What's the difference between the Meinl Weston 2155 and the Meinl Weston 2000? They seem to have the same specs. Differences in sound, intonation, etc? Please elaborate. Hopefully, eventually, I will be able to compare them by playing them both.
Just wondering, because the difference in price is so dramatic.
thanks!
MW2155 vs MW2000
-
quinterbourne
- 4 valves
- Posts: 772
- Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2005 5:52 pm
- Location: Ontario, Canada
-
WoodSheddin
- 5 valves
- Posts: 1498
- Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 9:44 pm
- Location: On the bike
- Contact:
-
Tom
- 5 valves
- Posts: 1579
- Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 11:01 am
The Meinl Weston 2000 and the Meinl Weston 2155 aren't even close to the same animal. Yes, I realize that even on Meinl Weston's own website they say "based on 2155," a statement I would preface with the world "loosely." You are not going to be able to tweak a stock 2155 into being a 2000. There are just too many differences.
The differences begin at the leadpipe...it's smaller and is "upswept" in addition to entering the valve cluster at a different spot. The angle is also different than the leadpipe angle on the 2155...the 2000 leadpipe seems a little shorter (I have not measured this) and doesn't wrap around the bell like it does on the 2155.
The valve section is a little different, too, because of the different way the leadpipe comes in, although both are the "big valves" and have the same bore.
The 5th rotor on the 2000 is turned 90 degrees and has a wider tuning slide.
The wrap is much tighter throughout the 2000 and sits down lower in the body of the instrument. The main tuning slide configuration is different and won't poke you in the leg like the 2155 does (at least when I play it).
The valve slide lengths seem to be different than on the 2155 too, although I do not know if this is universal practice. I have also noticed that the taper of the 2155 and the 2000 appears to be pretty different. You can sort-of see this in photos, but you can really tell when you see them in person. Perhaps it has to do with the hand-hammered bows...I'm not sure.
The bracing is lighter on the 2000 because they built it to ring, whereas the 2155 is heavier all around and heavily braced. The 2000 is also a lighter weight tuba by many pounds...I'm not sure what exactly this does for the way the instrument plays though.
All of the little changes have come together with an instrument that is "better" than the 2155 in every way I can think of. The tuning is much, much, much better on the 2000, the responsiveness is way better, it's more open, and the sound has more color in it. I realize all of that is totally subjective, but the difference is night and day when the two models are played back to back.
Between the two, I wouln't buy a 2155 at all considering what used 2000s are selling for these days.
As Sean said, play them back to back and you'll hear a difference.
The differences begin at the leadpipe...it's smaller and is "upswept" in addition to entering the valve cluster at a different spot. The angle is also different than the leadpipe angle on the 2155...the 2000 leadpipe seems a little shorter (I have not measured this) and doesn't wrap around the bell like it does on the 2155.
The valve section is a little different, too, because of the different way the leadpipe comes in, although both are the "big valves" and have the same bore.
The 5th rotor on the 2000 is turned 90 degrees and has a wider tuning slide.
The wrap is much tighter throughout the 2000 and sits down lower in the body of the instrument. The main tuning slide configuration is different and won't poke you in the leg like the 2155 does (at least when I play it).
The valve slide lengths seem to be different than on the 2155 too, although I do not know if this is universal practice. I have also noticed that the taper of the 2155 and the 2000 appears to be pretty different. You can sort-of see this in photos, but you can really tell when you see them in person. Perhaps it has to do with the hand-hammered bows...I'm not sure.
The bracing is lighter on the 2000 because they built it to ring, whereas the 2155 is heavier all around and heavily braced. The 2000 is also a lighter weight tuba by many pounds...I'm not sure what exactly this does for the way the instrument plays though.
All of the little changes have come together with an instrument that is "better" than the 2155 in every way I can think of. The tuning is much, much, much better on the 2000, the responsiveness is way better, it's more open, and the sound has more color in it. I realize all of that is totally subjective, but the difference is night and day when the two models are played back to back.
Between the two, I wouln't buy a 2155 at all considering what used 2000s are selling for these days.
As Sean said, play them back to back and you'll hear a difference.
-
Rick Oakes
- bugler
- Posts: 47
- Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 1:36 pm
LV/Bloke....Please use larger fonts.....
...so I don't have to squint. Thanks.--Rick Oakes