Purchasing used Sousa for a high school band

[mcp111]

Hi everyone,

I'm a high school band director and drummer by trade, so I'm looking for some advice on purchasing Sousas. I've been asked by my admin to see if we can buy used instead of new. I've found a couple brass Conn20K. Would these be a good choice, assuming they're in good condition? I know one of them is from 1978, not sure about the other yet. Is this instrument too heavy for high school kids? Are they durable? We currently have fiberglass/brass combo instruments and they are falling apart at the joints with duct tape everywhere. Are there better choices that I might be able to find?

If we do buy new, what would you consider? Brands, fiberglass/brass, etc.

Any input would be appreciated. Thanks!

[Sousaswag]

I prefer old King/HN White horns if you can find any. I like the 20K but dislike the intonation and don’t care for the short action valves. If you’ve got a good price on them then go for it. They’ve got a proven track record and good following but don’t buy new ones. Stick with used like you are.

As far as weight, all brass sousaphones are heavy. The kids will learn to deal with it.

[bloke]

I have c. six of these (that I've had for years in RESTORABLE - NOT READY FOR SALE AT ALL - condition).

to others: I'm NOT looking to sell them as-is, so no PM's about that, please.

The new ones (and this is a typical tuba-discussion-list comment about ALL types of tubas that people don't like, but this should be taken literally, here) are made of thinner material than the older ones, and dent much more easily. Additionally, I believe I've ascertained that the piston tolerances on the newer ones are a bit too close, which results in more valve problems when any damage around/near the valve block occurs, and/or when not oiled daily (and how many school tuba players oil valves daily?). The new ones (particularly the MOST recently-made ones) feature a whole bunch of redundant (don't do anything, in my view) braces, including a pillow-block bracing system for the lower mouthpipe tube (which - in my view - can be defeated just as easily as past bracing systems - including the original Elkhart ones, which - the vintage/Elkhart braces - were nicely-made specially/precision-shaped braces).

I'm not sure about weight, because - even though the new ones are much thinner (and come into my shop with considerably more dents) - all of those redundant braces (plus that wonky pillow block thing) surely add considerable weight back to the instrument.

Still, I very much doubt that the original Elkhart ones weigh even 30 lbs (wild guess: 27 lbs. or so...??).

The thing is this:

The instrument's bell should be installed at an angle defining a GENTLE OVERALL SPIRAL (only SLIGHTLY to the right, and NOT "way" to the right), the mouthpipe and tuning bits should approach the player's mouth from the players LEFT (NOT right), and the instrument should ONLY rest on the left shoulder MUSCLE (and NOT-NOT-NOT !!! also be laid across the players neck vertebrae - which could/can easily do permanent damage - in my estimation). The shoulder muscle WILL ache for two or three days, then become strong, and the ache will subside and disappear. OTC pain relievers (under doctor's recommendation) can help get through days 1-2-3. Neither the Elkhart-era soldered-on wide metal shoulder plates NOR those shoulder pads do anything at all (other than appear ugly), because the weight is the same, and the weight is still going to focus itself in the same small area.

If you purchase restored ones, try to purchase some that have NOT been previously restored (too thin, risking devastating body spider cracks), nor any that have sat around full of lime (which actually makes it way to the large body parts - believe it or not - and does the same thing). When I restore sousaphones and see evidence of this, I either abandon that instrument or find a substitute (good condition) large body branch.

Also, you don't want any that haven't had the (repair/overhaul) shop look over the pistons and make decisions regarding the valves' viability. I've seen far too many "beautiful-looking" instruments from the 1930's-40's-50's with useless valves (ie. expensive shiny decorations).

If you're typical, you're going to want silver sousaphones...whatever. Bright silver sousaphones (though the most popular) are never a good idea - in my view - because smears and tarnish are so evident, if not addressed.

In particular, bright silver is NOT a good idea with restored sousaphones, because overhaul shops tend to "buff the guts" out of them to remove scratches, which leaves some areas foil-thin. Restored sousaphones should be SATIN finished (other than slides and the bell interiors), as a satin (sand-blast) finish hides scratches (without removing tons of material) and can be scrubbed/polished (by students, etc.) back to a nice/clean/dignified/striking appearance without a bunch of "picking over" and without trying to be careful to not touch anything (as large as these things are) so as to leave hand prints.

Finally, it's become much more expensive to restore the old Elkhart, Indiana-vintage instruments, as plating costs and transportation are now much higher....but tons less than $13,000 (new quoted online satin silver finish price with case).

====================================

Alternately, John Packer (JP) - an English company that sells very high-grade (equal to European-quality valve sections) instruments - offers a King-copy brass (bright silver or lacquer) sousaphone WITH a case (extremely similar to an MTS case) for only a few thousand dollars (at least, when I sell them), which (again: built-quality) out-performs that which it copies, with
- all nickel silver (and nicely aligned and fitted) slide tubing
- stainless steel pistons (again: with build quality and piston-to-casing fit rivaling European quality - bluntly stated: exceeding the piston/casing quality of other Chinese manufacturers)
- a bit thicker wall body parts than current USA (though not as thick as 1950's-1960's, etc. USA body thickness)
- durable (if silver) silver plating - with antimony added for this durability
There are a couple of alterations (differing) from King: The main slide is easier to grab and pull, and (besides the nickel silver and stainless steel already mentioned), both male and female bell connection rings are nickel silver (more difficult to bend), the upper neck more resembles Conn than King (and a Conn will work as a replacement), and the two tuning bits are interchangeable - with one more accommodating a standard shank mouthpiece, and the other more accommodating a euro shank mouthpiece). King bell screws fit, and replacement parts are stocked in Wisconsin and (relatively quick shipping) London, UK.

info/specs: https://www.jpmusicalinstruments.com/pr ... sousaphone

[mcp111]

Thanks, I'll look into the ones you sell and get back to you.

[mcp111]

Stick with used like you are.

Problem is, I can only find one used and one new demo horn that's a $2,500 off. Is that a good or bad idea?

[mcp111]

Alternately, John Packer (JP) - an English company that sells very high-grade (equal to European-quality valve sections) instruments - offers a King-copy brass (bright silver or lacquer) sousaphone WITH a case (extremely similar to an MTS case) for only a few thousand dollars (at least, when I sell them), which (again: built-quality) out-performs that which it copies, with
- all nickel silver (and nicely aligned and fitted) slide tubing
- stainless steel pistons (again: with build quality and piston-to-casing fit rivaling European quality - bluntly stated: exceeding the piston/casing quality of other Chinese manufacturers)
- a bit thicker wall body parts than current USA (though not as thick as 1950's-1960's, etc. USA body thickness)
- durable (if silver) silver plating - with antimony added for this durability
There are a couple of alterations (differing) from King: The main slide is easier to grab and pull, and (besides the nickel silver and stainless steel already mentioned), both male and female bell connection rings are nickel silver (more difficult to bend), the upper neck more resembles Conn than King (and a Conn will work as a replacement), and the two tuning bits are interchangeable - with one more accommodating a standard shank mouthpiece, and the other more accommodating a euro shank mouthpiece). King bell screws fit, and replacement parts are stocked in Wisconsin and (relatively quick shipping) London, UK.

info/specs: https://www.jpmusicalinstruments.com/pr ... sousaphone

Doing my research and found this on Reddit. What's your take on this?

"I recently replied on a similar post a little while ago, but generally I don't reccomend John Packers instruments. Some of them play reasonably well but the build quality is not acceptable. I've repaired quite a few JPs and its not uncommon to find tubes without solder and general construction errors."

"It's not to say that JP horns are bad. I've played a few on pro gigs and they did a fine job.
The only real issue is that you might not be getting a complete horn. I'd do it with any instrument I just acquired, but in general, the first thing you should do when receiving Chinese instruments is take them to a good brass repairman and make sure things like this are fixed.
You probably want to make sure valves are aligned and joints are properly soldered when getting these instruments.

I'm not hating on JP at all, but there's a real difference between a $1,000 Chinese horn and an $8,000 European one. And one big place for this difference is in build consistency.

They won't compare to a fully professional instrument made by hand by a true instrument maker, but that shouldn't be expected. With the right repairs, they can be made functional for a working musician. Honestly, certain instruments I'd rarely work with (like a baritone, or a cimbasso, or a French Tuba, etc.), I'd rather not blow "

[Cameron Gates]

Don’t sleep on the Packer.

I work at a shop that sold 6 to a local HS. I have serviced each twice in 4(?) years. They are holding up as well as a King would. I would not hesitate to go this route.

The only “problem” I have found is that the pitch was a little low. We shortened the MTS “ferrules” 1 inch per and that did the trick. This problem may have been since been taken care of???

Twisting and dancing while holding onto the upper mouthpipe is a problem for any sousaphone. If that crap dose not happen there will be no problem with the upper/lower mouthpipe loopy brace IMO

All my opinion. That opinion comes from a retired federal government sousaphone player who has been a full time brass repairman for 30 years. I’ve seen a few sousaphones.

Oh, and Bloke is dead on with that assessment of new Conn short stroke things. Stay away if possible. Hate ‘em.

[mcp111]

Thanks! If they do need any repairs, would any shop be able to do them? I know my local shop can be a little finicky about what they'll work on, but that's more with the Mendini's and other cheap 'instruments'.

[bloke]

Regarding reviews, one must always consider the source.

If someone is exclusively an American sousaphone dealer, sells Asian instruments from an inferior factory, or exclusively fixes up old stuff and sells it, they're possibly going to have an agenda.

