Posted by Jay Bertolet on June 09, 2002 at 10:19:02:
In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Cerveny C Tuba posted by turd on June 09, 2002 at 00:59:10:
As usual Joe, your memory is spot on. The problem, as I understand it, was that Cerveny was making only .795 valves. Of course, this would be a problem when you offer horns with .795 & .835 bore. This was the problem on the model 601 I recently sold. When the horn first came to me, it was very stuffy in the low range. Low C ran fairly flat and the A and Ab below that were very hard to center. After having the ports and valves bored/scooped to match the bore of the surrounding tubing, the horn played completely differently. Low C was still a bit flat but not so much. The notes below that just opened right up. Very solid but now requiring a good deal of air.
I always wondered if they mismatched the valves intentionally to give the horn more resistance or if it was just a production issue and for some reason they could only make one size of valve. I never really pursued getting an answer on that one because I figured it would be difficult to get the answers without offending someone in the process. My experience has been that Cerveny is very intentional in their choices of how they produce horns. During the process of altering my 601 to my liking, I had a very heated debate with the chairman of the corporation about the merits of having a 5th valve on the 601. After several exchanges through the interpreter, I heard the chairman say something that sounded quite terse in Czech. The translater then told me that Cerveny will not offer a 5th valve on their horns because that is how they make them. End of discussion. Ironically, they now offer several of their horns with 5th valves and I have to wonder if my earlier conversation had some effect in the long run.
One thing that was asserted in this thread is that the "Piggy" model was a beginner/amateur level tuba. Several posters jumped on that idea like it was some kind of insult. Actually, my understanding was that this is exactly true. The "Piggy" was introduced and marketed as a lower budget horn that was ideal for the student because of its small size, versatile applications, and low price. That's not to say that some of those tubas are not really fine instruments. Of course, you could say that about any line and model of horns. Irregardless of whatever marketing was used at its introduction, the "Piggy" has stood the test of time as evidenced by the large number of them still in use. As usual, it really is about how the horn plays, not what it is called.
My opinion for what it's worth...