Posts made by Trumpetb

This is a very interesting piece that speaks of the Wagner tuba, the Engelbert Schmid Wagner tuba and the horn mouthpiece.

I note that the author mentions that the horn mouthpiece is not a good fit in the Wagner tuba, this is an extract of his piece

One thing that I realized very quickly was that the Houghton H3 mouthpiece I was currently using for my daily horn playing wasn’t ideal. The shank wasn’t a great fit for the tuba’s European receiver, and I felt that the small bore of the H3 was a bit confining. After trial and (lots of) error, I settled on an old Giardinelli B8 two-piece cup with an H1 rim. This is probably the largest mouthpiece that I’ve ever played professionally, and I couldn’t imagine it working for me on horn, but it is somehow pure magic on the Wagner tuba.

His conclusion is that the Engelbert Schmid Wagner tuba carries some differences to the Horn but there are many similarities, and they appear to be are a natural instrument for Horn players to double on.

This is the full article. It makes good reading.

https://houghtonhorns.com/blogs/articles/taming-the-beast-my-wagner-tuba-debut?srsltid=AfmBOooApdEMLJNDvAsfrhhQZfkNDJco_odKrx7F_2C993xHQlL0umqj

I will stick my neck out here

I have seen many Tenor horns and they have a conventional shape

A Wagner tuba is not a tuba it is essentially a Tenor horn

The other Tenor horn instrument that has the same timbre and fills the same position in an orchestra as the Tenor horn is the Alto horn.

Both are pitched the same and have a similar appearance.

The Wagner tuba is a quite different instrument in appearance to either Tenor horn or Alto horn.

While both tenor horn and alto horn have a traditional appearance being roughly rectangular with the valves at one end and the bell is straight on both

The Wagner horn is an oddity, It is roughly elliptical in shape and the valves are set on the side of the instrument, has a bent bell tube and has the timbre and pitch of both Tenor and Alto horns.

Looking at this image the mouthpipe is on the other side of the bell tube from most Wagner tubas

I have found one image of a Wagner tuba with the mouthpipe similarly placed to this one.

It is named the Engelbert Schmid Wagner Tuba.

It appears to be then a sub class of Wagner tuba, and I believe barliman is right it is a rotary valve Tenor horn, but I also believe it is a Wagner tuba of the class Engelbert Schmid Wagner tuba as administrator has suggested.

This is the kind of problem we encounter when creating an instrument that is a sub set of a sub class of a small group of instruments. The resulting instrument does not fit easily into any existing types.

I believe nobody who has posted is wrong we just have a very unusual and very confusing instrument here.

I am sorry but I have to speak up

I know that some players use WD40 as a lubricant but WD 40 is not a lubricant. In fact it is a complex mix of chemicals some of which are dangerous to health

The contents of WD40 read like a recipe from a chemists lab

These are a list of the published ingredients of WD40 and I hope that players will abandon it as a lubricant

Hydrotreated heavy naphtha: 50–60% of WD-40
Petroleum base oils: Less than 25% of WD-40
Hydrodesulfurized heavy naphtha: Less than 10% of WD-40, and contains xylene, 1,2,4-trimethyl benzene, and 1,3,5-trimethyl benzene
Mineral oil Similar to baby oil and Vaseline.
Alkanes
Decane, which helps WD-40 remain a liquid at cold temperatures
Nonane, which is water repellent
Tridecane and undecane, which are also found in stink bug scent glands
Tetradecane, another alkane
Carbon dioxide
Propels the WD-40 out of the can
Other ingredients in WD-40 may include:
Dimethyl naphthalene, a solvent
Cyclohexane, which gives WD-40 a high melting point
Solvent naphtha, petroleum, light aliphatic
Calcium sulfonate
Propane

Dimethyl napthalene is known to be dangerous

WD40 contains solvents whose primary role is to remove oils.

The WD in WD40 is there because WD40 was developed as a water remover. It displaces water.

That is why when it was first introduced it was used to displace moisture from electrical parts such as automotive ignition cables and distributors.

It does contain some 25% petroleum distillates but the rest are questionable and some are dangerous.

I recommend that anyone using it abandons it immediately.

