Recommendation on switch from a 186ish to a 188ish tuba

[royjohn]

As some of you know, I recently acquired a Mack 410 CC tuba (the 186ish tuba). I'm enjoy the horn and I think I can be quite happy with it for some time. However, maybe I've spent too much time reading about bort's endless transactions, because I can't help thinking about what horn I'd get if I decided to change...I'm thinking I would look for something slightly larger, around the border of 4/4 to 5/4, and maybe having a little more color in the sound, but still retaining a more or less point and shoot intonation. I wouldn't be able to spend a whole lot, maybe $3500 or $4000 or so.

So the obvious choice, I thought, would be a Mirafone 188 CC, if one could be snagged for near $4K. I wonder what other horns that meet the above criteria would suggest themselves to you. Maybe an exceptional Piggy? Some other Cerveny or Amati horn? Something else?

royjohn, tuba tyro

[bloke]

Money-wise - a few years ago, I might snag a 188 here or there that needed a good bit of my attention if – as an example – it was mis-identified by a pawnshop (eBay) as a 186, had enough ugly things on it to scare away most other bidders, and I was able to pick it up for $2500 or so.
Now that hyperinflation has kicked in (and there’s no sign of it stopping), I would be prompted to move on the same type of instrument for at least $2000 more dollars (still perhaps needing fixing up), slick it out, and then offer it at market value.
In fewer words, I don’t think you’re going to find a 188 - in any condition - for $4000, if I find it first.
Cachet-wise, I’ve always viewed the Czech tubas as historically functioning in the market as “the Chinese tubas before there were Chinese tubas”.

[bort2.0]

Baited with "188" in the subject line, and then zinged. :)

The $4,000 price point for CC tubas is, and has always been, pretty strange. It's beyond the cost of cheaper Chinese and Czech tubas, but not quite enough for the German tubas unless you get really lucky. And the "bigger than a 186" rotary CC concept is one that I've nearly exhausted, and I've never been fully satisfied there as well. I think the 188 is about the best compromise you can hope for, but it depends on the playing you do.

I got lucky with the 188 that I owned, and paid a little less than $5k for it. I sold it 8 years ago, and have missed it ever since. I haven't regretted selling it, but I have missed it. Worked perfectly in orchestra, and felt underpowered (as the only tuba player) in band.

The one option I can think of is the Meinl Weston 30 (4v) or 32 (5v) -- I think these are "bigger than a 186" in the way that they play and the amount of output they can produce. I like them. My first tuba was a MW-30, and it served me well until I got restless with tuba stuff. :) They have been out of production for a while and probably were not plentiful to begin with... but they are out there from time to time.

[KingTuba1241X]

Add another "No way you're going to find a $4k 188" unless one of us finds it first opinion. But yeah, I think Brett is right that there's a sweet spot there in size. 187 and 188 is that sweet spot before the size becomes unruly and riddled with intonation issues as you might find in a typical Kaiser (5/4 or larger rotary valve tuba). They also start getting to be air hogs at that level as well and WON'T play like a 186, 187 or 188. I lucked out on my 187 for the price especially since they are Unicorns. With Bidenflation, I might be able to sell it in a couple years for twice the price.. But I like it too much at the moment and don't want to make Brett's mistake of selling it too early in the game before I get all the enjoyment out of it.

[bort2.0]

Add another "No way you're going to find a $4k 188" unless one of us finds it first opinion. But yeah, I think Brett is right that there's a sweet spot there in size. 187 and 188 is that sweet spot before the size becomes unruly and riddled with intonation issues as you might find in a typical Kaiser (5/4 or larger rotary valve tuba). They also start getting to be air hogs at that level as well and WON'T play like a 186, 187 or 188. I lucked out on my 187 for the price especially since they are Unicorns. With Bidenflation, I might be able to sell it in a couple years for twice the price.. But I like it too much at the moment and don't want to make Brett's mistake of selling it too early in the game before I get all the enjoyment out of it.

