Where do "your" horns come from??

[hornbuilder]

Please watch this video, and give it some consideration.

[Burgerbob]

A well needed video.

[WGWTR180]

This is making the rounds.

[GabrielRice]

In all seriousness, there have been stencil instruments sold in the US for a long time. They used to be from Czechoslovakia, East Germany, etc. A Walter Sear tuba was usually a Cerveny, and it was pretty good. Now they're from China, Indonesia (at least for guitars), and probably other Asian countries, and their manufacturing has improved tremendously over the last 20 years or so. I would 100% buy a Chinese-made tuba right now if I needed one, and it would have an English language brand name - Eastman, Mack, or Wessex most likely. The quality to price ratio is high for those instruments.

[hornbuilder]

Gabe.
You're absolutely right. Stencils have been around for a long time. The difference now is, "anyone" can jump on the bandwagon. I don't have an issue with Eastman, Wessex, or any of the other Chinese brands that sell *under their own name*, and do their own R&D The issue is those that sell these stencil instruments "claiming them to be US made", or "made for the player", and do not have any background understanding of instrument design. The other consideration is price point. When you know how much some of these instruments can be purchased for on sites like Alibaba, and realize these same horns are being sold for 3 times that price. The only difference is they have fancy engraving and "maybe" a changed brace.

[harrisonreed]

I've bought two "fake" instruments, the first bring a jinbao alto (copy of Slokar alto) in 2005. It was terrible -- not made well at all. I was able to determine with this instrument that I wanted to continue learning the alto and that the Jinbao was not good. The K&H company did not lose a sale of the Slokar model because I bought the Jinbao -- there was likely zero chance I would ever buy that instrument because it just isn't one I'm interested in. The Eastlake Conn 36H I eventually got (and always intended to get) has consistently blown every other alto I've tried out of the water (post-mods to the tuning slide).

The second fake instrument I bought was a P-Bone as a novelty item. I think that's all I need to say about that.

If M&W or Edwards are really worried competition from these poorly made stencil horns that are falling apart ... I'd be really surprised. That can't really be the case, because M&W is so beautiful and so well made. Are these really eating into their business? An Edwards or M&W is going to be far better quality and a better product even if copied by a sub-par factory. Like, you make the best trombone you possibly can with the best construction I've ever seen -- how are these crappy instruments even a concern? Aren't they just targeting the student horn market?

I don't think Thein has been copied yet, other than their valve configuration on their alto. Maybe they are doing it right -- they are priced so high that nobody is even trying to copy their instruments or complete in their market.

If, some day, they make a stencil / copy that is superior to an M&W, or basically equal quality but significantly less expensive .... What then? I don't think very much that goes into any trombones these days would be granted a patent, and patents expire. What is different about a trombone or oboe that makes it morally bad to copy years after it comes out (the original in the OP video was from when, the 50's?), compared to say a CNC lathe or engine design? Machine tools, for example -- Japan makes the best ones. They didn't used to, and they certainly didn't invent the idea or many of the specifics.

The pharmaceutical industry faces a similar problem with drug development, when you think about new medicines. When the patent expires, generic versions can be made. Usually that's cause for celebration. But now we are in a situation where life saving drugs are just not made if the calculus shows that the R&D investment won't break even before the patent expires. Especially true for antibiotics, but for a different reason (bacteria become resistant before the drug is even fully rolled out).

I want to feel outrage about instruments being copied ... But if you look a bit further than just instrument design you see that it's how every industry works. And instruments are generally so niche that the copies will never really be any good. Ignoring the history of Yamaha of course...

[Finetales]

I don't think Thein has been copied yet, other than their valve configuration on their alto. Maybe they are doing it right -- they are priced so high that nobody is even trying to copy their instruments or complete in their market.

Thein has been copied plenty, most notably the Ben van Dijk contra. The Chinese piccolo trombones are also technically Thein copies, though it's not like anybody has played a real one to compare them.

The thing about the Chinese factories is, unless given direction by Wessex, Eastman, John Packer, etc., they will kind of just copy whatever they get their hands on. That's why you can still buy copies of such coveted instruments as old Weril flugabones, the Holton MH-101 marching French horn, Bach 42K, the aforementioned Thein piccolo trombone, everyone's favorite Conn the 83H, old German Bb/F trombones, whatever those awful alto valve trombones originally were, and more.

The issue is those that sell these stencil instruments "claiming them to be US made", or "made for the player", and do not have any background understanding of instrument design.

Fortunately I think that kind of thing is actually on the downward trend. Remember back in the day when we were flooded with those comically bad early Chinese stencils that were advertised as "French Engineering" or made in whatever random German city they could think of?

It does still happen, and it shouldn't at all (looking at you, Bell), but I certainly don't miss when it was that rampant.

In all seriousness, there have been stencil instruments sold in the US for a long time. They used to be from Czechoslovakia, East Germany, etc. A Walter Sear tuba was usually a Cerveny, and it was pretty good. Now they're from China, Indonesia (at least for guitars), and probably other Asian countries, and their manufacturing has improved tremendously over the last 20 years or so.

There have also been great stencils that sold for less than they should have, like the "F. Schmidt" line being just standard Courtois models made in the Courtois factory that sold for much less, or Buescher making license-built Alex 103 copies to a very high standard, or Couesnon making stencils under various names including "Elkhart" for export.

[harrisonreed]

I don't think Thein has been copied yet, other than their valve configuration on their alto. Maybe they are doing it right -- they are priced so high that nobody is even trying to copy their instruments or complete in their market.

