Re: Mirafone 180/MW 182


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Scott on August 27, 2001 at 22:00:54:

In Reply to: Mirafone 180/MW 182 posted by wondering on August 27, 2001 at 13:36:03:

I owned the Mirafone 180 for about a month, and my school bought the MW 182 for about a month (I only got to play it for an evening), so I'll try to give you what you're looking for. (Btw, before I forget, I'd be willing to bet the previous poster played the Mirafone 181, NOT the 180. I'd guess you knew that already, though.)

Anyway, the Mirafone has a nice sound, but it's not going to be mistaken for anything but a small F tuba. It's more euphonium than tuba. While that means I probably wouldn't take it into a quintet, it's the perfect horn for the Vaughan-Williams. Great for euph solos as well. You're not going to want to play it on every tuba solo out there (the Gregson comes to mind for which the 180 would not really work) but it's a small F tuba, great for F tuba stuff.

The 182 might be a little bit better for the Gregson. I didn't like it very much because I felt like it was a bit thin in the high register, it played like a little tuba in the middle register and I couldn't get a smooth transition into the low register. Where on the 180 I felt the progression to the low register was pretty natural, the 182 it gets stuffy at a faster rate (if that makes sense). It's still maybe more open then the 180, but I felt that the Mirafone was more consistent. It's a horn you have to get used to, but probably a good horn once you did.

Yeah, I'm biased towards the 180 since I owned it, but I do think it's the better solo horn, assuming that you're willing to pull out your 4/4 tuba for pieces like the Gregson. If you have a 5/4 and are looking for a horn to compliment that, given a choice between only these two I'd go for the MW.

Feel free to e-mail me with specific questions, but keep in mind I have a lot more experience with the Mirafone than the MW.

Scott


Follow Ups: