Eastman 832 after ring

[sugawi]

Just noticed Dillon has for sale 3 of 832 with the same after ring problem.
If they don’t fix it but sell as is at a discount then I’m not sure what to think about this.

[Dents Be Gone!]

I agree, guys. This is the way to go.

[bloke]

Were I looking for something like that, I would certainly try both versions (well...unless a used one of either model came up used for $1800 - etc. - then my "can hear/feel the grass grow" senses would tell me that the $1800 buck one is absolutely magical.

I would tend to suspect (approx.) .6mm vs. .5mm is about where most "thick vs. thin" tubas range...with Swiss tubas maybe (??) being thicker than either of those (maybe even by a considerable amount).

.5mm any-tuba is going to be a dent magnet (as it my - likely - .5mm thick really big tuba, which is why I only use the hard case, and haven't even considered looking for a bag).

Thinner tubas "feel" more vibrant, and it's really easy (regardless of playing prowess/experience/knowledge) to be lured by what is tactile. (Stringed instruments vibrate, and the fact that they vibrate is encouraging to their players, because that vibration is directly related to their sound output. Even though it's not with brass instruments, the tactile sensation still tends to be encouraging.)
I really like feeling the big/thin Miraphone B-flat vibrate (vs. what it would be like if thicker sheet metal), but I try to not get roped in by that tactile sensation...and yes, it's far less physically gratifying to play a really thick (ex: Swiss-made) tuba.

As it is...I have something (quite a bit) like those two similar Eastman models (though B-flat)...(I've posted incessantly/mercilessly about it.)...a Holton (same exact size as York 4/4) B-flat thing. It's slightly smaller than the (based on a really well-cut-down King) Eastman C offerings, which (maybe, being B-flat) sorta makes it closer to the Eastman's (ie. slightly smaller B-flat vs. slightly large C - with both having the same bore-size valvesets). ??

This B-flat Holton thing (with all the valves and upper/lower bow caps and guard wires I've stuck on it) weighs at least 24 lbs...maybe 25 (??)...but it doesn't "feel" dead nor sound muffled nor anything like that...It's (well...) good. (insert shoulder-shrug emoji here). I like Chris and Alan just fine, btw. Alan helped me a whole lot (during a brief period of study). I really liked the way Alan taught me...ie "I do it this way"...because (particularly for short-term instruction) isn't that what someone is paying a master to reveal (??)

ACTUALLY TOPICAL, YET NOT USEFUL:
I view "after-ring" as a mystery...because it happens with all sorts of bells, including (random) REALLY THICK-WALL sousaphone bells.

[sugawi]

.

[bloke]

diplomatic

[bloke]

I'm familiar with a couple of models of Remington rifles that came out a few decades ago. One was very ornate, considerably more expensive, and was marketed as the better rifle.

The sister model featured a plain stock, plain everything else, and was marketed as the budget model.

The budget version shot noticeably better and was noticeably more accurate than the fancy version. Almost no one bought the fancy version for both the reasons that it cost a whole lot more and - as good marksmen aren't easily fooled - didn't shoot as well.

Remington's solution was to discontinue the budget model.

Tubas are different. So many of them (all sorts of makes and models) don't shoot all that well that - when there rarely actually might be sister models marketed - the professional version is going to attract plenty of buyers, whether or not it actually "shoots" better than the more economically priced version.

With trumpets, so many of the so-called "step-up" models are little more than fancied-up beginner models. Predictably, they play the same, but might have monel pistons and a #1 slide thumb saddle. Repairing so many instruments, quite a few beginner and step-up models have been discovered to have nearly completely interchangeable parts... some saxophones of certain makes: the same thing... though - more recently - a top model might be made in the west, and the intermediate and beginner models might be made in the far east, so no interchangeability.

It's obvious to me that those two same-size sister models (tubas discussed) don't feature all that many interchangeable parts, but it's not necessarily a given that the more expensive one is going to be the better one.

I'm also fascinated by the current era cachet of thin wall tubas. How many of us are old enough to remember that - at least Americans - a few decades ago (whether or not justifiably) - viewed thin wall instruments as cheap? Truth be told, neither standard thickness nor thin thickness sheet metal instruments are necessarily lower quality or higher quality overall. I'm pretty sure that it requires more skill to build a flawless thin wall instrument, because more care has to go in to fabricating the large parts without creasing them, mushing them in, causing a buffing depression, or there being an in-shop denting accident. Being a skeptic as I am though, I'm not sure that there's a tremendous amount of benefit derived from an instrument being thin.

I recently bought an instrument of which there have been too few built to justify mass production methods, so - necessarily - they are all made of sheet metal. I have to be awfully careful with that thing. The previous owner - an eye surgeon who rarely played it - ended up putting two or three small dinks in it, and I confess to having done the same thing. Of course I repaired them. I have no way of knowing whether a similar instrument - except made with hydraulically formed bows - would play better or worse ("in my view"), because there are no versions made with hydraulically formed bows to compare. I suppose - as it is huge - I enjoy the fact that it doesn't weigh three or so more pounds than it actually does, but I still believe I would be able to negotiate it and carry/hold/play it, were it to weigh that much more... I'm thinking that my stubby but sturdy Holton instrument and this huge instrument weigh just about the same.

[Dents Be Gone!]

I agree, guys. This is the way to go.

[sugawi]

.

[Mary Ann]

So someone please educate me on what a "plastic ring" is, why it is problematic other than appearance, and why you couldn't just put clear packing tape (ha, or gorilla tape) on the bell in the same place you would put a plastic ring?

[bloke]

They are basically tubing which has been cut to the circumferencial length of a particular bell rim, melded together on the ends, and with a slit through the tubing so that it pops over the bell rim.

I believe they began to be a thing in the 1970s, and have gone in and out of favor since then.

[Tubeast]

Those rings come in very handy when marching and/or doing standing gigs in people´s driveways or outdoor concerts on plaster / concrete / pavement marketplaces.
I don´t know these as ring-damping devices, but rather as scratch preventers.

[bone-a-phone]

The "ring" to me is a real non-problem. Conn 88h, the Mirafone 186 of the trombone world, has a ring at about F# above the staff. It actually turns out to be an indicator for a great horn. My 88h rings, my 8h rings, my 79h rings... it's a quality of the temper of the bell material. It's not a ring that the audience can hear. It's not a ring that thy guy sitting next to you can hear, but the player can feel it. I've learned to ignore it because the rest of the horn, for everything that matters, plays so well. It's a wind instrument. It's job is to vibrate. If they mark down those instruments, take advantage and snap one up. It's probably a notch better than other instruments, at least the bell is.

If you really want to "cure" it, you can smash the bell and have it repaired. So the temper condition will probably not be the same, and it won't vibrate any more. One thing I did was to put a wrap around the bell (cloth, tape, neoprene, etc) and that stopped the ringing. I quickly realized that the only thing that changed was now that I had some ridiculous thing wrapped around my bell and I had to answer a lot of stupid questions. So I took it off and stopped worrying about it, and just played a really great horn.

[bloke]

This thread has got me thinking, and also remembering that I've never ever encountered that issue with a Miraphone tuba, and then I remember looking at some videos of their manufacturing processes and also remembering that they anneal the hell out of their bells, and I believe (??) they do it more than once in the bell manufacturing process.

I was going to post some other crap that's not important - as almost nothing that I post is of any importance, but I would like to just remind anyone that they shouldn't underestimate Matt Walters' ability to play the tuba, just because he tends to be extremely modest. Without being able to play well, it seems to me it would be pretty difficult to be able to evaluate instruments...
... as an example, how could anyone that's not a particularly good woodwind player be able to voice woodwind instruments, and not just stick new pads on them?

[Matt Walters]

Just noticed Dillon has for sale 3 of 832 with the same after ring problem.
If they don’t fix it but sell as is at a discount, then I’m not sure what to think about this. Can someone explain what’s going on here?

These are perfectly great tubas that have an after ring when they are played and usually only at "Blatissimo" on one or two higher notes. I have cleaned up some imperfections and diminished the after rings compared to when we got them. They all play great and as a community band level player, I would be very contented with one of these "B-stock" horns and be glad to have money left over to go on another 7-night cruise. These new tubas are being sold at used tuba prices. I tried to be very accurate with the descriptions.

Wish I had the cheap plastic bell rings in stock to include with these tubas. I'll order some.


Matt Walters