Thein has been copied plenty, most notably the Ben van Dijk contra. The Chinese piccolo trombones are also technically Thein copies, though it's not like anybody has played a real one to compare them.

Fair enough, thanks for the insight! Thein's price point is so high that I don't think there would be such a comparison done. I often wonder about their price point.

[hyperbolica]

My initial reaction was "all my main horns are vintage US"... Except...

... my main small bore is a Getzen 3508 (not vintage)
... my main medium small bore is a Benge (not vintage)
... my main large bore is Elkhart 88h with an sl2525 slide (half vintage)
... my main bass is a Duo Gravis with new indy valves (half vintage) my backup is a 62hi (not vintage) I had a Kanstul bass for ~12 years, but it turned out it wasn't as nice as more common instruments.

I've had a few Asian horns, but always just secondary instruments like euph or tuba (although my current tuba is an Olds.

I've only owned a couple Euro horns - Courtois and Selmer. The Courtois was fantastic, but tuned in a way I couldn't get used to, and the Selmer - well, somebody has to be sub-standard.

Wessex 4501 - Urbie copy - a really even and predictable instrument designed by the late Chip Hoehler.

Wessex Super Tenor - really a Holton 159 copy. Nice idea, but poorly constructed

Wessex double valve tenor prototype - wow, I should have kept that one. It was like a jacked up 42b with an afterburner

Wessex base-level euph - uninspiring

Wessex Festivo euph, nice horn once the manufacturing flaws got ironed out

Wessex Bombino Eb tuba - too small for any practical application

Mack 210 copy - just couldn't deal with it for some reason

Mack Yamaha 621 BBb copy - nice enough tuba I couldn't appreciate at the time

I've had a bunch of Yamahas, but didn't care for them for different reasons. The best that I've owned have been the 897 508 horn and a 455 dual medium bore. I wanted to like the 350c for its interesting design, but I just didn't like how it played.

I my experience, these Asian horns have been a mixed bag. The 897, 4501 and the 2v tenor were the only ones worth considering as long term or primary instruments.

To be honest, I avoid boutique bones because I just think they aren't that much better than what I have. But I have played a few.

Shires - they all seem solid, but uninteresting. Sorry, that's just my opinion.

Edwards - I like their lighter stuff, but not the heavy instruments

M&W - I played a beautiful and outstanding 525 bore bone - would have ended my marriage for sure

Greenhoe - one of the small bores was really a fantastic horn

Schagerl makes a bass and a couple tenors that felt great at the ATW.

K&H also makes horns that should be seen more in the US

Rath - I like their smaller horns for some reason better than the larger ones.

If you look at all of this, the non-Yamaha Asian horns really aren't up to being primary pro horns - tubas may be a different story just due to price.

So much of this is driven by the academic market which uses a different set of rules that are less concerned with playability.

And remember - there's a difference between copying a product and having the design handed to you by a CEO or Corp board looking to boost their own pay by firing hundreds of your neighbors and friends. You can only blame the Chinese government so much, the real blame is with the top of the Western corporate ladder.

[harrisonreed]

Also the idea that stencil horns are what ends innovation and creativity with instrument design ... It might be right but I feel like it might not be completely right. And this is new for me, because I recently believed the opposite. Aren't Carol Brass the ones making all kinds of crazy Whoville-esque bonkers brass instruments?

Have contrabass trombone design R&D costs *ever* broken even? Or if they have, was it the money that made it worth it or the musical possibilities? The bass clarinet concept on the OP video is a good example -- those good original bass clarinets were designed out of someone's desire to produce a great bass clarinet, and their love of the instrument. The innovation for that instrument design might have stopped because of copycats ... But it might also have stopped because the person or people who really cared about innovating died, became interested in other things, or thought they achieved what they could achieve.

Perhaps at that time, there were enough people on the planet really interested in the clarinet to produce a few people crazy enough to work on improving the instrument. And maybe now almost no one cares one iota about the bass clarinet.

Sometimes it's just part of the human endeavor to innovate and make something good, and profits be damned, right? I feel like that's how most great instrument designs came about, especially as you go further back in time. Relying on a corporation to innovate something like a bass clarinet is backwards (he mentions Yamaha, I think). It takes someone who really knows the instrument, loves it, has the skills, and is *not* motivated first and foremost by profits.

I keep coming back to thinking about pharmaceuticals. The real moral dilemma is when you can choose to innovate, you have the means to develop something that can save even, say, just ten people. I'm thinking of super rare diseases where there are very few cases. Big companies could do this, but they straight up won't because they lose billions of dollars developing it. Instrument makers deciding they won't innovate the bass clarinet because they will not make back the $50k it would take to change up the design kind of pales in comparison. Does the artisan really care about the state of their art, or profits?

[Tubaaiyue]

This topic is interesting

[Burgerbob]

Also the idea that stencil horns are what ends innovation and creativity with instrument design ... It might be right but I feel like it might not be completely right. And this is new for me, because I recently believed the opposite. Aren't Carol Brass the ones making all kinds of crazy Whoville-esque bonkers brass instruments?

You do have to see how the super low price point of the Chinese horns would impact the want or ability for an artisan to improve an instrument, right?

[ZacharyThornton]

A really obvious part that infuriates me… misleading the consumer. Just say: this is a (insert country of origin here) horn that I order with my name on it and did nothing else. Be honest with your customers and if the horn doesn't suck? They will buy it. Don’t act like you understand how to construct instruments when all you are doing is buying horns from somewhere else with your name on it.

