Getzen tuba?

[bort]

It's a Meinl-Weston... they used to be a division of Getzen. Either a MW-20 or MW-25, I'm not sure.

[bort]

Interesting, I didn't know the whole story!

[eupher61]

it appears of an age that this would be a 25. My main reasoning is that the 4th valve slide is not in front, while the 20 had it there from the start. I think...is that right?

The newer 25s have the 4th slide in front, similar to what every 20 seems to have.
But, the 20 is smaller than the 25, which is hard to compare. I just played a 25 last night, typical pitch issues but what a sound. Front 4th would help,this was an older one.

I've been wrong before, though. Please correct me if the slide location of the 25 is not a differentiating factor.

[Dan Schultz]

It's a Meinl-Weston... they used to be a division of Getzen. Either a MW-20 or MW-25, I'm not sure.

There were a lot more of the 20's sold to schools in the 60's - 80's than 25's. It's difficult to tell without seeing a good side-shot of the bell taper. The valve sections were the same and all that changed was the bottom bow and bell... maybe the back bow.

I've seen both versions with two and three slides on the top/front. I'd bet this is a model 20. The bell taper just doesn't look like a model 25.

Here's a model 25 next to a Miraphone 186

[eupher61]

Ok, my comment about the slide location is not valid. I've played 25s both ways but 20s only with the 4th in front. I suspect this horn is probably not as old as it looks.

[MartyNeilan]

The first models of the MW25 with the "4th on the front" had two VERY tight 90 degree bends to achieve this and a relatively short upward 4th slide. I felt that this had a negative impact on the openness of the 4th valve. I would prefer either the 4th in the back (like this one) or the later versions with the more rounded tubing.
My thoughts on the MW25 vs. the 186:
MW is slightly better for larger ensembles.
186 slight advantage for smaller ensembles/solo.