Re: Re: Holton 6/4 Conspiracy Theory


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

Posted by Dale on November 10, 1999 at 13:22:54:

In Reply to: Re: Holton 6/4 Conspiracy Theory posted by Jay Bertolet on November 10, 1999 at 09:36:24:

We had this same thread going a while ago. I think that if Holton (LeBlanc?)felt they could make money off of current production 6/4 tubas they would. I also get the impression they wouldn't care about the end product. My personal belief is that these two perspectives are not compatable, the Holton owners (LeBlanc?) know this and so nothing happens.
My impression is that the original Holton horns really were fabbed one-off, a great example is when my horn was built in 1972, they had an additional one ready at the same time. Well, the "other" horn was 4" shorter in overall height!

Apart from plumbing changes on my 5th valve, my Holton is VERY similar in appearance to photos of the CSO York(s.) Others I have seen appear different. The bottom arch on my tuba was obviously NOT hydraulically drawn through a mandrel, and the larger ferrules on the bell, bottom arch, and first couple of branches are obviously hand-fabbed and fitted.

Goodness knows CURRENT Holton production stories are checkered, I have yet to hear good about their Harvey P. tuba for example.

I really believe there is NO WAY this type of tuba could be tooled up for production and then built in this country and be profitable and price competitive with the Yorkbrunners, let alone the 2165's.






Follow Ups: