Re: Cerveny 693 vs ST.Petersburg.HELP!!!!!!!

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

Posted by steved on December 22, 1999 at 16:19:11:

In Reply to: Cerveny 693 vs ST.Petersburg.HELP!!!!!!! posted by AT on December 21, 1999 at 11:38:10:

I played a brand new St. Pete on loan for 2 months. By the time I returned it, the contact points at the 1st valve slide and the bell throat near the thumb ring had already discolored badly. Big black tarnish areas. The valves took a little time to break in as well. (This horn was the upgrade from TE) Since it wasn't my horn, I treated it even more like a piece of Waterford, so I didn't have any damage. It DID feel thin and fragile. A friend from my community band had a strap break on his St. Pete, and it cost him plenty to get it fixed. After they straightened his bell, they had to do extensive work on the valveset to get the horn back to playing condition. The horns play as well as many other, more expensive horns, but again, is the savings worth it?

As the owner of a Cerveny piggy, I can't address the characteristics of the 693 directly. I can give you some general observations BASED ON THIS ONE HORN only. The factory linkage is unsatisfactory. I am constantly tweaking it to quieten it down. It DOES seem to be built much sturdier than the St. Pete. It does not play nearly as well.

My next horn will be neither of these.

Caveat emptor!!!

Follow Ups: