TubeNet

Bruckner, or 1293?

I have yet to play a 1293, but I have spent some time comparing a Bruckner to the 1292, side by side. Both tubas overall played really well, with solid if not spectacular intonation. I wrote a review of the tubas for a friend of mine shortly after a trip to WWBW, but here I'll make my comments short and sweet:

1292-booming low register. The tuba itself seems to be really consistent sounding in all registers though. The extreme upper register sang pretty well. Great response overall, but some notes between the d in the staff and the g near the top of the staff didn't center up as well as I'd like. Fit and finish were excellent. Ergonomics pretty good, but not as comfortable as the Bruckner.

291-I'm pretty sure that while the tuba is still pretty new to the market, the 1292 outsells it big time, most likely due to the rotary vs. piston valves. Great response, better than most rotary horns I have tried. Sings in all registers. Maybe one of the best, if not the best, "blowing" tubas I have ever played. Like the 1292, the Bruckner has a booming low register. Extreme high register is wide open. Everything above the middle C spoke beautifully. I think this horn slotted better than the 1292 that I was comparing it to. The salesman at WWBW said that they don't sell too many of them, but I have no way to know how valid that is. If that's the case, more people in the market for a 4/4+ or small 5/4 need to gibe this horn a serious look. It has the most bang for it's buck of any tuba at the moment, with lacquer models starting at $7999. Word on this tuba may not be out, but it is a dandy. Reminds me of a HB-2 that I sampled about 10 years ago. Both this and the 1292 have a tremendous color pallet. If I had to pick, and it would be tough, I would go with the Bruckner.

I personally perfered both of these tubas to the Thor and the 6450. The low registers rivaled that of a PCK, but minus the edge. I tried both horns using a GW Baer mouthpiece, and my 88+. The only horn that I like better in terms of color, response and sound was a PCK. Not sure that I like the PCK 6k more though.

IMHO, you couldn't go wrong with either, but like I said, I haven't tried the 1293 yet.

Hoping that Roger Lewis will chime in on this... I was wondering the exact same thing this morning.

They are basically two different animals. The 291 is a great horn and the rotary valves make it incredibly easy to play. It plays bigger than a 188 but with the same ease and consistency. Great sound and great pitch and the sound color is consistent from bottom to top.

The 1293 is one notch bigger and a little more responsive in the low register, and it's a piston valve instrument compared to the Bruckner with rotary valves. The venting on the 1293 pistons makes it play very smoothly throughout the range, and the low register is very secure. The larger bell adds quite a bit of resonance to the horn and if I were looking for something between a 1292 and a PCK I would be looking at this horn.

Both are great horns and it just depends on what you need it for.

If you have some specific uses for the instrument I would be glad to address those. For example, I've done every type of playing from solo to large orchestra on my 1292 and it's worked well. I would have to spend more time with the 1293 to see if it will be just as easy to handle in a quintet setting. I see it as a 1292 on steroids.

I wish everyone a safe and happy holiday this week.

Roger

Hi-
Noticed WWBW has lacquer Bruckners new in stock on sale at $7999.

Also, Dillon has a PT-6 lacquer used for under $5900.

Good luck.
mark