Three Tubaphone questions
Bruce Duncan
by Vega were the best mass produced banjos of all time for old timey banjo
sound. The over-all quality of the instrument was of course responsible, but
much of the credit is given to the Tubaphone tone ring itself.
Apparantly there is no patent on the Tubaphone tone ring because a number of
manufacturers produce banjos with TR's called Tubaphone - Wildwood, Reiter,
Deering - to name a few.
My questions are:
1. If the Tubaphone t.r. is the best, why doesn't every manufacturer
make all their tone ringed open back banjos with the tubaphone t.r.? In
other words, why make anything else? Since all tr's have roughly the same
amount of metal material in them, it can't be solely a question of cost, can
it?
3. Why can't you readily buy a Tubaphone tone ring? Janet Davis, Gold
Tone, Stewart Mac all sell tone rings - Whyte Ladies and others - but no
Tubaphone.
2. Are the Tubaphone tr's made by today's manfacturers comparable to the
Vega tr's or are they the same in name only and bear little similarity? If
they are comparable, then aren't vintage Vegas over valued and present day
Tubaphone banjos somewhat undervalued?
BD
Peter Roehling
>
> It seems to be generally accepted that the Tubaphone tone ringed banjos made
> by Vega were the best mass produced banjos of all time for old timey banjo
> sound.
Not really. What's "best" mean? Players disagree. In droves.
> My questions are:
> 1. If the Tubaphone t.r. is the best, why doesn't every manufacturer
> make all their tone ringed open back banjos with the tubaphone t.r.?
See above. There are many styles of tone ring and each has it's
boosters.
> 2. Are the Tubaphone tr's made by today's manfacturers comparable to the
> Vega tr's or are they the same in name only and bear little similarity? If
> they are comparable, then aren't vintage Vegas over valued and present day
> Tubaphone banjos somewhat undervalued?
Most modern Tubaphone tone rings are very similar to the old ones, both
in construction and in tonal quality.
Vintage Vega banjos are valued for (A) their worth as original works of
art/craftsmanship, (B) their worth as status symbols, and (C) their
worth as musical instruments. Only the older, completely original, upper
grade five strings are really valuable. Tubaphone tenors such as the
Style M can frequently be found for bargain prices, and they sound just
exactly as good as the fancy models when a five string neck is added.
In fact, doing just that can often get you a five string with a vintage
pot (and sound) and a modern neck, complete with low action and an
adjustable trussrod, for well under the going price of an entirely
"modern" Tubaphone.
P.
Mike
Hope this helps...
Stanger
Bruce Duncan wrote:
It seems to be generally accepted that the Tubaphone tone ringed banjos made
by Vega were the best mass produced banjos of all time for old timey banjo
sound. The over-all quality of the instrument was of course responsible, but
much of the credit is given to the Tubaphone tone ring itself.Apparantly there is no patent on the Tubaphone tone ring because a number of
manufacturers produce banjos with TR's called Tubaphone - Wildwood, Reiter,
Deering - to name a few.My questions are:
1. If the Tubaphone t.r. is the best, why doesn't every manufacturer
make all their tone ringed open back banjos with the tubaphone t.r.? In
other words, why make anything else? Since all tr's have roughly the same
amount of metal material in them, it can't be solely a question of cost, can
it?
The Tubaphone was patented. The Vega brand namewent through several owners, and the patent has probably expired. All tone rings do not cost the same by a long shot! Depending on the ring and the process used in making it, they vary widely in the material and/or labor costs. For a manufacturer, the labor costs always outweight the material costs, but even the material costs can be substantial (try buying a couple of pounds of the best bell bronze mix in an ingot and you'll see what I mean). The Tubaphone design has both materail and labor costs aplenty, especially the labor, which is at least twice as much as with the Whytle Laydie/ Electric tone ring design, which is labor intensive, too. The Tubaphonetone ring requires a lot of sheet metal working equipment, experience in metal fabriction, and a very good hand running the tools. It is one of those items that is very impractical to make one at a time or in small quantites because of this, and tooling for production in a very major undertaking.
3. Why can't you readily buy a Tubaphone tone ring? Janet Davis, Gold
Tone, Stewart Mac all sell tone rings - Whyte Ladies and others - but no
Tubaphone.
See above. Because they do cost a lot to make, Stew-Mac and other parts producers aren't going to spend their money on tooling, training, and high wages unless there is a substantial market to serve. That's why they dropped most of their once-extensive and huge banjo parts inventory in the first place and began concentrating more on guitars and luthery equipment- that was simply where the market is right now. Janet Davis doesn't make any parts that I'm aware of at all, as do most other folks who sell them. Gold Tone and the vast majority of manufacturers are making what will sell the most, which right now are Gibson style banjos. Deering took a fairly big chance on even buying the Vega name and taking on the huge job of producing a banjo that was totally out of their previous mold, which was exactly the same as the one Gold Tone is in. Stew-Mac builds the Whyte Laydie tone ring because it is much easier to build right, and is almost as popular as the Tubaphone. The only other maker I know of who is building Tubaphone rings totally in-shop is JaroslavPrucha, and his rings are the equal or better than anything Vega ever produced (as is the rest of the only banjo he makes that uses the ring). I don't know if he sells the ring independently, though.
The Tubaphone ring, especially in it's classic setup which also uses the heavy bracket band, isn't a setup that is a drop-in sort of conversion, either. They need to be very carefully fitted and finished to get the best tone they are capable of. The bracket band seems to impart more qualtiies tonally to the ring than to the Whyte Laydie equpped banjos, at least to my ear. I've played variations of both setups, with or without the bracket band, and that's my opinion, anyway.
This situation may change, but for now, the market is in Gibson clones, as it has been for over 20 years, and the makers and parts suppliers serve their market. Simple as that. If you order a couple of hundred Tubaphone tone rings, I'm sure Stew-Mac would start making them again.
2. Are the Tubaphone tr's made by today's manfacturers comparable to the
Vega tr's or are they the same in name only and bear little similarity? If
they are comparable, then aren't vintage Vegas over valued and present day
Tubaphone banjos somewhat undervalued?
I've played a couple of new Deerings, and I have to say that they are close, but not there yet. This opinion is based on experience that is a couple of years old, though, and Deering may now be smack in the ball park now in terms of quality. Theirrings fit well and produce good tone, but the ones I saw are a little roughly finished. The Prucha's fit and finish is impeccable (I bought one), and it has the right stuff to my ear.
What is overvalued? and what is undervalued? Old Vegas in general have held up very well. It seems to take a lot of trashing to really mess one up beyond salvage, and Vegas in general don't go for any more money than other vintage instruments of equal quality. In fact, if anything, they are slightly undervalued, considering the big surge in popularity clawhammer style playing is undergoing right now. Also, remember that Vega tenors were very popular, and remain so in that area of banjoists as well right now.
While there are pros and cons to buying a vintage banjo, the fact remains that a good vintage instrument, one that has seen good care and is sound, will have a developed mature tone that only age can impart. Banjos, in my opinion, change less over the years than other stringed instruments, but they do change, and an old one, where all the parts have settled in to each other over the years, simply cannot be easily compared to a new one that is still learning how to speak.
Good banjos NEVER have been cheap! A Vega #7 or #9 actually cost way more in terms of purchasing power back when it was made than what they go for now. In the 1920's, a #9 cost the equivalent of a house for a lot of people, and that's why there are so few of them. And all the people who made them are now dead- where are you gonna get a new one EXACTLY like the one made in 1920? It is simply impossible, period. It's like buying a piece a land- they quit making that a long time ago, too.
On the other hand- the living makers are trying to serve their market as best they can, and the marketplace determines how much they can sell their products for. Count your blessings, my friend- before Chinery started snapping up all the D'Aquisto archtop guitars he could get his hands on, they sold for years at between $2-10,000. Definitely not cheap, but nowhere near the $35,000+ they now command and get. Scott Chinery simply had the wherewithall to change and influence the market, and he did. All it will take for Tubaphone equipped banjos to make an enormous jump in price is a shift in buyer's perceptions of "good" and a couple of people who put up the big cash.
(and Stanger, in italics)BD
Sean Barry
: It seems to be generally accepted that the Tubaphone tone ringed banjos made
: by Vega were the best mass produced banjos of all time for old timey banjo
: sound. The over-all quality of the instrument was of course responsible, but
: much of the credit is given to the Tubaphone tone ring itself.
: Apparantly there is no patent on the Tubaphone tone ring because a number of
: manufacturers produce banjos with TR's called Tubaphone - Wildwood, Reiter,
: Deering - to name a few.
Any patent on a part designed at the turn of the century would have
expired a long time ago, to Mr. Ford's chagrin.
: My questions are:
: 1. If the Tubaphone t.r. is the best, why doesn't every manufacturer
: make all their tone ringed open back banjos with the tubaphone t.r.? In
: other words, why make anything else? Since all tr's have roughly the same
: amount of metal material in them, it can't be solely a question of cost, can
: it?
Tubaphone rings are difficult to make--the formed square tube requires
lots of handwork to execute properly, and some pretty advanced metallurgy
to pull it off at all. (Gibson Mastertone-style bluegrass tone rings are
cast and machined, much simpler to make than a Tubaphone ring). That
means that if you want to produce them, you'd better be able to sell
enough to make it worthwhile, and presumably up to this point StewMac, the
largest tone ring producer and supplier, has not seen the market to
justify the production commitment. It not only can be but definitely is
solely a question of cost (as measured by the size of the potential
market). Also, the Whyte Layde design (which StewMac has copied, and very
well) was until recently favored even over Tubaphones by many
well-regarded players, so the pervasive interest in Tubaphones may be too
recent for the parts manufacturers to have geared up to exploit.
: 3. Why can't you readily buy a Tubaphone tone ring? Janet Davis, Gold
: Tone, Stewart Mac all sell tone rings - Whyte Ladies and others - but no
: Tubaphone.
Hand in hand with the above, the manufacturers may feel that if they
produced more than they do they won't be able to sell them. If so, I
think they're wrong, because there is definitely a lot of interest in that
design. It's also a way of minimizing competition, which seems to me at
least as likely a motivation as cost/production/market concerns.
Speculation.
: 2. Are the Tubaphone tr's made by today's manfacturers comparable to the
: Vega tr's or are they the same in name only and bear little similarity? If
: they are comparable, then aren't vintage Vegas over valued and present day
: Tubaphone banjos somewhat undervalued?
The new Tubaphone design banjos and tone rings have a collective excellent
reputation, and as far as I know the new rings are identical in every
regard except age to the originals. In general, original high-quality
anythings are more valuable than modern knock-offs, if only because you
get a piece of history in addition to a wonderful instrument (these days
the new instruments from reputable builders are every bit as good and
often much better than the originals that they emulate--check out Wyatt
Fawley's "Vega" necks, with far better wood and pearl work (including
engraving) than Vega ever did. Look for modern manufacturers to increase
production of Tubaphones and possibly to make the rings available
separately as interest and pocketbooks continue to grow.
Sean Barry
Jon Freeman
> Tubaphone tenors such as the
> Style M can frequently be found for bargain prices, and they sound just
> exactly as good as the fancy models when a five string neck is added.
Just out of curiosity, what sort of prices are you talking about? I can't
afford anything at the moment but I've fancied a Tubaphone tenor for some
time.
Jon
eh
The Tubaphone Tenor is such an outstanding tenor, compared to other tenors,
that to me it seems like a bl.... shame to convert it to a five-string of
medium quality.
The Tenor has such a distinct, clear, not ringing or fluttering, tone - with
the same 'colour' all the way up the neck, that plectrum playing is a sheer
delight, and every time you play your Vega it teaches you something new, you
didn't know you could do.
For the time being 5-string is 'in' in US, whereas tenor is more popular in
Europe.
A firm Vega-lover
Erling
Peter Roehling
>
> "Peter Roehling" <peter_r...@eee.org> wrote
>
> > Tubaphone tenors such as the
> > Style M can frequently be found for bargain prices, and they sound just
> > exactly as good as the fancy models when a five string neck is added.
>
> Just out of curiosity, what sort of prices are you talking about?
I've seen them (and bought them) locally for as little as $125.00 and as
high as $300.00. If you buy one from a dealer or over Ebay you can
expect to pay quite a bit more.
P.
Peter Roehling
>
> I think I have mentioned it in another thread:
> The Tubaphone Tenor is such an outstanding tenor, compared to other tenors,
> that to me it seems like a bl.... shame to convert it to a five-string of
> medium quality.
It doesn't become "a five-string of medium quality", it stays just
exactly as good as it was as a tenor.
While I don't condone chopping up a good tenor neck, there's nothing
wrong with swapping necks entirely. You just put the tenor neck in the
tenor case and pack it away in case of a sudden unlikely surge in the
popularity of four string banjos; in which case you can always swap it
back.
> For the time being 5-string is 'in' in US, whereas tenor is more popular in
> Europe.
Tenors were more popular in the US for an approximate thirty year
period, starting in about 1905 and ending in circa 1935. Both before and
after that the five string held sway, and it doesn't look like going
away in the foreseeable future.
P.
LDuffie
>exactly as good as it was as a tenor.
>While I don't condone chopping up a good tenor neck, there's nothing
>wrong with swapping necks entirely. You just put the tenor neck in the
>tenor case
I have a Vega Whyte Laydie that was converted to 5 string.Wish they had kept
the tenor neck to go with it.I also have a Vega Tubaphone that was cinverted to
5 string longneck banjo and do have the original neck to go with it.
The only original banjo that I own is a 1929 Vega Tubaphone #3 Plectrum and
that will never get converted to anything.
Larry
newsgroups
Mike
Just an aside on this topic- I recently took off the 5-string neck I had
made for my B&D Silver Bell and put it's original plectrum neck back on.
It only took about 15 minutes at most to switch the necks, bridges and
tailpieces.
Stanger
William Steinbach
Wheeewwwwww!!! Glad to hear that Mike, casue that Plectrum neck
sitting there all lonely and unused was casing me great concern!!!!
Now I can sleep better knowing that another plectrum is being
strummed. Bill
Mike
Although I'm a dedicated 5-string player, I decided a while back to play
some plectrum and try to develop some new chord voicings on it. To tell
the truth, I'm getting into using a flatpick more than I ever thought I
would. The banjo is a sweetheart, either way.
Stanger
Bill
MIke, my first banjo was a {Pete Seeger long neck tubaphone. So I can
point to a frailing heritage.... But the jazz / dixieland caught me!
Thus the 4-string 'stable'..
If you are enjoying playing plectrum and want thorough and clearly
laid out lessoins, get Dave Frey's books.. see www.banjobook.com
The set is fantastic for any level of 'learner'. Heck, my tenor
teacher uses them.
BiLL
Mike
available through music stores?( We have a huge printed music
distributor here in town.)
Stnager