TubeNet

Whatever happened with the horn Roger Lewis was trying to get off the ground?

I think I played one of these, iirc, at wwbw a year back. But it wasn't the main reason for my trip there and I don't actually remember much about it's characteristics. It was a 6/4. It was shiny. Seemed "okay". Drop Roger a line @ tubadome.com and see what the latest is.

Meanwhile -- if you spend too much time with that loaner "old-school" 184, even a 186 will SEEM like a 6/4 ....

So, do your research quickly!

Cheers,

actually it's an old 186 with the 16.5 inch bell.It sure is easy to play.but,when the sh!t hits the fan and the brass section really cranks up,i think i'd find myself rubbing crushed viagra around the bell garland

MikeMason wrote:actually it's an old 186 with the 16.5 inch bell.It sure is easy to play.but,when the sh!t hits the fan and the brass section really cranks up,i think i'd find myself rubbing crushed viagra around the bell garland

I had a 4v version of this same horn as my 1st CC a few years back, that I bought from Lee Stofer. It worked well and I rather liked it. Ok for quintet, ok for the larger groups I play with (which aren't professionals). But I wanted to get a 5th valve, hence the 56J.

I'm now thinking of something with a bit weighter sound, but I don't want something that will suck what little air I have available out of my lungs. I really liked the 1292 I played a while back at WWBW -- very easy to play, and I thought it had a bit heavier sound than the 56J. The Thor was very nice in the low-mid range, but I liked the 1292 better up higher -- something important for me when playing in quintet (which is most of what I do). I really don't need a 6/4, but a 5/4 that's easy on the airflow would be nice, I think.

Good luck with your hunting,