TubeNet

How do you tell the new-and-improved Thor from the old?

(not a joke set-up - genuine inquiry)

J.c.S.

Larger diameter bell.

cjk wrote:Larger diameter bell.

What's the new diameter?

J.c. Sherman wrote:

cjk wrote:Larger diameter bell.

What's the new diameter?

18.9˝.

The old bell diameter was 17.71"

cjk wrote:

J.c. Sherman wrote:

cjk wrote:Larger diameter bell.

What's the new diameter?

18.9˝.

The old bell diameter was 17.71"

Brasswind is still listing the old diameter, and I was confused - Thanks

J.c.S.

J.c. Sherman wrote:How do you tell the new-and-improved Thor from the old?

Price is higher and they are impossible to get.

SF

Was the bell diameter really the only thing they changed?

Hi-
Does M/W still make/sell the 'original' Thor version with the smaller bell (similar to Miraphone with the 1292 & 1293) or is it just the large bell new version that is sold now?

mark

I thought I'd heard a new mandrel was used for the new bell... whatever the change, I hated the sound of the old one... and the new one was dynamite...

J.c.S.

bloke wrote:

J.c. Sherman wrote:I thought I'd heard a new mandrel was used for the new bell... whatever the change, I hated the sound of the old one... and the new one was dynamite...

J.c.S.

...and I'm delighted that you're not on the list of those who regularly hires me to play.

bloke "Isn't that spelled 'Dinovite'...??"

Uh.... I'm missing something...

I haven't tried one in a few months... my initial impression was good. I haven't heard one with others; am I to take it you preferred the old version, or neither version? Or am I just clueless this morning?

I'm not a huge fan of "close mic" situations, because that's not what my audience hears... they hear me from 35-1,000 feet away. I'm a huge fan of listening to recordings of myself where the mic is ambient... then I can learn what to do, what to adjust, and what the conductor and audience hear.

Close in, I'm going to sound like whatever the engineer wants me to sound like, and that has varied wildly, often with the same equipment.

It was the "hammer" of the original Thor that felt - to me - inflexible and monotonous. It played incredibly well, but the sound was not mine. The new one - coming from an Alex type, not a York type, sound concept - sounded "right" to me. Much like how I loved my 52J and couldn't stand the 56Js... That pancake - or lack thereof - can make a big difference!

Getting a pro-19" bias,

J.c.S.

Joe-
OK, your Thor is your 5/4 and your modified 2165 is your 6/4--what is your 4/4 CC?
Mark

bloke wrote: As to the bell size thing, there's such a thing as the *bell diameter being proportional to the size of the tuba.

*

Ah, the proverbial/legendary "parasol model" -- great for outdoor gigs on rainy days ...

Beautiful helicon!
Mark

I have had two new Thor (bell 48cm) and today I have a old Thor (bell 45cm).
My conclusion about them is that the new Thor has a little more power but focus on the sound of the notes is compromised.
Thor is old need ... Focus is something perfect, the tone is a bit hoarse and tuning is little better ...
These were my comparisons between these Thor's ...

Ive been dying to play either Thor, so I can only say that what I have heard and that is not much in terms of which is "better" In a lot of ways I see changing bell size but nothing else on the entire horn kinda risky

How does the bell on the 5450RA compare to its piston counterpart?

I had a chance to test play a brand new Thor at The Tuba Exchange yesterday. It was a definitely a treat to play. I've spent a little time now behind both Thors and I would have to say I enjoy the sound under the bell better on the newest version. A couple of my friends listened to me play on it, and one of them who's instructor plays on an "Old Thor" told me that I was able to get the same tone out of the "New Thor" as he was used to hearing from the other.

From my observation, I would guess that the bell may be made out of slightly thinner brass. (Again... Just a guess) The reason I say that is because it appeared to respond quicker for me than any other Thor I've played.

I played a little Blazhevich on it and also played it in a tuba/euph quartet setting with my friends. I loved how it played and my quartet enjoyed the sound I was making with it.

For me, I really enjoy a horn that I like the sound right underneath the bell as I play it. I wasn't crazy about how I sounded underneath the bell on the "Old Thors." That's just me though...

I wish I had the money to spend on another horn right now. If I did, I would definitely buy one of these!