Re: Difference between the Mirafone 188 and


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

Posted by Wade on February 23, 2001 at 19:21:46:

In Reply to: Difference between the Mirafone 188 and posted by John Doe II on February 22, 2001 at 21:15:46:

I won my gig on a really great 188. My contract calls for 80 quintet services in addition to the orchestra stuff. It is better in both than the 186, which is too small for a good bit of the rep, IMHO. The older 188's had great pitch. The post claiming that the leadpipe is common to both horns is incorrect. The 188 leadpipe opens sooner and has almost as much to do with the larger sound ad the larger bell and bottom bow. A common "poor man's" 188 is a 186 with the larger leadpipe; this is a really common fix, in fact. Actually, in the older (late 1960's) 188's, the machine (actual name of the combined valve set and slides) is the only shared component.

And the horns from 1963 to 1969 seem to be much better than the horns from the 1970's. Miraphone was undergoing much automation in that period. As the inconsistent but detailed hand-crafting was replaced by machines, quality suffered a lot at times as the new manufacturing techniques were brought up to speed. The lapse was corrected after about six or seven years, and starting in "79 or "80 things were okay again.

This is all my opinion, but based on having played many of both models from the years in question, as well as a great deal of first- and second-hand knowledge. Take it for what it is worth.

The 188 is an excellent instrument. Always has been.

Wade





Follow Ups: