TubaForum.net

bloke wrote: ↑Mon Mar 13, 2023 11:31 am

cktuba wrote: ↑Mon Mar 13, 2023 11:03 am I think the bad intonation on the older Alex horns was really magnified by the huge friggin' lead pipe and the fact (I beleve I remember reading somewhere) that the 163 CC was just a cut down 163 BBb. I think the larger valve section would probably throw off the intonation on a 188. But it would be interesting to see what the result would be.

The strategy of sticking a swollen bottom bow and giant bell onto a pt6 - reusing the rest of it, and morphing it into a 6/4 instrument- didn't do any favors for the intonation of that set up.

Yeah, I don't think the results would be good. But it would be interesting. Most likely kind of like a car crash isn't good but everyone has to slow down to gawk.

The 291 has pretty solid intonation. The Tuono, PT-6, Mr. P and 291 would be the horns I'd look at if I were looking to make a move. Of course I may skip straight to a Rudy 5/4... but no money, no changing. If there was a Kalison rotary that played like my DS.. I would be very interested. But I've never heard anything good about those. There was a reason they moved to pistons on their CC horns.

I'd LOVE to own a Tuono... But they're hard to find.

I think we've discussed just about every big rotary CC there is out there! Except the HB6? Never played one, never seen one for sale, and only read that they've got some pretty funny intonation.

Seems the majority recommends the Pt6. So... Get a Pt6!

Sousaswag wrote: ↑Mon Mar 13, 2023 2:29 pm I'd LOVE to own a Tuono... But they're hard to find.

I think we've discussed just about every big rotary CC there is out there! Except the HB6? Never played one, never seen one for sale, and only read that they've got some pretty funny intonation.

Seems the majority recommends the Pt6. So... Get a Pt6!

As a very long-time owner of a piston 5450, the rotary version is remarkably "brighter", sonically (which some seem to present as a complaint about the piston version)...and even though (no sonic effect, in my observation) they tacked on some more bell pancake. Yes...I've spent NON-elephant-room time with the rotary version, and I really-REALLY attempt to purvey EITHER accurate information OR genuine/sincere observations/opinions here.

One last thought for a while... maybe since the 188 has already been described as "a 186 on steroids," that's why it doesn't make sense to look for a 188 on steroids. The 188 is already the answer to one "like this but bigger" question, so maybe it's unreasonable to think that you could extend it yet one more time.

Well, what *I* want is a 3/4 188, and the 184 isn't it.

Mary Ann wrote: ↑Tue Mar 14, 2023 9:50 am Well, what *I* want is a 3/4 188, and the 184 isn't it.

Cerveny Piggy?

I have no idea. Bore size matters --- I'd have to have one to try, and my understanding is that Piggys (Piggies?) are pretty inconsistent. It's back to that old "not going to pay shipping for ten seconds to find out it doesn't work for me." You'd think there would be more tubas in a city this size than there are.

So I have had a B&S MRP for a few weeks now and I’ll have to say that @bloke was right! It’s the only horn I’ve found that really feels like a larger 188. It’s not quite as comfortable to hold but no horn that’s any bigger is really going to be. But the intonation is spot on and it’s VERY easy to play, it really does remind me of my old Miraphone 188. So @bort2.0 it looks like you need to look into getting a MRP too!

bort2.0 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 09, 2023 1:01 pm
Playing in wind bands ... for the sheer volume and style of playing (louder, loudest, loudest+), it was difficult to make the tuba do what I needed it to do -- I was just pushing it too hard and close to the max, too often.

I played for a few years in a great wind band that could play piano it was the best time to explore the dynamic range of whatever horn I brought along, even when (sometimes) there were four others in section and other times when it was just me. Then that band started to change and their conductor left and some "section leaders" started posturing to be conductor/director. That band lost the ability to play piano. The egos on the podium didn't even realize they had a hand, for dynamic direction that is. And I learned that no matter what horn I carried, or what some internet pundit said to insert their ego into any actual community thought process, that if I thought that I needed to hear myself play the ensemble (and probably me too) was already playing too damn loud. Then I got dystonia.


The end.

Pakins51 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 06, 2023 9:46 am So I have had a B&S MRP for a few weeks now and I’ll have to say that @bloke was right! It’s the only horn I’ve found that really feels like a larger 188. It’s not quite as comfortable to hold but no horn that’s any bigger is really going to be. But the intonation is spot on and it’s VERY easy to play, it really does remind me of my old Miraphone 188. So @bort2.0 it looks like you need to look into getting a MRP too!

I think @Mikelynch has said pretty much the same thing about his MRP, after he made sure I'd got a good 188.

I enjoyed my MRP when I had it. Big congratulations to you! I’d think they are probably wonderful audition horns too, and they offer (to me) better playability and clarity than a York copy offers.

It certainly offers a different type of sound and response than my new-ish 5450RA. I had the chance a few days ago to compare a MRP side by side- physically it’s bigger, and the 5450 is no small instrument.

I think the Pt-6 or 5450 is probably the next-size up from the 188. It’s still significantly larger than the 188.

The MRP is a better, more refined Pt-6. Probably what he originally wanted the 6 to be? It’s still a larger horn than either 5450 or the 6.

The MRP seems to be the latest evolution of the large CC tuba from B&S... The PT-6, Neptune, and PT-7 all have different characteristics and excel at different things... I think the MRP is mostly the latest dialing-in of that. I chatted with Bob Tucci about the MRP a few years ago, and I think that was my general take-away.

In this way, I find it interesting that Steve Campbell (Minnesota Orchestra) previously used a rotary Neptune, then a rotary PT-6, and now a MRP.

I also think it's interesting that the MRP is marketed the same way as the PT-7... a CC tuba that has the sound of a BBb tuba. I liked that concept, but the PT-7 is a piston tuba, so trying to be twice different (CC piston vs BBb rotary) always seemed like a big leap. The MRP may do a better job of this, since it's a rotary tuba. The PT-7 was said to have a bell that was made on a mandrel for some ancient kaiser BBb tuba... unique to the B&S lineul. Is the MRP bell unique,
or did they grab a Fafner or 2165 bell?

Of those, I think the PT-7 had the best sound, the PT-6 was the best playing and best overall, and the Neptune was the prettiest. I have no doubt that the MRP is a great tuba, and good for you to own one!

It's in my list of things I'd like to try in the future, but frankly, we're talking like 10-15 years until any kind of major tuba purchase. By that time, who knows what else will be around, and maybe Miraphone will finally make that 189 or a CC version of the 496.

bort2.0 wrote: ↑Sat Jul 08, 2023 7:29 am The MRP seems to be the latest evolution of the large CC tuba from B&S...

Is the MRP bell unique,
or did they grab a Fafner or 2165 bell?

I might be totally wrong, by I really thought it used the Fafner bell.

Pauvog1 wrote: ↑Sat Jul 08, 2023 9:13 am

bort2.0 wrote: ↑Sat Jul 08, 2023 7:29 am The MRP seems to be the latest evolution of the large CC tuba from B&S...

Is the MRP bell unique,
or did they grab a Fafner or 2165 bell?

I might be totally wrong, by I really thought it used the Fafner bell.

I thought so too. That also makes me consider this as an iterative update. Obviously it has the same valve section that they've used forever, but also now that they have a really good bell figured out, there seems to be a lot of piecing things together to see what works the best.

I don't mean that to sound negative, I actually think it's really interesting see all the R&d come together, because there's been so many instruments made of this form before. And as we've seen with places like Kanstul, or very very small production handmade instruments, if you are instruments are made, more variation there is between them. B&S has built so many for so long that they are quite reliable and have long since resolved whatever issues they could/wanted to resolve.

Good stuff!

I, too, am a former 188 owner.

From my 188 I went to a 1291, then to a special Rudi 4/4.

With all those horns I used to reminisce about my 188 because it was so easy to play.

I thought I would be done with buying horns after I got the Rudi. On a knack I decided to drive to Jacksonville to try some horns. Try; not buy.

I ended up buying an MRP and selling the Rudi. It is literally the best horn I’ve ever played. And I’ve had some responses from some trusted very competent musicians who thought the same thing. It really is that good.

The 188, for me, was wonderful in its time… but I don’t have the same feeling I had before about “I wish I had that horn back.”

If someone is looking for the next step up from a 188, the PT6 or MRP is the logical choice. But I’d go and try multiples to make sure you get what you want. Of the four instruments I tried, they each played differently and only one could’ve convinced me to sell my Rudi.