TubeNet

Chuck(G) · Post by **Chuck(G)** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 1:17 am

richland tuba 01 wrote:okay, so what's the opinion of the "experts":

is the BBb 184 or BBb 186 better?

Two different animals, entirely. Not really comparable.

windshieldbug · Post by **windshieldbug** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 2:06 am

richland tuba 01 wrote:okay, so what's the opinion of the "experts":
is the BBb 184 or BBb 186 better?

What, are you kidding? Two different animals, two different applications.

As an aside: Since the 184 is such a good small ensemble horn, I had the water key closed off on mine, and dump water like a horn, rather than subject listeners to the "pppppssssshhhhhhhhh" of clearing it in a concert.

tbn.al · Post by **tbn.al** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 8:23 am

We should talk about mouthpiece selection for the 184 BBb. I was recently amazed at the change to the overall core of sound when I accidentally inserted my PT-88, instead of my normal Miraphone TU17 into my 184. I have not been satisfied with the core of sound I was producing nor the intonation on the 184. The sound was somewhat thin and the 12 combinations horribly, 2 inch pull, sharp. With the 88 both problems surprisingly dissapeared. The 88 is not the answer however due to upper register effort. This has put me on a mp quest. The 184 BBb should be the ultimate quintet horn for an old Bass Trombone doubler like me. I play either Tuba or Bass Trombone in quintet, which ever is called for. I now have the following:
PT 20
PT 65
PT 88
Shilke Helleberg
Yamaha Jim Self
Miraphone TU 17
Playing these in succession has revealed an incredible range of differences in the sound and intonation of the tuba. To my surprise, the best so far is the Yamaha. I have been told it was modeled after the Miraphone C4. Any comments or suggestions would be welcome. My 184 is a good little horn and with the right mp might be a great little horn, especially if I could find a better player for it.

tbn.al · Post by **tbn.al** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 4:55 pm

Than ks for the input. I played a Conn Helleberg for about a week. In fact it was the first alternative I tried. It didn't seem to help much over the TU-17 I was comparing it with. I'm going to check with a couple of guys who studied with Perantoni and see if they can shed any light on the PT design and nomenclature and then I may start a thread on that topic. I was really surprised in the outcome of my initial test. Of course I may change my mind over the next few weeks. Thanks again for the input.

Chuck(G) · Post by **Chuck(G)** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 7:35 pm

richland tuba wrote:uhh...okay. Maybe I didn't make myself clear. I just wanted to know if one was considered better than the other as an all-around horn.

The 184 is pretty much a small-ensemble 3/4-sized horn. The 4/4 186 comes much closer to being an "all purpose" instrument.

iiipopes · Post by **iiipopes** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 11:21 pm

To broaden the tone of the 184, try a Wick 1L.

Chuck(G) · Post by **Chuck(G)** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 11:33 pm

richland tuba 01 wrote:okay, thanks, just looking for a horn to buy after high school, since I use a brand new 186 BBb right now, and I don't exactly have a lot of money.

The 186 is a great all-around horn--you'll not easily find another with its intonation and versatility for the price. Unless you're looking to spend a pile of cash for one of the super-duper orchestral models, you can hardly do better.

If you're looking for more of a solo horn, keep the 186 and buy a small F or Eb.