Posted by Sam Gnagey on September 01, 2001 at 20:13:22:
People have asked my why I don't send the horns that I reconfigure in my shop out to overhaul shops to be made to look nice. I've had that done to some of the instruments that I've redone, but they always came back not playing as well as when I sent them off. In the process they got taken back apart buffed, replated and reassembled. They did look nice, but this usually added more than $1500 to the price of the instrument. It also reduced the life expectancy of the tuba by thinning out the brass. And there's a reason for that thickness: it's in the sound.
Another of my crafts is making and repairing bowed stringed instruments. No one in that trade would consider having a fine old violin refinished. Finishes are carefully restored, but not made to look brand new. That's what makes an old violin such an interesting treat for the eye as well as for the ear.
I think we've been sold a bill of goods by the new instrument manufacturers and salesmen.
If a brass instrument is used they can't make much of a profit on it. I have a 6/4 Holton 4-valve BBb here that a shop took in on trade and deliberately tried to turn into scrap by driving the first valve into the casing with the guide out of its slot. I understand that this is not too uncommon a practice in the industry. I have some choice words for the people who perpetrate this kind of vandalism.
It's really OK to play on a less than perfect looking instrument if it sounds great and meets your needs. I look at my colleagues in the horn section all playing on unlacquered tarnished raw brass instruments. They don't seem to mind not having a shinny new looking horn. Many of the hornists I know will even have the lacquer stripped off if it's there when they buy a horn and let it go "natural".
What I want to stress to those of you selecting a tuba is to go in with your eyes shut and your ears open. You may come out richer in a couple of ways.