TubaForum.net

Nice work. I’d imagine it takes a decent amount of upper body strength to get one of those rounded out with big honkin draw rings.

I love it. Great to see it mounted up. Not knowing about this round/oval (but understanding now that its brought up) I'm really glad to have Bloke on the job. I gave him my list of things I wanted done and then he added on top of that what he was going to do to get it done right.

I had a dream (nightmare?) last night that Bloke decided that rather than extending the MTS slide legs, he added a short upward facing tuning slide in the leadpipe.

I didn’t write down those things on your checklist, so when it gets to be time for assembly, I’m going to ask you to email them to me - so I can print out your list and look at it.
At this stage of the job, those things are basically cake icing.

One minor hurdle is going to be to take that hump out of the mouthpipe tube, that someone put in it -,to accommodate the absurd angle at which some previous repair place installed the valveset.

I did whack my right hand index finger a couple of weeks ago putting up some fence, when an old-construction cross brace under tension flew out and caught my finger in some twisted wire (a turnbuckle that I was adding - to reinforce it...and probably should’ve just replaced the post with a nice new one)...but the swelling is going down day by day, and the range of motion and strength are both coming back. it’s a bit slowing to work around a lame right hand index finger.

As to the fence, it’s basically just two large-gauge wires that are a couple of feet apart from each other - to support a row of grapevines that we planted a couple of years ago, and they extend about 100 feet along some wooden posts. Being me, the wires are very taught (more so than needed) and very straight... You can actually pluck them, and they sound like one of those extra-low (normally white) black keys on an extended-low-range piano.

tubaing wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 4:05 am I love it. Great to see it mounted up. Not knowing about this round/oval (but understanding now that its brought up) I'm really glad to have Bloke on the job. I gave him my list of things I wanted done and then he added on top of that what he was going to do to get it done right.

I had a dream (nightmare?) last night that Bloke decided that rather than extending the MTS slide legs, he added a short upward facing tuning slide in the leadpipe.

Here are "money shots" of the ready-to-install customer Holton bottom bow - along with another one that is smoothed out.

The "smoothed out" one would look great if polished and capped, but - were someone with a discriminating touch to run their hands around it, while wearing a pair of soft/thin gloves - it would feel out-of-round, if closely examined...so the "brown" one (just as did the shiny one) needs ROUNDING, prior to being capped, soldered, cleaned, scraped, and polished...

...and yes, the inner cap must be removed prior to rounding.
Otherwise, it ends up getting all dented up from the rounding rings (as there is always an arched gap between any cap and any bow).





...so - I suppose - this is the first evidence (here on P. 3) of any Holton "twin spin"...

I’m a sucker for a purty bottom bow......

Yorkboy wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 2:32 pm I’m a sucker for a purty bottom bow......

Thanks for the thank.

I feel RELIEF, once there's a purty bottom bow.

Typically the rest of the dent removal (tuba-wise) is "easy" (at least, compared to a bottom bow - particularly: a huge-and-smashed one).

"Dent machine"...?? ...yeah...It has machine-made parts on it - and parts of it are "simple machines", but it's JUST as capable of ruining (denting) something (in the "right" hands) as it is restoring (un-denting) something. The older I get, the fewer mistakes I make (this time: none ) when using one...and - eventually - I'll be dead, and no more mistakes will ever be made.

' remarkable progress on the "bugle", this evening.

' not ready for prime time, but way beyond "dents removed real good".

As can be seen, someone used the wrong brace flanges (Conn 2XJK-style) when they remounted (cockeyed, fwiw) the valveset in the past, but I believe all the rest of this bugle's solder joints are original, as well as the braces. I also believe that the lacquer on this bugle is original. It's going to be removed, but - at least - no one has "buffed the $h!t out of" any of this...and alignment/orientation need no correction, here...

...I'm going to see IF (??) I can leave all of this factory-attached to itself, and remove ALL of it's dents (as I'm 97% there, already) without un-soldering these bows.

The diamond brace flange footprint on the upper end of the large side of the largest lower bow pictured was THE WORST dent in this bugle, and it passes (in my judgement) as "removed 100%" (no low nor high spots). Everything else remaining is easier to deal with...so I'm optimistic about POSSIBLY leaving all of this together. There were other somewhat "epic" dents as well...but (well...) they came out pretty quickly.

Do you use magnets to get rid of dents?

LargeTuba wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 7:07 pm Do you use magnets to get rid of dents?

yes, but some convex "balls" that fit precisely under dents (pounding them in place via rebounding off slightly smaller similar "balls" - used as drivers), and mixing-and-matching of levels of magnetic attraction as well (which were further micro-adjusted by adding layers of cloth, to reduce attraction, as well as smaller/larger balls to decrease/increase attraction.

Part of it was also repaired with typical rod-and-ball methods, and part of it will fit on the dent "machine" (tomorrow).

Again: It's not "done" but I'm very encouraged...and I managed to get the formerly-flattened ferrule/bottom bow receiver VERY round, and fitting the bottom bow VERY well.

(Anyone who might have brought this in to just get it "fixed" would already be extremely happy with it.)

Also...the upper guard wire (original) is in good enough shape to reuse...so I probably will.

tomorrow: finish up this (however I find that I have to get it done), get the lacquer off of it, and clean up the surfaces.

DETOUR: I might POSSIBLY not get anything done on this, tomorrow, because I really need to race through a school's Jupi-stuff, because I'm headed off to another (nearby) school the next day, and NEED to "kill two birds with one stone".

Are there any of the rounding issues on this part of the bugle like there were in the bottom bow? I imagine you can't use those fancy rounding rings unless you take this apart.

tubaing wrote: ↑Wed Jun 02, 2021 7:15 am Are there any of the rounding issues on this part of the bugle like there were in the bottom bow? I imagine you can't use those fancy rounding rings unless you take this apart.

Though there were some deep dents, nothing was damaged as badly as the bottom bow, except for that one dent underneath that diamond-shaped brace footprint...and I repaired that dent by pounding something round (and precisely the right bore size) under it.

If the top of the large upper bow feels oval to me, I'll probably take it off and use rounding rings on that part.

Smashed 6/4 upper bows require a bunch of hand work; they're larger than many 3/4 tuba bottom bows, and not reachable by a "dent machine".
I stripped the lacquer chemically, and decided to go ahead and separate this from the rest of the bugle, so it would be easier to handle.

This is after unknown time expended. (...well under half a day...Things went well).

- no filing
- no sanding
- no heavy buffing (only: "shined up")

The owner should take a good look (though the picture, admittedly, is low-resolution).
This is all I signed on to do...not file, sand, nor buff the crap out of it...just "fix" it.
If the owner decides on a lacquer finish, all the old "love" scratches, scuffs, etc. will be very shiny, and will all show really well.
At the apex of the bow, the tube is only about "one layer of sheet metal thickness" away from measuring completely round...
...and that took some work, as (I suspect) it wasn't manufactured round.

Wanna do a 20J next?

(Not serious)

2XJ restorations require payment in advance...
...in full...
...in cash...
...and are completed to my satisfaction.

(no offense intended)

bloke wrote: ↑Wed Jun 02, 2021 9:19 pm 2XJ restorations require payment in advance...
...in full...
...in cash...
...and are completed to my satisfaction.

(no offense intended)

One day, I'd love to drop this off with the amount and format of currency you desire. That Holton looks great already, and is just "some pipes."

I absolutely cringe to think that at one point in history, there were hundreds of shiny, dentless 6/4 tubas inexistence (although some were hastily assembled), only to be beat to hell by school children and other un-gentle folks.

Conn’s are OK.
Lots of folks love ‘em.

bort2.0 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 02, 2021 9:25 pm I absolutely cringe to think that at one point in history, there were hundreds of shiny, dentless 6/4 tubas inexistence (although some were hastily assembled), only to be beat to hell by school children and other un-gentle folks.

I wish I had known then what I know now. I'd likely have more stuff than I have room to store it.

bloke wrote: ↑Wed Jun 02, 2021 10:03 pm Conn’s are OK.
Lots of folks love ‘em.

I sure like mine, and it is perfect for its intended uses. And mine is NOT a looker AT ALL. Typical lacquer issues, a few dings and dents, and the bell has some minor folding? around the edges. As far as I'm concerned, it needs nothing (outside of an annual bath, felts, corks, etc.). It has character.

bloke wrote: ↑Wed Jun 02, 2021 10:03 pm Conn’s are OK.
Lots of folks love ‘em.

Thinking about this…

I believe the Conn 2xJ (and likely the 3xJ) offer a fairly good representation of “big tuba sound” with a relatively small learning curve. The other 6/4 tuba designs like the 345 take a bit more care in learning the ins and outs of the response. But in the end, the 345 (or other similar designs) offer a bit “more” of the big tuba sound across the register.

Different target audiences, I guess.

matt g wrote: ↑Thu Jun 03, 2021 10:52 am

bloke wrote: ↑Wed Jun 02, 2021 10:03 pm Conn’s are OK.
Lots of folks love ‘em.

Thinking about this…

I believe the Conn 2xJ (and likely the 3xJ) offer a fairly good representation of “big tuba sound” with a relatively small learning curve. The other 6/4 tuba designs like the 345 take a bit more care in learning the ins and outs of the response. But in the end, the 345 (or other similar designs) offer a bit “more” of the big tuba sound across the register.

Different target audiences, I guess.

The Holton is a lot more expensive, and with the one-piece bell and front valves has a lot more visual credibility. Nobody is going to show up to orchestra rehearsal with a 20J!