That *OTHER* 1971 Mirafone 186 on My Bench

[jtm]

Pretty sure this is a brass post on a 1965 BBb 186, even though it looks just barely yellow in this picture.


This one looks less like nickel silver.


Here's one from a much newer B&S-made Musica, where the post is lacquered brass.


And one from my mysterious Scherzer, the vintage of which I'm only confident is between 1950 and 1990.


That last one looks the most like brass, somehow. Maybe it's a darker lacquer.

I do still have the 186. Are there any particular ferrules you'd like to see?

[jtm]

Aside: fairly modern cell phones make it ridiculously easy to take detail closeups like this. I would have been fussing over it a lot longer, and maybe wouldn't have done as well, with my digital SLR.

[the elephant]

Just a reminder of where I left the homemade 5th valve project a few days back…





Here we are today. I now have a THIRD excellent set of Mirfone 186 valves from the 1970s (with one new one mixed into the bunch) and I can honestly say that they are BETTER than the set I installed into Ethel (this 186 that I cut to CC). That had me thinking all day, "Hmm… maaaaaaybe I could take Ethel back apart and install these valves…" and then I would step back from the edge of that abyss and think, "Nope. No F-ing way." BAHAHAHA!!!

So my next project horn will have a very nice set of classic Miraphone valves.

Here is the set of five…


Packed for long term storage…


And here you can see how I got the mess cleaned up. Not too bad. The arrows indicate the knuckle I removed and rotated 180º (which rotated the direction 90º)…

[prairieboy1]

That is real craftsmanship right there. Well Done!

[the elephant]

Aside: fairly modern cell phones make it ridiculously easy to take detail closeups like this. I would have been fussing over it a lot longer, and maybe wouldn't have done as well, with my digital SLR.

Nice shots, and thank you for sharing!

[the elephant]

That is real craftsmanship right there. Well Done!

[the elephant]

This is a long post. It is about playing characteristics and other nonsense. There is no "build thread" content. Sorry for that. Please save yourself some time and skip this if you are not interested to know what I am currently thinking about and planning for this tuba.

WR
_________________

Okay, so I have now spent enough time playing the two 186s side-by-side to pass on a little bit of the old judgment, here.

The cut horn is *exactly* as I had anticipated. It has a smaller and less loud sound than the CC, which seems to prove my theory on why the top bow and inner branches on the factory horn are visibly fatter: By shortening the BBb by two feet, not only is the pitch raised by two semitones but the loss of overall fluid volume makes the horn much smaller in tone. It is less broad, less projecting, etc. It is like a large 185 now, with perhaps slightly less weight, as a 185 can pack some heat.

I believe that fattening these parts to increase the fluid volume of the bugle without lengthening it does a very good job of imitating the tone of the BBb 186. Once these adjustments have been made the CC regains lost some of the lost weight and breadth of tone. Everyone who has played both a BBb and a CC 186 knows that the BBb horn has more guts and that the CC feels "lighter", and that is true. However, if these bows had not been blown out a little bit the two horns would not be nearly so similar, probably needing to have two different model numbers.

Intonation is surprisingly good on this tuba, but it is noticeably different from the factory CC. The tendencies vary between the two, with the factory horn being much more of what one would expect, and the cut horn being unusual, but not bad at all. (I have used it on several gigs, now.) I suspect that if the bows were a bit fatter like the factory CC branches that the intonation would line up to be very close to the factory CC. By that, I mean to say that I do not suspect any of the pitch differences to be due to my assembly work, but an effect of the differences in fluid volume of each part.

My next experiment with this tuba will be to dump the large 188 leadpipe and trial the other two that I have on hand, one being a modern 186 leadpipe and the other a N/OS leadpipe made in 1978. They were smaller in that era, and this one has a slightly smaller receiver size and an Alexander-style leadpipe-as-receiver/receiver-as-sleeve setup. Both should be interesting. If the 1979 leadpipe proves to be the winner then this tuba could become my new quintet instrument. It is that good.

