Page 1 of 1
Alexander Tubas
Posted: Sat Oct 16, 2021 5:55 pm
by pakins51
I’ve heard of people using Alexander 163 in orchestras, but I know they are about the same size as as a Miraphone 186/188 with a larger bore. So I’m just wondering if anyone has had experience using one of them or just hearing them in an orchestral setting and do they really put out enough sound to back an entire ensemble?
Re: Alexander Tubas
Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2021 12:00 am
by Porky
Listen to Chester in Boston (early chester before he started playing the HB50 more ) and Dave Kirk in the Houston Symphony. Those are the standards of the Alexander sound in an orchestra. There's a very great Bruckner 4 with the HSO Hans Graf conducting Kirk told me he was using the 163 but hearing it you'd think he was using the Nirschl York. Same with a Bruckner 6 with Eschenbach. Alexander tubas can put out a-lot of sound and they teach you how to play. Ron Bishop also used Alexander’s in the Cleveland Orchestra aswell.
Re: Alexander Tubas
Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2021 1:49 pm
by Jonathan Fowler
The short answer is yes, absolutely. I've never felt like I needed something larger since I bought my 163 about 10 years ago. My previous horn was a MW2155 - it played quite well, evenly across all ranges, but lacked the color spectrum that the 163 has. When you drive certain instruments hard (186, 2155) the sound tends to blend in with the trombones, almost too homogeneously. This makes it hard to balance the section as the colors of the bass bone cancel you out to a certain degree. I've never had that particular issue with my Alex.
Re: Alexander Tubas
Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2021 9:17 am
by Ted Cox
This season is my 36th year in professional orchestras - year 30 with the Oklahoma City Philharmonic. For all 30 seasons I've played an Alex, and prior to buying my 163 in 1992, I played a Miraphone 186 I bought in 1975. This past Saturday night, I played the Miraphone on our concert - the same Miraphone I bought in high school. We had a rehearsal and concert Sunday, and I brought my Alexander 164. I asked our bass trombone player what he was hearing and he said: "it sounds like you." The 186 is considered a 4/4 and the the Kaiser Alex 164 is considered a 6/4 tuba. Practicing at home, my wife, a former horn player, can't tell what I'm playing. A 163 Alex and a 186 Miraphone are not the same tuba. In my opinion, we get a little too wrapped up in equipment and don't pay enough attention to artistry - which on tuba, begins with air. We seem to want to put the workload on the equipment so we don't have to deal with our own deficiencies. The Alexander 164 will absolutely let you know where one's deficiencies lie. Weak air, you can't make it work. Weak ears, you can't play it in tune. Dead spots in your buzzing, it won't respond. The 164 has been a great teacher for me in my early 60's. I once asked Chester Schmitz how he can play so loud. He said, "quality of sound and pitch." That's what we should be working on. Few on this forum have heard Chester play live in Symphony Hall on his Alex. If you ever have, you might start looking for an Alex.
Re: Alexander Tubas
Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2021 2:16 pm
by circusboy
Great post, Ted. Nicely said.
Re: Alexander Tubas
Posted: Mon Oct 25, 2021 11:54 pm
by BrassoProfundo
Ted Cox wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 9:17 am
This season is my 36th year in professional orchestras - year 30 with the Oklahoma City Philharmonic. For all 30 seasons I've played an Alex, and prior to buying my 163 in 1992, I played a Miraphone 186 I bought in 1975. This past Saturday night, I played the Miraphone on our concert - the same Miraphone I bought in high school. We had a rehearsal and concert Sunday, and I brought my Alexander 164. I asked our bass trombone player what he was hearing and he said: "it sounds like you." The 186 is considered a 4/4 and the the Kaiser Alex 164 is considered a 6/4 tuba. Practicing at home, my wife, a former horn player, can't tell what I'm playing. A 163 Alex and a 186 Miraphone are not the same tuba. In my opinion, we get a little too wrapped up in equipment and don't pay enough attention to artistry - which on tuba, begins with air. We seem to want to put the workload on the equipment so we don't have to deal with our own deficiencies. The Alexander 164 will absolutely let you know where one's deficiencies lie. Weak air, you can't make it work. Weak ears, you can't play it in tune. Dead spots in your buzzing, it won't respond. The 164 has been a great teacher for me in my early 60's. I once asked Chester Schmitz how he can play so loud. He said, "quality of sound and pitch." That's what we should be working on. Few on this forum have heard Chester play live in Symphony Hall on his Alex. If you ever have, you might start looking for an Alex.
Very much in line with what Pat Landolfi of the NJSymphony used to say when I was a student of his. As I recall, he used to say that the Alex was an unforgiving tuba martinet -- it demanded you really know what you're doing. But, IF you could play it right, it was an incredibly dextrous, flexible, powerful instrument. You could play any pitch at various dynamics on an Alex with a color range throughout dynamics that allowed you to blend, create various voices, and be heard clearly and distinctly through an entire symphony orchestra.
After a Rip Van Winkle long hiatus from tuba, when I started playing again in 2018, and learned that Pat had retired, one of the first things I wondered was what had become of his Alexes, particularly good models and well kept, admired and coveted by those in the know.