There are wonderful alternate lubricants that are available.

Even raw paraffin is more healthy than this

This is what the industry says about WD40:-

WD-40 can be harmful to health if used incorrectly or for long periods of time. It can irritate the eyes, skin, and respiratory system.
Inhalation
Can cause dizziness, headaches, nausea, and upper respiratory irritation
High concentrations can cause central nervous system effects
Prolonged exposure to fumes can cause respiratory issues
Skin contact
Can cause drying of skin and/or irritation
Prolonged and/or repeated contact may produce mild irritation and defatting with possible dermatitis
Eye contact
May cause irritation, tearing, and redness

Also:-

DANGER! Extremely Flammable Aerosol. Contains gas under pressure; may explode if heated. May be fatal if swallowed and enters airways.

In short the recommendation is to keep it away from eyes keep it away from skin do not swallow it do not breathe the fumes.

It is a dangerous product

I make no excuses for calling out this dangerous product.

If the shank fits your cornets then it is more than likely a cornet mouthpiece.

There are several considerations with cornet mouthpieces.

There are several different tapers on cornets. The Bach taper is pretty standard today but was not standard back in the day.

Bach cornet pieces have more c shaped bowls very much like their trumpet mouthpiece bowl shapes

I have a Bach cornet mouthpiece and the rim measures 16.35 mm whereas the cup depth measures 10.89 mm.
I would class this as a shallow mouthpiece.

For example I have a Wick cornet mouthpiece that measures 17mm rim width and 18.37mm cup depth. I would call this a deep mouthpiece.

A rule of thumb is that modern pieces have bowls shallower than the rim width and the ancient pieces have bowls deeper than the rim width.

This is not a rigid rule many manufacturers make pieces that break this rule of thumb.

The Wick often follows ancient cornet mouthpiece shapes with very deep cup almost vee shaped whereas some Wicks have shallower cups than their rim.

I have an original cornet mouthpiece from the 19th century and that cup shape is very similar to the Wick cup shape measuring 15.9mm rim width and 17.46 cup depth.

This confirms the Denis Wick documentation that claims the Wick cornet mouthpieces originally followed early cornet mouthpiece designs.

It sounds very much like your mouthpiece is an older design than is the current trend. I cannot say for sure without seeing it.

I have a Yamaha 16E cornet mouthpiece and a Yamaha 11E4 cornet mouthpiece both of these represent well modern cornet mouthpieces and they fall fairly close to the modern Bach cornet mouthpiece design. both use the Bach taper.

One characteristic of ancient mouthpiece designs is the shape of the shoulder at the base of the cup where it enters the backbore.

If it is rounded the mouthpiece is probably a later design, if the shoulder is sharp then it is a more ancient design and could be expected to have a deep cup shape. This does not always hold true.

In short I would assume your piece to be simply a much older design of mouthpiece than we are used to seeing today.

Trying to get the root cause of this problem will be almost impossible given that
1 different valves have different clearances in the valve block
2 the valves wear through their life and the clearance changes
3 the valve surfaces lose their surface pits which normally hold oil in a stable film as they wear and become polished
4 different players use different oils with different viscosities
5 different players use varying types of oils with different additives
6 different players use varying amounts of oil some very low and some very large
7 different platers use different pressures and volumes of air as they play
8 different instruments have different resistances
8 the position of the nodes and antinodes changes as different pitches are played and this affects the pressure at the valve and this can lead to increased oil migration up or down the valve
10 changes in the pressure exerted by the player as the dynamics change during play changes the way the oil on the valves migrates during play
11 the temperature and air pressure change each day and this changes the behavior of the oil
12 the amount of condensation in the instrument varies according to the temperature of the instrument
13 the ability and efficiency of the player dramatically changes the internal pressures and volume of air

So many variables affect how the oil sits in the instrument and how it behaves that each variable would have to be tested independently for a meaningful result to be obtained.

They all compound together and we would have to test all combinations of variables.

To be very simplistic, the number of tests that would have to conducted to test all combinations and reach a conclusion could be as many as 12x11x10x9x8x7x6x5x4x3.

That adds up to 239,500,800 tests.

