TubaForum.net

Ok title says it, so if you've ever owned a Mirafone 187 or currently own one please give your best run down on everything you like and dislike about this horn. Any quirks, tuning issues, low end, stuffy or free blowing opinions. I am thinking about switching to rotary (again) this time to ward off finger arthritis issues of having to push straight down on piston valve caps mostly. I have an incredible deal working with a tech friend of mine that's got one that needs some dent work and parts but is in good shape otherwise. Also don't want a 186 really, they feel too skinny and don't have quite the same feel as a larger 4/4.5 sized horn to me. Photos of your horns if you care to share them as well.

Gosh the responses are overwhelming here. Really? No one has anything to say either way about the 187? I've only seen about 3 or 4 of them in archived for sale postings on the "old site" over the years and maybe 2 on the general internet for sale so maybe 5 or 6 total (ever). 186's in either key can be seen for sale in any condition every few months a couple of them pop up. Perhaps much more supply and demand or flooded market. Either you guys are hanging on to these 187's as the best kept little secret or they are just "blah! Just buy a 186, they are the same thing"?

..so, do you own one?

I played one in the 76th Army Band in Germany. Mine was a five-valve version. It had the typical intonation issues (flat d in the staff, slightly high f). Other than the fifth valve, I didn’t think it was much different from the 186’s my section mates played.

bloke wrote: ↑Sun Aug 22, 2021 10:33 am ..so, do you own one?

Sort of by default at this point, yes. It's a late 70's in need of repair at a friend's shop he will be putting a 5th valve on and some 3B miniballs/new linkage parts. Should be a good horn when it's done. Just not sure HOW much different other than larger conical section than a 186 and "deeper" sounding?

jonesbrass wrote: ↑Sun Aug 22, 2021 11:30 am I played one in the 76th Army Band in Germany. Mine was a five-valve version. It had the typical intonation issues (flat d in the staff, slightly high f). Other than the fifth valve, I didn’t think it was much different from the 186’s my section mates played.

Mark, do you mean not much different than how the 186 sounded or was it physically similar to you? Also, comparing 4 and 5 valve horns..do you think the 5th made it more or less stuffy playing through it without the 5th depressed? Always wondered.

I don't remember them from the 1970's at all, as I'm thinking the 188 had barely emerged, but whatever...

My first impression (after playing a couple of them briefly, that I repaired) was " ' nice try, Miraphone".

I don't view them as bad...

There's a school - about an hour and a half away from here - that MUST HAVE had (in the past) a tuba-playing band director (who wanted something nice to use for themselves), because - when I looked through their inventory of (mostly) junk, there emerged (from the ashes) a nice/shiny/only-lightly-damaged 187...

I don't remember them from the 1970's at all, as I'm thinking the 188 had barely emerged, but whatever...

Serial number puts it at the end of 1979 sometime. It also has the dogleg coming out of the valve section into the MTS, as opposed to the straight leg signifying the first version of this particular horn.

I think of the 187 and 188 as proper big-ish 4/4 tubas. Frankly, the way things get upsized these days, the 186 feels a little small to me, at least for playing in a large band. So the 187 and 188 feel more normal sized and like what I think a solid 4/4 should be. Same concept, but accepts (and dispenses) "more."

bort2.0 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 22, 2021 1:39 pm I think of the 187 and 188 as proper big-ish 4/4 tubas. Frankly, the way things get upsized these days, the 186 feels a little small to me, at least for playing in a large band. So the 187 and 188 feel more normal sized and like what I think a solid 4/4 should be. Same concept, but accepts (and dispenses) "more."

I think that 39-40'' tall horn is perfect especially with it having thicker bell and outer branches. The King I have is 41, almost 42'' tall and seems to bump into stuff a lot during rehearsals. I think you're right as far as the 187-188 being what a normal 4/4 sized should be, as I think the 186 has really skinny outer branches and feels small to me.

Maybe you have had a lot of responses because there aren’t a ton of 187 miraphones out there?

York-aholic wrote: ↑Sun Aug 22, 2021 2:12 pm Maybe you have had a lot of responses because there aren’t a ton of 187 miraphones out there?

This is what I was thinking but also at the same time shocked there isn't (at least in a community of players who typically have their noses and fingers all up in the proverbial tuba cookie jar and know most everything) I will have to e-mail Miraphone and see if they will divulge some 187 production numbers.

KingTuba1241X wrote:

jonesbrass wrote: ↑Sun Aug 22, 2021 11:30 am I played one in the 76th Army Band in Germany. Mine was a five-valve version. It had the typical intonation issues (flat d in the staff, slightly high f). Other than the fifth valve, I didn’t think it was much different from the 186’s my section mates played.

Mark, do you mean not much different than how the 186 sounded or was it physically similar to you? Also, comparing 4 and 5 valve horns..do you think the 5th made it more or less stuffy playing through it without the 5th depressed? Always wondered.

The 187 is to the 186 as the 188 is to the 186, if that makes sense. Physically and sonically very similar. It may have had slightly more “headroom” for dynamics. In the example I played, the 5th valve only added a tad bit of stuffiness compared to the four-valve 186s. . . Nothing to complain about. I agree with Brett that in today’s world of oversized tubas, the difference between a 186 and 187 is minor by comparison to today’s 5/4 and 6/4 tubas.

I don't know when Miraphone changed the bell size of the 186 from 16.5 to 17.7 (or whatever!), but I also wonder if the 187/188 development was meant as an upsize from the smaller bell 186s. Back in the day, the 186 had that smaller bell... And the 185 and 184 were smaller from there.

The 187 and 188 sure weren't Kaiser tubas, but sure are a little bigger than the 186 from either era.

Personally, and selfishly, I think they could squeeze a 189 in-between the 188 and 190. That would make me very happy. :)

the difference between a 186 and 187 is minor by comparison to today’s 5/4 and 6/4 tubas.

Yes, and that's a good thing for those wanted just a smidge bigger all around than a 186 yet keeping that "non diffuse" sound of a rotary horn as opposed to going full on "lap sousaphone" from 4/4 to 6/4.

bort2.0 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 8:55 am I don't know when Miraphone changed the bell size of the 186 from 16.5 to 17.7 (or whatever!), but I also wonder if the 187/188 development was meant as an upsize from the smaller bell 186s. Back in the day, the 186 had that smaller bell... And the 185 and 184 were smaller from there.

The 187 and 188 sure weren't Kaiser tubas, but sure are a little bigger than the 186 from either era.

Personally, and selfishly, I think they could squeeze a 189 in-between the 188 and 190. That would make me very happy. :)

I know for sure by the early 90's that the 186's had the larger Vanilla bells on them. My estimate would early or mid 80's they changed up the linkages and bell sizes for the production horns. The 187 in question I will be getting is a late 79' as I mentioned and it appears to have a 17.7'' bell with old thicker bell kranz on it which is awesome. Still has me confused though as the dog leg near the MTS is crooked not straight like newer 187's and I'd like to find out why and when they changed that (yeah tuba nerd stuff but I'm also a historian kinda).

I agree with a "189" model in between there. Even though the 190's sound pretty cool, they are a bit too tall for my taste and don't really fit in most gig bags. A true 5/4 Miraphone version of the PT-6 rotary would be great, although I think the 188/187 cover that sonically but physically I'd like to see it (19'' bell, 41'' tall, optional factory bore size of .772'' or .835''). Historically speaking regarding Germans and their machines back to WW2, it's ironic that the Focke-Wolfe aircrafts were numbered similar to the Tubas years later IE: FW-189, FW-190, Panzer 88mm (Miraphone 188). I know maybe no correlation but interesting to ponder if someone wasn't a WW2 buff naming these horns.

KingTuba1241X wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 10:04 am I know maybe no correlation but interesting to ponder if someone wasn't a WW2 buff naming these horns.

I don't think so. Aside from the pretty weak correlation (the number 190?), at the time I imagine more than a few band directors had seen active combat against the Reich, and memories were pretty fresh. Same with Japan.

Speaking of memories that fade, "186" was funny only a few years ago, I suppose because it referred to an enthusiasm for the 186 that had already peaked. The only Miraphone I've ever played was an old Bb 190, and if you'd asked about that, I could tell you it was definitely a tuba. A good example of the 187 sounds like a pretty safe bet, but I would trust someone's verbiage about it about as far as I trust wine descriptions.

Not sure if this is well known, but there was a 189. I've heard good things about the 289, but I don't know how much like the 189 it is, valveset excepted. I have no direct experience with any of them, so can't comment personally.

Aside from the pretty weak correlation (the number 190?)

3 numbers matching up between the two, if there wasn't a correlation then, I suppose I just made a case for them now. History has to be written at some point, and remember the 70's were only 30 years past WW2 when the old Wehrmacht WW2 vets would have been in their 50's and their kids in their 20's-30's who might have been working at Miraphone. It's nothing too serious but something to think about.

hrender wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 11:21 am Not sure if this is well known, but there was a 189. I've heard good things about the 289, but I don't know how much like the 189 it is, valveset excepted. I have no direct experience with any of them, so can't comment personally.

Yep, forgot about that one. That's a true Kaiser, even larger than the 190. Nearly 52'' tall wow.