Miraphone 181 intonation

Mojo workin' · Post by **Mojo workin'** » Fri May 11, 2007 11:30 pm

I'm relatively new to playing F tuba exclusively and am having some problems figuring out the best solutions to the intonation problems on my Miraphone 181. As a general observation, I'm finding that I have to pull the 1st valve slide on most 1st valve combinations, as well as some 2&3 combinations being sharp. Maybe I just don't know the horn well enough yet, or maybe I don't have one of the better 181s.

Are there tendencies that are peculiar to this model, and if so what are the best solutions? I've heard of repairmen "fixing" certain intonation issues on this and other horns. What do they do?

Rick Denney · Post by **Rick Denney** » Sat May 12, 2007 2:19 am

Mojo workin' wrote:Are there tendencies that are peculiar to this model, and if so what are the best solutions? I've heard of repairmen "fixing" certain intonation issues on this and other horns. What do they do?

If you have to pull the first valve slide out for most first-valve combinations, then leave it out, and push it in for the more infrequent times when it's flat.

Also, lots of European F tubas are designed for the standard European practice of routinely using the third valve by itself in lieu of the 1-2 combination. This may change your perception.

As far as fixing the intonation goes, if there is no physical problem with the instrument (such as a big dent at the wrong spot or leaky valves), then a tuning problem is in the taper design and that's not something that can be fixed without making it into a different horn. You may have some influence on the intonation with mouthpiece selection, but that's about it, and that effect will be subtle indeed.

Rick "who finds the first valve slide isn't the one most wanting adjustment on his F tubas" Denney

Mojo workin' · Post by **Mojo workin'** » Sat May 12, 2007 5:51 pm

Jack it up, and run a "Firebird" (or other more intonation-friendly) model under it.

Good one.

Mojo workin' · Post by **Mojo workin'** » Sat May 12, 2007 6:19 pm

Are you opposed to a few alternate fingerings or pulling slides?

I don't like either, try to avoid both if I can. Even if that means getting another horn.

I'm guessing C in the staff is a little high. If it is, then it takes either a strong buzz or 1+3. How about Bb pull, A 3rd, D in the staff 12/below staff 3?

You've guessed right. And these have been my solutions as well thus far.

There are folks who tweak, but it's for easier playing, not intonation (not in any major way). Intonation is what it is.

I'll take this as my answer. I know that I have very good pitch, but was wondering if there was something magical that repairmen can do to fix intonation in a substantial way. I only see the repair shop to fix dents, I'm not really in the loop as far as what improvements can come from cutting slides and such. I had read in other posts that someone had Alan Baer cut some slides to "fix" some intonation problems on their Miraphone 181. That's where this was coming from.

Stefan · Post by **Stefan** » Mon May 14, 2007 4:44 pm

Dear Mr. (or Mrs.) Mojo,

I really think you should not be afraid of alternate fingerings. Once you get used to them, they become your regular fingerings. In my experience with tubas, there are few "normal" fingerings for some notes.

Stefan

Mojo workin' · Post by **Mojo workin'** » Mon May 14, 2007 8:40 pm

Dear Mr. or Mrs. Stefan,

If it weren't for the tone color change that happens in using a lot of alternate fingerings, I'd have less problem in using them. This particular tuba is wrought with having to use them as well as slide pulling more so than any other tuba I've owned. Thus my question to the forum.

Mojo workin' · Post by **Mojo workin'** » Mon May 14, 2007 10:11 pm

What kind of mouthpiece are you playing?

Schilke 62 mostly, sometimes Helleberg. Not exactly the latest hottest models. I like the very different sounds they produce. Are there better models for this horn's intonation?

MartyNeilan · Post by **MartyNeilan** » Mon May 14, 2007 11:05 pm

Mojo workin' wrote:
What kind of mouthpiece are you playing?
Schilke 62 mostly, sometimes Helleberg. Not exactly the latest hottest models. I like the very different sounds they produce. Are there better models for this horn's intonation?

If you really are stuck on teh Helleberg, you may want to try the shallower 7B or the improved FLoyd Cooley version.

Mojo workin' · Post by **Mojo workin'** » Tue May 15, 2007 12:25 am

Conn Helleberg is way too big for F tuba, IMO. Only complicates intonation. I've tried it. It is a contrabass mp anyway.

Agreed. It's the only solution that I presently have for a "darker" sound than the 62.

I've tried several mp's w/ mine, but the Josef Klier 4D is the best match for intonation and sound. PT 72 was pretty good, too. Helleberg 7B was ok, but not the best sound.

Will any/all of these give me a suitable contrast to the brightness of the 62?

Stefan · Post by **Stefan** » Tue May 15, 2007 6:01 am

Let me know if you want to try my PT-64. I compared that against about 5 other recommended f tuba mouthpieces back in the day. I could find no reason to spend the money on a new MP - the 64 was great.

But I doubt a better suited MP will offer major intonation differences - at least the kind of differences you want. I found that it was mainly a tone issue.

Mrs. Stefan

jonesbrass · Post by **jonesbrass** » Tue May 15, 2007 7:30 am

I don't think the helleberg size is the problem, but I would suggest using a more bowl-shaped mouthpiece on a rotary F. I was a dyed-in-the-wool funnel-cup mouthpiece user for years, but my 188 really took off when I changed to a bowl-shaped cup mouthpiece. My old MW 45 did a lot better with a bowl-shaped mouthpiece, too.
If you're relatively new to playing F, you might just need to give yourself time to settle in to playing that pitch of instrument. You may have consciously adjusted to the horn, but it might take a little while for your body/brain/ear to get used to the tone, location of the partials, etc.
Good luck and don't give up too quick.

Mojo workin' · Post by **Mojo workin'** » Tue May 15, 2007 6:59 pm

Danke Schoen, everyone.

iiipopes · Post by **iiipopes** » Tue May 15, 2007 7:15 pm

Also try a Wick 3L. Deep with a barrel backbore, yes, but it's made for smaller tubas, and if you want a "deeper" or "darker" tone, it's worth at least a try to get a broader perspective.

Mojo workin' · Post by **Mojo workin'** » Tue May 15, 2007 11:12 pm

Having recently test driven some newer models of contrabass and bass tubas with which I hadn't spent much time in the past, some tuba manufacturers are, finally, stumbling across some bugle designs that offer reasonably trouble-free intonation combined with the clarity of sound that many desire.

Which ones? I only get to try whatever Baltimore Brass Company has or attempt to hear myself over the cacophony in the Army Conference exhibit room.

rascaljim · Post by **rascaljim** » Thu May 17, 2007 10:55 pm

I admit I only skimed the rest, but ...

I know Al Baer designed modifications that can be done to try to correct the intonation. I never did them because I find that the intonation was managable with the Dillon PS S3 mouthpiece. The sound is kinda bright with that piece. All the helleburg style mouthpieces I've used with the 181 let you blow more air, but the sound is way too contrabassie. Right now I'm messing around with a PT-65 that seems to be working pretty well.

Past the mouthpiece thing. I found my tone to be a little on the spread side with the tuba. After discussing this with Lee Stofer he recommended putting rubber tubing around the bell rim. It tightened up the sound as well as made the notes slot a lot better. Might be worth a shot.

Jim Langenberg

TubeNet

Miraphone 181 intonation

Miraphone 181 intonation

Re: Miraphone 181 intonation