[ZacharyThornton]

Also the idea that stencil horns are what ends innovation and creativity with instrument design ... It might be right but I feel like it might not be completely right. And this is new for me, because I recently believed the opposite. Aren't Carol Brass the ones making all kinds of crazy Whoville-esque bonkers brass instruments?

You do have to see how the super low price point of the Chinese horns would impact the want or ability for an artisan to improve an instrument, right?

Yeah, why do the work to make a great new innovation knowing it will be ripped off in a year?

[SwissTbone]

A really obvious part that infuriates me… misleading the consumer. Just say: this is a (insert country of origin here) horn that I order with my name on it and did nothing else. Be honest with your customers and if the horn doesn't suck? They will buy it. Don’t act like you understand how to construct instruments when all you are doing is buying horns from somewhere else with your name on it.

That's what I think too. Don't think your customers are stupid.

[RJMason]

Please watch this video, and give it some consideration.

Since you started this thread, I’d love to hear more about your process. I am especially curious to know if all the components of your horns are made by you, by hand, in the USA?

I ask because I know of German craftspeople who spin and form bell flares for builders who then finish and brand the instruments themselves. On one hand, sourcing high quality components from skilled makers, regardless of where they’re located, seems like a different conversation than the one about generic imports. But on the other hand, given the quality that is possible in China, maybe the only distinction is the direction of the compass? Curious how you see this.

[harrisonreed]

So there are a couple different takes on what's going on here. This is a topic that I'd love to do an essay or article style blog post about, honestly.

First:

You do have to see how the super low price point of the Chinese horns would impact the want or ability for an artisan to improve an instrument, right?

Yeah, why do the work to make a great new innovation knowing it will be ripped off in a year?

For the first set of quotes I used to think this way. But the more I dip my toes into creating mouthpieces -- and granted I am very new and probably beady-eyed and bushy-tailed as a mouthpiece maker -- the more I see "making" as a creative endeavor. I have an innate desire to make good things, and create new designs. I make two or three new designs every weekend, and play them during the week, and innovate for the sake of innovating. Because I care about it. I'm not really making much money doing this.

I think these first quotes are really getting after the idea of corporations, like Conn Selmer, etc, innovating. That hasn't happened in decades. We can't rely on corporations to innovate in wind instrument designs because they care about money first. And there simply isn't any real money to be made in wind instruments.

It comes down to quality. Yes, anything you put together can get copied, eventually, but crappy Jin Bao horns ... I feel like they aren't the threat they are being made out to be. Boutique makers of instruments make art. They make the best instruments you can buy. There is no way that Jin Bao is actually ripping off an Edwards instrument and putting out anything remotely close to the real thing at their price point.

When someone dipping their toes in the world of wind instruments buys a Jin Bao or whatever, we should be thankful enough that maybe they will get into playing wind instruments at all and eventually learn about what a good instrument actually is. The boutique artisan selling $5500 trombones without a case is not losing a customer or business when a $400 Jin Bao is sold on eBay -- they were never going to have that customer to begin with. Maybe they will become a customer eventually thanks to getting their feet wet.

So if XYZ boutique company really isn't innovating (and how innovative can you really be with wind instruments?) because of Jin Bao, it's a corporate decision. If the innovation is with some bell buffing technique...Jin Bao is not going to be able to copy that, seriously if you don't make a big deal about how special your bell buffing is. Just make a great bell. If the innovation is with a valve design or wrap configuration, they can superficially copy it but it won't be as good.

Or maybe it could be as good. If they aren't breaking patent laws or selling the horn in a misleading way .... Can you really get that upset that a horn that beats the boutique horn is being sold for less? We only have to look to Yamaha for this. If we're cool with Yamaha, we have to be cool with Y-Fort or whoever in China that is putting out good stuff. Yes, some companies in China are using artificially low-cost labor and the reasons behind that should give us pause. What are we really supporting when we pay $400 for a piece of crap Jin Bao whose low price is made possible by potential human rights violations? That's a completely different question. Can people in such a situation make the equivalent of an Edwards trombone? I doubt it.

Now contrast with:

A really obvious part that infuriates me… misleading the consumer. Just say: this is a (insert country of origin here) horn that I order with my name on it and did nothing else. Be honest with your customers and if the horn doesn't suck? They will buy it. Don’t act like you understand how to construct instruments when all you are doing is buying horns from somewhere else with your name on it.

This is the real problem, of course. And the worst case I heard of was Greg Black having his whole catalogue purchased and copied, and then marketed in a deceptive way. The blanks were supposedly exact copies, and the marketing material and model numbers identical to his catalogue.

I think these are two different issues.

[Burgerbob]

Y-Fort is obviously an example of this being a good thing, a factory making Eastman garbage tier stuff decided to really go all-in and make an excellent large bore tenor all their own. But it's a totally different situation than the copy of the 42BO being sold by the zillionth local retailer.

[hyperbolica]

My degree is in mechanical engineering and my professional background is product development. Not necessarily musical product development, but I have done some of that.

I watched the video, and this is old news to most of us. Any music store can order instruments from China and put their name on them. Dillon. Mack. Wessex. Schiller. Lake. Etc, etc. Old news.

This doesn't have much to do with product development at all. It's mostly about marketing.

China is today where Japan was 50 years ago, but the reasons are very different. Japan got where it is because the US used nuclear bombs on Japan, and then the US rebuilt and modernized and built a new ally. Japanese products went from total crap to industry leading. They learned a lot over time by observing how good products are developed and manufactured. But the US rebuilding Japan meant a lot more than just erecting buildings. Japan also received a lot of technology and designs were essentially given to them. Japan benefited, but the US also benefited. A lot of people felt about Japan then in the way that people feel about China today. Nuclear bombs are of course a terrible thing, but rebuilding a destroyed country into a technological powerhouse and a modern ally has grown something positive from a very awful event.

China on the other hand wasn't owed anything. The communist government manipulated their economy and currency such that Chinese labor was dirt cheap. Western corporations sent technology and designs to China to avoid paying Americans (which was and is despicable). The product quality went to hell, but the Chinese learned over time. One thing I was directly involved in was creating molds for plastic parts. The Chinese would do one of two things: run the molds and make one part for you, one part for them. So they used American tooling against us. The other thing they did was after the Americans sent them the design data for the molds and for the end products, the Chinese would just make themselves a set of molds and then make the completed products from those molds. This is how we got cheap knock-off products. So they got all of the design and tooling data for free. Sure, this is outright theft, but what else did these Western corporations expect? All they cared about was money for CxOs and stock prices.

Having a design given to you or copying an existing design is one thing - the design is only half the story. It also has to be manufactured. And some manufacturing steps do not produce something you can measure with a laser scanner. Material properties are the product of multiple processes. Heat treat on a bell can make or break a design. This takes a lot of experience to learn. So even with all of the design data, it's still very difficult to copy some products.

These days China doesn't need people to send them design data, they just copy it from existing products. It's more work, but still easier than developing their own ideas. The products start out as junk, and gradually improve, and rarely if ever innovate. Innovation itself is mostly copied. Is this respectable? No. But what can you expect from communists?

How does this effect innovation? Innovation typically leaves these people in the dust. It remains to be seen if China begins to approach Japan's success in quality and reputation. They have a long way to go. And I think brass instruments aren't exactly the Chinese cultural item that would drive them to actually innovate them. Innovation takes experience.

And remember in communism, the government owns everything. When was the last time you really remember something innovative or worthwhile coming from any government? I don't think the Chinese are going to get much past copying products. How many pros or semi-pros here are using a Chinese instrument as their first instrument? (tuba is kind of an exception)

[Posaunus]

My degree is in mechanical engineering and my professional background is product development. Not necessarily musical product development, but I have done some of that.

Japan got where it is because the Japanese products went from total crap to industry leading. They learned a lot over time by observing how good products are developed and manufactured. But the US rebuilding Japan meant a lot more than just erecting buildings. Japan also received a lot of technology and designs were essentially given to them.

I also have degrees in mechanical engineering and spent much of my career in product development and innovation. I was able to spend some time working with products in Japan (when, long ago, our American products were often superior).

One of Japan's "secret weapons" in advancing their products' success was also a postwar benefit, provided by (of all people) General Douglas MacArthur. It was MacArthur who introduced Japan to W. Edwards Deming, whose expertise in quality-control techniques opened the eyes of the Japanese to improvements in manufacturing methods that revolutionized their industries. He was invited by Japanese industries to give speeches, conduct workshops, and share his views and techniques on product design, quality control, reliability, and even marketing. Per Wikipedia, "Deming made a significant contribution to Japan's reputation for innovative, high-quality products, and for its economic power. He is regarded as having had more impact on Japanese manufacturing and business than any other individual not of Japanese heritage."

Deming, largely ignored on the home front, became a legendary hero in Japan. He didn't single-handedly change Japanese manufacturing culture, but had a strong influence on their success. Apparently, the Chinese haven't all learned those lessons. [And American industry would do well to heed what we long ago exported!]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._Edwards_Deming

[harrisonreed]

When was the last time you really remember something innovative or worthwhile coming from any government?

US Gvt: James Webb Space Telescope
Implementation of mRNA vaccines

European Union: CERN - creation, containment, and transportation of antimatter

Japanese Gvt: JAXA - Hayabusa 2 asteroid sample return mission

China - CFR-600 liquid sodium nuclear reactor
Independent R&D into functional/feasible fusion reactors

[sf105]

When was the last time you really remember something innovative or worthwhile coming from any government?

I struggle with this "all government is bad" line. The techbros' oligopolies, and related US dominance, are founded on decades of government-funded innovation (plus some very juicy contracts to help them along).

On a smaller scale, there's a book out there of interviews with government staff whose job is (or was until recently) making peoples' lives better, like the engineer who helped to slash mining deaths (sorry, can't find a reference).

And US instrument makers? Loads of public sector contracts from schools, colleges, and the military to pay the rent. It's their own fault they took the money without investing in resilience.

We should remember that before we had all that interferin' government, we had rivers that caught fire and clusters of birth defects.

S

[Burgerbob]

Wow, that's a pretty bad post, Hyperbolica.

[harrisonreed]

I thought he made some good points, though.

It's just, not all government is bad. It's too bad that they aren't doing*more* to fund real science research or maybe to clean up the Pacific Ocean trash island.

All those developments I listed make worrying about a lull in instrument innovation seem pretty low on anyone's priority list.

I still think, if you have a great idea and want to innovate the trombone, you just gotta do it - Minick-style. How much profit potential is there really to be had?

[hyperbolica]

Wow, that's a pretty bad post, Hyperbolica.

You're going to need to be more specific.

[Burgerbob]

Painting the Chinese as "communists" when they are basically in name only (and when the CCP wants to assert power over something). In most ways they are more unfettered capitalist than the US.

Government does plenty of good things, but if you are on the conservative side of the spectrum you've been taught to ignore all of them.

Capitalism is the whole reason they are doing their thing- it's a pretty common trend for an established industry to offshore to save money. I mean, it's even happening to China now.

