Miraphone 187 initial review
Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2021 1:12 pm
Some of you already know, that I pulled the trigger on this 187 that came up for sale this past month after a LONG deliberation between rotary horns and trying to find the right fit and not have an old polished horn gag me to death or trigger my chemical allergy. Yes it was an expensive journey, no I will never do it again. I know what 2 horns in life now I need to make good sounds and be happy, and there's always a special golden saddle ready to mount on another detachable bell 2341 someday down the road, but..for now...the Miraphone 187.
So the horn came in last week and after a quick pit stop at the repairman, it was ready to play and be seen in public once again. I was so busy, I hadn't even played a note on it. In fact my section mates all just grabbed the horn before I had a chance and started playing it
luckily they are friends. Last night's Christmas music rehearsal in a concert band of about 40 people (3 other tubas) it was able to bury the band when needed and then back way off to a perfect Pianissimo all with very little effort. The first of 2 mouthpieces I tried was a Yamaha Jim Self, not bad..but took a bit of extra air I wasn't too comfortable with even though the tone was great and had some fairly wonky tuning (even worse trying to tune with a large CC Willson which didn't help). (I think the Jim Self with it's medium deep funnel is best for Piston horns and St. Pete's). Switched to my trusty Schilke 69C4 and the horn came alive. I think that shallower cup really dialed the tuning back in as well. The one note that stuck out to me as bad was the C in the staff being played 1st valve was EXTREMELY flat all the way in, (I heard Roger Lewis say this was a thing back then and they fixed the newer 187's)? It was easier to control with the Schilke than the larger Jim Self mouthpiece for sure.
There have been discussions in the past on the old site about the comparisons between the 186, 187, 188 and so on...I will go on record as saying the 187 blows like a 186 but sounds like a 188 or even a PT-6 with half the effort. It's truly a forgotten and overlooked model. I can see why with those newer models like the 191, 1291, etc...or even the Kaiser 190 that the 187 was overlooked, but I think it's solely based on looks and the fact no one really played a 187 to give an honest review on it, so this is why I am typing all this. Maybe even a salesman's pitch to buy the newer models disuaded them, who knows but I think the market really missed out on this model. Sadly only got 1-2hr rehearsal "seat time" so far with it until likely January now, but it was a good purchase and glad I was able to re-home my other stuff to mostly cover the added cost of it. Is it too much for community band work? Not really..but will quickly bury a small group if you're not careful and play like Warren Deck, but if you shape your air like the horn wants you to..you can play a Quintet style gig easily as well. Again, not far at all from the way a standard 186 plays and blows but you are able to step on the gas harder and get a 5/4 sound from it. I did make it break up a bit with the C4 style mouthpiece but with a larger, deeper cup I think it would be pretty hard to do without sending pieces of your lung into the ceiling tiles. (Think of 186= Natural Aspirated gas motor and the 187= with a super charger added to it).
Physically, they are about equal at 39 1/4'' tall with a 17.7'' bell and .772'' bore. And of course the 187 has the thicker bottom bow and bell stack with a quicker expansion of the conical section leaving the main tuning slide into the body of the horn compared to the 186. Miraphone did a FINE job on this horn by keeping it similar "enough" to the 186 and giving it a super charger with the thicker bell and bow. Is it worth the $1000 more retail price over the similar 186? Hell yes! Luckly I scored this one, a 17 year old 187 with light wear and tear from a senior player for about half of retail so I had to pull the trigger to find out all the hype. I will add more hopefully at a later date once I figure this horn out more and what it needs. It didn't totally exhaust me and doesn't smell like a morgue so it's already won me over to a point
So the horn came in last week and after a quick pit stop at the repairman, it was ready to play and be seen in public once again. I was so busy, I hadn't even played a note on it. In fact my section mates all just grabbed the horn before I had a chance and started playing it
luckily they are friends. Last night's Christmas music rehearsal in a concert band of about 40 people (3 other tubas) it was able to bury the band when needed and then back way off to a perfect Pianissimo all with very little effort. The first of 2 mouthpieces I tried was a Yamaha Jim Self, not bad..but took a bit of extra air I wasn't too comfortable with even though the tone was great and had some fairly wonky tuning (even worse trying to tune with a large CC Willson which didn't help). (I think the Jim Self with it's medium deep funnel is best for Piston horns and St. Pete's). Switched to my trusty Schilke 69C4 and the horn came alive. I think that shallower cup really dialed the tuning back in as well. The one note that stuck out to me as bad was the C in the staff being played 1st valve was EXTREMELY flat all the way in, (I heard Roger Lewis say this was a thing back then and they fixed the newer 187's)? It was easier to control with the Schilke than the larger Jim Self mouthpiece for sure.There have been discussions in the past on the old site about the comparisons between the 186, 187, 188 and so on...I will go on record as saying the 187 blows like a 186 but sounds like a 188 or even a PT-6 with half the effort. It's truly a forgotten and overlooked model. I can see why with those newer models like the 191, 1291, etc...or even the Kaiser 190 that the 187 was overlooked, but I think it's solely based on looks and the fact no one really played a 187 to give an honest review on it, so this is why I am typing all this. Maybe even a salesman's pitch to buy the newer models disuaded them, who knows but I think the market really missed out on this model. Sadly only got 1-2hr rehearsal "seat time" so far with it until likely January now, but it was a good purchase and glad I was able to re-home my other stuff to mostly cover the added cost of it. Is it too much for community band work? Not really..but will quickly bury a small group if you're not careful and play like Warren Deck, but if you shape your air like the horn wants you to..you can play a Quintet style gig easily as well. Again, not far at all from the way a standard 186 plays and blows but you are able to step on the gas harder and get a 5/4 sound from it. I did make it break up a bit with the C4 style mouthpiece but with a larger, deeper cup I think it would be pretty hard to do without sending pieces of your lung into the ceiling tiles. (Think of 186= Natural Aspirated gas motor and the 187= with a super charger added to it).
Physically, they are about equal at 39 1/4'' tall with a 17.7'' bell and .772'' bore. And of course the 187 has the thicker bottom bow and bell stack with a quicker expansion of the conical section leaving the main tuning slide into the body of the horn compared to the 186. Miraphone did a FINE job on this horn by keeping it similar "enough" to the 186 and giving it a super charger with the thicker bell and bow. Is it worth the $1000 more retail price over the similar 186? Hell yes! Luckly I scored this one, a 17 year old 187 with light wear and tear from a senior player for about half of retail so I had to pull the trigger to find out all the hype. I will add more hopefully at a later date once I figure this horn out more and what it needs. It didn't totally exhaust me and doesn't smell like a morgue so it's already won me over to a point