I owned my 188 for a solid 3 years before selling it. Again -- for the orchestra playing I did, it was ideal. But when those gigs started to dry up, I realized how much less ideal it was for band, and as a one-tuba man, I had to move on.

[DonO.]

Lee Stofer has a sweet looking MW 30 for sale right now at $3500. With a leather Reunion Blues bag. So sweet looking it made me wish I played CC. Just sayin’.

[bort2.0]

Lee Stofer has a sweet looking MW 30 for sale right now at $3500. With a leather Reunion Blues bag. So sweet looking it made me wish I played CC. Just sayin’.

I was going crazy trying to remember where I had seen that tuba... great suggestion, @DonO.

[the elephant]

Oh, I want that bag! I greatly prefer the older round-ended RB bags that were not full clamshells. Nicest bags ever made.

The tuba is also very nice. I really liked my MW32. It was 186-sized but 188-voiced. It also did not have the excellent intonation of my current 186 or the old 188 I used to play. So I sold it.

This horn, though, is a 30 and not a 32, so no fifth valve.

And yes, one could be added using new, factory parts. Lee can easily do the work, but it would be a lot of money.

[bort2.0]

Oh, I want that bag! I greatly prefer the older round-ended RB bags that were not full clamshells. Nicest bags ever made.

I didn't look that closely at the bag before, but yes, that's really pretty nice. @greenbean any chance for round-ended SF bags in the future? :)

[cjk]

Would a 188 really be considered an upgrade to a 186?

[bort2.0]

Would a 188 really be considered an upgrade to a 186?

I think "upgrade" is based on opinion.

But I do think a 188 plays differently and is "a little bit bigger" in size/sound/output than a 186.

[cjk]

Would a 188 really be considered an upgrade to a 186?

I think "upgrade" is based on opinion.

But I do think a 188 plays differently and is "a little bit bigger" in size/sound/output than a 186.

A "little bit". I find a 186 and a 188 to be vastly more the same than different and honestly pretty much interchangeable. I can "get" wanting a bigger tuba than a 186, but I can't imagine that "bigger tuba" then equates to "188" for most people. There are just so many options out there which would make a bigger difference than the marginal differences between a 186 and a 188.

I'm probably lost in the weeds.

[bort2.0]

Would a 188 really be considered an upgrade to a 186?

I think "upgrade" is based on opinion.

But I do think a 188 plays differently and is "a little bit bigger" in size/sound/output than a 186.

A "little bit". I find a 186 and a 188 to be vastly more the same than different and honestly pretty much interchangeable. I can "get" wanting a bigger tuba than a 186, but I can't imagine that "bigger tuba" then equates to "188" for most people. There are just so many options out there which would make a bigger difference than the marginal differences between a 186 and a 188.

I'm probably lost in the weeds.

No, it's a good point.

My experience of comparison was spending a few hours at Dillon Music, play testing several 188s and 186s side-by-side. The 188 felt consistently bigger in my hands, and consistently played with more oomph. Or, more importantly, the 188 accepts more input for me than the 186, and thus gives more output. The brand new 4-valve gold brass 186 CC that I played there was dreamy -- awesome valves, impossibly easy to play. Just a wonderful tuba. That felt like a toy, and felt "a little too small."

But without that experience, if a person had ONLY a 186 or ONLY a 188, would it be fair to say there's a major difference between the two? I'm not sure... because that wasn't what I did.

My beef has always been the opposite -- I want a tuba that is a marginal difference upwards from a 188, but I can only find things that are bigger differences than I want. The 190 is NOT the answer. Nor is the Bruckner, frankly. And I've been through just about every big/bigger rotary CC tuba, without finding the answer. So I'm left either going back to the 188, pushing forward with the couple of remaining options in that category, or moving on entirely. Or just running my mouth and not really doing anything about it.

I'm particularly good at the last option. :)

[matt g]

Main difference I got from the 188 was a bit more headroom in terms of upper dynamics (without sacrificing incredible response at very soft volumes) and a bit better scale.