[bassclef]

How does this effect innovation? Innovation typically leaves these people in the dust. It remains to be seen if China begins to approach Japan's success in quality and reputation. They have a long way to go. And I think brass instruments aren't exactly the Chinese cultural item that would drive them to actually innovate them. Innovation takes experience.

Maybe that's true for brass instrument manufacturing, but speaking of another area in which I have much personal interest, have a look at some articles from the past week or two regarding the CEO of Honda (perhaps the best Japanese auto maker, maybe second only to Toyota) visiting a Chinese automobile manufacturing plant.

His summary: "We have NO CHANCE against this" and is actively overhauling his massive organization from top to bottom.

The Toyota CEO was quoted: "Unless things change, we will not survive. I want everyone to acknowledge this sense of crisis".

Because every word out of a CEO's mouth has the valid chance to affect the almighty stock price, I would think that they would choose them carefully. Honda and Toyota are afraid of going completely out of business in the near future.

You'll see that their comments were NOT driven by the Chinese producing cheaply stenciled versions of existing cars to undercut any/all competition with rock bottom price points. Both the current state of Chinese speed of development, supply chain, manufacturing processes and the final products are so different (far ahead?) of their Japanese & Western counterparts, it's approaching apples to oranges territory.

For more info, go to YouTube and simply search "Chinese cars" to see what they're doing.

How much longer can the "free market" effectively ignore this using only anti-Communist propaganda? Is Detroit's lobbying budget big enough to keep these out so they can continue to produce their disposable, made-to-break offerings?

Someone is getting left in the dust by innovation here, and they are not in China.

[RJMason]

I am not going to go into communism or government (yikes!!) but for the sake of trying to get back on track I’d like to comment on a couple holes I see within some really strong points about the ecosystem/topic at large.

1. Yamaha invests in its own R&D, engineering, and quality systems and has for decades. That’s not the same as copying someone else’s catalog and stamping your name on it. Equating the two as some have done, intentionally or not, dismisses a real distinction.

2. Some folx argue Chinese quality could match boutique makers, but then say they doubt they could produce an Edwards equivalent. Sooo which one is it? Both can’t be true at the same time.

My take? I’d go with the latter based on Y-Fort…

3. The $5500 boutique maker ‘was never going to have that customer’ assumes a binary between $400 and $5500. What about the middle market? Yamaha makes horns that are cheaper than boutique and arguably built better. And what about the used market? Should that not be considered as seriously?

PS: still waiting to hear from the owner of M&W trombones about where their horns come from.

[harrisonreed]

I'm wondering if how hard my wallet is getting hit by everything is the western capitalist response to the comparatively low cost of labor in China?

They can't pay people any less here so they will just keep increasing prices and putting less chips in the proverbial Doritos bag. And maybe the tariffs to offset the low price of comparable Chinese goods.

In response to the comment above about China being able to produce something of comparable quality to Edwards, I believe they could, but it won't be at a Wessex price point. It'll be very similar in price to Edwards, plus shipping, and tariffs ... That's why we don't see it very much if at all. Is Y-Fort *really* as good as Edwards? Or is it just "wow this is really good for what I paid!"

This topic is originally from a boutique trombone maker, so I made the binary comparison. If you want to talk about the mid range market, well, no kidding. Look at the King plant shutting down. Yamaha, Shires Q, and maybe some of the cheapo Jin Bao horns eating into the student horn market did our mid range makers in. But that was decades in the making. Why were they all in on being mid-range to begin with?

Also Yamaha started by copying Conn trombones in the 70's, maybe earlier. They don't do that anymore. That's why I used them as an example of where China might be headed.

[JohnL]

Also Yamaha started by copying Conn trombones in the 70's, maybe earlier. They don't do that anymore. That's why I used them as an example of where China might be headed.

Somewhere along the line, Yamaha made the jump from making good copies of other companies' instruments to looking at other companies' instruments and asking themselves how they could improve upon them.

The same thing happened with Nikon and Canon cameras. In the beginning, Nikon copied Contax (Carl Zeiss) and Canon copied Leica, but they eventually moved beyond copying and developed their own products.

In each case, a moment arrived when the people running the company said something along the lines of: "OK, we've learned all we can from everyone else, it's time to show the world what we can do ourselves." I don't think any of the instrument companies in China have reached that stage yet (with the possible exception of Briz). I get the feeling Y-Fort is close.

I don't think a company can get to that turning point if their primary emphasis is producing a product that ends up being sold under someone else's name.

[JohnL]

Also Yamaha started by copying Conn trombones in the 70's, maybe earlier. They don't do that anymore. That's why I used them as an example of where China might be headed.

Somewhere along the line, Yamaha made the jump from making good copies of other companies' instruments to looking at other companies' instruments and asking themselves how they could improve upon them.

The same thing happened with Nikon and Canon cameras. In the beginning, Nikon copied Contax (Carl Zeiss) and Canon copied Leica, but they eventually moved beyond copying and developed their own products.

In each case, a moment arrived when the people running the company said something along the lines of: "OK, we've learned all we can from everyone else, it's time to show the world what we can do ourselves." I don't think any of the instrument companies in China have reached that stage yet (with the possible exception of Briz). I get the feeling Y-Fort is close.

I don't think a company can get to that turning point if their primary emphasis is producing a product that ends up being sold under someone else's name.

EDIT:
Where do MY horns come from?
My daily driver was made in a factory that was a couple blocks west and a mile or so north of the house I live in today.

[MahlerMusic]

Where do MY horns come from?
My daily driver was made in a factory that was a couple blocks west and a mile or so north of the house I live in today.

