TubeNet

Hallo Kurt!

Here is a comment, not very decent probably:

While I have never played or even seen a M-W 25, I believe the Yamaha YBB-641 is a copy of it or another similar M-W horn. They are not popular currently, but Bloke or someone else can tell when these were at their most popular here in the US (Getzen distribution years? ≈ 1970s-1980s?). They seem to have always been a second choice behind the Miraphones over here.

Opinions will range from "best 'middle of the road' rotary BBb" to "so-so"...

Eric

The Model 25 is to Meinl-Weston what the 186-Bb is to Miraphone. It's their standard, 4/4, traditional Bb rotary tuba.

In comparison to the Miraphone, I have always found the 25 to have a more closed sound, almost muffled in comparison to a Miraphone, which is quite the opposite.

But popularity has been a regional thing. Back in the 70's when these instruments were in their heyday for use in schools, Meinl-Weston instruments seem to have been more popular in the northeast, while Miraphone was THE instrument in the west and also in Texas.

I would prefer either to a Yamaha 641, which was Yamaha's attempt at a traditional 4/4 Bb rotary tuba.

One of the best in that class, and from the era when these ruled school bands, was quite rare over here, and that was the tall-bell rotary models made by what is now VMI/B&S. They were marketed under a variety of names, and were probably thought to be budget instruments in those days. They had the open sound of a Miraphone but without the tendency to bark. All of these were really trying to be like the Alexander, which was at that time the archetype for this sort of instrument, but without the playability issues that would have made an Alex unsuitable for school bands.

Rick "who has played a lot of 4/4 rotary Bb tubas" Denney

What Rick said.

Also, I think the MW-25s had quite a bit thicker brass than the 186s. I know that several band directors in Oklahoma preferred them to the 186s because of added durability. AFA as appearance, the 25 and the 186 were VERY similar, IIRC. Both had the rear-pulling main slide, both had the same upper slide arrangement.

There are still band directors that swear the MW25 was the perfect high school band tuba: decent sound, low-maintenance, reasonable price, and tough as nails. But you know what they say about opinions. I preferred the 186.

Rick Denney wrote:The Model 25 is to Meinl-Weston what the 186-Bb is to Miraphone. It's their standard, 4/4, traditional Bb rotary tuba.

I disagree. I think that the Model 20 is more analogous to the 186. The 25 is a bit bigger.

Having tried M-W 25, a Miraphone 186 and 188 I much preferred the 25 - much more colourful sound. Admittedly it was a gold brass 25, so cannot comment on the standard yellow brass version.

Although I wanted to like, I personally found the Miraphone rather bland sounding.

It is interesting the regional preference. Going by TubeNet, the Miraphone is far more popular in the USA, but my perception is the 25 is the more popular in Germany.

bloke wrote:the M-W 25 (except for valveset bore size) is roughly halfway between the sizes of a Miraphone 186 and a M-W Fafner.

So is more comparable to a 188, than a 186?

Having played both the Melton 25, Miraphone 186 (and the 187, the BBb "brother" to the 188) in the 76th Army Band in Germany, I much preferred the Miraphones to the Melton. The main reason is that I found the Melton incredibly stuffy in response and dull in tone. The ones I played on were heavier than the Miraphones, too. Ironically when I would talk to local players, they perceived the Miraphones as "expensive."

My college back in the 70's had MW 25's and I had a 4/4 Rudy. I would agree with Joe S. that it is bigger than a 186 and I would add that I thought it was comparable in size to the Rudy and that is where the similarity ends. The Rudy had a big colorful sound and was nimble/flexible and easy to blow. The MW25 seemed to need more air and the sound was not colorful. The valves were sluggish compared to the Rudy. I would say that for the right price it wouldn't be a bad overall horn - just not a horn I would seek out. I thought the intonation was better than the Rudy but I had a pretty good Rudy.

Speaking of Rudys Lee Stofer stopped by with a 6/4 Rudy yesterday on his way to a local player who was interested in it. Biggest freakin horn I've ever seen. Huge seems like an understatement. The main tuning slide was so big I think you could drop Kennedy Half dollar coins down the tubes. Too cool!

tofu wrote:Speaking of Rudys Lee Stofer stopped by with a 6/4 Rudy yesterday on his way to a local player who was interested in it. Biggest freakin horn I've ever seen. Huge seems like an understatement. The main tuning slide was so big I think you could drop Kennedy Half dollar coins down the tubes. Too cool!

Yep, Rudy's #/4 designations are a bit funny . . . I played a Rudy 6/4 BBb at the factory some years ago . . . made the big Yorks seem small by comparison . . .
FWIW, I think Rudy Meinl tubas are in a league of their own, and not just for size. For rotary BBb's, IMHO the Rudy's are the best.