On the other hand we could simply chuck another felt in for a dollar, save a crapload of time, make some great music instead, and stop worrying about it.

I have faced this many times.

Felts can be washed with no ill effects.

Felt is after all saturated with water as part of the manufacturing process so how can water damage it.

One of the processes for making felt is even named wet felting. I see no issues with getting felt wet. Other processes in felt making use lots of steam.

There are many scare stories about wetting felt but I have washed felts many times and it appears now to be simply scare tactics.

Some people even claim that washing a car damages the paint.

My method of dealing with oily felts is this.

Remove the felt, press the felt between two pieces of absorbent material to remove most of the oil.

Then saturate the felt with soft soap or washing up liquid and massage it well in. This removes the oil.

Now saturate the felt in plenty of water to remove the soft soap.

Then when all the soft soap is removed by the water and the felt is clean, gently press the felt between layers of absorbent material like kitchen towel to dry it. You may have to do this several times to remove all the water.

Then refit the felt and it can air dry while in place, or leave it to air dry on a bench if it is fitted internally.

I have done this many times and it has no ill effects on the felt.

Badly compressed felt often regains its thickness by this means.

The felt may change thickness after this, so you may have to revisit the alignment although I have never had to myself.

Like all things in instruments this procedure must be carried out with care.

I dont wish to be petulant but clearly my opinion is not wanted so this will be my last post on this matter.

Well I reject your contention that I am naive. I have worked in business at the very highest level no naivete is not one of my failings.

You claim there are laws to protect the end consumer and that is correct in the west. Laws governing correct practice of manufacturers have been gained on the backs of a great many victimised customers.

In the far east and in China in particular there are no such laws. The Chinese government has been busy creating such laws in recent years following malpractice in Chinese industry.

There is an obligation in business to operate in a correct manner, however many businesses disregard customers best interests and are only brought under control by government legislation. This cannot be denied.

Western manufacturers are bound by western governance and legislation. Indian companies Chinese companies, Malaysian companies, Korean companies, Vietnamese companies, are not bound by USA codes of practice and legislation.

They operate under local laws existing in their locale.

I agreed with you and you claim that in doing so I derailed the thread.

You disagreed with me and then took issue with my supporting my own opinion in the thread in which it was questioned. Is this an attempt to shut down any opinion other than your own.

By all means disagree with me but I ask you to allow me to disagree with you.

Your expertise is music, my expertise is global manufacturing, global sales and business processes.

I have no issue with you stating your position I would ask the same of you.

I think it is misleading to say that Chinese and Indian manufacturers have their manufacturing processes under control.

Some manufacturers do have their processes under control, however many do not.

I have worked with a manufacturer in china who opened a factory with hopes of producing quality products at lower cost than in the west and therefore offering the very best, high quality products at low price.

Unfortunately after they built a factory and started producing product, a new Chinese startup copied their products and then undercut the original Chinese manufacturer selling substandard copies of those products and then they drove the good Chinese manufacturer out of business.

I would agree that they had their processes under control so you would be right, however they were driven out of business by a company who did not have their processes under control.

It is still the wild west out there.

It cannot be said that Chinese manufacturers are operating correctly when only a few are and many are not.

Having worked in manufacturing, I would suggest allowing an importer to force the manufacturer to begin making inferior products simply to win a contract makes that manufacturer a farce.

There must be standards in manufacturing or what is the point.

Would it be correct for an importer of Chinese cars to cut corners on things like suspension and brakes to achieve sales at low cost and the result is cars that kill their occupants.

We learned this in the west with the ford Pinto. Ford decided it was too expensive to make the Pinto safe when hit from the rear. So they just made the cheaper product.

A Chinese company who is willing to make instruments down to any price whatever that might be is not a company that should remain in business.

What response would Bach make to a music shop who demanded that Bach produce Strads for 200 dollars each because the customer only wants to pay 500 dollars for the instrument.

That is not how manufacturing works. The customer does not dictate the price.

As for taking a position that we should not discuss the junk available for sale to the public as viable trumpets simply because we in trumpetboards know better is not going to help anyone looking to buy an instrument.

