TubeNet

I'm quite interested at how these horns play, and just some info about the horn. I've played the BBb counterpart to this horn, the 191, but I haven't played the 291. I'm not a rotar guy, but am just trying to gather info on it. Bore size, height, weight, etc.

Thanks in advance.

Best,
Zac

I played Roger Lewis' demo last year. I am amazed these aren't more popular, it was a very attractive horn in every way.

I ask because I'm in the process of selling my Willson, for a new sound, and I'm thinking the Thor is what I'm wanting to hold out for. I was just curious about this horn because I was offered one in a trade for my Willson.

Keep the comments coming!

I had a friend who owned one of these for awhile and I got a chance to play on it quite a bit. I currently play on a piston 1291 CC and I think the Bruckner plays very similar to it, maybe with a larger sound. I've owned rotary horns in the past and things like Fountains and Ride took a bit more effort than with my 1291. However, on the Bruckner they were played as easy as on my piston horn.

In typical miraphone style, these horns have a great sound and are very even throughout the registers. This is probably one of my favorite rotary horns I've played. (Disclaimer: I don't claim to have played an abundance of rotary horns)

I played one of these at a couple weeks back and I was highly impressed. I had previously heard that these were smaller than to be considered 5/4 (I hate the 4/4, 5/4, 6/4 system) however I found this to not be the case at all. It is every bit big enough to fulfill most any need you could have. It's a nice tuba. Intonation is rock solid. Tone quality is stunning, and the response is almost instantaneous. It has a nice, big, warm, rich, fun low register, and the high and mid registers are great too. I am more of a piston guy and ultimately ended up liking the Miraphone 1293 even more than the Bruckner. To me the 1293 has a sound that is slightly bigger and broader, especially in the low register thanks to the XL fifth valve. It felt a bit heavier to me, not sure if the two are made of different thicknesses of metal though. Anyone know? I think that the larger bell of the 1293 reflects more of the high overtones back into the horn giving it that darker sound. To me the 1293 was everything that I wanted the Thor to be. Better intonation, much more interesting sound (IMHO), and just as easy of a low register but not as "bitey". I think it would fit great in an orchestra. The Bruckner would as well, it just seems to have a slightly more covered sound, and just feels ever so slightly smaller than the 1293 but is still definitely a "5/4" tuba that can hold it's own with the big boys. Both of them are two of the best tubas I've ever played though and I would highly recommend either.

Hope that helps,

Jim Andrus

I really like mine. I've used it with big and small orchestras, chamber groups, lots of solos. It is a terrific "all around" instrument.

Not to post click bait, but I have many recordings of myself using my 291 at my youtube channel if you'd like an immediate sense of what I can do with mine: https://www.youtube.com/user/tubalex2112" target="_blank

I may not be this best guy to get advice from regarding your questions about the Bruckner but I thought I'd chime in anyway.

I'm a B flat player who is making the switch to the merry old land of CC. I test played a bunch of CC tubas and I bought a Bruckner about two weeks ago.

The Bruckner was the most free blowing tuba that I tried, Gronitz, Alexander and other Miraphones. Probably due to its large valve set. The tone was warm and I could play it at all volume levels easily. The low range, which I struggle with normally, is amazing on the Bruckner. It sits comfortably in my lap and is a joy to play.

I do have some intonation issues with it. The open C through A flat below the staff requires that I lip up about a half step to be in tune. It is easily done and I can do it but it takes a conscious effort to do so. I don't know if this has anything to do with me being a B flat player or I have a lousy embrasure or not. This is an issue I will conquer on my musical journey.

My overall impression of the Bruckner is very positive. I must tell you that I am a rotor guy. Rotor horns are much easier on these old arthritic fingers and hands then pistons.

Good luck!

One of my favorite tubas I have tried -- played one for quite a while at the Miraphone factory. Had I need for it, I may have bought it on the spot. It's big sounding, but not tubby or fuzzy. The rotary setup has got a bit more pop than many 5/4 piston horns I've played. It's got a bit more (*modern*) depth than a 188, but responds a lot like it. It's a superb horn; it has character which I feel many horns lack. It's big enough to shake some ground, but you also won't feel like you are driving a semi through rush hour traffic; and it's stable through all octaves.