Cleveland sousaphone back home to roost
Forum rules
This section is for posts that are directly related to performance, performers, or equipment. Social issues are allowed, as long as they are directly related to those categories. If you see a post that you cannot respond to with respect and courtesy, we ask that you do not respond at all.
This section is for posts that are directly related to performance, performers, or equipment. Social issues are allowed, as long as they are directly related to those categories. If you see a post that you cannot respond to with respect and courtesy, we ask that you do not respond at all.
Cleveland sousaphone back home to roost
In 2014 I loaned my Cleveland H.N. White for a gig, and he bought it from me immediately thereafter and that was that, until he emailed me a couple weeks ago asking if I wanted to buy it back.
I've spent the intervening time hoping he wouldn't change his mind and sell it to someone else until my schedule allowed me to drive out yesterday and retrieve it. I haven't played it yet, but I noticed some details that I'd previously overlooked or forgotten.
These pictures might interest the Cleveland/H.N.White historians among us:
Looks in overall good shape; bell collar, horn, and valves all serial-match (1960 build per H.N. White Cleveland chart)
I don't know if White made A & B versions, but if so, this looks like the smaller-collar A version (with 24" bell)
I can't recall if a one-piece bell is the difference between old vs. newer Cleveland or between King vs. Cleveland models, but my (1940s) King 1261 was the smoother "one-piece" vs. this 1960 Cleveland.
Don't recall seeing this shape of main tuning brace on other Cleveland pics that folks have uploaded.
Likewise, don't recall having seen this "marching band" Cleveland logo.
And I thought that the first top slide was pullable on Clevelands, but maybe just on the earlier, pre-White Clevelands?
I've spent the intervening time hoping he wouldn't change his mind and sell it to someone else until my schedule allowed me to drive out yesterday and retrieve it. I haven't played it yet, but I noticed some details that I'd previously overlooked or forgotten.
These pictures might interest the Cleveland/H.N.White historians among us:
Looks in overall good shape; bell collar, horn, and valves all serial-match (1960 build per H.N. White Cleveland chart)
I don't know if White made A & B versions, but if so, this looks like the smaller-collar A version (with 24" bell)
I can't recall if a one-piece bell is the difference between old vs. newer Cleveland or between King vs. Cleveland models, but my (1940s) King 1261 was the smoother "one-piece" vs. this 1960 Cleveland.
Don't recall seeing this shape of main tuning brace on other Cleveland pics that folks have uploaded.
Likewise, don't recall having seen this "marching band" Cleveland logo.
And I thought that the first top slide was pullable on Clevelands, but maybe just on the earlier, pre-White Clevelands?
- These users thanked the author tokuno for the post (total 3):
- gocsick (Mon Jun 09, 2025 2:08 pm) • catgrowlB (Thu Jun 12, 2025 11:26 pm) • Mark E. Chachich (Sun Jun 15, 2025 11:17 am)
- arpthark
- Posts: 5772
- Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2020 4:25 pm
- Has thanked: 1775 times
- Been thanked: 1914 times
Re: Cleveland sousaphone back home to roost
Sorry, none of your pics are loading for me. It says that I need to request access to view.
Re: Cleveland sousaphone back home to roost
Thanks for the headsup.arpthark wrote: Mon Jun 09, 2025 12:52 pm Sorry, none of your pics are loading for me. It says that I need to request access to view.
I modified the default "restricted" to "anyone", but don't know if that's sufficient or if I'll have to update the links in the post.
Please let me know if you still can't see them.
-
graybach
- Posts: 109
- Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2020 11:54 am
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
- Has thanked: 484 times
- Been thanked: 43 times
Re: Cleveland sousaphone back home to roost
tokuno wrote: Mon Jun 09, 2025 1:08 pmThanks for the headsup.arpthark wrote: Mon Jun 09, 2025 12:52 pm Sorry, none of your pics are loading for me. It says that I need to request access to view.
I modified the default "restricted" to "anyone", but don't know if that's sufficient or if I'll have to update the links in the post.
Please let me know if you still can't see them.
I could not see them at first, either. But, after you changed the permissions, I can view them now.
- arpthark
- Posts: 5772
- Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2020 4:25 pm
- Has thanked: 1775 times
- Been thanked: 1914 times
Re: Cleveland sousaphone back home to roost
Works now, thanks! Cool horn!tokuno wrote: Mon Jun 09, 2025 1:08 pmThanks for the headsup.arpthark wrote: Mon Jun 09, 2025 12:52 pm Sorry, none of your pics are loading for me. It says that I need to request access to view.
I modified the default "restricted" to "anyone", but don't know if that's sufficient or if I'll have to update the links in the post.
Please let me know if you still can't see them.
- arpthark
- Posts: 5772
- Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2020 4:25 pm
- Has thanked: 1775 times
- Been thanked: 1914 times
Re: Cleveland sousaphone back home to roost
Likely a cost cutting measure, having that seam silver brazed and smooth versus ferruled and soft-soldered. Early King sousas and recording bell tubas had the one-piece bells, and later after the move to Eastlake (if I recall correctly), you started to see the two-piece bells.tokuno wrote: Mon Jun 09, 2025 12:46 pm I can't recall if a one-piece bell is the difference between old vs. newer Cleveland or between King vs. Cleveland models, but my (1940s) King 1261 was the smoother "one-piece" vs. this 1960 Cleveland.
- bloke
- Mid South Music
- Posts: 24364
- Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2020 8:55 am
- Location: western Tennessee - near Memphis
- Has thanked: 5225 times
- Been thanked: 5887 times
Re: Cleveland sousaphone back home to roost
Cleveland were basically King with an inch less bell radius, tuning in the wide bow (as with Conn) and the economy bell construction (that King resorted to later and to the present...ie. soldered vs. brazed seam from the elbow the flare).
Those as good, as long as their pistons aren't worn out (same as any other old-old sousaphones).
Those as good, as long as their pistons aren't worn out (same as any other old-old sousaphones).
-
Yahnay-san
- Posts: 49
- Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2020 10:52 am
- Has thanked: 24 times
- Been thanked: 10 times
Re: Cleveland sousaphone back home to roost
I have a 1959 King, which is fairly comparable I think: top of my first valve slide is not pullableeither. I note with interest that additional brace near the tuning silde, the lone brace joint on the other side of my tuning slide is prone to breaking solder joints.
-
catgrowlB
- Posts: 318
- Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2023 8:46 pm
- Has thanked: 296 times
- Been thanked: 124 times
Re: Cleveland sousaphone back home to roost
Cleveland was the budget/economy line of HN White (King).
Still, a great HN White sousa.
Just like Pan American was for Conn, Grand Rapids Band Inst. for York, etc.
Aside from a few mostly cosmetic differences (ferrules, bell construction, main tuning slide, etc. it's the same bugle as the 1250 and later 2350 sousas.
The 1250 sousa went thru some minor cosmetic changes after HN White (King) was sold to Seeburg Corporation in 1965, and then became King Musical Instruments until about 1980, then sold a couple times before becoming part of UMI in 1985. After 2000, UMI (King) was folded into Conn-Selmer.
Still, a great HN White sousa.
Just like Pan American was for Conn, Grand Rapids Band Inst. for York, etc.
Aside from a few mostly cosmetic differences (ferrules, bell construction, main tuning slide, etc. it's the same bugle as the 1250 and later 2350 sousas.
The 1250 sousa went thru some minor cosmetic changes after HN White (King) was sold to Seeburg Corporation in 1965, and then became King Musical Instruments until about 1980, then sold a couple times before becoming part of UMI in 1985. After 2000, UMI (King) was folded into Conn-Selmer.
