That don't look like no Miraphone to me!

[EMC]

Doesn't even look like a clone to me, looks more like a Sanders or something.

[Dan Schultz]

Nope. Not a Miraphone. Not a B & S. Not even a good 'clone'. It looks like some of the stuff 'Violin King' in Texas was selling about twenty years ago.

Certainly not worth what the seller is asking.

[doublebuzzing]

That thumb ring looks like it would come off if you tried supporting the horn with it.

[toobagrowl]

It's interesting how these early Chinese tubas are starting to pop up on ebay as of late. I've never seen them before. Kinda weird to see early/older Chinese tubas with "S" linkages because we recognize them as "recent" tubas. But repairmen like TubaTinker and bloke have talked about seeing these tubas for at least a couple decades now.

This tuba + case would probably be a decent buy at under $1,000. But a $3,500 BIN for this used Chinese clone You can get a NEW clone of this same model tuba for just over half that price, and it is probably better

[Michael Bush]

The title is misleading, you just made a double negative, so you're implying this is a Miraphone?

He should have used proper grammar and said "This don't not look like no Miraphone to me not no how.)

[sugawi]

Seller's response:
"There is no model number or serial number. From the research we have done it is a pre-1960 model to which Miraphone did not put either one on the instrument. We don't really know much more than that."
How long do you think it will take for seller to realize the truth?

[Dan Schultz]

..... How long do you think it will take for seller to realize the truth?

Dunno. I sent the seller a message several days ago.

[sugawi]

It sure doesn't look like original:)

[Michael Bush]

Huge price cut, to $1995. Still saying it's a Miraphone, though.

[Michael Bush]

I have a Rolls Royce STYLE car for sale...

How did I miss that? Good catch.