Posted by Lee Stofer on July 30, 2002 at 09:01:33:
In Reply to: Rudy Meinl posted by E on July 28, 2002 at 20:50:07:
I decided to check out the BBS this morning, and now I know why my ears were burning !!!
Let's just say that the Rudolf Meinl tubas are in the same quality and price range, generally as the Hirsbrunners. After playing both makes extensively, I like the tone quality that is available in the Rudolf Meinls.
As for model designation questions elsewhere in this thread; Rudolf Meinl was comissioned to make a copy of a 1920's Conn 4-front-piston CC tuba, back in the 1980's. I have played it, and it is an exquisite horn. Even the large body ferrules look like a Conn. The bore was not very large, and I'd consider it a chamber instrument. Well, Herr Meinl decided to make his own version of the instrument, and I got to play a couple of prototypes at the factory in the mid' 1990's. It was somewhat larger, and the bore was such that it was extremely open, so much so that a mouthpiece with a somewhat small venturi was necessary to focus some notes easily, like the low G. Since piston valve instruments typically have a smaller bore through the valves than a comparable rotor model, the instrument was designated as the 4345 CC, the 43 being his 3/4 CC designationa and the 45 being the 4/4 designation. The rotor 4345 CC was introduced last year in Europe, and it differs from the traditional 4/4 rotor CC in that it has a shorter leadpipe, uses a smaller-bore rotor section (.730" bore), and has more tubing after the valve section, more like the piston 4345. I think that a tremendous amount of design work went into this latest model.
I played a brass quintet gig with it yesterday morning, in the pit of a 4,000-seat auditorium. Besides being delighted with the sound quality and the pitch, the dynamic contrast was what I noticed most about this horn. I could just whisper the pp sections with a good tone, and when we opened up to FF the first time in the Susato "Renaissance Dances", I think I scared them ;^)