RE, Relacquers & JSnola's comments about his horn:
I'm going to suggest that you possibly "lucked out" on the horn: it's a relacquer and it plays well. However, I definitely wouldn't call that the rule, I'd call that the exception. We could also talk about how the horn might not necessarily have been a "relacquer", as the Conn New Wonder "Transitional" was available in bare brass and could have been lacquered at a later date. I also know that a "relacquer" can be done without stripping much metal -- however, it's still something that screams out, "Lots of play-testing needs to be done!"
If you're a beginner, first you shouldn't be buying vintage and second, if you're getting used (other than overhauled, warrantied instruments), you should have a player that's better than you playtesting the horn before you buy. It's kinda like me saying that that 1975 Harley Softtail is junk because I got on it and fell off after 1.3 seconds because I have zero experience riding motorcycles.
===========
RE, appreciation of repair work/quality of repair:
First, my opinion is that, primarily, the repair(s) made are to make the horn into better shape than it was before and "overhaul" suggests that the horn is now in perfect mechanical condition. I really do not care if you use the highest quality materials and craftsmanship on my horn if it still isn't working right when you're done.
Second, I know the tech is constrained by the price agreed to. If the person brings in a horn for an overhaul, the tech looks it over and says, "It needs X. It will cost $Y to fix X" and I counter with, "Well, could you use lower quality materials, so I'd have to pay $Y-a bunch?" the tech has to decide whether or not he can cut those corners for me, knowing that it might not be as good a repair job.
As an example, I'm a tech: a computer tech. If the user says to me, for instance, "I've got a virus infection. However, you've only got two hours to fix it" the computer will NOT be in as good condition when I'm finished than if I had four hours to fix it because you haven't given me enough time to do as quality of a job as possible. Minimal time = minimal repair.
Now, I am NOT qualified to rate instrument technicians, other than by what other people say: are the majority of folks happy with the repairs that were done? Are there complaints with the BBB (or equivalent)? How about with NAPBIRT? That's how I can rate 'em. I AM qualified to rate other computer techs, for instance, and I can tell you how competent they are or not by the work they've performed. However, results still count for something: if our junior tech fixes a computer in the same amount of time it would have taken me, but uses a different method, is there any real difference in quality? Hey, the junior tech's obviously not as good as I am.
However, this is straying into the range of, "How do we judge how well a horn is repaired?" and that's really not the topic of this thread. I encourage you to open one, because it'd be interesting (to me) to see what is posted: we've got a lot of woodwind repair techs here.
The upthrust is that if I'm looking at a couple used horns of equal overall quality and price and I HAVE to buy one -- and I only have a budget to BUY a horn, not to get one overhauled -- I'll get the one that plays the best, not the one that can be overhauled to be the best.
), but given my experiences, I would not recommend buying a horn with roos unless one can try first. Admittedly, I haven't tried white ones.
