not a repair post; a damage post

[bloke]

@Rick Denney

The advantage of a 3-valve compensating system in a school isn't that it weighs less, though it might possibly, but it's that there's not a some several feet long extra loop of tubing that only almost does what a three valve compensating system does, that tubing wanders all around the instrument, and a bunch of braces are required to hold all that snake of tubing in place. 4th valves offer a good solution to 1-3 and a crappy solution for 1-2-3. Below low E - a pitch which is still stinky sharp with four non-compensating valves, the only valve combination that serendipitously works out is 2-3-4, so we're back to falstones (as with the non-compensating 3-valve system, again...and what percentage of school children are going to pull slides, even when told to?

You're a smart guy, and - even if you don't agree with me - you understand my points:
- Even if three compensating valves somehow doesn't weigh any less than four non-compensating valves, it's a far less fragile setup... the thread topic being ridiculous damage.
- three compensating valves does a better job - referring to the B-flat world - with low E and B natural - pitches which are not as well addressed with four non-compensating valves.

Other reasons for four noncompensating valves could be "I'm used to four non-compensating valves" or "I don't like top action", but neither are a particularly good argument against an already good-playing fiberglass sousaphone enhanced with three front action compensating valves for school use indoors and outdoors, agreed?

[Rick Denney]

I’m not arguing the efficacy of compensation. But putting a kid on the three-valve compensator path from the start will mean that they will have nearly no similar choices to buy when the school tuba is no longer available to them. Even where compensation is the standard (which is nowhere in the USA), three-valve compensators are not thick on the ground.

And it’s sheer fantasy to imagine a three-valve front-action compensation system on a sousaphone. If schools are spending taxpayer money, I prefer that they buy in the middle of the market, where competition will (without corruption) provide the best value. And I define value as a ratio of quality to cost, and that happens in the middle of the market.

I don’t have a problem with limiting them to fiberglass sousaphones, given that that’s how I was limited until my senior year in high school. And I don’t have a problem with top-action instruments, though I’m surprised you don’t. One good whack on the outer branch usually distorts the valve body enough to impinge function, as I have heard you argue in the dim past :)

Rick “not sure the valve swindle is the most significant cause of poor intonation in school bands” Denney

[bloke]

Of course, you're right...

None of us every managed to figure out 4, 5, or 6 valves - having started on only 3.
(You're arguing for the sake of arguing - which is what we do, here.)

Demand drives manufacturing.
If enough people were educated enough to understand the benefits, most school instruments - likely - would be 3-valve compensating.
What's preventing the demand is ignorance.
As Conn is building (ridiculous) four-valve short-action sousaphones (because some directors are silly enough to demand them - lacking the understanding to realize how little benefit there is), some far-more flexible (not Taiwanese - as they seem to be quite inflexible, but) Chinese manufacturer would jump on the idea.

Right now, I can think of someone who might be screen-shooting this and sending it off to someone else.

but AGAIN......
For there to a REAL demand, a bunch of band directors would need to be un-stupefied, and properly educated/informed as to the advantages of three-valve compensating...

...but really, Rick...

...putting a kid on the three-valve compensator path from the start will mean that they will have nearly no similar choices to buy when the school tuba is no longer available to them...

is a REALLY lame for-the-sake-of-arguing argument.

Think of all the other "different-to-learn-later" mess there is, out there:
- trumpets with #1 slide thumb saddles, multi-length trumpets, and 4-valve piccolo trumpets
- four valve COMPENSATING euphoniums (vs. the flood of YEP-201's, YEP-321's, and their various knockoffs)
- DOUBLE French horns (vs. single...as well as triple, descant, and on-and-on...)
- F-attachment and double-valve bass trombones (vs. so-called "straight" trombones)
- oboes, bassoons, and bass clarinets with tons more gadgetry than with the "school" ones
- three OTHER lengths of tubas with just about every valve configuration imaginable

...Your "engineer" is showing, my good friend...

...and (seriously...) the ONLY difference between three-valve COMPENSATING tubas/sousaphones and three-valve NON-compensating tubas/(sousaphones) is "better intonation"...NOTHING different regarding any of the button-mashing (and surely: you knew this...??)
...and on-and-on-and-on...

Yes..."3-valve compensating" - other than English baritones - is extinct (but it is STUPID that it's extinct, and should be brought back - asap).

ANY four-valve "school" tubas and sousaphones:
repair NIGHTMARES, and - BOY-OH-BOY - to the little 11-year-old through 23-year-old school-children TEAR THE SH!T out of ANYTHING school-owned that is 4-valve (vs. the amount that they tear up ANYTHING that is 3-valve).

99.99% of ALL old Besson 3-valve compensating tubas encountered:
- the unholy-hell beat out of their exterior bows/bells
- no repairs required to their 3-valve compensating valvesets

some nose-in-air peeps:
"I don't do school repairs."

me:
"Schools pay better (more) than anyone else, because it's not their own money...
...so why DON'T you...?? Is it because they're TOO HARD, and there are TOO MANY of them to repair in TOO SHORT an allotted time...??"

[Rick Denney]

You wrote all that and you are accusing me of arguing for the sake of arguing?

Rick “uh, yeah” Denney

[bloke]

You wrote all that and you are accusing me of arguing for the sake of arguing?

Rick “uh, yeah” Denney

I'll interpret that as conceding.

[Rick Denney]

Interpret it however you want.

Rick “back at work” Denney

[bloke]

One good troll deserves another. I'll call it a draw.