Let's talk about your opinion on Chinese musical instruments. China also has excellent musical instrumentsp

[JohnL]

Hootersmre euphonium 8521G/7521G from Oves Company in Tianjin

For those wishing to do some research into the brand, it's spelled Hootersmae. I didn't find much info out there about Hootersmae or Oves.

There's someone on reddit who says that Oves makes instruments for both Packer and Thomann.

[harrisonreed]

Hootersmre sounds like some kind of branded field ration. I've never had a chicken wings MRE before.

Oh god, imagine if it was a shelf stable, bone-in chicken wing MRE. The legend would be up there with the Veggie Omelet.

[Tubaaiyue]

For example, Tuba from Eastman Group in Beijing, Hootersmre euphonium 8521G/7521G from Oves Company in Tianjin, Tuba and trombone from ZO Company in Hebei Province Chinese i

Tubaaiyue, I am glad you listed brands. I have not heard of any of these.

I did take a look at ZO. From what I can tell, they ad copy is part of the problem I mention in my first post. Now, in your defense, and in the defense of the advice of buying a musical instrument, I do need to get out and play them. However, if I try to make a decision solely off of the advertising copy. I can see one tenor trombone is some sort of a small bore. But what kind? Is it a student model? A step-up or intermediate model? Is a professional model like a King 3b or an Edwards? I can't tell.

Maybe that isn't a problem? Maybe I need to play them? I think we take Conn's mass production too much to heart or at least their legacy from 1800s to 1969. And we just assume they are all good and all play good. Maybe we need to approach this how young violin students, their private teachers, and their parents do. They get out and they play fiddles after their teach helps to narrow them done first by play testing them. I think at times we don't do that enough. I digress.

Back on the ZO site, I see a middle horn that is like a Conn 88HO or a Bach 42BO. That f attachment wrap looks like it. And I think that is the point. I think they want the customer to think that, too. It is the middle option. And that takes us to the third choice: it looks like the higher end model. Why? I has a Minnick wrap or an Alessi wrap or it at least looks like that is what they want me as the customer to think. So here, I think I am supposed to think I am getting a custom horn or a boutique horn. 1-2-3. Good-Better-Best. Am I though? I guess the proof is in the playing. Or the proof is also when I take it to a tech and have them look at it, or have them clean it, or have them repair it. Will it still be a good, long term value? I don't know. Maybe it is. Likely it is not. Or even more likely, "it is complicated".

and as for those small manufacturers who are not serious about making instruments, we Chinese people also dislike them. Of course, any industry needs to develop, and from the beginning to maturity, it takes time and continuous learning

I am REALLY glad you mentioned that. Bold for emphasis. I think you need to understand what our (American mainly, but UK, Canadian, and Australian, too) experience is with Chinese horns. Many of us first see them as teachers or as parents whose students or children get these. Often it is Allora, which is a House Brand instrument of a music store chain such as Guitar Center, Music and Arts, or similar. It is Chinese. Often the tone is not good. the responsiveness is not good. The intonation is not good. The construction does not hold up well like a Conn 88H or a Bach 42B. The brass is of low quality and cannot be resoldered or repaired buy a brass technician or local musical instrument repairman. The metal is too poor quality, the solder is poor quality. The solder work is even worse quality. Another chinese horn we see is online, sold as Mendini by Cecilio trombones. These also are not good.

Realize, we tend to see THESE either first or most often here in the States. So this is also what we are typically commenting on. Tubaaiyue, if I understand you correctly, you also have a low opinion of such trombones that are made by people who are not serious about making instruments. If so, then we agree on something.


P.S. For me, I think when the Chinese start making something as good as an American Schilke Greenhoe large bore f attachment or bass double valve, I will take notice.

Tianjin Oves（天津市奥威斯公司）Now it is one of the companies with relatively good musical instrument manufacturing technology in China, and the name of their own high-end product brand is “Hootersmre ”The euphonium 8521G and 7521G models of this brand are popular among many people in China, and I really enjoy playing 7521G. In addition, Bach student grade trombone and JP instruments are all manufactured by Oves. I estimate that foreign friends may not be aware of this, so I would like to share with you here

[Tubaaiyue]

Also, I don't know what happened to Sierman's mouthpiece because no musician friends have talked to me about it. If you know the specific situation, please leave a message and let me know. I really didn't expect their brand to have such a thing

[Tubaaiyue]

.