If a reviewer's name is there (and nothing online can be found about that reviewer after a search) or the review is anonymous (assumed name, etc.), I would toss such a review in the trash (and do with dishwashers, cars, refrigerators, and anything). Further, the overwhelming majority of reviews are placed by gripers, where as the microscopic minority are posted by those who are pleased (who - simply- go on about their lives and don't ever bother to review, as it is a considerable amount of trouble to do so). As an example, I know of one person who adds an additional valve to 40-year-old small-bore piston B-flat tubas, but this >> https://www.jpmusicalinstruments.com/pr ... p179b-tuba << sort of messed up their micro-market and - ever since - they've been bad-mouthing JP. JP makes near-complete knock-offs of several models of tubas, and my only objections to them are (not workmanship, but simply) that I'm not particularly personally fond (for my own use) of the models they've copied...though many others certainly are.

I sell JP because I do many-many-many repairs, play music a good bit, and prefer to not have to open/inspect new instruments (and do not with JP) because I already have enough work to do. I like things that I can simply sell and ship.

[mcp111]

This wasn’t from a review but rather a Reddit discussion. I don’t trust or distrust it, just looking for feedback. If the JP are truly quality instruments then I’m going to seriously consider them. But having no knowledge of them, I just want to see if any of these claims hold any water, positive or negative. I appreciate the input so far. If anyone else has experience please chime in.

[bloke]

As someone who repairs more sousaphones that I’d care to, all makes of sousaphones get torn up equally badly by careless children.
I feel like - in the last decade - both Jupiter and Conn have tried to tighten up their piston to casing tolerances slightly, which (i’m thinking not a good idea) has caused me to have to repair more valve casings when other peripheral damage is done to those makes. I’ve recently dealt with a rash of children dropping pistons, so I guess it really doesn’t count, because pistons just don’t like to be dropped - regardless of which make.
Jupiter bodies are thicker than most others and tend to collect fewer dents, but the 4th branch - in particular - on Jupiter is thin (this is one of the smaller-bore curved body pieces that is over and under an inch in diameter) and that part of a Jupiter sousaphone tends to dent as badly as Conn sousaphone and King sousaphone bodies. Brace flanges and other hardware - such as neck insertion receivers and things like that - are under-engineered on Jupiter, and end up having to be discarded and replaced. Additionally, Jupiter water keys are made of pot metal, and - when they snap in half - they have to be discarded and replaced, rather than brazed back together… so I have to keep Jupiter water keys, neck receiver parts, and threaded (as well as soldered on) brace parts well stocked.
Again: Body dents are deeper on recently-made (last few decades) Conn and King sousaphones, because their body sheet metal is thinner than other makes.

[DonO.]

Marching band tubas are a conundrum. It’s difficult for a band director to know what to do, especially since that purchase represents really big bucks. Probably second only to uniforms in terms of program money spent. None of the options are problem free.

Fiberglass sousaphones- hold up under student abuse and still look good, if you like the look. Somewhat lighter than brass. But inferior tone imo.

Brass sousaphones- better sound but heavier and collect dents like an SOB. Inevitably end up looking like crap and falling apart eventually.

“Contra” style tubas- either convertibles (change from marching to concert with a switchable leadpipe) or stand alone marching tubas- can sound great because they are designed to direct sound toward the audience. But can be tricky to handle and are much more easily dropped.

Another consideration. Will you be using the same horns for concert band? Or do you actually have enough money to invest in separate tubas for concert and marching? If you have that, what a luxury! If you use sousaphones for concert, you will need the special chairs that hold the instrument in correct position for that use. And that’s not ideal of course. A convertible tuba can be used for concert and marching, but much like a spork it’s a compromise and not ideal for either. A stand alone contra tuba cannot be used for concert band under any circumstances and so must just be what it is and no more.

You all may think this is funny, but do you know what I’d like to see more of? Using concert tubas for marching if they have strap loops attached. Much like some British marching brass bands do. Why not? The only down side would be that the sound wouldn’t be directed towards the audience if the bell is upright, but maybe a recording bell would help?

Don “I made this long meandering post because I don’t have anything better to do right now” O.

[mcp111]

Consensus seems to be fiberglass don't sound as good as brass. We currently have fiberglass body with silver bells. Is that worth considering for the price and weight considerations or is the sound inferior enough that I should only consider brass? Do they even sell this combo? I know the ones we have are not matching parts.

