Re: Another MW2000/2155 post...


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

Posted by Josh Calkin on November 10, 2003 at 01:06:06:

In Reply to: Another MW2000/2155 post... posted by Big Den T. on November 08, 2003 at 12:24:18:

When I bought my 2155 I was able to play a LOT of tubas (Dillon Music) including a new 2000.

I quickly narrowed the field down to the five 2155s (four new, one used) and the 2000, and set to playing them all side by side.

This was when the 2000 was a new design and I had heard nothing about it by that point, so I was not swayed by a pre-conceived notion that the 2000 was inherently superior.

Here is what I discovered:

-Three of the 2155s (including the used one) immediately went into the "no" pile, as the response was clearly inferior to the rest of the field.

-Of the two remaining 2155s, I REALLY liked the sound of one, though it had minor response issues (it stayed in the running due to the sound). The other 2155 responded well, but the sound was not as good and the intonation was inferior to the other one.

-Matt, after listening to me play and my subsequent explanation of the playing characteristics of the two 2155s, switched their main tuning slides. Now the one with the better sound also had good response. Go figure.

-I went back and forth between the final 2155 and the 2000 for quite some time. In the end, the 2000 didn't really justify its price difference. Egronomically, they both felt fine to me. The sound was MARGINALLY better on the 2000, but (even in Matt's opinion) not worth the difference in money. The intonation was likewise a bit better on the 2000, but the 2155 is by no means unmanageable. I bought the 2155 and have never regretted it.

Points to ponder:

-The 2000 was better than the BEST of a field of five 2155s, though not by much. They were both superior to the rest of the 2155s.

-This may have been a great 2000, or "merely" a good one. I doubt they get much worse than good, but another 2000 might have blown all of the 2155s out of the water.

-I didn't memorize the serial of the 2000, but I think it was one of the earlier ones. They may have changed since then; I haven't played one in a few years.

-The 2000 was, as I said, MARGINALLY better. If I were made of money, I might have bought the 2000 due to these slight differences.

-Even larger than the differences in horns are the differences in players. Your discoveries, had you played the same horns I did on the same day, would likely have been quite different from mine, as would those of everyone who responds to this thread.

So to answer your questions:

No, I didn't find a 2155 that played as well or better, but I did find one that was nipping right at the heels of the 2000 for $4000 less.

No one can say that the best 2000 must be better than the best 2155, with the possible exception of the play testers at the MW factory. Still, the fact that one 2000 was better than the best of a batch of 2155s would seem to support this theory. I may have played the best 2000 and the best 2155 on earth that day. I may also have played the WORST 2000. I'll simply never know.

Though the 2000 is based on the 2155, they are very different horns. I doubt very much if a lot of custom work would make a 2155 too similar to a 2000.

It's been said before, and it will likely continue to be said until after we are long gone: just pick the one that works for you.

-J


Follow Ups: