the old 184 - O-99 thing...with a different twist...

[bloke]

We've all read/heard discussions about people would stuck Olds model O-99 B-flat bells on to Miraphone 184 C tubas, but here's a different twist (or two)...

Most Old O-99 tubas (GOOD tubas) were made with only 3 valves. By now, most of their pistons are worn/leaky.
Most often the O-99 bows and bells are very restorable. The bore size was 21/32" (.656" - approximately 16 2⁄3mm).
The low range was slightly stuffy, yet (no surprise) "good" for bass trombone doublers.

Also floating around are a few old Miraphone model 184 tubas (4 rotors). Often, the valvesets are in good-or-repairable condition, but their bells (and bottom bows) are trashed. New 184 B-flat bells (different from 184 C bells) are expensive. Their bore size was .709" (18mm) ...almost 23/32".

Out of curiosity, has anyone ever pasted a 184 rotary B-flat valveset on to an Olds model O-99 bell and bows set?

I'm far less curious as to whether anyone has pasted a 184 C valveset on to a Conn 2J (C tuba - as 2J tubas are already 4-valve instruments, and their valves are usually still in pretty good shape, as they tend to have been individually-owned), or a 184 B-flat valveset on to an old two-piece King B-flat body (somewhat unwieldy, at c. 45" tall).

[the elephant]

SHHHHH…

I am putting an 18 mm rotary set on an Ultratone contrabass bugle. (Same bell and bottom bow. Differences start with the very tall top bow, but the taper stays constant with the BBb O-99 for the same distance, with a lot of cylindrical tubing that can easily be excised between where the taper ends and the valves.) I am working out the inner branches to put it in (probably) BBb. Putting it in CC would involve a lot more surgery and would probably suck. I have also thought of keeping it in GG and just duplicating everything's length that is already there.

But oh, all that chrome… oh, my…

I am not much of a fan of the O-99 tuba, so I am not expecting much. However, one never knows; it might be pretty good.

[bloke]

cool...

Everyone's short on dough, but Anderson might strip that for you for not-a-whole-lot.

Otherwise, muriatic (c. 40% hydrochloric) strips chrome, and nitric should remove the nickel plating underneath the chrome.

...I'd rather have Anderson do it, myself...

(You may remember that I was enamored with some Olds GG contra guard wire, harvested it, had Anderson strip it, and used it on my squatty Holton B-flat project.)

[cjk]

With the long leadpipe, wouldn't one end up with a pretty flat bugle?

[bloke]

Conn found places to shorten the expanding bugle by two feet to make a 2J, so I would imagine that it wouldn’t be too difficult to shorten it by one foot.
Otherwise, the rotors could possibly (??) all be flipped to resemble that interesting-looking Alexander model - which happens to be C length.

That having been said, we need smart people around like CJK.

With the long leadpipe, wouldn't one end up with a pretty flat bugle?

[the elephant]

If high resolution, well-lit front and back shots of a 2J could be had for comparison, where the cuts were made could be determined and likely copied with some success. Nothing will be "factory tapered" (slightly goofy ends to make ferrules fit correctly) but it could be made to work well.

My observations from cutting that 186 from BBb to CC exposed a "secret". To make the shorter CC 186 have a similar tone and *weight* of tone the shortened branches were all re-tapered for the correct rate, with the ending of the cut section being LARGER. The majority of the top bow of a CC 186 is a good bit fatter (having a higher fluid volume). The number of these parts and their basic shape is the same, but the bottom bow is slightly shorter on the small side, so the top bow has to be larger, and the taper is slower than that of a BBb 186. So when you get to the end of the slightly larger but shorter top bow it is actually a good bit larger at the small end. The corresponding CC branches, while shorter, all share this characteristic. I measured in my own non-scientific way that the shorter branches of the CC are actually fatter enough to give them just about the same fluid volume as the BBb mates.

My conclusion is that the CC 186 matches the BBb 186 so closely (no, it is not "the same" but they really do sound and feel alike) because while two feet shorter, the CC has about the same internal volume as the BBb. This is some clever Cold War German engineering. This is not the case for the factory CC and BBb Holton 345 tubas, in my experience. The BBb always has a deeper, more organ-like tone, more breadth, more weight. The two 186 tubas are not so different from one another. I suspect that is this aspect to the horns: they share almost NO parts in the bugle. The CC 186 is not a shortened BBb, unlike the Alexander CC and BBb 163 horns, which do not have the same weight, and the CC normally has a lot of goofy intonation issues that the BBb usually only has to a minor degree.

The secret is to not just cut branches but to make new ones of the correct length and shape that share the fluid volume of the original BBb part. Can people do this at home? No. And it would not be a cut job, but a mostly new horn. The larger the internal volume, the more rapid the taper, the more parts you would have to build to duplicate the intonation and tone of the original horn. I think this is why so many cut horns fail. No one can do that, so it always ends up being a crapshoot.

Regarding this specific project, I think the taper of the Old tuba is rather slow. The Ultratone bugle maintains it, but the branches are wrapped in different places along the taper. The bugle has a long section of cylindrical tubing between the end of the natural O-99 taper from the bell flare that runs unaltered to the two valves, which are about four more feet away from the tapered section of the bugle. There's about 4' of tubing from the bugle through the MTS out to the receiver on these horns (a very rough guess). I think the GG horn is about 22'6" long, overall, so the tapered section is about the length of a BBb tuba @ 18' and that last four feet of tubing is definitely much fatter bore than the MTS-receiver section of the BBb O-99. To make my contra work as a BBb tuba the bore would have to increase, and at some point, it will be just too large.

However, cutting an O-99 to CC would involve very little change of taper to make parts fit, and the bore would be usable at the original size, so new valves would not likely be needed. The already-smallish valves would likely work a bit better, IMHO. So making a 2J-like rotary valved tuba from an O-99 might be a good horn.

If I had the needed photos of a 2J *and* a spare O-99/4 I might like to try this, but I don't, so I can't. I do have that contra, though, so some fun might be gleaned from messing about with it, and rotors are always a good choice when you need a lot of options.

This is a fascinating project to me, as an exercise more than for something to sell. I hope this thread gains some traction and does not roll off to page 32…

[the elephant]

If quoting the above dissertation, please use the following string…

too many words

That is all. Carry on.

[bloke]

Yeah...The Yamaha YBB–201/321 bugle (Besson knock-off) also has a lot of very slow tapering bow areas, but - reportedly (??) when Schilke chopped one down to C, and put a front action valve set on it (according to several), results were not wonderful.
===========
random stream of consciousness sidebar of a sidebar:

I have found out that Yamaha YBB-201/321 bottom bow caps (certainly not elegant) are out-of-proportion expensive, costing $125 - even when bought straight from Yamaha.
Even though Conn-Selmer has cheaped out - and made the one for the King 2340/2341 very narrow…and even though the King bottom bow is smaller, I’m probably going to force-fit a couple of (very affordably-priced) King bottom bow caps on to a couple of repaired Yamaha YBB-321 bottom bows - for schools.
===========
BACK TO THE OLDS O-99 WITH MIRAPHONE 184 ROTORS TOPIC...

[cjk]

Personally, I'd be much more interested in something more the opposite. I'd rather see an 18mm piston valve set replace the rotors on a 184 CC bugle.