The next stage (probably over a year from now, unfortunately) will be to give modern CC inner branches a try. (I do not intend to use the larger CC top bow.) I do not see issues with my goofy 5th slide setup, and my cobbled-together 4th circuit works really well, so those will not change. I am, however, concerned that my cobbled-together 5th pretzel is causing some issues, and a proper CC one will be way too large for my cut BBb 4th branch, as a proper CC 4th branch will be too large for my cut 3rd branch. I think I can make a CC 3rd branch fit my smaller, cut BBb top bow, however, as it would be large enough for my tools to make the tapers and end sizes match.

The intonation shakes out like this…

C in the staff is sharp. I do not know whether the same Bb was sharp on this horn before it was cut. I actually never played this horn before it was repaired and then cut. I wanted to assemble it as a BBb *first* to see what I had, but I ended up cutting the branches rather early in the process. Oh, well…

The C#/Db in the staff is very sharp, played 12, but 3 lines up nicely if I do not want to pull out 1st.

Bottom line G is actually very close to in tune.

4th line F is in tune, and the D below it plays in tune without a slide push. Open E is fine, too. Eb needs to be played 23 in most keys, though. Top space G and Gb are fine. The top line A and Ab are sharp, but only a bit; 3rd is flat, so 12 with a short pull is fine for A, and Ab lips easily. B natural on top of the staff is still flat, though, as on my factory CC.

The Eb/Ab 23 situation is not as goofy as on most tubas. I do not really *need* to move 3rd to get them all. If bottom space Ab is a tad flat everything else in that series is pretty good to go.

2nd valve B below the staff is flat while the one on the second line is a bit high like the other notes in this partial.

Below the staff E and A need to be played 3rd, low G is 4th and the Gb is fine without a slide pull. However, the Gb 24 is a little flat if the Db 24 above it is in tune.

In general, it feels like I have a small leak in one of the joints of my 2nd valve, which could be causing the strange high and low notes using that valve. Plus, I think I can *hear* a small leak when I play bottom space A as 12. It has to be in the valve area itself, as when played 3rd everything seems to be normal. However, just playing 2nd valve does not make this sound. I will soap-test this tuba sometime this coming week.

Alignment of the body is not where I want it, and the garland I put on is laughably ugly inside the bell. Once I'm done testing on it I will see if I can fix everything.

I may offer this tuba for sale after playing on it for a season in the orchestra. I love it and am quite proud of what I have done to it, but it is not dissimilar enough from the factory CC to merit keeping it, and it is not similar enough, either. It is a tough one for me as I assign a great deal of personal value to both tubas. I actually *like* this tuba more, but the factory horn is just great in large ensembles, and my job requires that. If I can get them more similar in intonation and the smaller leadpipe works well then it could become my quintet tuba, but it is harder for me to master two nearly identical tubas than to master two very different ones. I get confused when they are really close. Wildly different horns (like a CC and an F) are quite easy for me to keep straight in my head as I read music. But I had a three-year period of time where I had four CC tubas that I used at work, and it was a nightmare. I ended up selling off most of them in the end.

So that is where I am on this tuba. I will have more to add to both of these build threads before long. I have not worked on either horn in some time because I have wanted to PLAY them both to see what I have.

Finally, after all that rot about the two different styles of 5th levers, I have to admit that — as currently installed — I like the new one better. This is after many hours in the woodshed with both horns. I think I still prefer the old lever, but I need to reposition the thumb ring to make me happier. I do not have a thumb ring on this tuba, so my hand can find the lever easily. On the factory CC, the thumb ring seems to be too high for me. I will mess with that soon. Anyway, my "lever hate" was unfounded. I still think the parts were poorly cut at the factory (misaligned screw holes, etc.) but I would indeed purchase the new lever again if it was miraculously less expensive, which I seriously doubt. I still greatly prefer the look and weight of the older lever. And, if I do move the thumb ring bracket down an inch or so I might still prefer it in all ways. But to be honest I no longer dislike the new lever at all. In fact, I rather like it.

Though my oddball 5th valve and slide circuit work very well, they look weird, and not in a fun, goofy way. I think what I have is ugly. I now have an excellent 5th valve unit that I made here at the house. I may decide to purchase the parts I cannot make here and do the 5th over correctly. Not sure. It works well as is. It just bugs me whenever I look at it.

That is all.

I plan on getting back to work tomorrow, wrapping up both projects for the time being.

Then it is back to the Holton 345…

[LargeTuba]

I'll give that a like!

[Tubajug]

Excellent! I've been waiting for the 345 to get back on the bench!

[bloke]

I've played 186 C tubas with all of those characteristics, and don't view any of them as serious issues.
=======================
I have had two different very-similar-yet-just-different-enough (X, Y, or Z model) instruments more than once...and in which I had time invested.

After a while, my practical side screamed in my ear (this shoulder...on this side...again: the practical side), and I sold one of them.

Like you, I knew which one I needed to keep...every...single...time.

...and - regardless of any imperfections - someone will be VERY proud to buy/own that instrument - if you offer it out.

============================

I'm thanking the Lord every night (for the sales and work He's given me), because (well...the tootin' bidness is obviously down because-of blah-blah and because I had to help out two of my kids...plus one of their spouses), but I REALLY WOULD like to finish this (cute, yes...??) little Holton. It's frustrating, because I've got it JUST to the playability stage, and I've NEVER had more fun playing a B-flat tuba...

[the elephant]

Necrobump!

It's baaaaa-aaaack…

[the elephant]

New year, new me!

I think I am going to try to make this old, beater, homebrew "CC" 186 into my MSOBQ tuba for our many, many educational programs. This year's show is very difficult to knock out at a high level with little to no warm-up at nine in the morning on a Monday, 40 times a season. I really need to do it on a CC, and had been dinking around with my "good" 186 with this in mind… and then I sold it. So, no.

Truth be told, I had completely forgotten that this tuba was tucked away in the corner of my tuba room under three empty gig bags.

To sort of finish up the above thread before launching into this new continuation, the horn worked pretty well in freelance settings, but when I took it to a rehearsal for one of my quintets (Capital Brass), I could not easily get it into tune with the group. Could. Not.

I was very busy dialing in the factory CC and gave up on this tuba for the time being, and that stretched into about four years.

Whoops!

Now I have been sitting around grousing about having to sell my lovely, old 186 and having to take my YamaYork to everything, even to stage setups where a smallish beater would have been the better choice and not the spendy, silver "trust fund" tuba.

The other day, I remembered this tuba, suspended in carbonite, and that I had cannibalized it a few times for parts, and that it was unplayable. I also remembered that the bell rim I had installed was disastrous and would require a ton of work before I could use the instrument again.

It needed:

• three Minibal links
• three Minibal alignment discs
• three Minibal Torx screws
• one 5th valve linkage rod
• a leadpipe
• a mouthpiece receiver
• removal, annealing, and reshaping of bell kranz
• reinstallation of bell kranz


This is a tall order for me right now, as I am in the process of getting ready for cataract surgery in both eyes and am having issues with either my heart or my heart meds. (Probably the meds, otherwise the docs would be pushing the testing along with alacrity.)

So today I was freaking BORED and decided to drag out the homemade CC 186 to see what it needs and what I have on hand. That way, I could at least consider sending in an order for parts to Miraphone despite the damnable tariffs.

I have everything.

Right here.

Just sitting in snap-lid boxes in ziplock baggies.

All of it.

Hot damn baby!

So I dug up the needed tools, set the parts aside, put away the boxes, cleared my bench, and slung baby up there for the first time in years.

All I did was tape on the beater 188 leadpipe that came on the "good" 186, but that did not fit right. It has some dings and is… funny looking… but plays really well.

I no longer GAS about "funny looking" and I have a brand new receiver that fits it perfectly. So I used blue tape to slap those on. After checking that it was sealed up well enough to test the horn, I locked the 5th valve open and replaced most of the missing valve parts. (I could not easily find the old 5th valve link rod, but it is there… somewhere… I'll find it later.)

I spent about an hour playing it with a tuner and drone pitches.

MOST IMPORTANT NOTES FROM TESTING:

This is a really darned good tuba. I put it away when I suddenly could not play it in tune with itself. I had been using the much smaller N/OS 1977-ish Miraphone pipe, and in hindsight, I can see that this tuba hates that pipe. It just does not work. I tried it out, and the open partials were whacked out like you wouldn't believe. Don't ask me why. The answer is far above my pay grade as a Screw Turning Monkey.

I went with the old, beater 188 pipe that needed a receiver. Everything lined up quite well.

Day and night, Night and day.

Again, my contract as a Screw Turning Monkey prohibits me from actual cogitation, so I have no idea why, and I am not paid enough to care.

The bell rim is actually fine. I would expect this sort of mess if I had bought it used and in rough shape. It will take a lot of work to clean up, but that it all it *needs* — a cosmetic bit of clean-up work.

Valves all work well, except for 1st, and that just needs a bit of lubrication. The slides all still work nicely. I could not tell that this tuba had been sitting in a bag untouched for more than four years.

So this evening I plan on cleaning up the leadpipe and installing the receiver. I will also get impatient and install the leadpipe to the instrument when I ought to wait until tomorrow, but I am a bit stupid in this regard… heh, heh…

I also plan on making the 5th valve functional tonight. Tomorrow I will look at the bell rim to see if it is in a condition to use this horn at work on Monday. (We have four of those kiddie shows where this tuba would greatly enhance my ability to walk in unprepared, early on a Monday morning, and do a good job.)

So I have tonight and all day tomorrow to learn and polish that show on CC tuba, and it ought to be fine.

So I sold my classic and much beloved 186.

BUT THAT'S OKAY BECAUSE I HAVE ANOTHER ONE RIGHT HERE! MUWAHAHAHA!!!

The one I sold was the factory CC 186, which is on the right. This bastardized 186 that I hacked and chopped up to use as a CC tuba is on the left. I also did not want to buy another 5th valve, and had not yet made that excellent 5th valve that I ended up with, so it has the wrong type, and the 5th slide looks weird. But it works quite well, so I will not be "fixing that. It stays.


Here is that slide, but a bit closer to the camera. Joe had to do something like this to that nice, silver 186 that he sold to Doc.


Leadpipe taped on, 5th valve not yet hooked up…


Plays in tune with the mail slide set here…


If everything works out with this tuba, it will become my main horn in the MSO brass quintet, and maybe in Capital Brass, too. Once I get used to it, I will start using it at freelance gigs.

And the crappy beater Tuba Exchange gig bag it has lived in for the last four years will be replaced with the "leftover" blue Miraphone-branded bag made for the 186. I used it for my Kurath for years until I got the better-fitting Cronkhite bag.

This 186 bag has spent years serving as a comfy, scratchable, padded cat bed.

Sorry, kitties. You lose.

[the elephant]

Before, as Tabor sent it to me, as a BBb. Holes, cracks, tears, etc.



Now with a bunch of corrective work, lots of parts from the factory CC, parts from five other BBb 186s, and a lot of cutting and retapering to make it work in CC… oh, and another valve, etc.



This cut BBb plays *exactly* like the excellent late 1960s 186 BBb I played in high school, so it shouldn't weird me out that the mouthpiece it prefers seems to be the Miraphone Rose Orchestra, which is the same piece I played back then, and actually was the first mouthpiece I ever bought. Odd, but okay.

Remember that the top bow and inner branches are visibly skinnier than the factory CC 186, because the CC has the branches sort of blown out to maintain roughly the same fluid volume as the much longer BBb. It is not the same, but it is actually very close. This helps the CC 186 keep up with the BBb despite its longer bugle. So this tuba, using the skinnier BBb branches, actually drives a little more like a 185 than a 186 9better in a quintet), but with the larger outer branches (more top end in a big group). It is a strange bird, to be sure, but so far I like it a lot more than I did. Perhaps I had the "better" 186 as my side-by-side benchmark, and that made me try to play it in the same manner using the same slide presets, etc. I don't know. It is not the same as the factory CC, but once you stop trying to make it be the same as that tuba, it really comes into its own.

I am far less sad to have sold my wonderful 1971 186-5U CC, now. My 1971 186-4U BBb with the extra valve that plays about 200 cents sharp is also a very fine instrument.

If I start working on this tuba again in the future, I will bump this thread again. For now, though, just know that even though my prized 186 is gone…

I HAVE ANOTHER ONE RIGHT HERE.

[York-aholic]

That is excellent news.

He forgot he had a tuba sitting in the corner of the room…

And I thought my memory was bad.

[the elephant]

It was lying on the floor in a black gig bag, covered up with a few other, empty gig bags, behind four other instruments, including my upright bass. It was more than a mere senior moment, heh, heh…

[the elephant]

Leadpipe and receiver soldered on, but the brace from the 5th needs to have the foot of the leadpipe bent to fit the new space, so it is loose right now.

The bell garland still needs reworking. Blech…

Using the Rose Orchestra, I am getting the intonation compromises dialed in. Still not having to move the first slide much as I play. But I have to move 1, 2, and 3 a little in each key as I progress through the circle of fifths.

I like the Rose Orchestra, but am nearly ready to start the mouthpiece-o-rama, where I play the same four etudes in all 12 keys on every mouthpiece that makes the final cut.

That is achieved by playing the same chord progression exercise on every mouthpiece I own. This allows me to eliminate most of them very quickly, going from about 30 mouthpieces to four or five in one afternoon. The next time I do this, it will be just the finalists and a lot of time in my book The Dozens with a tuner and drone pitches.

This can be tedious and frustrating at once. However, any time I have a tube that was not ironed out at the factory, I have to do this, as the intonation characteristics are an unknown variable, as are all of the basic playing characteristics. In short, this is a one-of-a-kind tuba, so I am having to do all the factory R&D myself, with no computer help.

It takes a bit of time…

So far, I am more excited about this one than I was with the factory CC. I don't know why, as the factory horn was better. I guess it is ego being satisfied that my work was well done, in the cutting department… a form of validation, I guess.

[bloke]

Is the bell garland currently (mostly) attached to the bell?
If "yes", I'd like to send you a private note or talk briefly on the telephone.

[the elephant]

It's on, but the "fold" is ugly because I failed to trim the bell exactly right, and have a bit that needs to be removed before the garland can sit on the wire and rim correctly. (This was my first shot at this specific repair.)

It is suitable for use at work, but in general, this tuba was hastily assembled to see how it would sound after being cut from Bb to C. I would call this — at best — a "25-foot paint job". If it turns out to be a winner at work, I will fully reassemble it this summer. I will run all the branches and the bell through the Z-60, and I'll address the garland at that time. I may even trot out and install that sweet engraved one I've been saving for a special occasion, heh, heh…



By the way, the mouthpiece I have settled on to break in this tuba at work is my OG Ultimate. It rocks in this tuba!



Please pardon Ginger's tail in the photo. She would not take the hint and go away while I was trying to snap that shot…

[the elephant]

This 186 is Ginger Approved®

[bloke]

I'm glad you're using it, I like the cat a lot, and never mind on the kranz.
The only thing I was going to tell you about was something that I've found works with old ones that are effed up and installed.