TubeNet

I'm currently in the market for a 5/4 CC Tuba for college. I'm looking for a professional quality horn that will last me long after graduation. I've currently been trying to checkout 3 different models that I'm seriously considering. I wanted to see what your opinions were on these instruments. I've currently been checking out the Meinl Weston 5450 Thor, the B&S 3198(PT-6P), and the Miraphone 1293(open to the possibility of a 1292 New Yorker). Unfortunately I don't have anywhere close where I can try these instruments. So what do you all think. I'm especially looking for feedback from those of you whom have played these instruments. Thanks ahead for your help.

Matthew Gregory

Willson also makes some very fine 5/4 tubas.

Out of the ones you listed, I like the Miraphone the best, although it seems a bit smaller than either of the other two. The Thor and PT-6 are both nice tubas, just not for me.

You have to try them someplace. You can't buy a tuba based on what people recommend. You can get a sampling size of tubas to try based on people's recommendations and then you have to play them. They're all different. Duh! Personally, and I'm 62 yrs. old, the Thor was too big for me and uncomfortable for me, although it sounded great. I now own a 1292. It's a 4/4 or small 5/4 size tuba and is certainly capable of holding it's own in any size ensemble. It is also comfortable for me to hold being 5' 9" tall. It doesn't have a large valve cluster spread. Try it! If you want more breadth of sound, try the 1293.

Generic non-answers which also happen to be the most likely to be helpful:
1) What does your teacher suggest?
2) What are your criteria in order of priority? Sound? Intonation? Evenness/ease of response? Ease of clarity? Ergonomics? Epic low register? Epic high register? Etc? Playing all of these horns and listening to recordings of yourself playing them will go a long way to answering those questions and giving you more satisfaction with your choice. I would encourage you to start another thread asking folks how they assess a tuba and what they value in the ones they own.
3) Why only 5/4?
4) I would seriously look into a good used Miraphone 186 CC(or similarly nice playing in-tune 4/4 tuba).. when you can play anything on it you will be in a much better position to assess what you really want from a more expensive tuba. FWIW, I have lots of opinions about all the horns you've mentioned.. but lots of folks sound great on horns that I consider garbage and lots of the opinions expressed here run counter to my views. At the end of the day the only opinion you should value is your own and your teachers.

Unhelpful but way more fun answers:
1) You should also add both the 4/4 and 5/4 Rudy, the new B&S MRP, Tuono, and 5/4 Gronitz to your list.
2) I own a PT6/Thor and it's the best!
3) A Miraphone 1293 is really only 4/4.
4) The PT6 rotor has better intonation and a more pleasing sound than the PT6P but sacrifices some clarity. I consider that a very fair trade-off.

Good luck!!

Actually... Don't make it complicated. Buy something used, and see where it takes you. If you like it, great. If you want something else, sell it and buy something else.

At this point in your life, any of those will be a million times better than whatever you're used to right now. Don't get hung up in making a perfect choice, just make a good one.

THOR
Pros: Big sound. Great low register. Free blowing. Great intonation.
Cons: Lots of core, not much color variety. Very bright sound, easy to get edgy and lose refinement. Heavy. No auditions won yet.

PT6 (ROTOR)
Pros: Huge sound. Excellent intonation. Won many auditions. Good projection. Prettier sound than PT6P.
Cons: Low register harder to master. Not as much projection as PT6P. Fights back when forced to be very loud.

GRONITZ PCK
Pros: Big sound. Great low register. Broad BAT-like depth. Easy to blow and respond. Won auditions. Light.
Cons: Made with different parts/brands. Inconsistent intonation. Chainsaw-esque low register when pushed.

PT6 (PISTON)
Pros: Huge sound. Good intonation. Won many auditions. Better projection than rotor. More clarity than rotor.
Cons: Low register harder to master. Sound not as pretty as rotor. Fights back when pushed loud. Very heavy.

TUONO
Pros: Bigger sound than Thor. Excellent intonation. Free blowing. Great low register.
Cons: Heavy. Hardly found in the US. No auditions won yet.

1293
Pros: Big sound. Good intonation. Short action pistons. Solid low register. Medium weight.
Cons: Not as large as other 5/4. No auditions won yet.

bloke wrote: All of the problems discussed above are more-than-apparent in these recordings:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3n3gO-3Igo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_DaMAUvIMY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgsHV8X7YSs

bloke "I guess it depends on how one defines an 'audition'...but if you're looking for a used 5450, you'll have to ask someone else if theirs is for sale."

The Thor is a very good instrument as are the others. Despite this, the tendency is for players to abuse the instrument and over blow, play like Jason Voorhees in the low register, rattle the walls down, and it offers a sound without many overtones that tire the ears eventually. This is not to say that a capable and honorable gentleman is to be incapacitated to perform with taste and refinement.

Doc wrote:Additional proof:

http://youtu.be/oSe-sT2exvw

Additional proof that the Nirschl 6/4 is a great instrument, yes. However, I do not think that the OP is interested in 6/4 horns. Still, understandable why it was confused for a Thor.

Leto Cruise wrote:THOR
Very bright sound, easy to get edgy and lose refinement.

Leto Cruise wrote: The Thor is a very good instrument as are the others. Despite this, the tendency is for players to abuse the instrument and over blow, play like Jason Voorhees in the low register, rattle the walls down, and it offers a sound without many overtones that tire the ears eventually. This is not to say that a capable and honorable gentleman is to be incapacitated to perform with taste and refinement.

