Re: Re: Re: Mirafone tubas (cc)


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

Posted by Tracy B. on August 24, 2003 at 23:12:29:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Mirafone tubas (cc) posted by Rick Denney on August 24, 2003 at 14:33:51:

Also with respect, what experience leads you to the conclusion that I am absolutley wrong? I will try to answer your question without being argumentative. My experience with Miraphones far exceeds (and not to mention) just owning a 186. I have had students, collegues, and teachers who have all owned Miraphones at one time or another. The older Miraphones (70's and 80's) seem to fair better. Most of my comments concern ones made recently. They all have had durability issues. I am not speaking of extreme case of damage, like the dropping you mentioned. I'm talking about normal use. I don't recall making an issue about the reasons for or against the thickness of the brass. I simply said they dent very easily, even for that style of tuba. I still stand by that opinion. As for the linkage, I think the number of posts about them breaking speaks for itself. Its not an issue whether or not they can be replaced. While it is true with the proper care a Miraphone can last a lifetime, but so can anything. Now let me be clear about this, I like Miraphones. Alot. For the money, you can't beat them and they can be used in nearly every situation. They are certainly more durable than a Cerveny, but I don't think any one will argue that point. If I stepped on the toes of a diehard Miraphone fan, I do apoligize. This is not a contest about who's is better. I simply offered up my "experience" with these tubas, which is considerable. As always, I can agree to disagree.
Thanks,
Tracy "who doesn't believe every difference of opinion on this board has to be an arguement or contest" Bedgood


Follow Ups: