Well, I'm certainly glad that a couple of you guys dug up this thread that had developed earlier in the year, as it's a really good topic. I try to be mindful of the desired result, and that's the tuba in my head that's usually trying like hell to have something of that bright Roger Bobo projective sound that you could imagine cutting through almost anything. He's been my gold standard among tuba players then and since, so I wanted to try to work with something close to what he did, and see if I could model my approach that way. That's why I got myself a Mirafone 186 5U CC WAAYYY back in '72, and, even though I've gotten a succession of approving comments on it over the years [by both Abe Torchinsky and Toby Hanks, among many others ....], many on this forum have spoken highly about that model in general, further confirming long-standing suspicions. Now of course we can't always play under ideal sound recording studio conditions, so adjustments need to be made, usually finagling the mouthpieces around. And the Mirafone just doesn't deliver the hall shaking sound sometimes expected [
and demanded] of the tuba player. Those times might be better-reserved for something bigger that really packs a punch.
More recently, I've had other horns and sold them off, but right now I also work with a Meinl Weston 45 SLP that I can get some fine results with. Generally I'm happy with the horn. It has some weaknesses, but I generally can compensate for them so that the result is pretty close to optimal results without too much work. Sometimes, it isn't the easiest thing to get to output as thoroughly light as I might like. Some of you guys on here like the Firebird, and that might be a solution. I've tried the Firebird and like the lighter feel -- just that I have a personal continuing uneasiness about rotor valves -- IN SPITE of the Mirafone 186! But -- Doc and others -- you're right -- there IS a good horn there ...
I am looking for a bigger, darker, phatter horn, and several have come to my attention. The MW Thor is a fine and dandy one -- not so much for the wide fluffy sound, but the low range kicks ***, intonation is generally
REALLY fine, ease of articulation rate it high on the food chain. But pulling tuning slides seems to rival pulling teeth out of a chicken. That might all be rectified by a visit to bloke's -- any place to pitch a tent down there while while all us prospective Thor customers have our sticky slides tooled up? I would like to stack it up, though, against the MW 2265 [I salivate at the descriptions that the elephant has laid on us about his 2265 ....] and the Baer 6450 [another apparently well-done addition that could certainly shine, and, if it could really extend that Mirafone sound to its ultimate
ULTIMATE ... well, what else is there? ...]
The PT-6 seems to have its many fans but my concerns with it include the design of the third and fourth valve tubes that seem to include a couple of hair-pin turns. Now that apparently flies in the face of fluid dynamics. Rick Denney or someone might be able to help clarify, but air is a fluid, and when it goes crashing into metal walls and around sharp corners -- instead of along long smoother bends, there is doubtlessly going to be something of a less-than-desirable differential there. This would be among the reasons I'd be a little skittish about the horn. Yet I've also been fairly well convinced about the instrument's merits while having the privilege of listening to Carol Jantsch summers here in Saratoga Springs with the Philly Orchestra, and, yes, she does some genuinely beautiful work with her PT-6. After experiencing that, what's not to consider? The Gronitz PCK also has a few REALLY sharp bends on that fifth valve tubing, but overall gets very high accolades. They all seem to have their quirks, yet the obligation of the better player is to find ways through the mine field. Definitely one to be considered -- besides, another great excuse for a trip to Hamburg to check in with family there ....
Occasionally, Mike Sanders chimes in here with news about his Yorkbrunner, all of which seems to be quite positive. Yet he had worked for quite a while with an Alexander 163, as did Chet Schmitz in the BSO. That Chet Schmitz Alex sound is a GREAT thing on so much BSO work -- in the right place, wow, what a terrific presence. Even if it were to come through in smaller groups -- where you need to project that way, why not the Alex? Yet the Alex, apparently just like the Yorkbrunner, can be a different quirky beast -- an island unto itself, and aside from possibilities of intonation difficulties with each, there can be considerable variation in consistency from horn to horn. But if you find the right one that hits that certain sweet spot, there isn't much reason to look back.
I'm also also wondering if a hybrid concoction might also be the most desirable horn. I've thought about what the Rudi Meinl 4345 might do if its carcass were grafted onto their 5-4 rotor horn outer body so that the result would be a bigger, darker, woofier sound --- BUT have the dexterity of the lighter piston-based guts of the sound producing center. Hey, why not include Diespeck on the itinerary after Hamburg to find out the answer, right? That sort of pulling the best features out of several quarters to get an ultimately desirable end-result is something that also seems to wash with several of the repair-type folks I've chatted with. So maybe there isn't any "one best horn" per se, but that best horn might be a combination of the best parts of several of them.
Now all that's just going low and phatt. What about high, light, and thin? As above, possibility of the Firebird. I've heard and thought some good things about the MW 2182. Bob 1062, among others, doesn't seem to like the stove-pipe-like construction of the horn, but it might also depend on what you're trying to model and simulate with your playing, what your bigger goals are, where you usually do most of your work. Maybe that one's a solution, maybe it isn't. The Yamaha 821 has that funky construction of the fifth valve happening FIRST -- BEFORE any of the first four valves. Instead of a dependent fifth, seems like we have a dependent 1-4. ..... ()@*&#*&@) But who knows, maybe it also doesn't make for any kind of a bump in the road. Have only had the chance to VERY briefly sample one, and not enough to form a definite opinion yet.
And then we have the VERY occasional foray into eupher land. Again it might depend on your specific work and goals, but have you checked out that little stable that Rick Denney keeps? [Sorry to put you on the spot here, Rick .... ] Something like that could work with a good higher register horn for those times and places -- but then again, you might be onto completely different. Also, how often are you REALLY going to need it and would it justify the investment? It seems that the best answer is to come to terms with what you want to and need to do, and then to graft onto that whatever best floats the boat from the myriad possibility that's supposed to mimic that mental tuba. That could be just one horn and one mouthpiece, but it could be many. Depends on what you need to do and where you want to go. And maybe bloke has a
GREAT caveat with the one that "generates the largest paychecks for the lowest quantity of blows ....."
