Posted by Rick Denney on June 17, 2002 at 11:23:43:
In Reply to: Re: Re: Cerveny CBB 6864MR or Amati posted by Klaus on June 16, 2002 at 08:52:14:
I once owned a "Sanders" tuba which is the house brand of Custom Music. It was clearly a Cerveny 686 (or its predecessor). The sound was quite good, the intonation manageable, the construction passable, and the valves excellent. It was quite soft and attracted dents with a vengeance. During one repair, the glued-on Sanders label came off, revealing Amati engraving underneath. This absolutely confirms what Klaus said. Cerveny is owned by Amati/Denak, and when they were both owned by the state, they applied labels according to whatever central-management whims struck them that day. It's not unlike UMI labeling the Conn 56J as a Conn, when it is made from King parts in the King factory, because of marketing reasons.
As to poor materials and sloppy workmanship, I would say yes. It had one leaky solder joint on mine, even after it had been used as a demonstrator for some months. The linkages were the cheapest possible ball-end mechanism that I quickly had to replace with something more robust.
As to requiring the supplied small mouthpiece to sound acceptable, I would only say that Klaus's standard mouthpiece is a drilled-out PT-50, which means that nearly every mouthpiece made but his is small by comparison. I used a PT-1 (old numbering) on mine, which was anything but small, and it worked fine.
But for the stated price, I'd take a VMI or Schmidt 2103 in a hearbeat, if for no other reason than they are more consistent I'd be less likely to get a dog. Those two instruments are quite similar, but the VMI's bore is a bit smaller and it is therefore a bit easier to blow with a good sound.
Rick "agreeing with Klaus's conclusion but not everything that led up to it" Denney