I will quote the recent Bach Stradivarius trumpet offered by a Chinese manufacturer. The price was I believe 280 dollars. It was not an original Bach it was counterfeit. The materials were poor the intonation was bad.

It did however look great. Unfortunately many parents of would be musicians were taken in, and techs refused to work on these instruments.

I do not think it is wise to pretend that the junk does not exist, we need to be better than this, we need to be a shining light for truth and integrity.

If we do not tell visitors to the site where the traps are in buying instruments, we might unwittingly condemn them to falling into them.

I agree almost completely with ROWUKs post, one area I slightly disagree with and this is only a slight disagreement is the contention that instruments labeled "student" can be relied upon to be student instruments.

The reason for this belief is due to much experience of a variety of instruments and knowledge of the companies that made them and why they determined to call some instruments student others intermediate and yet others advanced or professional.

This was due more to price point determination and seeking to increase profits than any real assessment of quality.

Many decades ago these classifications of student intermediate and professional simply did not exist.

There were the highest quality instruments suitable for orchestral use, lower quality instruments suitable for dance and marching band use and cheap instruments suitable for beginners so those with almost no money could afford to try the hobby.

Olds for example who were known for producing exclusively high quality instruments seen in the industry as concert and professional standard took the business decision to manufacture cheap instruments intending to capture the very large collegiate and student market by offering professional quality instruments at prices students could afford.

On the other hand many manufacturers in India and in China, took the decision to market their products no matter how bad they were as professional instruments.

I am not saying that all Chinese or Indian instruments are bad, I have owned and gigged a cheap Chinese instrument and it was great.

I am saying that some manufacturers make rubbish and market it as professional quality.

In my opinion as an armchair expert there are many "student" instruments from the likes of Olds Buescher Reynolds Conn and many other traditional manufacturers in the USA and Europe, that comprehensively out perform the "professional" instruments of the worst manufacturers offering their instruments today.

I totally agree with ROWUK that an instrument correctly designed for a student is a great instrument for a student and meets their needs entirely.

However I contend that the water has been so muddied by unscrupulous manufacturers in the far east that nothing in an instruments description can be trusted.

So what is a student to do if they want a good instrument.

1 Ask your teacher what a good instrument to buy is for your standard of play.

2 Ask a qualified and experienced trumpet player which instrument to buy.

3 Ask a good tech which instrument to consider.

There is only one make that I have advised students to buy and that is Yamaha. The quality control and the level of investment that this company demonstrates means all of their lineup are great instruments and any player can progress to the highest level using only their products.

So I say beware of the labels "student" "intermediate" and "professional", I simply dont trust them.

In my opinion this is the most important lesson, we cannot judge an instrument by the label others place upon it.

Thankfully there are many hundreds of wonderful instruments out there that are of exceptional quality and capable of making the most beautiful music and can be had for peanuts.

The quality of the music we make on an instrument is a combination of three things, good technique, good mouthpiece choice, and good instrument choice.

Get the balance of these three right and you will make beautiful music for a lifetime.

I wish you well in your search for a replacement.

Its a Brevette

Its an F Besson meaning Fontaine Besson

The serial appears to be a five digit and it appears to read 870??

It has the appearance of pre-war Bessons so the serial number would suggest it falls beyond 1930 possibly 1935, anything closer would be guesswork

Apologies I cannot be more accurate

The Paris bessons were excellent so I would suggest this too is excellent.

I note you are using a Wick mouthpiece, I do like the Wicks on old instruments I would recommend however having a look at the Yamaha cornet pieces as well.

The 11E4 is a fine piece and good alternate to the smaller Wick pieces. The 16E is a good alternate to the larger Wick pieces.

I am not suggesting you dump the Wick but having both Wick and Yamaha pieces in the armoury gives greater possibilities in finding exactly the right sound you are looking for.

@J-Jericho My mistake I thought the instrument came to you from a prior user.

Non the less your maintenance regime is excellent and proved its worth.

I do understand that breaking in a new horn can be problematic.

I do see however a great similarity with both of our methods of breaking in a problematic horn.

The method is always the same. Clean the valves clean the valve block lubricate the valves. Keep it clean keep it well lubricated.

I feel there is a need to explain a seeming issue between the table shown by Dr GO and my personal anecdotal results, and in so doing close off a loose end in the story of valve oils.

It would appear that either the table is wrong or I am wrong. How can it be possible that the test results of Blue Juice indicate that it will evaporate to 8% of its volume in 120 hours and yet no such rapid evaporation is detected in 5808 hours when it sits in an instrument that is open to the air.

Both surely cannot be right.

I would argue that in fact both can be correct, and this is due to a combination of the properties of oil and the circumstances in which it is used.

We need to understand something called vapor pressure for part of the answer to this conundrum.

Different volatile liquids such as gasoline or paraffin evaporate at different rates. The higher the rate of evaporation the more volatile the liquid is and the higher the vapor pressure is.

A heavy oil will have low vapor pressure and a light oil will have a high vapor pressure.

This explains why there are different results for evaporation rates of different oils in the table.

Looking at the table again, Mineral Spirits have a higher vapor pressure than Clark Terry. This is shown by the Clark Terry taking longer to evaporate than Mineral Spirits.

I am confident that the entries for all the products are probably correct where the products are left to evaporate freely in the open air.

I have however seen valve oils last for many years in their bottles with no reduction in volume if the bottle is unopened.

The air space above the oil quickly becomes saturated by the evaporates and no more evaporation can happen until the bottle is opened.

In an instrument the oil sitting on valves in the valve block is not open to the air. It sits in effectively a sealed chamber between valve and valve block in a similar manner to oil in a sealed bottle. This slows the evaporation of the oil to almost nothing and explains why valves lubricated with oil are still operative many months or even years later.

I hope this helps clarify what is happening in the valve block of an instrument in storage and resolves an otherwise apparent illogical disparity.

An excellent anecdote J. Jericho allow me to attempt to explain this behavior and what happened.

First of all, all surfaces contain defects, even polished glass contain micro scratches, often only revealed under a scanning electron microscope.

The micro scratches hold oil and help the oil cling to the surface. Many manufacturers including car engine manufacturers and musical instrument manufacturers score the metal surfaces of pistons or the piston chambers to encourage oil to stick to the surface of the piston.

Car manufacturers score the piston bores, trumpet manufacturers score the valves.

Now, when an instrument is not correctly maintained residues of old dirt, old green sludge from lack of maintenance, and old surface scrapings from lack of lubrication in the past, become embedded in the surfaces of the valves and the micro scratches present on them.

These residues become hardened over time and build up.

When the instrument came to you it was clearly affected by this problem.

These hardened residues can be removed by a competent tech either by solvent or by ultrasonic cleaning.

Valve oil often contains solvent additives that are intended to prevent sludge build up. They can however soften existing sludges built up in the past and I think this is what was happening here.

Your excellent cleaning regime plus adding copious amounts of fresh oil allowed the solvents in the oil to attack the built up and hardened sludge sitting in the micro scratches on the surfaces of the piston valves and the surfaces of the chambers they run in.

Your anecdote shows the high quality of your maintenance regime and also illustrates the invisible harm that poor maintenance brings to all instruments.

I hope other players can learn from your experience and also perhaps they might learn your excellent approach to maintenance

Thank you for your very valuable anecdote and explanation.

@Dr-GO That table is very interesting.

I take the view that while the contents of this table confirms my earlier words that light fractions on cheap oils evaporate first leaving heavier fractions behind which can then result in the valves becoming sluggish, I do not see this happening in my own experience.

For example

I have been using blue juice exclusively for some years.

The table suggests that for blue juice, after 120 hours only 8% will remain. Presumably if the table were true, at 120 hours after oiling, the valves will have become sluggish and need re-oiling or cleaning and re-oiling.

All my instruments apart from my current hack have been packed away into storage with blue juice on the valves. So by now presumably they all should be un-useable.

I have just taken 3 instruments out of storage and tested them:-
a selmer packed away in June of last year that is 8 months or 5808 hours ago
a besson packed away in august last year that is 6 months or 4356 hours ago
a different besson packed away a week ago that is 168 hours ago.

If the contents of this table were correct and reliable then none of these instruments should be playable by now, the blue juice on the valves should be either dry or acting like some kind of gum.

Instead all of the instruments tested had lightning fast valves, the oil is fresh and they are all very playable.

I would gig them immediately after being lifted out of storage with no need for any preparation or maintenance. I would give them a few drops of oil probably.

I have never seen any problems with valves and I have used several kinds of valve oils.

I have even used a white oil on valves and was surprised when I took an instrument out of storage where it had remained oiled and untouched for 3 years, that is 52560 hours.

The instrument was undisturbed in all that time.

If this table were correct the valves should have been either gummed up solid or grinding or stuck.

Instead the valves were swift and sweet as though oiled the day before, the oil was still fresh on the valves and working perfectly.

I have argued many times with players who insist that old instruments are unplayable the valves on them are always sluggish or sticky.

I have never had any such problems.

If the old instruments were really so bad why did Louis, Dizzy, Doc, and the rest never complain about them.

If I were uncharitable I might ask, what are modern players doing to make their instruments so unplayable.

I will give a quick rundown on a little of what I know about oils.

Perhaps by this means I can address this particular question of the wisdom of oiling before rather than during or after playing.

There are many kinds of oil, if we ignore vegetable oils found in cooking and drying oils found in timber preservation or artwork, we have several kinds of oil that fall under the umbrella of mineral oils.

The action of refining and the fractional distillation of mineral oils typically derived from crude oil, produces paraffins, olefins and white oils.

Olefins are in fact not themselves mineral oils but they are found in mineral oils.

All of these are hydrocarbons with various and different chemical bonds.

The refining of crude oil results in paraffins and white oils, both of which are suitable as a lubricant of an appropriate viscosity for use in lubricating brass instrument valves.

The problem is many manufacturers blend different oils to arrive at the precise viscosity they desire in their product. They also add various additives that control things like deterioration over time and corrosion.

What this means is a valve oil will probably contain additives and will consist of a mix or blend of light oils that each have different properties.

If these various additives and additional oils are not completely miscible (mixable) they can over a short period of time separate when standing.

Additionally the different light oils in the mix will very probably evaporate at different rates.

The result of this is leaving oil in an instrument over time such as for a day or two or longer may result in the mix breaking down and the properties of the mix changing.

The lightest fractions evaporate first and this typically means that over time the oil may become thicker and make the valves sluggish.

The purest oils, like double and triple refined white oils, or the most modern oils such as ultra pure, or the modern synthetic oils such as the excellent Yamaha oil, do not suffer from these issues.

In short the more you pay the better the product.

My opinion is synthetic oils such as the Yamaha product can be safely left in the instrument with an expectation that they will be unchanged and fit for purpose when you next come to play.

Changing to a different oil may hold issues when making a change. As a rule of thumb, the more expensive and the more pure the oil the better.

My own personal choice is blue juice. I consider it a good balance between performance and price. I have never had any issues with leaving blue juice on the valves for many days.

When it comes to choice of viscosity, the tighter the valves the thinner the oil should be. Yamaha valves are among the tightest in production and the Yamaha oil is a thin oil and is therefore the correct choice for these instruments.

So where we are is this, for most oils it is wiser to oil immediately before playing, whereas with the most modern synthetic oils such as the Yamaha oil, it will make no difference to the playability of the instrument if instead you oil at the end of playing.

Hi Anthony,

Congratulations on purchasing a great instrument from a great manufacturer.

In my experience pistons do not accumulate any debris.

All of the air that enters the instrument comes from the mouth of the player.

Ever since I started brushing my teeth every single time before I play an instrument I have had no trouble at all with debris in the instrument.

As for oiling. I oil before playing and during playing, and I dont care how much oil I waste doing it.

Yes I am wasteful and over oil. I must be wasting as much as 20 dollars a year on oil.

Of course I could reduce the amount of oil I use, and if I do that I would probably have to spend 600 dollars every few years on repairing valves I have wrecked through under oiling.

And after the valves wear out because I am being a scrooge or a skinflint on the minimal cost of oil then the instrument that I love will start playing very badly with leaky valves.