[Doc]

Would a 188 really be considered an upgrade to a 186?

I think "upgrade" is based on opinion.

But I do think a 188 plays differently and is "a little bit bigger" in size/sound/output than a 186.

A "little bit". I find a 186 and a 188 to be vastly more the same than different and honestly pretty much interchangeable. I can "get" wanting a bigger tuba than a 186, but I can't imagine that "bigger tuba" then equates to "188" for most people. There are just so many options out there which would make a bigger difference than the marginal differences between a 186 and a 188.

I'm probably lost in the weeds.

I owned a mid-80s vintage 188, and it was an excellent instrument. I later owned a 186 (larger bell, recent production), and I did not like it at all. It played/felt/sounded smaller and the intonation was not as good as the 188.

Today, of course, I have that special 186 that outplays them both, and although it may lack in size somewhat compared to the 188 (and it IS a bit smaller), it makes up for it with resonance. And with intonation. If there is an exception to the rule of 188 being bigger/better, it would be this 186 (and ones like it @the elephant ). And my 3/4 Rudy played bigger/stronger/louder/farther than all of them.

Main difference I got from the 188 was a bit more headroom in terms of upper dynamics (without sacrificing incredible response at very soft volumes) and a bit better scale.

This is a fair assessment, IMHO. I would add that the depth and breadth of sound was noticeable.

Royjohn - Find a 188 somewhere to test and make a concrete determination. Then you'll KNOW if you need to save a few extra thousand dollars over your budget to acquire a used 188 for that small step up in size - because finding a 188 for less than $5000 that doesn't need work is a needle-in-a-haystack endeavor. And how big does it really need to be? $6500 bigger? Only you can decide for yourself, and trying is believing, and informed decisions are better decisions.

Avoid the Czech tubas generally. Don't let the prices talk you into something you'll regret. There are "good ones" but they are rare and if found, might stretch your budget.

Other decent 4/4 to 5/4 CC tubas that are mechanically sound and play well are tough to find in the $2000-$4000 range. Work on expanding your budget, but still keep your eyes open.

Or keep what you have.

Or get a large BBb.

[bloke]

That’s actually a pretty good question.
I do believe that the smaller bell diameter older 186 tubas sounded more different.
Now… Here’s the type of thing that would drive the engineer types - here - nuts:
The very roundest sounding and most 188 sounding 186 that I ever played was one made around 1968 or so, and featured a 16 1/2 inch bell.

something of no interest to anyone else but me:
As is known, I built myself a very nice vintage/updated 186 with the complete intention of keeping it, but - once it was finished and it played like a dream, I realized that I wasn’t grabbing it and taking it - very often - to playing jobs. Further, as I have already admitted, I have picked up some stupidly inexpensive 188 instruments in the past that I could’ve easily afforded to keep and use - after I fix them up…but what did I do with them? I sold them.
Both are superb models, but – as far as a C instrument is concerned – years ago I dumb-lucked into a particularly nice not-a-Miraphone one that just seems to do anything and everything I need it to do.

Would a 188 really be considered an upgrade to a 186?

[KingTuba1241X]

I would add that the depth and breadth of sound was noticeable.

Yes this is my feeling to the larger horn as well. The sound difference to me is MUCH greater than the physical SIZE difference between the 186 and 188 if that makes sense. I say it would be worth it, but..like was mentioned see if you can try one of each out before you pull the trigger.

[Dan Tuba]

I had the opportunity to sit next to a gentleman in a community group the past few years who played a 188. He was a strong player, and he made the 188 sound awesome. I usually play BBb tubas because it's easier for me with my current job. However, if I were ever to switch to CC again, I would definitely consider a 188.

[iiipopes]

Edit: Never mind. The question incorporated in my post was answered above. CC - not BBb.

[matt g]

One option to the 188 is the MW 32. Those will pop up from time to time at a reasonable price.