Re: Re: York Tubas

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Rob P-M on April 24, 2002 at 17:18:01:

In Reply to: Re: York Tubas posted by Tim Cary on April 24, 2002 at 16:36:05:

I think it's clearly true that most York instruments were considered a notch below Conn and King, with the only exception being basses (tubas), in which York was well-regarded. Our community band has a 3 valve York Monster BBb (really just what we'd call a 4/4 size BBb with a 20" bell). The valves had to be redone, but since then it is a wonderful player: the sound is amazing, although it's stuffy low and the intonation is quirky up high. It has a sound more like a King than a Conn, but richer than a King.

Actually, although we tend now to forget, each of the major manufacturers was regarded as generally better at some things than others. Conn was known for its cornets, altos and french horns, perhaps also for its doublebell euphoniums, basses and sousaphones(the 20K has been the gold standard since its introduction in 1934). King was considered especially good at trombones (the Liberty 2B is still a standard among jazz players), also for cornets and basses and sousaphones. Holton was known for top quality cornets. Martin was known for saxes and trumpets, but the trumpet gold standard was Bach by the mid-30's or so.

Follow Ups: