

Lately I've found myself browsing the Interwebs ISO different and unusual ways to "finish" a tuba. Tonight, I came upon this:



It's a matte lacquer finished Rudy Meinl, and for my money it is drop dead gorgeous. The question that rattles around my head is how do you a horn from A to this, and it occurred to me I have no idea. I believe it's disassembly, stripping old lacquer, de-denting, buffing, more buffing, followed by reassembly, more buffing, then spraying on the lacquer. Am I correct in my guess?

I also guessing there are very few places in the US who would even take on this kind of work. I suspect Oberloh's shop could do this, Lee Stofer, and of course Joe. Beyond those three I'm not sure who else would even be an option nevermind trust to do a quality job. I have to think the application of matte lacquer could be at least as tedious as standard lacquer,

Disclosure: Yeah, I think this would be a cool way to re-finish my GB 188, someday, but I'd like to get a sense of the process and effort involved in something like this.

[bloke]

As long as an instrument is dent-free and free of lacquer, it doesn’t need any buffing (well...other than the slides, the bell interior, and maybe a few other places as finish “offsets”). All that is needed is a sandblasting machine, someone with a good touch, and then someone to shoot clear on it - when the glass bead blasting job is done.

summary: Assuming no dents at all (which - LOL - is never the case...)

> strip lacquer
> polish (buff) and clean bell interior, slides, and offsets
> tape off instrument openings, cut out a cardboard circle to cover the bell interior, and tape it over the rim
> glass bead blast with a sandblaster at low pressure and a few inches away (ie. WITH CARE)
> wipe down gently (any surface dust that remains from the sandblaster)
> remove bell cardboard, clean up any tape residue, hang up the tuba, and shoot with clear

(The majority of an instrument's surfaces - for this finish - require no buffing...only that they be free of lacquer and - assuming a logically-minded customer - free of denting. Any pre-buffing becomes wasted effort, once a surface is hit with a sandblaster...ok...possibly some exceptions, but very limited ones.)

[bloke]

A "wild" option would be (once the sandblast work is done) to "copper strike" the instrument prior to lacquering.
Though the nickel offsets would be covered (which is a negative), that would render the entire instrument a "copper red" color - again - with a sandblast finish (and - necessary to keep it from turning brown - with clear lacquer over it).

"Copper strike" (other than the r/t shipping cost to/from a plater) isn't that expensive...and it's (well...) "striking".

[LargeTuba]

Does anderson's have a copper tank big enough for a tuba?

[bloke]

Does anderson's have a copper tank big enough for a tuba?

yeah...They copper-strike most all instruments that are plated.

Plating doesn't adhere all that well to nickel silver (nor even to the common approx. 70:30 brass alloys), which is why Conn ("back in the day") made most all of their to-be-silver-plated instruments out of "low brass" (80:20) - to improve bonding.

The copper strike stage is done because copper plates to so many things (even some plastics), and silver/nickel/gold plate so well to copper...so it the thin copper layer behaves - just a bit - as does a "paint primer".

[hrender]

Do any of these have advantages as an approach to refinishing an older instrument? In other words, is the resulting appearance better when overlaid on a more worn surface?

[bloke]

Do any of these have advantages as an approach to refinishing an older instrument? In other words, is the resulting appearance better when overlaid on a more worn surface?

Glass bead blasting (whether not plated or - traditionally - silver plated) does a good job at cloaking deep scratches/"cuts", as well as cloaking VERY MINOR imperfections in dent removal.
It will not cloak most of the "imperfections" that I tend to see (when asked-or-prompted to "go back over" others' attempts).

[Three Valves]

I'd keep the inside of the bell shiny but...

[bort2.0]

Rob, you should have the 188 done in a matte finish and leave the valve slides and leadpipe shiny.

This is a 188 anniversary model that is unlacquered. I think the patina is really pretty!

[bloke]

If I had a musical instrument that featured a better-than-90% original finish, I would never consider replacing that finish with another one.

I’m just too much of a pragmatist...
...but - worse than a pragmatist, I tend to assume that there are a lot of people who think like I do, and - when I see redone finishes or lacquer removed from originally-lacquered instruments - they (yes...??) start wondering what the hell else was done to those instruments, and shy away from being interested in buying them – when they are offered for sale by their owners.

In particular, a better-than-90% lacquer finish is really easy to boost up to at least 97% without much expense.

To clarify, I’m speaking about my own preferences and in general terms, and I am not offering anyone in particular any individual advice.

[bloke]

If I had a brass musical instrument that featured a better-than-90% original finish, I would never consider replacing that finish with another one.

I’m just too much of a pragmatist...
...but - worse than a pragmatist, I tend to assume that there are a lot of people who think like I do, and - when I see redone finishes or lacquer removed from originally-lacquered instruments - they (yes...??) start wondering * “What the hell else was done to this instrument?”, and shy away from being interested in buying them – when they are offered for sale by their owners.

In particular, a better-than-90% lacquer finish is really easy to boost up to at least 97% without much expense.

To clarify, I’m speaking about my own preferences and in general terms, and I am not offering anyone in particular any individual advice.
Flying in the face of everything said above, I have put satin silver finishes on instruments (Instruments which were taken completely apart, and which had almost none of their original finish left), but it was typically only their second finish, and with the purpose being to avoid doing hard buffing on those instruments, as a satin finish is much gentler on an instrument than a heavy buffing job. I admit that I am more suspicious of no finish than I am of a redone finish, but I am suspicious of both. An additional bad thing about a brown patina (no finish) is that it doesn’t show damage very well, and some owners of brown tubas tend to bump them on things, because minor damage really doesn’t show.
____________________
* ie. “I wonder what terrible things happened to this instrument that prompted its owner to go to the trouble and expense of having it’s original finish completely removed and replaced with nothing/something else.“

[kingrob76]

Rob, you should have the 188 done in a matte finish and leave the valve slides and leadpipe shiny.

This is a 188 anniversary model that is unlacquered. I think the patina is really pretty!

yeah, my thinking is the valve section and kranz stays as is and the rest of it in the matte lacquer look. Raw brass has never appealed to me as a look but I don't hate it. Clearly, this is "fixing up the hot rod" type thinking - not trying to make it stock, but, unique with the idea this is going to be with me a long time even though it won't be my everyday axe from now until eternity.