Plot twist... they live in China

[RJMason]

In each case, a moment arrived when the people running the company said something along the lines of: "OK, we've learned all we can from everyone else, it's time to show the world what we can do ourselves." I don't think any of the instrument companies in China have reached that stage yet (with the possible exception of Briz). I get the feeling Y-Fort is close.

I don't think a company can get to that turning point if their primary emphasis is producing a product that ends up being sold under someone else's name.

Love this perspective

[Finetales]

In each case, a moment arrived when the people running the company said something along the lines of: "OK, we've learned all we can from everyone else, it's time to show the world what we can do ourselves." I don't think any of the instrument companies in China have reached that stage yet (with the possible exception of Briz). I get the feeling Y-Fort is close.

The Y-Fort trombones are copies of nothing, in fact it seems like they deliberately went out of their way to make not a single component compatible with any other brand.

Arguably, Y-Fort is a better example than Briz, as Briz just makes the same Geyer and Kruspe wrap horns as everybody else. They do it very well, but they are hardly brand new designs.

[harrisonreed]

EDIT:
Where do MY horns come from?
My daily driver was made in a factory that was a couple blocks west and a mile or so north of the house I live in today.

That's awesome! Aside from those two gimmicks/fakes I discussed above (of which I only kept the pBone and it's a dog), and my beloved antique 3BF Silversonic, all my horns have been bought brand-new from US makers:

Bach 36B (sold)
Conn 88HT-CL (sold)
Conn 36H
Edwards 396-A

I'm not into owning extra instruments even if they are cheap if they are sub par.

[Posaunus]

Of course JohnL's "daily driver" was made (locally, in California) more than 50 years ago - when innovation, manufacturing processes, and quality control were highly valued in the United States.
That's not ALWAYS the case these days, but also not unheard of. Many quality products are still U.S. made.

[hornbuilder]

Before I answer the question that is obviously burning a hole in some people's pockets, I'm going to offer a bit of history

US musical instrument manufacturing has for the most part, been done by large companies, employing many workers, who do “pretty much” everything from start to finish under one roof. I say “pretty much” because there are things in this business that no one does themselves. For example, no manufacturer has their own foundry, and they all purchase material in rod, tube and sheet form from various national and international suppliers. This includes even the largest makers like Conn Selmer. Factories such as Conn, King, Getzen and Bach employ people who are then trained in the tasks involved in the making of an instrument. Often times, the workers perform a couple of specific aspects of the production of the instrument, and pass their work piece to the next person once they're done with it, but they rarely have the knowledge/skill to do everything involved in making an instrument. This system has benefits (you have control of the entire process from start to finish) and downsides (you're limited by the knowledge/skillset the workers possess)

The other way of making an instrument, common in Europe, is to have a small “Parent Company”, often owned by a Family or individual. In this case, vendors are used to produce specialty items. Companies like Meinlschmidt make valves. Bell makers like Bernd Sandner make bells (“many” very highly regarded makers in Europe use Sandner for their bell requirements. More on him later) and there are companies that will make bent parts/crooks, or machined parts to specific order. This is how the Greenhoe company operated in Wisconsin. There were 4 techs employed to perform the “hands on” assembly and finish work, but CNC machining was done by vendor companies, as well as tube drawing and bending done by M/K Drawing and Bending in Elkhorn. Sandner made the bells for the Greenhoe “Custom” instruments.

When M&W was created more than 10 years ago, it took us a year between the formation of the LLC, and having the first instruments made. In that year, we had to find a shop space, and fit it out to be able to do what we needed to do. This included buying a lathe and a mill, building a buffing room with exhaust system, and installing a spray booth with air makeup unit to replenish the air the booth sucks out of the shop. Benches, industrial air compressor, ultrasonic cleaner, etc etc. Setting up the shop involved a LOT of time and money. For the instruments themselves, I sat down with a blank sheet of paper, a pencil, calculator and ideas based on my years of playing trombone professionally, and the years of making trombones at both Greenhoe and Getzen, and drew every single part of the instrument. Those drawings were then used to make tooling to make parts. This included tapered mandrels for tuning slide crooks, and bending forms and/or dies for balling out/callibrating all of the curved parts/branches. The cost for that tooling was substantial as well. Bell mandrels that I designed were made in Germany for bells to be made by Bernd Sandner, to my specification for material and thickness and rim type. I make all of the bent tube parts myself, starting with lengths of straight tube, which are cut, annealed, pickled, filled, bent, emptied, balled out/callibrated, cleaned, sanded, polished, then cleaned again before using it in an assembly. I draw tapered tubes from tubing I make from sheet stock.
Some parts such as cork barrels and handslide receivers are CNC machined by vendor CNC machinists who specialize in musical instrument parts, to my specification. These parts are not available to other makers. Other turned parts such as brace sockets on the bell and handslide, are machined by me on my 1920’s Southbend lathe, from nickel silver rod stock using form tools that I ground to shape myself. Valve levers are made from 3/16” stainless steel rod, which are cut, drilled, tapped, bent, cleaned, then have their spindle, which I machine from rod stock, silver soldered on. The touch piece is turned on the lathe from a 5” acrylic blank. I trim every single part to length on the band saw or table saw, then carefully file the part at each joint to ensure no tension, or gaps underneath ferrules. Alignment of every single piece is carefully checked before solder work is done. I build handslides with an acceptable tolerance of +.003” in parallel.
Once assembly is complete, I then hand rag the instrument with Tripoli compound to clean away any excess solder, and start the polishing process. After Tripoli comes hand ragging and buffing with red rouge. This part of the process may involved a whole afternoon for a double valve bass trombone. Once the instrument is buffed to my satisfaction, it is cleaned in the ultrasonic cleaner, and prepared for lacquer. I spray the instrument with a clear baked on epoxy lacquer. After baking, I can then do the valve fit work, which involves hand lapping the bearing plates to their respective spindles, and the rotor to the casing. End play is set to .0005” precisely. Every single time. ( A regular piece of writing paper is .005” for reference) The inside of the outer slide tubes are polished, cleaned and checked/corrected for straightness. The inside of the inner tubes are cleaned, and the tube checked for straight. The water key has it's cork and spring installed, and the cork barrels receive their cork bumpers.
Oh. I also hand engrave the logo/makers mark and any custom engraving using the old school method of Hand Wriggle Cut Engraving with gravers that I shape and sharpen myself. I do a final clean, play test each instrument, pack it, and take it to the Post Office.

