TubeNet

What's with the relative silence regarding the Tuono vs the over the top raving that followed the release of the Thor?

In my initial toot of a Tuono in an elephant room it appeared to address all of my concerns with the Thor without giving up any of the admitted strengths of that bugle.

I pulled out a tuner and checked. Intonation was stellar. The response was quick and even top to bottom(just as effortless and clean as the Thor). Most importantly, the sound was moved much more in the direction of the PT6(probably not an accident that the valve section looks very PT inspired)... much more warmth, depth, character to the sound. Sonically, my initial impression is that the Tuono offered much more flexibility and character vs the Thor.

As a bonus, the Tuono is far more ergonomically friendly to those that aren't 6' tall ogres.

What am I missing? Is there THAT much of an anti-rotary bias in the tuba community?

I won't be selling my PT6 or 3/4 Rudy CC any time soon but I'd happily play the Tuono and recommend it to friends.

Hello!
Since the launch of Thor I like her a lot, but never had it due to its small bell (45cm). Its construction, with the body like the GR-51, not being one or a tube or a tube York and Kaiser, was very interesting to me, I think the tube is a hybrid packs all of the future ...
However due to the small bell is not really encouraged me to possess a Thor, when it appeared the Tuono, a wonderful instrument to my eyes because Thor was the largest (48cm bell), ie, an instrument not with the body of the GR-51 but with the GR-55.
I bought it and will not repent, the instrument that I ever wanted in my hands, the sound I always hoped for a big bass tuba DC.
Little, Meinl Weston, moved the body of Thor, changing the body to even the Tuono, ie 48cm bell. Due to my preference for pistos, got a new Thor.
Today can state that the new and Thor Tuono ring similarly, the same tool are such that the tubist may have the option of pistos and rotors. The timbre, pitch, focus, volume, everything sounds the same in both ...
I hope I have been helpful ...

joh_tuba wrote:Is there THAT much of an anti-rotary bias in the tuba community?

In a word, yes. As witnessed at ITEC-Arizona, some of the best players (collegiate and professionally) won't even PICK UP a rotor CC (even in the elephant rooms). It is pretty odd, but preferences abound in our community.

KiltieTuba wrote:

ShoelessWes wrote:

joh_tuba wrote:Is there THAT much of an anti-rotary bias in the tuba community?

In a word, yes. As witnessed at ITEC-Arizona, some of the best players (collegiate and professionally) won't even PICK UP a rotor CC (even in the elephant rooms). It is pretty odd, but preferences abound in our community.

That's only because there aren't any good 'rotor CC' tubas...Remember all CC tubas have to have a 3/4 inch bore, four piston valves, one rotary valve, 19 inch bell, and only available in one extra-extra-large (6/4) size, plus be satin silver or heavily buffed satin silver that is now bright silver...

I never said it made sense.

The sound of the new Tuono and Thor are the same and wonderful ... The best CC tuba sound I ever heard and touched my life ... I love them!!

Has anyone tried the Tuono and the Bruckner side-by-side?

According to the Meinl-Weston website, the bell size on the THOR is 48cm not 45cm, was the thor changed?

Hello
The relocated, she grew up ...
Is the same size as the Tuono and has the same sound, who used my experience and use these tools ...
See:
http://www.meinlweston.com/melton-meinl ... 0-238.html" target="_blank
Big hug

I have to disagree. The Tuono sounds way different than the Thor. More refined sound and not as bright as far as I could tell.