I was playing today on an instrument that is 101 years old and it still has the original copper valves that were fitted to it in 1924 and they still work perfectly. There is a good chance that over oiling protects valves.

The question is this, is it worth destroying a beautiful instrument to save a couple of pennies on oil.

I urge you to keep your instrument in perfect working order by using plenty of oil, and then you have a good chance of sounding like a monster player.

There may be cause for concern.

Tenite was a regenerated cellulosic plastic.

It was made by the Eastman chemical company which was a part of Eastman Kodak until Eastman and Kodak separated in 1994.

Tenite cellulosic plastic was a plasticised cellulosic resin similar to celluloid which was the prime material that film stock was made from, and I believe this is the connection to Kodak.

Cellulose plastic used in the film industry was found to deteriorate and then it became a fire risk and a number of old movies burst into flames prompting the industry to find an alternate product.

The alternate product they found was acetate or polyester.

There is no suggestion that Tenite is a fire risk. The original celluloid film stock was in fact nitro cellulose based and the nitro part of the name suggest a link with nitro glycerine which also carries an element of risk.

There is no nitro element or association with Tenite it being a product based upon regenerated cellulose fibres.

Other materials made from regenerated cellulose fibres include Cotton, Flax, Lyocell, Viscose, and Rayon.

None of these products cause any concern or significant risk of fire.

However, The internet reveals this
"Not to be mistaken for mold, the powder from Tenite decay is considered hazardous and proper gear such as nitrile gloves are recommended for handling".

Recommending that nitrile gloves be used for handling Tenite is worrying to me.

I suspect that it may be wise to encapsulate the instrument in a sealant of some kind to limit its decay and decomposition, and limit any possible exposure to the products of that decay.

I am thinking of the application of a clear acrylic laquer and then storage behind glass.

I have used clear acrylic laquer spray on instruments and found it to cover well and totally seal the instrument and the resulting finish was very thin and long lasting.

Having said that I only used it on raw brass and not on any plastic material.

I cannot predict the effect that a spray coating of acrylic laquer would have on Tenite. It could damage the material if it is carrying with it any solvents.

The internet also states that acrylic laquer is solvent based.

I would therefore consider it risky to use spray acrylic laquer on a Tenite instrument without testing it first on a sample.

The question now is this, is the desire to own this plastic instrument worth the risk given that there appears to be clear evidence that when Tenite breaks down and deteriorates as it ages it becomes hazardous.

I hope this is of some value in reaching a decision about what to do with this instrument.

The problems with ChatGPT have not even begun to surface.

Already it is being used to create literature.

The literature ChatGPT creates is mind numbing in its mediocrity.

I am put in mind of speech writers that teach students to use various tricks of speech that appear to be dynamic and yet they amount to a series of fireworks that carry the audience with them and yet they say nothing of substance.

These are the tricks that messers Adolph Hitler and Joseph Goebbles used with great effect to win over a population and take them into a place nobody should inhabit.

ChatGPT is a tool that is correct but it is a tool that sounds a death Nell to creativity.

It should be used as the tool it is and overseen and controlled by people who have knowledge experience and the capability of logical thinking.

I see the death of individualism in ChatGPT and the echoes of George Orwells 1984 in its potential.

Similar to 1984 newspeak I see a contraction of grammar and vocabulary in ChatGPT and the common belief of how wonderful ChatGPT is fills me with dread.

The modern idiom of AI pervades society such that only applications for work phrased in elementary forms are acceptable, only certain candidates are allowed to be employed, only certain phrases are allowed to be uttered, only certain thoughts are allowed to be held, only certain statements are allowed to be made.

Dumbing down of society is now at an end and the more pervasive and more serious dumbing up of society is being forced upon us.

I see factories selling via the internet, AI taking over all thinking, I see whole sectors of society being reduced to poverty.

The only work that people will be offered is hand work making things like garments and fishing rods or working the land.

We have taken a rural society with everyone living in poverty and through an industrial revolution made everyones lives better, living in riches.

And now through AI and computers we are set to take everyones jobs away from them by ending the reason to employ people.

What will the result be.

It holds nothing more than a return to a rural life with everyone living once more in poverty.