That's a lot!!! There are plenty of little details that I've left out here, but it gives a sense of just what is involved in actually making a brass instrument. I make each and every instrument for a specific client to their desired specification, one at a time. I played professionally for the Australian Opera in the Sydney Opera House for 16 years before coming to the US. I was one of 8 permanently employed, full time orchestral bass trombists in Australia. I have exceedingly high expectations of the horns I play, and I would not sell an instrument to someone if I would not be happy to play that instrument on the gig myself. I am constantly thinking of new things I want to do, and have numerous projects in various stages of development/completion.

So why did I go on so much about what is involved in making an instrument?? Because there is now another way of becoming an instrument “maker”, which involves having overseas factories putting horns together with your own logo, as outlined in the video I posted. It used to be that having such a thing done was less easy to do. Generally it was established brands using “stencils” to offer an instrument that they may not have the tooling/ability to make. Several US makers used to offer French Horns and/or tubas made in Europe for example.
Now though, “anyone” can email one of the Chinese factories, and as long as they have the cash, can have anything made with their logo taking pride of place on the bell. This is how a new “maker” can suddenly appear with a full catalog of options, and have dozens of bright shiny instruments hanging on the wall of their show room. They don't need to know how to solder, or bend and ball out parts, or how to buff, or lacquer, or even have any knowledge of the acoustics of the instrument, or where nodal points lie and how the dimensions are that part of the instrument affect how it plays. They don't have to actually “make” anything. Sure, some people will even go to the trouble of visiting the factory to “supervise” the work done But the fact remains, all they're doing is having someone else do the work, for them to take the credit. Some even claiming the instrument is “built for the player” and “built in the US”. These instruments, by the way, are purchased for a certain price point by the “maker”, and sold for 3 times that amount. Cha ching!! It's not about making a quality product. It's about making a buck by exploiting the fact foreign workers are paid poorly, and not telling your customers the truth about where their horn comes from.

This is NOT aimed at Eastman or Y-Fort. They're honest in how they present their product. We all know they make their horns in China. This is aimed at those who deliberately misrepresent what they're selling.

[ZacharyThornton]

^and then give people horns to be “artist” and get them to force their horns down people’s throats with social media marketing. Those “artists” are often band director or local freelance players that will endorse anything for a dime because it makes them feel special.
This whole marketing bullshit and false advertising is driving me nuts and making me cynical about the music world.
So I’m just going to practice more and ignore the rest.

[Posaunus]

Before I answer the question that is obviously burning a hole in some people's pockets, I'm going to offer a bit of history

Thanks, Matthew, for the informative details!

[RJMason]

The line between “maker” and “assembler” isn’t where anyone in this business says it is. Everyone positions themselves as far from China as possible, but the spectrum is tighter than folks want to admit. The metal doesn’t know what country it’s being worked in.

Players deserve transparency about what they’re buying and that standard should apply across the board not just to the easy targets.

So where do “my” horns come from? Yamaha & Scott Sweeney

[harrisonreed]

^Sweeney rocks!

[hornbuilder]

The word "modifier" should also be added to the list with "maker" and "assembler"...

[WGWTR180]

The line between “maker” and “assembler” isn’t where anyone in this business says it is. Everyone positions themselves as far from China as possible, but the spectrum is tighter than folks want to admit. The metal doesn’t know what country it’s being worked in.

Players deserve transparency about what they’re buying and that standard should apply across the board not just to the easy targets.

So where do “my” horns come from? Yamaha & Scott Sweeney

Well I think the Matthew took the time and explained each and every detail to you as you requested. We play what we play.

[MStarke]

Love the transparency coming from Matthew!

It's certainly not an easy field, especially in times of general economical challenges, tight governmental and private budgets, lots of insecurity etc.

I would certainly recommend refraining from judging other countries or governments. The US is not a rolemodel for the whole world, there is not much actual intellectual property in brass instruments. As long as it happens within legal boundaries... Of course if they are misusing the design AND actual brand name, that's something else.

Transparency is for sure important and can be expected. On the other hand if you buy a new bass trombone for <1000 USD and think it's made in the US, there is something wrong with your thinking.

I don't think there is anything wrong with getting parts/supplies where you want, as long as - latest upon request - you are transparent with it. Certainly there is no reason, apart from maybe some political view, to complain about getting bells from Sandner or valves from Meinlschmidt.

I think it is also pretty clear that the typical Jinbao customer is totally different than the typical Thein/M&W/Lätzsch/Greenhoe player. You buy a Jinbao when a) you have no clue, b) you have no funds or c) you have both, but just want to try something fancy (large bore, double valve alto trombone in F?). You buy an M&W only if you have the funds and typically if you are a pretty advanced to professional player.

So realistically I don't think there is much, if any loss of market share between those.

In the contrary: The cheap brands can even in the long term have a positive effect, as they allow more people to at least start on an instrument and maybe later in life have more funds for "the real deal". I myself started bass trombone on a Weril "just for fun" and went through Kühnl & Hoyer, Throja, 3 Conns and a Greenhoe until now. Not a bad deal for the expensive brands.

[RJMason]

Well I think the Matthew took the time and explained each and every detail to you as you requested. We play what we play.

I didn’t request a history lesson on buffing, measuring, and assembling, but okay.

Great post and I respect the craft that goes into what M&W does. The design authorship point is the strongest part of the argument, perhaps even the real line, to ask: Did you actually draw the parts and understand the acoustics or are you just buying what a factory already makes?

But M&W is drawing that line right below himself and right above Bell, which conveniently makes him a “maker” and Bell an “assembler.” If say, O’Malley, drew that same line, would M&W not be on the other side of it too, since both companies made their own mandrels but the former spins and crafts the bells in house? Hmmm.

[WGWTR180]

Well I think the Matthew took the time and explained each and every detail to you as you requested. We play what we play.

I didn’t request a history lesson on buffing, measuring, and assembling, but okay.

Great post and I respect the craft that goes into what M&W does. The design authorship point is the strongest part of the argument, perhaps even the real line, to ask: Did you actually draw the parts and understand the acoustics or are you just buying what a factory already makes?

But M&W is drawing that line right below himself and right above Bell, which conveniently makes him a “maker” and Bell an “assembler.” If say, O’Malley, drew that same line, would M&W not be on the other side of it too, since both companies made their own mandrels but the former spins and crafts the bells in house? Hmmm.

If all you got from Matthew's post was a history lesson in what you stated than you read what you read. And I completely disagree with your assessment on what is what. But that's my opinion.

[hornbuilder]

I offered what I wrote because there are many people who have very little idea as to what is involved in actually making an instrument. Sure, they understand that it starts as raw material, but are often astounded to find out how many steps are involved in actually creating the thing they simply hand over the money for.
You're correct. I do not make my own bells. But there are very few people anywhere in the world that have all of the skills required to do what I do as a One-Man shop.

I came to manufacturing pretty late in life. Bell making is a "highly" skilled task, which takes YEARS to become proficient enough to make bells that are suitable to sell. A lot of scrap is made in the process of perfecting the craft. I have done some metal spinning, but my skills are not good enough to make a consistent enough product that I would proudly sell to others to play. Does that make my instruments any less viable? Greenhoe didn't make their own bells in Wisconsin, either. (I don't know what they do now) Does that disqualify those instruments? As I mentioned before, there are several "very" well known European makers who use Sandner for their bells. One of these companies doesn't draw their own tubing, either. But they sell probably the most expensive brass instruments available. Does the fact they use a vendor that specializes in a highly skilled craft disqualify them from deserving the respect they have?? Where "do" you draw the line?? I wish I had started in this game earlier so that I could have spent the time perfecting metal spinning, but that wasn't the case. Making instruments is how I.make.my living now. I'm 57 years old. I can't afford to put the time into it. Does that mean I lose your respect?

And btw, I didn't say Bell was an "assembler". You did. At best he is a "purchaser". The distance between the "line" between what I do, and what Bell does, is enormous.

[Burgerbob]

Most of the top German makers are also using Sandner.

[GabrielRice]

To add to Matthew's point, Steve Shires DID spend decades spinning bells, starting with training at Schilke and then at his own company, where that was his hands-on job in the manufacturing process. He spent years trying to train somebody else to do it, and several very intelligent and otherwise highly skilled craftspeople could not find the touch. Finally, a year or two before the Eastman purchase, the guy who now spins bells at the Shires factory was able to do it to Steve's satisfaction and started to take over some of it from him.

Fast forward to today, Steve is building instruments in his workshop in a very similar process to what Matthew is doing, and he is buying trombone bells rather than spinning them...because, as he told me directly: "if I invested in the tooling I could do what they are doing but I couldn't do it better, and they do exactly what I ask for."

And one more point: "assembly" is critically important. The problems we see with the larger legacy manufacturers these days are not typically problems of design or even quality of fabricated parts; they are problems of assembly. Sloppy assembly - and designs compromised to accommodate sloppy assembly - makes for instruments that do not play even close to as well as they could. The time and care taken in the assembly is most of what you pay for when you buy a boutique instrument.

[harrisonreed]

^and then give people horns to be “artist” and get them to force their horns down people’s throats with social media marketing. Those “artists” are often band director or local freelance players that will endorse anything for a dime because it makes them feel special.
This whole marketing bullshit and false advertising is driving me nuts and making me cynical about the music world.
So I’m just going to practice more and ignore the rest.

This is at all levels of instrument manufacturing ... I can't think of any famous trombonist who sounded *better* than what they were originally on once they switched brands to a horn with their name on it. To a T they all seemed to sound best with the original equipment that made them famous. Alessi is probably the one who consistently sounded amazing as he changed models and brands, but each change was really noticeable. I believe he was consciously moving to brighter and brighter gear, so it's a subjective call. Some others though, they make the change and it's like, was that really an artistic choice??

There is at least one very high profile trombonist who went from sounding unbelievable to flat-out *bad* after they took a deal for being a promoting or endorsed artist. And they didn't get sponsored by Jin Bao.

The fake stencil endorsements are comical though.