TubeNet

The Thor is a bigger instrument and puts out more sound than the Bruckner, though the Bruckner might have a prettier sound for some. The Bruckner is consistent from the bottom to the top with great tuning all the way and the color is very consistent. The Thor is stronger in the low range (as it IS bigger) and again the tuning is great and the color is very consistent throughout the range.

The biggest difference would be in the sound color and the projection. The Thor plays very easily to the cheap seats. The Bruckner can do so also, but needs just a little more energy in the process. The Bruckners tend to be a little darker in sound color and the Thors a tad brighter. The Bruckner sound may tend to fit in with the double basses in an orchestra while the Thor would probably stand a bit apart from them, requiring a little less effort on the part of the player.

It needs to be said that they are two completely different horns, both in size and build and both play extremely well. It's kind of a McIntosh v/s Granny Smith apples to apples kinda' thing. Either one will get the job done and either one can do just about everything.

Sorry if this lacks clarity.

Roger

I'm curious about the Bruckner too, but I just haven't gotten out anywhere to try one yet. I played a 1291 CC for several years, and thought a rotary "version" of it would be a lot of fun. I'm currently looking for a rotary CC tuba, and the Bruckner and 188 are on the short list. Based on $$ and the fact that there are no used Bruckners out there, the 188 is higher up on that list.