Alex ID needed

[dtemp]

Not to familiar with Alexs.

Anyone know what this horn is? The details are sketchy, I know...

http://minneapolis.craigslist.org/msg/491231062.html

Thanks.

[dtemp]

Wade-

Thanks for all the info.

By your description, this doesn't sound like the horn for me.

My main ax is my EEb, and I was looking for a cost effective big horn to use only now and then (when a BIG tuba is really needed).

I don't think I'll have enough time to devote to it in the practice room to really make it worth my while.

I still might give it a toot if I have a chance, but I guess I'll keep searching (and saving).

[tofu]

[MartyNeilan]

One thing to watchout on the old Alex Kaiser tubas is receiver size. It was a special size far larger than what we now call Euro or large shank. An American or standard shank mouthpiece will be so small as to be absolutely unusable. If it has the stock receiver, be prepared to wrap some tape or something around your mouthpiece shank.

[iiipopes]

I have noticed that the Miraphone 186 CC tubas with the newer, larger bell have finer intonation (more in line with the 188 CC) but the tone is more generic. Is that a good or a bad thing? I don't know.

It seems that some quality of tone is lost when certain distinctive horns have "improvements" introduced into the bugle taper to correct pitch. Go figure.

As I've heard both the new CC and BBb 186's, regarding your first statement, if you're in a concert band, it's probably a good thing so it blends in section better. In orchestra, it probably is not a good thing where good individuality of tone is necessary.

YMMV - the destination is the same.

[The Big Ben]

Sound like an old Alex is like a high-maintenance girlfriend. Needs lots of attention.

[Jeffrey Hicks]

Just remember the only woman and Alex that aint high maintenance is dead.

[MikeMason]

Anyone know how this story ended? Who ended up with the Alex from craig's list?

[dtemp]

Would've liked to give it a toot, but never got a chance.

I just couldn't have given it the care it needed.

I would have been fun to have, though.

[J.c. Sherman]

The 163 is a BBb tuba that was re-engineered (cut) to also be a CC tuba. You can get them in either flavor. The Kaisertuba 164 is (or was) only a BBb tuba. This may have changed over the years, but I doubt it.

The older 163s sounded a bit better to my ears. The newer ones have changes to the mouthpipe and bell that cleared up a lot of intonation issues and they still sound quite good. But they do not have that Alex sound that was worth all the work, again, to my ears.

I have played two BBb "new" 163s and liked mine from 1958 better, despite the minor pitch issues. I liked my CC 163 a LOT better, despite the more pronounced pitch issues.

I have noticed that the Miraphone 186 CC tubas with the newer, larger bell have finer intonation (more in line with the 188 CC) but the tone is more generic. Is that a good or a bad thing? I don't know.

It seems that some quality of tone is lost when certain distinctive horns have "improvements" introduced into the bugle taper to correct pitch. Go figure.

Actually, I have a rather ancient 164 CC. It is a complex love affair. I think of the tone as being "more of a good thing" compared to the 163 - not a worse tone at all. But it took a long time before the intonation was solid enough from me to take it into public. It's still a squirly sucker! Half the time I want to get rid of the thing. The other times, usually on stage, I'm reminded why I keep it. I don't use it very often, but when I do - sigh...

Incidentally, the receiver size dwarfs the 163. Doug Elliot's largest shank rattled in there; no grab at all. I have an Alexander 78 mouthpiece - they claim never to have made it, and while it grabs slightly all the way in, I have an adapter for it. Only mouthpiece I've found which works reasonably well.

I know of another 60s 164 CC, and Hornguys/Ferguson Music had a 164 recently. As I understand it, no one bought it. They do have a BBb right now...

J.c.S.