TubeNet

Friends,

Over the years I have owned and played many CC tubas; from the small 184, to the BAT Hirsbrunner. Recently, I purchased a Bruckner. I can't recommend this tuba highly enough. It won't do everything, but it does ALMOST everything very well. This is a good 5/4 tuba that will work well in most band and orchestra settings. It is VERY good in pit situations, where you need a big sound, but you are the only one pointing OUT, frequently with a reduced low string section. It is good in all band situations, where a good, solid, bassy sound is needed. I am using it in the quintet this morning, but I think it will be a good fit with our group. It'll work in orchestra stiuations, where you are dealing with a smaller string section, like 3-4 basses and 4-8 celli.

The fit & finish on the horn is what you would expect from Mirafone; it's gorgeous. The pitch is spot on. I checked it out with the Peterson Strobe and the only note that was sketchy was the first valve, 5th partial, d. It is easily corrected with the first valve slide pushed all the way in. I think I'll get a ring on the slide so I can reach it better. The 4th valve slide is a little short, so the instrument needs to be played with the 4th slide pulled. Luckily, there is enough pull to get low F (4&5) in tune. The low notes just pop right out. You can get plenty of sound out of this instrument, PLENTY

If you want a large CC that will cover almost all large ensemble situations, the Bruckner should be on your short list.

One nit to pick - I HATE moveable thumb rings.

Steve Ferguson at The Horn Guys helped me facilitate the purchase.

tclements wrote:One nit to pick - I HATE moveable thumb rings.

Any tech worth his tools can remove the removable thumb ring and solder on a fixed thumb ring exactly where you want it and then touch up the lacquer, all pretty quickly and inexpensively.

Congratulations Tony - sounds like you have found exactly the CC for you!

One question, out of interest does the 'Bruckner' feel heavy like a PT-6, or lighter weight for its size?

Neptune wrote:Congratulations Tony - sounds like you have found exactly the CC for you!

One question, out of interest does the 'Bruckner' feel heavy like a PT-6, or lighter weight for its size?

Was wondering the same myself; many of the newer Miraphones are somewhat heavier than their older MiraFone counterparts.

No, it's CC version of the 191.

Tony,

I'm so glad to hear that you bought a Bruckner and that it's working well for you. I can't get enough of mine. I think that I was the first person to get one in the US.

The pitch on this horn as you said, is fantastic, and it must be consistent from horn to horn. I also correct the 5th partial D with a slide-push, and have the fourth slide pulled out, but other than that it is spot on. The most in-tune tuba I have played.

I could do without the adjustable thumb ring as well. It came loose one time, and it was a small challenge to get it back to where it was set from the factory, which is fine for me. There were two very small issues with the finish on mine, where the lacquer has come off near the bottom bow, and another small place near the top. I noticed that when I first got the tuba, but really didn't didn't care about the imperfection once I tried it. I bought it sight unseen, and was promised by Steve that both he and Anthony liked it the best of the first two they received last year. That was enough not to worry about the imperfect finish -- although I can't honestly say that Miraphone gets that part right every time.

I wish I had more opportunities to play out here in NC. I have recorded with the Bruckner a few times, and think it is great under the microphone. I have a feeling that if Tommy Johnson was still around, he would really dig this horn, after all the years he used his silver 188 in the studios. To me, the Bruckner is even better for recording than any of the 180 series CCs.

Dammit... I'm going to be in big trouble once I get to try one of these...

Woah, wait. What about that sweet Willson you just got a bit ago Tony?

tclements wrote:No, it's CC version of the 191.

Tony -- are you sure?

I just went to the Miraphone site and looked at the Bruckner open bugle, and compared it with both the 191 BBb and the 1291 CC. It looks exactly like a 1291 (asymetrical top bow), but with a rotary valve section grafted in. It does not resemble a 191 as closely to my eyes ..... This is most obvious when you rotate the photo and look at the back side of the horn.

Why do you think the Bruckner draws its lineage from the 191 BBb, instead of the 1291 CC? I'm curious ....

Best Regards,

I think most people think that the Bruckner is CC version of the 191 for 2 reasons-the model number, which is 291, and the fact that some retailers seem to advertise it as such.

Make no mistake, the Bruckner is essentially a rotary version of the 1292. Standing side by side, it looks like the bottom bow and the top bow are the same. Slightly larger bore through the valves for the Bruckner.

In short, this is the best rotary valved Miraphone tuba that I've ever had the chance to play on. It seems to take all of the good stuff from the 188 and upgrade it. After spending a few hours playing this model at WWBW, I'd say that the Bruckner is SERIOUSLY flying under the radar.

tclements wrote:...
The pitch is spot on. I checked it out with the Peterson Strobe and the only note that was sketchy was the first valve, 5th partial, d. It is easily corrected with the first valve slide pushed all the way in. I think I'll get a ring on the slide so I can reach it better....

Does this mean that the open E is flat and you're playing it 1+2, or does this mean that the open E is usable, but the D is flat?

Thanks,

Christian

Sorry, I missed a couple questions posed here.

I still use the Willson 3050-RZ5 for all the big, non pit gigs. I heard the playback from last week's concert and I am VERY happy with the sound, projection, pitch and blend of this tuba. Too bad there aren't more of these around to be played and purchased. I'd like to buy a rotary F Willson to go along with the 3050, but there just isn't one to be had. I'll probably end up with a MW 4460.

Pitch: the 5th partial notes are a bit low, but as I have ALWAYS used the 'natural' fingerings, I don't really see it as a substantial problem. Only the first valve d, as I stated earlier.

Weight: I have only played 2 rotary PT-6's and I don't recall how the weight compares. Compared to the Willson (THIRTY pounds!), it feels like a 184!!!

I am no pro on this, and I will defer to those who can actually take accurate measurements, but I still maintain that this is the CC version of the 191. I could be wrong on this, but when playing both, it feels a lot like the 191 BBb.

Enjoy!