TubeNet

I'm in possession of a very very nice playing early handmade production small belled five valve 186 CC.

It really does seem to be something special and it's very obviously been maintained.

That said:
I would appreciate the collective wisdom of those with more experience with this rare beast. Technology/design has marched forward since this horn was made. Is this horn as perfect as it gets or are there 'mods' that you feel any horn of this vintage will consistently benefit from?

I'm not looking to change the fundamentals of this horn.. it's near perfect in the ways that I care about.. but, for example, if a modern leadpipe or receiver is a no-brainer improvement.. I'd like to know that.

Tuba Joe Exley.. You play a horn similar to this and have visited the Miraphone factory recently.. thoughts?

Yah, mine's one on the later side of the old-school ones. (late late 70s, maybe 1980 - from the run of MiraFones) it's a got a 17 3/4 (I think bell), it's smaller than the newer model. It's got the original ball linkage (straight, not S shaped) It's fantastic. It's got some quirky intonation -- the 3rd and 5th partials are lower than on more modern horns. It's an incredibly flexible horn tonally which is one of the main reasons I have stuck with it. Also, mines only a 4v CC... I've never really needed 5 as the privileged tones are outa sight. Mine is unlacquered; removed by the person who had it before I did.

A couple years ago I spent the better part of a day at the Miraphone factory in Waldkraiburg and got to compare the new '86 and '88 to mine closely. Christian Niedermaier also broke down the differences between the modern models and the old-school ones.

The newer ones are heavier, have a larger bell and have a lifted leadpipe (I think), they still sound like Miraphones, but they have a heavier sound. It's simply the trend with going with players worldwide preferring larger and larger horns.

That said, I liked the student model version of the 86, versus the pro model. (say what you want...lol) this is also the exact conclusion I came to when trying the same horns at Dillon / conferences etc. Also, this all said and done, the modern '88 comes a bit closer to the old-school 188s.

Christian explained one of the main differences now is that with the older horns, the bow section was hand-hammered as the rest of the horn still is. Now the bow is pressed/stamped which gives much more consistent results, but also results in a thicker gauge...or something to that effect. Still, the newer horn played well. The intonation is improved, and much of the old Miraphone soul is still there. It's a more consistent horn between ranges than the older horn.

and as far as changing an old one... MAN... I'd say don't mess with a good thing. I don't think you'll improve on it. One adjustment that people do is raise the lead pipe... I've had it done too, and *immediately* had it reattached to the bell. On that old horn, the leadipe-bell attachment, and the amount of solder used to attach it seems to have a pretty big impact on how it plays; on the focus and character of the sound.

The older horn has a much wider range of tone colors than just about any modern horn I've played which is why I stick to it. The difference is that in a more typical current situation, players play multiple horns for various colors, with the tonal control of each a modern horn being more direct and defined. The older horn will go in almost every direction, but the tradeoff is that you have to tell it what direction to go, if that makes sense. It works in almost any context, but you've got to definitively tell it which way to go. I've set out to replace it multiple times, but never have found anything that seems to fit as well. ...and I never bought it way back when with the intent of making it a career professional horn, it just sorta worked out that way.

I'd say, if you run across an old one and it's decent enough, don't muck it up. I've never played a modified one that I liked. Learn to love it's quirks. I think character vs flexibility is where it's at.

Hope that helps...!
Joe

tubajoe wrote: The older horn has a much wider range of tone colors than just about any modern horn I've played which is why I stick to it. The difference is that in a more typical current situation, players play multiple horns for various colors, with the tonal control of each a modern horn being more direct and defined. The older horn will go in almost every direction, but the tradeoff is that you have to tell it what direction to go, if that makes sense. It works in almost any context, but you've got to definitively tell it which way to go. I've set out to replace it multiple times, but never have found anything that seems to fit as well. ...and I never bought it way back when with the intent of making it a career professional horn, it just sorta worked out that way.

Wonderful observation! Thank you.

Modern designs have become progressively more monochromatic in terms of sound and response across registers and dynamics. In older Tubenet days it was common to discuss which tubas produced the most 'flexible' sound. Design and expectations have moved significantly in the last decade.

Everything moves in cycles.. already the 188 is enjoying a small resurgence in certain circles.. How long until people start 'modding' newer 186s with smaller bells and leadpipes?

Thanks again!

Hmm. I thought the older models had the "stovepipe" 16 1/2 inch bell, and the newer ones had the 17 3/4 inch bell. Yes, the old bell can be very versatile, especially "point-and-shoot," and the newer bell is rather vanilla, kind of the tuba version of a Bach 37 trumpet bell.

The older model with the 16" bell also had a drastically different leadpipe taper than the newer ones. The leadpipe was smaller at the beginning and that makes a huge difference. Same bore in the valve section.

bloke wrote:The best mouthpipe ever on these instruments (imho) was a small mouthpipe found on the c. mid-70's instruments.

I absolutely agree. I have one on mine. You can see the difference. Much better tone, intonation and breath support - just the right amount of resistance.

Thank you all soo much for the sage advice and voices of experience.

My instincts agree with the sentiments of others. Miraphone built it right the first time.

Miraphone should consider bringing back this iteration of the 186.

Interestingly, when I emailed Miraphone about this horn they simultaneously implied that the newer leadpipes don't always fit the older horns(tubing specs were a bit different back in the day and it's possible the valve section is a slightly different bore) BUT they have become much smarter about leadpipe/receiver taper design in recent years.

I suspect at some point 'better' becomes less about quantifiable improvement and more about taste and musical goals and route to achieving them.

Question -- Miraphone has been known to take custom orders, especially for items where they "still have the tooling." Any chance that (for a price), Miraphone would build an old-style 186 as a custom order? Might cost more than people want to pay... but it might not be completely impossible.

A thought:

Since there seems to be a conventional wisdom that the original 16 1/2" bell on a 186 made for a more flexible and interesting sound and the modern 185 HAS a 16 1/2" bell I wonder how many new 185 parts are interchangeable with a vintage 186.

More to the point, would a modern 186 with a 185 bell work and be in the spirit of a vintage small bell 186?

Conversely, would a modern 185 with a 186 valve section work and be in the spirit of a vintage small bell 186?

Will we see a flurry of Chinese 186 clones with 185 bells in the near future?

More than the 1.25" of bell diameter, the method of crafting and the thickness of the metal used probably plays a bigger difference in the new vs. old Miraphones... Even if a modern 185 bell fit on a modern 186, I doubt the results would be that drastic.

The taper of the vintage 16 1/2" bell is visibly different.

I don't know the answer to my questions and this seems a reasonable place to ask.

joh_tuba wrote:The taper of the vintage 16 1/2" bell is visibly different.

TheHatTuba wrote:More than the 1.25" of bell diameter, the method of crafting and the thickness of the metal used probably plays a bigger difference in the new vs. old Miraphones...

Yep....and yep. I've only played one old Mirafone 186 BBb. It had a low serial #, smaller 16 1/2" bell w/kranz, 'S' linkages (which were very noisy), and the metal thickness was noticeably thinner-gauge than the modern ones. Probably made in the early 1960s. The tuba was lighter in weight than the modern ones.......not as light as an Alex, but still lighter than the later Miraphones. And I did notice the bell taper being more like an old M-W. Despite it's issues, I thought it played quite well, and the sound was sweeter/more interesting to my ears than the later models. I also heard the owner play it.

The modern Miraphone 18X series of tubas, while nice, are just kinda too blah/generic for my tastes. But (from my one-time several-hours experience) there is definitely some "magic" in those vintage Mirafones