Posted by Lew on January 12, 2003 at 17:27:06:
In Reply to: Cerveny 686 posted by SHS Tubamaster on January 12, 2003 at 16:08:47:
I owned a rose brass stencil version of this horn for a few years (it was sold as a "Styriaton" Conn International 97J). It had dual minibal linkage, that was very fast and quiet, and lots of nickel silver trim, but was essentially the same horn. I bought it because it played well and the people I brought with me when I tried it out all thought I could produce the best sound on it of any tubas available to try at that time, which included a MW model 25, Yamaha 641, Miraphone 186, Besson 993, Jupiter 582, Conn 5J, and the 2 piece King 2341 that I owned at the time. The fit and finish on mine looked excellent, and I had no problems with it. I swapped it for a new King 2341 because I found that I didn't have the air to provide the support needed for this large bore, especially in the low range. Even so, there are times that I am sorry that I sold it because it had a great sound for quintet work and the King doesn't seem to blend as well in small groups.
I have heard that the quality of Cerveny horns is very variable, so it's even more important to be able to test out the specific horn you buy, but I was happy with mine. I don't know if they put more care into the ones that they made to sell with the "Conn International" name, or how much of a difference the rose brass made. The conventional wisdom is that "stencil" horns are of lower quality than the original brand, because the manufacturers name isn't on them so they aren't as concerned about quality. I didn't find this to be that case with mine.
Bottom line, it's a decent tuba for a very reasonable price.