TubaForum.net

[

This tuba followed me home yesterday.

It's a B&S 3198 (No Perantucci on the bell) - So it's newer, but not new.

I believe it was made in 2012. It's well used. 3 Previous owners. And it is spectacular.

You will notice it's pretty ugly. Martin Wilk apparently re-seated the bell and bottom bow, added, moved, or shifted basically all the braces, added a little hand hammered plate on the bottom bow guard, lifted the leadpipe off the bell and rounded it out, added the slide pull stops, and added MAW valves.

Whew.

It's also had some bell damage in the past, and has a few dents in the normal places. Normal for a tuba owned by many. Now that Ferree's Z22 is available again, I'll probably strip what's left of the lacquer. The fifth valve linkage also has a wobble to it - Not uncommon for these, from what I understand. I think it needs a new rod for the hinge tube. Easy enough to fix.

All that is normal for tubas that I buy lately.

The good...

It's ugly, but boy does it play. I'm not going to lie, this tuba makes me sound better than I ever have on my 6/4. The sound is clear, present, and seems to travel really, really well. I LOVE how I sound on this tuba.

It is also comfortable for me to hold. I don't recall playing too many of the piston versions of these, because I've just never had the opportunity. The rotor version is set up very well, so it's no surprise I can be comfortable with this one too.

Intonation is great. Yoink first slide for F, and fourth for Db. That's about it. Eb and Ab line up. Upper octave is also wonderfully in tune and clear.

Response is also so easy. Everything feels even, whereas on my 6/4 I've really got to play it to remember what it wants for the upper register and that pesky low G. None of that here.

Why did I buy it? Because I wanted it.

Okay, that's not the fun answer. Here goes... I bought it because I wanted something physically smaller than my 6/4 for my wind band. You all know I love my 6/4. It is also not the best instrument for all the things I play C tuba for, and because it's so nice, I am wary of bringing it to some places. And I haven't even put the new bell on it yet. Look... Bottom line, I wanted it.

My section mate has a rotor PT-6 and I've always liked the sound that they make. Two PT-6's will be fun.

Make sense? Here are some more FAQ's:

No, I will not be selling either 6/4. That 2165 is my baby and will continue as planned with the bell swap/Baer mods.

No, I have NOT owned a PT-6P before. I had a MRP-C and a VERY brief stint with a rotor PT-6 before I ever started posting on the forums. Love the sound those make, but I prefer pistons.

No, I have zero modification plans or needs, other than minor dent work and the 5th linkage. I'll strip the lacquer myself.

No, I don't *need* two C tubas. I have a feeling I'll be using this one A LOT, though.

I'm happy.

Comparison pics:

[

[

[

Congrats, David! I noticed you offloading a lot of stuff and wondered what you had in the pipeline.

You don't have to justify it beyond "because I wanted it" to us!

Life is short; if one has the means, procure a flock of European tubas to your heart's content. However, when one has a spouse, that's when things start to get a little dicey...

PT-6P, these things play great. I know it's been a while since you had the rotary PT-6, but how do they compare in your estimation? It looks like the previous owners did several modifications to make it even more awesome. I think Martin pretty much does everything in his power to make every tuba that goes through his shop realize its full potential.

Personally, with like 85-90% of the lacquer remaining, I wouldn't strip it, but you do you. You could probably get someone to buff up those areas and shoot some clear on it and it wouldn't look too bad.

You know, I think the PT-6’s are more similar to each other than people make them out to be. I don’t consider them two different horns. They play and respond almost identically. Sound? Yeah, they have a different sound, naturally, with different valve types.

I think, ergonomically, the piston version wins for me. That’s why I let go of the rotor version, the rotor MRP, and the 5450RA. Not the sole reason, but a contributing factor. I prefer piston valves.

The 6’s - They both respond evenly throughout all registers. I haven’t sensed a “bad” note yet. Top line Ab on my 2165 isn’t easy and requires a lot of care to get it to speak. Not the case here.

They both offer easy intonation tendencies. Both also have easily accessible slides, though the piston version wins here. I found that reaching way over the top bow on the rotor 6 and MRP to be uncomfortable. It’s not quite as big of a reach on the 6P.

Both also offer plenty of sound, and they have a great “core” to their sound. It really feels like these instruments were designed to be in C, rather than C being an afterthought at the design table. (Duh, they were designed in C)

Really, I think it boils down to if you like pistons or rotors. Same with the 5450/5450RA (which I’ve owned both of) - Pick the valve types you like, and you’ll have a great and reliable instrument. This one checks all the boxes for me. I’ll record some stuff on Thursday and post it here if I remember.

I've honestly never tried the piston version, but owned a rotary PT-6 for about four years, loved it.

Having owned a piston PT-20, I do like the B&S piston valve block and the way the slides are oriented. You can basically fiddle with 1, 3 and 4 as needed.

I found the slide layout on my son's rotary PT-6 a little awkward. 1 has easy access but only has a relatively short pull before popping it out. 3 and 4 are on the back. 5 is very easily accessible but folded up so there is a huge mass to move. It doesn't seem to need a lot of slide manipulation.. but it is the one thing that felt like it could be improved.

It’s a similar story with 4th on the 6P. Very short slide, but it doesn’t have to move very much.

On the rotor B&S tubas, the first slide is short, but didn’t have to move very much.

Pull stops, particularly on B&S tubas, are proving to be quite useful. My MRP had one on the first slide. 3 and 4? Set and forget.

I know there are some PT-6P “New York” models floating around out there with a longer pull on the 4th slide and a seemingly larger main slide. I don’t think those mods are needed.

As promised, I recorded some stuff.

I'm using the PT-6P. My colleague is using a PT-6. They both create quite the sound. Take a listen, if you desire.

Nothing I played is perfect. Missed some notes, some out of tune, but you'll likely be able to hear why I'm so tickled with this tuba.

[

[

That's a tremendous sounding horn! Congratulations!

I thought about posting this in the repairs thread, but... Nah. I already have a thread here.

Anyway...

I decided to strip the lacquer off. I think the tuba looks 1000% better.

The process was pretty simple. Brush Ferree's Z22 on, let it sit for a few minutes, hose it off. The only thing was, it left a really weird looking pattern on the raw brass immediately after. It was like the brass tarnished just enough while the lacquer was still on there, but flaking off, and left that pattern as a reminder of what I did.

After I got the horn dry, I used Flitz metal polish to get it as close to "good" as I could get. As you can see, it's already begun to patina, especially in high contact areas.

Why did I do it? The horn was ugly. I didn't really want to try and get the patches of raw brass touched up, especially with the previous bell damage scars and current dings in the bell that still need to be repaired. The upper slides were already brass, and the lower 4th has some rot in it that will eventually need a patch or repair. Guess what? That will also be raw brass.

Anyway, I've been playing around with mouthpieces. So far, my favorites have been the Mr. P 4.4 and the RT 48. I think the 50 and 88 are too big (for me), but I'm feeling very comfortable with the 48.

[
Here it is. I'm happy! There are a few spots I missed. I just don't feel like going outside and getting those taken care of yet..