Posted by Matt G on October 09, 2001 at 21:44:29:
In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: St. Petersburg Rumor posted by dw on October 09, 2001 at 15:07:51:
The Mainl-Weston 32's are not horns with bad reputations. I have one with a very open low register and good intonation. Two others, that were new, I played may not have been as open in the bottom end but did have good intonation. One older horn that Dillon's had (20+ years old I'm guessing) was almost exactly the same but with a slightly different sound characteristic. Maybe the newer ones are better. Warren even still has his 32 from last I remember being told. The most interesting thing is, however, is that Meinl-Weston has continued to tweak the 32 over it's production. The St. Pete has not really recieved any real updating. And yes, I'm sure their are good examples of this model, BUT their are more consistantly better horns for the same money out in the market. The St. Pete did us a favor by coming out at $3K and making other makers get more competetive. Most of the gripe about St. Pete's really isn't about the horn itself. The marketing behind it is the problem. People are being misled to believe that the St. Pete plays as well as horns costing thousands more. Well that is true about many other tubas. I have played a Nirscl 6/4 CC that plays as well as a Yorkbrunner and that horn cost thousands more. I own a $600 york Eb that plays as well as a $11,000 Hirsbrunner F. A GOOD St. petemay play as well as a Mirafone 186 or a Meinl-Weston 25, but it won't hold up as well. And a good example of those two will blow a St. Pete out of the water. Plus their are now Jupiter, Weril, VMI, King and other makes all well within the $3k range. The St. Pete just isn't the "value" that it is made out to be. A few people have been burnt by this horn and it will never be able to fill the role that many of it's competetor's do.
Matt G