[Tubaaiyue]

.

[Tubaaiyue]

For example, Tuba from Eastman Group in Beijing, Hootersmre euphonium 8521G/7521G from Oves Company in Tianjin, Tuba and trombone from ZO Company in Hebei Province Chinese i

Tubaaiyue, I am glad you listed brands. I have not heard of any of these.

I did take a look at ZO. From what I can tell, they ad copy is part of the problem I mention in my first post. Now, in your defense, and in the defense of the advice of buying a musical instrument, I do need to get out and play them. However, if I try to make a decision solely off of the advertising copy. I can see one tenor trombone is some sort of a small bore. But what kind? Is it a student model? A step-up or intermediate model? Is a professional model like a King 3b or an Edwards? I can't tell.

Maybe that isn't a problem? Maybe I need to play them? I think we take Conn's mass production too much to heart or at least their legacy from 1800s to 1969. And we just assume they are all good and all play good. Maybe we need to approach this how young violin students, their private teachers, and their parents do. They get out and they play fiddles after their teach helps to narrow them done first by play testing them. I think at times we don't do that enough. I digress.

Back on the ZO site, I see a middle horn that is like a Conn 88HO or a Bach 42BO. That f attachment wrap looks like it. And I think that is the point. I think they want the customer to think that, too. It is the middle option. And that takes us to the third choice: it looks like the higher end model. Why? I has a Minnick wrap or an Alessi wrap or it at least looks like that is what they want me as the customer to think. So here, I think I am supposed to think I am getting a custom horn or a boutique horn. 1-2-3. Good-Better-Best. Am I though? I guess the proof is in the playing. Or the proof is also when I take it to a tech and have them look at it, or have them clean it, or have them repair it. Will it still be a good, long term value? I don't know. Maybe it is. Likely it is not. Or even more likely, "it is complicated".

and as for those small manufacturers who are not serious about making instruments, we Chinese people also dislike them. Of course, any industry needs to develop, and from the beginning to maturity, it takes time and continuous learning

I am REALLY glad you mentioned that. Bold for emphasis. I think you need to understand what our (American mainly, but UK, Canadian, and Australian, too) experience is with Chinese horns. Many of us first see them as teachers or as parents whose students or children get these. Often it is Allora, which is a House Brand instrument of a music store chain such as Guitar Center, Music and Arts, or similar. It is Chinese. Often the tone is not good. the responsiveness is not good. The intonation is not good. The construction does not hold up well like a Conn 88H or a Bach 42B. The brass is of low quality and cannot be resoldered or repaired buy a brass technician or local musical instrument repairman. The metal is too poor quality, the solder is poor quality. The solder work is even worse quality. Another chinese horn we see is online, sold as Mendini by Cecilio trombones. These also are not good.

Realize, we tend to see THESE either first or most often here in the States. So this is also what we are typically commenting on. Tubaaiyue, if I understand you correctly, you also have a low opinion of such trombones that are made by people who are not serious about making instruments. If so, then we agree on something.


P.S. For me, I think when the Chinese start making something as good as an American Schilke Greenhoe large bore f attachment or bass double valve, I will take notice.

Yes, I really dislike those companies that don't make musical instruments seriously, because students in China also face a situation where parents and students don't know which brand produces high-quality musical instruments. Sometimes they will follow the advice of teachers or the school will purchase them uniformly. The school's unified procurement is a very bad thing. As far as I know, some schools recommend students to buy products from companies that don't make musical instruments seriously, and those instruments are really garbage. ZO's "Cobra" tenor trombone is their professional level musical instrument positioning. As far as I know, ZO, Oves, Sierman, Eastman, these brands all have their own factories to produce musical instruments, while others who don't make musical instruments seriously. The company doesn't even have their own factory

[Tubaaiyue]

Additionally, it seems that Thomann's instruments are also manufactured by Oves. I have noticed that Thomann's models are very similar to Oves

[Tubaaiyue]

Hootersmre euphonium 8521G/7521G from Oves Company in Tianjin

For those wishing to do some research into the brand, it's spelled Hootersmae. I didn't find much info out there about Hootersmae or Oves.

There's someone on reddit who says that Oves makes instruments for both Packer and Thomann.

The people on Reddit are right

[Tubaaiyue]

.

[Tubaaiyue]

Hootersmre euphonium 8521G/7521G from Oves Company in Tianjin

For those wishing to do some research into the brand, it's spelled Hootersmae. I didn't find much info out there about Hootersmae or Oves.

There's someone on reddit who says that Oves makes instruments for both Packer and Thomann.

Yes, the correct spelling is Hootersmae. I typed the wrong letter before

[imsevimse]

To put sone wood on the fire

1) What is a copy? All American trombones are, to some extent, copies of trombones from Europe (Germany). If we are being precise, all trombones—regardless of where they are manufactured—are copies of some other trombone.

2) Stencils are not something Chinese. In the past American shops used to import European parts for instruments and assembled them under their own brand names. The parts came from Germany. Sweden did the same.

3) Innovation also takes place when instruments are produced in China. One company I am familiar with that helps with innovation of Chinese instruments is Wessex. These innovations have been developed in collaboration with professional musicians in the West.

4) Thomann has its own brand that it puts on Chinese instruments and provides some form of quality control. This makes it possible to return an instrument purchase. It is not innovation, but it is a good business model for the customer, the seller, and the development of quality

/Tom

[ghmerrill]

To put sone wood on the fire

3) Innovation also takes place when instruments are produced in China. One company I am familiar with that helps with innovation of Chinese instruments is Wessex. These innovations have been developed in collaboration with professional musicians in the West.

Yes -- to some degree -- but when you look into this you discover that the design "developed in collaboration with professional musicians" may not have been well executed in the instruments actually produced and sold. And so sales of those instruments have not met expectations. And some of the Wessex instruments have been short-lived or market failures because of either design or quality.

In full disclosure, I played a Wessex clone of the Besson 981 compensating Eb tuba for over ten years, and was very happy with it -- despite the dreadful and inexcusable threading of the valve caps, sloppy assembly in some places, and several very poorly executed solder joints. Despite that, in terms of playability it was quite wonderful. But we shouldn't get carried away with claims about the quality and success of such production and such "collaboration" in the design/development/manufacturing/sales chain without looking in detail into the history, nature, and success of such products, including some cases of potential infringement of patents on the part of off-shore "designers".

4) Thomann has its own brand that it puts on Chinese instruments and provides some form of quality control. This makes it possible to return an instrument purchase. It is not innovation, but it is a good business model for the customer, the seller, and the development of quality

Ability to return a poorly designed or manufactured instrument is not "some form of quality control", but is instead an attempted substitute for quality control. It is not "a good business model for the customer" or for "the development of quality". It is a direct dodge of quality and any attempt to achieve quality. It's a simple "replace rather than repair" approach based on the low cost of labor and production to the manufacturer.

I'm always skeptical when sellers or customers refer to the seller of Chinese instruments providing "some form of quality control" because in my own case I just haven't seen it. I've bought and used three different Chinese-made instruments from three different sources and have NEVER seen evidence that the instrument was inspected in ANY way prior to sending it out to me or was EVER taken out of the plastic bag it was enclosed in withing the case prior to shipping by the manufacturer. Evidence of this includes the fact that these instruments appear not to have been cleaned in any way after assembly (you MUST clean them when you receive them), the persistent use of absolutely crappy components such as valve felts and valve corks (often affecting alignment), water key corks that MUST be replaced prior to any serious use, and the consistently dreadful quality of valve cap threading. Some of this has improved in recent years, but has not disappeared.

Any company whose basic approach to problems with their product is to use an immediate return/replace approach KNOWS that there is an underlying problem of quality of the product to the degree that it is not economical for the company to support a classic warranty of their products.

I will note that I recently I bought an ACB cornet (a Yamaha clone, of course ) for my grandson -- "used", but essentially in new condition -- and was very impressed with the quality, fit and finish, and all the components and parts. So I do think that there are SOME companies that are willing to go the distance to deliver quality Chinese-made products to their customers. I could see absolutely NO issues with threading, fit, or assembly. The seller had tried it for a short time, liked it, but decided to spend the extra $2,500 on the Yamaha. He sold it to me for $250 (throwing in two mouthpieces, a nice Wick cup mute, and a trumpet stand), which from my point of view was pretty much like stealing it. My grandson is ecstatic about it.

Little of this, of course, has to do with any genuine issues of "innovation" -- except that in some sense it's all a dodge of innovation in favor of market domination. There's nothing wrong with that, but we should recognize it for what it is and not try to see it as anything else.

[tkelley216]

China dominates (or at least has a huge share) of the student horn market. Turns out if you want a low commitment, the price tag matters most. You can always buy yourself/your child a better instrument if they actually stick with band for more than a year...

China is breaking through the intermediate market (the Yamaha Allegro to Conn 88h "I need something for high school and maybe college" range). The Shires Q series, Y-Fort, and the other brand mentioned are giving the more established brands a run for their money. I would probably recommend a Y-Fort over a brand new 88h due to quality of the new Conn-Selmer horns I've tried in the last few years, and the Q series is a great idea from a marketing perspective, especially being able to "upgrade" to the American made parts.

The high-end professional market is actually quite competitive right now between smaller shops and larger established brands. China's reputation for student horn quality gives them a pretty big hurdle to clear, plus they don't have any home-grown brands that can quite compete with the years of design, refinement, and craftsmanship that other brands have in this market, so purchasing established American/European brands actually makes a lot of sense from a business perspective. They can keep the shop financially afloat and use the shops' R&D and manufacturing expertise to refine the Chinese made products and make them more competitive. Quality seems to be slipping for some of these brands as more and more parts are made by less-experienced workers in China, but the extra money spent on marketing has ensured that people keep buying them.

I have plenty of issues with this approach but generally, when there is a lot of deregulation and corporate buy-out/control in any industry (domestic or foreign), you see hyper-competition for a brief period followed by industry consolidation, lapse in QC, and rising prices due to control over market share. Chinese companies are extremely competitive to come out ahead of not only international brands, but each other in hopes that they can outspend/outlast the competition and dominate the market. The Chinese auto-market is currently in the hyper-competition phase where they are producing cars that are outperforming European and American made cars for cheaper, but there are so many Chinese auto-makers that they all have to fiercely fight each other for name recognition and market share while also being super reliant on government subsidies from a country that is currently dealing with some major domestic economic issues. (The government subsidies are a big reason of why they are cheaper than foreign auto brands, but that's another conversation for another forum....)

Personally I would rather support a small business over a corporation even if quality was similar but the corporation had better prices. If you buy an O'Malley, you support Miles and his team. If you buy an M&W, you support Matt Walker. If you buy a Stephens Brass instrument, you support Steve Shires. If you buy from one of the many, many excellent small German shops, you support a small team of people. Even Getzen/Edwards is a relatively small, family owned business that does everything in house and makes excellent instruments from the student to professional line. You can argue that buying a Shires still supports the small team of people making/selling horns in the Massachusetts shop (which it does), but it also supports a company that is aggressively trying to control the market.

Giving $5,000+ to one of those shops for a wonderful instrument keeps them in business, keeps them making/developing great horns, and keeps competition strong. Apologies to all the other small, independent instrument makers I didn't mention.

[imsevimse]

....
Giving $5,000+ to one of those shops for a wonderful instrument keeps them in business, keeps them making/developing great horns, and keeps competition strong. Apologies to all the other small, independent instrument makers I didn't mention.

I agree. I too like the idea of small shops who make the instruments with love. In Sweden it's Lars Gerdt. He is the only maker I know of. His small shop is in Stockholm. He has made a lot of trumpets but not that many trombones. I know he made nine small bore .500 trombones, a couple of 547 and a couple of basses. All TIS. Small bores and basses with Hagmanns are what I think very good instruments. I like to support him and his shop. I've bought two of his small bore horns. They are the ones I use the most. I have many good American and European trombones too. I think I have eight Kanstuls. That was a good brand owned by a family. I liked their horns a lot. Unfortunately gone now. I'm a collector and tromboholic so I'm not a normal person. Instruments and makers interest me more than average. I bought my eight Chinese Thomann trombones primarily to know if they were any good. "Too much talk. Too little experience wherever I searched." I wanted to play them and have my own opinion set.

/Tom

[ghmerrill]

Clearly two classes of purchasers here: (1) A large class who want what they think of as "good" and reliable trombones for (what for them is) an "affordable" price, and (2) A small class for whom cost is little or no object and like supporting small/boutique businesses in order to have custom instruments. Different strokes for different folks. The Chinese are currently not remotely attempting to serve class 2.

[harrisonreed]

Clearly two classes of purchasers here: (1) A large class who want what they think of as "good" and reliable trombones for (what for them is) an "affordable" price, and (2) A small class for whom cost is little or no object and like supporting small/boutique businesses in order to have custom instruments. Different strokes for different folks. The Chinese are currently not remotely attempting to serve class 2.

What about Y-Fort? I haven't tried yet, but it seems like that is an attempt at boutique.

[ghmerrill]

I think that depends on what you mean by "boutique". A number of things we've seen here refer to small one-man shops (or close to that) that have severely limited production. Y-fort appears to have a line of "models" and a production schedule and distribution network: "Mr. Yang Fang, the Chairman of Y-Fort, has been a part of the music instrument industry for a long time. He’s been making instruments for Eastman and other brands since 2004. Since 2019, Y-Fort has been crafting top-notch instruments in a new, highly automated factory." (via Swisstbone) That doesn't sound very boutique-y. It sounds like quality design/development/production. Edwards (and Getzen/Edwards) has, in part, a boutique operation, but also a full-blown production operation. So I guess there's a mixing in several cases of the two classes I mentioned.

[SwissTbone]

What about Y-Fort? I haven't tried yet, but it seems like that is an attempt at boutique.

I have never been to their factory but I don't think they are small like the boutique shops mentioned beforehand. But they still manage to put out good quality trombones. My 763GL holds up just as well if not better than any higher regarded brand.

[eubean]

To make this a bit more confusing, many Chinese brands are hard to find outside of China, eg Jinyin.
When I was recently in China, a shopkeeper said that many design partnerships between Chinese domestic and foreign companies (not necessarily Eastman) were being marketed domestically to students, and that certain companies, such as Jinyin, had taken this knowledge to be able to design independently.
So, maybe the poor quality instruments are not representative of Chinese manufacturing, and many decent instruments are staying in China.

[dukesboneman]

I can remember when No one would touch a Yamaha horn. They obviously fixed that perception.
I too have been leary of Chinese Horns until...
I played a large ensemble gig an the Tuba player had a horn who`s configuration was not familiar to me.
It was a Mack Brass CC Tuba. He said the quality was fantastic and the horns were solid He owned 2 Mack Brass CC tubas.
I was playing Euphonium in a high end Wind Ensemble , and the other Euphonium player had a new horn.
He sounded great on it and said he loved the horn , one of the best he`s ever played. Mack Brass again.
I was not happy with the Tuba I was playing at the time and looked into the Mack Brass brand.
I was intrigued by their TU422L 3/4 BBb tuba.
Called them and Joy and Tom could not have been nicer and helpful. Fantastic customer service.
So I sold the Malhillion BBb I had and bought the Mack Brass horn.
I couldn`t be happier . It`s a fantastic instrument and the price was incredible. Brand new tuba for under $3,000
I`m sold.

[officermayo]

I recently purchased a PB4501 (Marin clone) from Wessex and I must say I'm impressed with every aspect of the horn. Fit and finish is flawless and it plays exactly like my Martin TR4501. I was surprised by how nice the case is too.

[Finetales]

To make this a bit more confusing, many Chinese brands are hard to find outside of China, eg Jinyin.

You can find Jinyin instruments sold new on eBay from various sellers. I have a Jinyin Eb/D trumpet (bought used) which is a great instrument.

I've owned many Chinese brass instruments and played many more. Have I played bad ones? Sure. But all the ones I own (everything from a Selman C trumpet to my Shires Q contra) are great instruments that never let me down live or in the studios. I've also tried many more that I would love to own, especially the ZO tubas.

I could write a lot more, but suffice it to say that I have a lot of experience using Chinese brass instruments professionally, and writing them off entirely (or even mostly) is very outdated, to put it charitably.

[Doubler]

I'm very late to this discussion. FWIW - My basic concerns are the employee motivation in the contrasting political/business environments of Taiwan and Communist China, and to what degree patent infringement/counterfeit manufacture play a part in the global market.

Taiwan of course follows a capitalist model, whereas I understand that Communist China incorporates a capitalist/state controlled hybrid in which capitalist principles are incorporated into business operation in order to fund successful ventures. Are employees restricted to being allowed to participate on the basis of social credits that exclude those who aren't considered CCP supporters? Are some workers required to participate without benefits due to their social/political/ethnic status?

Do some of the companies manufacturing musical instruments use 3D scanning to precisely duplicate patented/trademark designs for the purpose of displacing sales rightfully and ethically belonging to the originators of the designs? When is a clone a counterfeit? Other than the brand labeling, what's the difference?

[Posaunus]

• A. Do some of the companies manufacturing musical instruments use 3D scanning to precisely duplicate patented/trademark designs for the purpose of displacing sales rightfully and ethically belonging to the originators of the designs?

• B. When is a clone a counterfeit? Other than the brand labeling, what's the difference?

B. A copy (or "clone") is only a counterfeit if is mislabeled with an intent to defraud.
A trombone made in China and labeled "M&W" would be a counterfeit.
A Bach-like trombone made by Yamaha in Japan and labeled "Yamaha" is simply a perfectly legitimate copy.

A. I’m not sure that most musical instrument “designs” are usefully protected by patents (though there are some prominent exceptions). Of course certain features (e.g., valve configurations) may be protected by patents, but not any dimensions, such as those that could be determined by 3-D scanning. Protection is narrowly limited to a patent’s claims – drawings and descriptions are not “protected.” There are “Design Patents” (that protect appearance and shape) but I doubt that these have often been used for musical instruments.

Note also that patent protection is essentially a country-by-country matter. You must file for, and be granted, a patent for each country (or region) where you want protection. And of course not all countries are rigorous in enforcement.

The alternative to patent protection is “trade secrets” – where the manufacturer does publicly not share his “know-how.” If these secrets are not divulged, protection can be long-lasting, as contrasted to a patent (which is intended to teach as well as protect, but which typically lasts only 20 years; after that the invention enters the public domain). However, trade secrets are not enforceable against independent discovery or reverse engineering. Trade secrets work better for processes and manufacturing methods that are not visible in the final product.

So unless a reverse-engineered “clone” instrument contains elements that violate the specific claims of a patent, or is misbranded, it does NOT constitute an infringement or ethical violation. Copying, and improving upon, existing products is a long-standing practice that generally leads to improved products, as well as perhaps lower costs or wider availability. [Think of the widespread practice of copying mouthpiece profiles, generally admired and appreciated by TromboneChat members. Is Greg Black’s 6½AL a “stolen” design from Vincent Bach (who apparently long ago copied it from someone else)]?

In a free market, the products that are successful are those that provide better quality and performance than their competitors, at a reasonable price. I don’t have any cloned items in my collection of trombone paraphernalia, but I wouldn’t reject one off-hand (unless it was made in violation of legal or ethical restrictions / counterfeit).

[Finetales]

In the guitar world, where clones are WAY more prevalent than in brass instruments, there is an interesting legal case brewing, as Fender has decided to go after some of the companies producing guitars like theirs. Their latest effort is Yamaha, which is a weird choice because their guitars really are significantly different, whereas other makers just make exact copies of Stratocasters for example. It seems to me (as someone who doesn't play guitar) that the entire electric guitar industry is essentially built on everyone making Strats and Les Pauls. Yet Fender is still doing great and people still revere their guitars.

This legal attack by Fender (after decades of not caring) is an odd choice and is TANKING their reputation. But more importantly, the result of the case against Yamaha will set an important precedent for this kind of thing, especially when the instrument in question really isn't a clone.

[Matt K]

In a free market, the products that are successful are those that provide better quality and performance than their competitors, at a reasonable price. I don’t have any cloned items in my collection of trombone paraphernalia, but I wouldn’t reject one off-hand (unless it was made in violation of legal or ethical restrictions / counterfeit).

"Reasonable" there is definitely doing a lot of lifting. It seems that there's more of a bifurcation, at least, where price sensitivity is not totally relevant for some, quality is not relevant for others (esp. for parents buying for their 5th graders off Amazon), and yet others who want quality but are price sensitive. Some parents wouldn't buy an Edwards/Shires/Rath/M&W if it was $1k new, because they can get one for $150 off Amazon. Thein retailed for thousands above American manufacturers even before the tariffs kicked in last year, yet still sell! Obviously, then there are parts of the market for Q, JP Rath/Rath RXXX series, Yamaha 800, etc. that are varying levels of good quality at varying levels of cheaper price points.