[bloke]

note:
I have no new nor used partial fiberglass or total fiberglass sousaphones for sale.
——————-
I think fiberglass sousaphones are just fine, and sound just fine.
There’s a very subtle “plastic pipe” type of sound which can be heard in the background of ~some~ fiberglass sousaphones’ sonority, but brass sousaphones suffer from their big flat bells ringing after notes are finished been played - and on pitches having nothing to do with the pitches played.
RESIN sousaphones (which look like fiberglass, and some people don’t understand the difference) – which weigh as much as brass ones – seems silly to me, other than the fact that they don’t dent.
I believe some of the snobbery involved in fiberglass sousaphones and plastic clarinets is due to their pricing.
Back when there was a draft during the Vietnam war, high school level playing prowess was extremely competitive, because quite a few older boys were hoping that they could get into some sort of military band - to avoid being shipped off to Southeast Asia. During that era, our very low income part of town high school had four first chair all state tuba players in a row who auditioned and performed on the cheaper version (36K) of the Conn fiberglass sousaphones…and with no screens hiding our instruments from the judges.
One of us used their budget model school fiberglass sousaphone and auditioned into Pershing’s Own, during their 12th grade year.
By the same token, there is snobbery against plastic clarinets, even though several models feature very carefully thought out tone hole sizes, undercutting, and playing them with fine mouthpieces and reeds - by a fine player - results in some fine playing.
The same snobbery doesn’t occur with plastic or partially plastic oboes or English horns - nor those which are lined with hard rubber, due to them costing thousands of dollars, and this would include a plastic top joint Loree oboe, which was played in the Philadelphia Orchestra for quite a few years by the principal oboist.

After all these years of selling, repairing, and playing used fiberglass sousaphones, I believe my very favorites are the Kings (not those made now, but those which were made a couple of decades ago), which offer(ed) a lot of presence, a lot of front in the sound, are extremely lightweight, and offer very easily negotiable intonation.

[mcp111]

Sorry to resurrect an old post, but I'm giving more serious consideration to the John Packer Sousas. My hesitation is of course it's 1/3 the price, so how can it be good? If anyone has anything to add, I'd appreciate it. Thanks again!

[Three Valves]

Sorry to resurrect an old post, but I'm giving more serious consideration to the John Packer Sousas. My hesitation is of course it's 1/3 the price, so how can it be good? If anyone has anything to add, I'd appreciate it. Thanks again!

Made to exacting standards in Communist China where the COL is 1/3 of what we are used to.

Not hard to digest.

I’m more concerned with the Communist China part than the build quality part.

I had the benefit of seeing them up close.

If quality is your primary concern, proceed.

[mcp111]

The instruments or the working conditions?

[Three Valves]

The instruments or the working conditions?

Let’s just say those little commies make nice sousaphones.

[bloke]

I believe everyone knows that I sell this brand.
I also repair all brands of sousaphones and have to deal with all sorts of ridiculous abuse and undo it.

There is not a brand - regardless of how much gadgetry and overdone bracing they put on it whereby students cannot easily destroy the lower mouthpipe receiver, lower mouthpipe tube, and lower mouthpipe bracing system.
The upper mouthpipe (neck) serves as an incredible lever, as so many children have made the decision that loosening the tension screw is just too much trouble.

I’ve repaired completely torn up American, Taiwanese, and JP lower mouthpipe stuff this summer. I was able to replace the JP one with stuff laying around the shop, because the lower mouthpipe tube is so simply designed, that the last few inches of a junk single French horn bell section proved to be exactly what was needed. That having been said, if I didn’t have a junk single French horn, the same park to fit a King would’ve worked. Otherwise, this is one of the parts that is not stocked in Wisconsin, so I would’ve needed to order it from London - which would’ve taken a few days.
JP sousaphones tend to not dent as much as currently-made American ones, because – like Taiwanese sousaphones – their bodies are thicker.
Compared to all other makes of sousaphones, JP valves are amazing.
A whole bunch of King bracing works on JP, Conn model 20K necks work on JP, and Yamaha tuning bits are compatible with JP. All of this defines JP sousaphones is pretty easy to repair.
JP cases are complete copies of the MTS sousaphone cases with the butterfly latches upgrade that Conn-Selmer requires.

I showed a local university the JP sousaphones, but they decided to go with USA made $XX,XXX sousaphones, because the band director grew up playing those. The issue is that the band director’s memory is based on instruments made in Elkhart, Indiana - which are strikingly different from those made today, even though they basically look the same from a few feet away.
I never had problems with Elkhart short-action sousaphones’ valves, but I’ve had to deal with valve issues with some of these new ones, and there was one that was bought just this year which has been sitting in my shop waiting for all three new pistons to be shipped from the factory, because I had to mix and match pistons in order to get as many of their newly-bought Instruments working as possible.

You’re going to see all sorts of reviews about all sorts of instruments (“I don’t like these instruments because my students tore them up“, etc.), and all of them can be torn up by children.

[mcp111]

The durability issue is less of a concern for me, for all the reasons you brought up and because I'm lucky to have kids that are actually thoughtful and careful. I just want to make sure in terms of playing there's no downside vs. buying new Conn's or King's. If they play just as well then it seems like an easy choice.