Hellow fellow tubists. I was wondering if any of you guys could give me some advice. So here it goes. I am interested in buying one of the Nirchl York 4/4 CC tubas. Specifically, the one that is for sale right now. The thing is that I have never played a Nrichl and telling from the pictures it looks very similar to the Meinl Weston 2000. I have played one of MW 2000 and I am not a big fan of the design and the piston valves. So my question is has anyone played the two and if so are the two horns very similar in feel, design, playabiltiy etc? or are they completely two different tubas? I know that in the end it is up to me to try the horn but I figured doing a quick background check wouldn't hurt before I begain the long process of buying a new tuba. Thank you for taking the time to read this.
Zach
Nirchl York and MW2000 similar?
-
Tom
- 5 valves
- Posts: 1579
- Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 11:01 am
The first thing that needs to be cleared up is that the 4/4 Nirschl for sale here is not the same as the "Nirschl York" model (a couple of those are also for sale here). One is a copy of a Jacobs York (6/4 CC--the Nirschl York) and one is a 4/4. As you might imagine, they play totally different from each other.
I owned a MW 2000 for about 2 years. I sold it for a few different reasons, but the biggest reason was ergonomics. I tried to get used to it over the course of my time with it, but was having problems that just weren't worth the struggle (I switched to a rotary CC and am quite happy). Great sound, fine pitch, so-so valves.
The 4/4 Nirschls are fantastic tubas. I have spent a fair amount of time with 5 different examples, and while all differed slightly (all were "original/older" examples), they were all fine tubas. The valve layout and action is MUCH more comfortable on the Nirschl for me, and the Nirschl seemed much easier to play. Some do not care for having to hold the horn at a bit of an angle due to the short leadpipe, but it did not bother me. Pitch on the 4/4 Nirschls that I played was quite good, but I would describe the sound as being a bit "dark," which did not bother me. Craftsmanship on the Nirschl is outstanding...better than on the MW 2000, in my opinion.
I owned a MW 2000 for about 2 years. I sold it for a few different reasons, but the biggest reason was ergonomics. I tried to get used to it over the course of my time with it, but was having problems that just weren't worth the struggle (I switched to a rotary CC and am quite happy). Great sound, fine pitch, so-so valves.
The 4/4 Nirschls are fantastic tubas. I have spent a fair amount of time with 5 different examples, and while all differed slightly (all were "original/older" examples), they were all fine tubas. The valve layout and action is MUCH more comfortable on the Nirschl for me, and the Nirschl seemed much easier to play. Some do not care for having to hold the horn at a bit of an angle due to the short leadpipe, but it did not bother me. Pitch on the 4/4 Nirschls that I played was quite good, but I would describe the sound as being a bit "dark," which did not bother me. Craftsmanship on the Nirschl is outstanding...better than on the MW 2000, in my opinion.
-
Casey Tucker
- 3 valves
- Posts: 463
- Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 12:25 pm
- Location: Houston
i felt same about the 2000 as i did the 2145 in ease of play. personally, it didn't slot as well as my PT does but i did like the the overall sound and feel of the horn. the Nirschl's that i've played i thought were a fantastic horns EXCEPT for the leadpipe positions. i can't sit comfortably with the horn at an angle. i have heard of people buying handmade nirschls and requesting a repositioning of the leadpipe done buy the factory AS WELL AS getting it changed after they've played with it. Nirschl tubas are in my top 2-3 next horn (s) but i will be getting the leadpipe changed. you have two fine choices but i would advise you to check out the Thor side-by-side with the 2000. it might sway your decision a little. also, if you like the nirschl's you should try out a gronitz. they have some very nice CC as well as a FANTASTIC F (pf125)
-casey
-casey
-
bttmbow
- pro musician
- Posts: 342
- Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 12:04 am
- Location: in front of the timpani
The 4/4 Nirschl and the MW 2000 are both 4/4ish tubas. They have similar bell flares and bell diameters, but have a completely different wrap, and a different taper.
The Nirschl has a great sound, but quite a different feel (resistance-wise) than the 2000, so YMMV... Most 2000s sound better than many 2155s.
The Nirschl and 2000 have DIFFERENT sounds and playing characteristics.
Both are better than good 4/4s, but you have to play them to find if one works for you.
Good luck,
CJH
The Nirschl has a great sound, but quite a different feel (resistance-wise) than the 2000, so YMMV... Most 2000s sound better than many 2155s.
The Nirschl and 2000 have DIFFERENT sounds and playing characteristics.
Both are better than good 4/4s, but you have to play them to find if one works for you.
Good luck,
CJH