Page 1 of 1
Re: Alex 164
Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2016 12:23 am
by doublebuzzing
bloke wrote:Being a BBb, it's more likely to offer a non-troublesome scale.
Notice how older tubas' mouthpipes' receivers are mounted low.
People are taller these days.
On that note, have you ever borrowed a horn with a mouthpipe receiver way too high for you? Not a situation I would ever like to repeat
Re: Alex 164
Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2016 9:17 pm
by Heavy_Metal
the elephant wrote:This seller is screwing up. He has it listed as BOTH a 163 and a 164. It is clearly a 163, based on measurements and the photo. The 164 is much larger. Nice horn, regardless, but this is no Kaiser, but a normal smallish 5/4 Alex. The 164 tubas are quite rare. I have only ever seen/played two of them. (I played a 163 in the orchestra for twelve years.) You can tell them apart with no A/B visual reference by the bell throat, which looks a lot more like a BAT on the 164. The 163 has a bell with the typical rotary horn throat/flare shape.
The seller has both 163 and 164 typed into the text of his ad at least twice each. I don’t think he knows the difference, which is not really surprising, since the 164 is really not common. Also, the 16” bell and .826” bore are definitely 163-sized.
Dunno, Wade- the 163's bore is .807"/20.5mm. The 164's bore is 21mm which converts to .827".
These models have changed over the years. My Alex has been described as a very old 163, but it looks very different from later 163s. The basic wrap is the same, but the bore is only .787"/19.98 mm and it's not as tall or as wide. But, as my 163CC-playing colleagues would attest, it has the classic Alex sound.
This one is certainly older as it has clocksprings, but they don't have tension adjusting wheels like mine does so it's probably not as old as mine. It might just be "an older 164".
Re: Alex 164
Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2016 9:38 pm
by Heavy_Metal
That would make three bore sizes, then, that have been used on 163s. The late great Dave Bragunier's 163 CC (which "big1096" now owns) is, I believe, an early 1960s model and its bore is .807"/20.5mm. Maybe the 21mm bore was an option?
Re: Alex 164
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2016 11:02 am
by jeopardymaster
I'm guessing this is a fairly new 163, but the clockwork springs are confusing me. All I know about Alexanders is from the few I've seen and the one I own. This appears to have a very good lacquer finish, but the only ones I have played have been bare - that includes 2 once owned by Mike Thornton, "The Wizard" that I sold to tuben, and mine. Have Alexes always been offered in either finish? Has the finish held up so well that THIS horn could be 1950s vintage without being re-lacquered (or lacquered) recently? Can one of you guys clear up the "lacquer versus bare brass" thing for me?
Re: Alex 164
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2016 1:15 pm
by Mark Horne
The ebay horn looks bare brass to me. I also agree with others that the bell profile matches a 163 to my eye. Most of the modern Alexes that I have seen sport a lacquer finish.
Re: Alex 164
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2016 3:22 pm
by Donn
Mark Horne wrote:The ebay horn looks bare brass to me.
Right, note the traces of color around the lyre holder mount, leadpipe, etc.