Huh? You need to listen to and judge tubas "out front"; not so much in some elephant room or up close, because what really matters is how it sounds to the audience.
Bloke posted some great clips of his Thor. I hear a dark, centered, rich sound. Sound-wise, like a mix of Alex and Yorkbrunner. Very nice.

bloke wrote:same 5450 / same player / different mouthpiece / different style...

...so why doesn't it sound the same as on the church orchestra recordings...??

bloke "My ears are tired. I'm going to bed."

The video that Doc posted is a Nirschl 6/4 and not a Thor. It is not the same horn or player. Understandable why the confusion occurred as the design is similar.

Leto Cruise wrote:THOR
Very bright sound, easy to get edgy and lose refinement.

I disagree completely. The performance of any vehicle is greatly affected by the driver, I suppose. But I find this statement to be completely contrary to my experience with my Thor. Then again, my Thor is thertainly thuperior.

Leto Cruise wrote: The Thor is a very good instrument as are the others. Despite this, the tendency is for players to abuse the instrument and over blow, play like Jason Voorhees in the low register, rattle the walls down, and it offers a sound without many overtones that tire the ears eventually. This is not to say that a capable and honorable gentleman is to be incapacitated to perform with taste and refinement.

I also disagree with the statement that it offers a sound without overtones. In fact, I think it's quite superior in this regard, allowing for an ability to blend with other instruments in a manner exceeding a number of other 5/4 horns I've tried. I think it's actually quite consistent, thereby seeming possibly bland. I remember trying a PT6P years ago that I thought was horrible because every valve combination produced a different formula of overtones. Playing a one-octave scale sounded out of tune to my ear at first, then I realized it was much more the case that each scale degree had a different color to it because it was a different balance of overtones from one note to the next. I don't know which would be preferable to the world-at-large, but I find the consistency of the Thor more suitable to my tastes. I think this trait is also the reason I find the horn responds differently to each mouthpiece. I've only ever had one other horn that exceeded the Thor in its ability to reflect a change in a mouthpiece. 5 mouthpieces=5 Thors.

bloke wrote:Wisemann 900.

Is this the PT-6 clone?

I've never loved the Thor or PT-6. In my hands (and in brief play-tests), they play huge and dark, but that's about it. I didn't like it, because it seemed like dull and dark, and I didn't think I sounded like myself.

To my surprise, the Tuono was no better. It literally seemed like a Thor with rotary valves instead of pistons, no other difference.

Again, all just first impressions from brief play-tests. Maybe I could grow into any of those 3 tubas. But the initial feedback I got was enough to make me politely set the tuba down and move on.

I'm playing on Tuono and last summer I had opportunity to compare it,side by side with the Gronitz PCK. My Tuono is yellow/gold and the PCK was silver. The most precisely I can compare is by the way the room responded to the soun(i was playing them in to the Horn Guys). With playing the Tuono i got a sound that was spreading on the walls and the other subjects in the room. It was more precise and defined kind of sound. The PCK though had more dark kind of sound I couldn't feel the sound on the walls,but the floor was shaking. I c0ould feel the sound down in my legs. It had not that much defined kind of sound. That's all I can help.
P.S. I also tried Miraphone 1291 and the one I tried had good intonation,but veeery small sound,not resonant at all.

MacedoniaTuba wrote:I'm playing on Tuono and last summer I had opportunity to compare it,side by side with the Gronitz PCK. My Tuono is yellow/gold and the PCK was silver. The most precisely I can compare is by the way the room responded to the soun(i was playing them in to the Horn Guys). With playing the Tuono i got a sound that was spreading on the walls and the other subjects in the room. It was more precise and defined kind of sound. The PCK though had more dark kind of sound I couldn't feel the sound on the walls,but the floor was shaking. I c0ould feel the sound down in my legs. It had not that much defined kind of sound. That's all I can help.
P.S. I also tried Miraphone 1291 and the one I tried had good intonation,but veeery small sound,not resonant at all.

Very nice observations Macedonia. Have you had the chance to play a Thor or PT6 before?

Leto Cruise wrote:

MacedoniaTuba wrote:I'm playing on Tuono and last summer I had opportunity to compare it,side by side with the Gronitz PCK. My Tuono is yellow/gold and the PCK was silver. The most precisely I can compare is by the way the room responded to the soun(i was playing them in to the Horn Guys). With playing the Tuono i got a sound that was spreading on the walls and the other subjects in the room. It was more precise and defined kind of sound. The PCK though had more dark kind of sound I couldn't feel the sound on the walls,but the floor was shaking. I c0ould feel the sound down in my legs. It had not that much defined kind of sound. That's all I can help.
P.S. I also tried Miraphone 1291 and the one I tried had good intonation,but veeery small sound,not resonant at all.

Very nice observations Macedonia. Have you had the chance to play a Thor or PT6 before?

Nope,i haven't tried any of those tubas,i have mostly played rotor instruments(even though I LOVE the piston tuba). Hopefully one day I will:))

Not worth much... but when I tried a Thor and Tuono back-to-back (for like 5 minutes), I thought they were almost exactly the same, just they type of valves was different. That is, the Tuono played like a piston tuba to me.