[hyperbolica]

There are two niches where I tend to buy Chinese: one is to get features that are kind of rare or discontinued. Examples would be the Wessex Festivo euphonium (4v front inline compensating), or a copy of something discontinued, like the Urbie Green copy by Wessex. The other niche is just something that's interesting, but not my main axe, example would be the Mack 420 tuba - a Yamaha ybb 621 copy.

I can't see myself buying a Chinese horn as a main axe. Right now 88h, Getzen 3508 and King Duo Gravis hold those spots.

I think Wessex had a good thing going while their prices were low, with the more popular niche horns that weren't made any more (Martin Urbie Green), or kind of weird stuff that people wanted but couldn't just buy (like sackbuts). Their current pricing kind of puts them out of reach as just curiosities.

We keep hearing about YFort. Maybe some day they'll be a classic, but I'm not replacing my 88h any time soon.

Of course stealing the market with low prices and then once all the American manufacturers are dead (or owned by the party) jacking up prices is a sleazy thing to do. You can't really compare Chinese manufacturers to free market stuff. The currency is manipulated to keep exports cheap, all enterprise is communist party owned, and they don't follow any intellectual property rules.

[LeTromboniste]

We keep hearing about YFort. Maybe some day they'll be a classic, but I'm not replacing my 88h any time soon.

I think Tiffany basically replaced her Elkhart 88H with her Y-Fort. They really are that good. Probably nobody who's looking at buying a new Shires or a Thein or any premium boutique horn will consider a Y-Fort, but they're good enough to compete with any horn you'd buy second-hand for the same price (around $2K).

[Doubler]

• A. Do some of the companies manufacturing musical instruments use 3D scanning to precisely duplicate patented/trademark designs for the purpose of displacing sales rightfully and ethically belonging to the originators of the designs?

• B. When is a clone a counterfeit? Other than the brand labeling, what's the difference?

B. A copy (or "clone") is only a counterfeit if is mislabeled with an intent to defraud.
A trombone made in China and labeled "M&W" would be a counterfeit.
A Bach-like trombone made by Yamaha in Japan and labeled "Yamaha" is simply a perfectly legitimate copy.

A. I’m not sure that most musical instrument “designs” are usefully protected by patents (though there are some prominent exceptions). Of course certain features (e.g., valve configurations) may be protected by patents, but not any dimensions, such as those that could be determined by 3-D scanning. Protection is narrowly limited to a patent’s claims – drawings and descriptions are not “protected.” There are “Design Patents” (that protect appearance and shape) but I doubt that these have often been used for musical instruments.

Note also that patent protection is essentially a country-by-country matter. You must file for, and be granted, a patent for each country (or region) where you want protection. And of course not all countries are rigorous in enforcement.

The alternative to patent protection is “trade secrets” – where the manufacturer does publicly not share his “know-how.” If these secrets are not divulged, protection can be long-lasting, as contrasted to a patent (which is intended to teach as well as protect, but which typically lasts only 20 years; after that the invention enters the public domain). However, trade secrets are not enforceable against independent discovery or reverse engineering. Trade secrets work better for processes and manufacturing methods that are not visible in the final product.

So unless a reverse-engineered “clone” instrument contains elements that violate the specific claims of a patent, or is misbranded, it does NOT constitute an infringement or ethical violation. Copying, and improving upon, existing products is a long-standing practice that generally leads to improved products, as well as perhaps lower costs or wider availability. [Think of the widespread practice of copying mouthpiece profiles, generally admired and appreciated by TromboneChat members. Is Greg Black’s 6½AL a “stolen” design from Vincent Bach (who apparently long ago copied it from someone else)]?

In a free market, the products that are successful are those that provide better quality and performance than their competitors, at a reasonable price. I don’t have any cloned items in my collection of trombone paraphernalia, but I wouldn’t reject one off-hand (unless it was made in violation of legal or ethical restrictions / counterfeit).

Excellent, informed post! Thank you!