Oval Euphoniums

[Dan Schultz]

I'll let you know by the end of the week. I finally broke down and bought one of those Chop Suey 4V oval euphoniums just to see what kind of repair work I'm going to be facing in a couple of years. BTW, I worked on one of the Chinese Sanders Imperials last week. It wasn't too bad beyond a bell that was about to fall off and a 4th rotor that has a drag caused by a yet to be determined problem.

There is a REAL interesting Mirafone 4V oval euphonium on that auction site at the moment.

[imperialbari]

The large bore and bell oval brasses are very elegant and playable, but they are not euphoniums. They are far too light in sound to deserve that name.

An older thread on this topic:

http://www.chisham.com/tips/bbs/jul2001 ... 61604.html

Klaus

[Carroll]

but they work in an ensemble setting. we used them exclusively in the tuba ensemble at Tenn Tech for years. They all were bad... but they all sounded just the same. It allowed for a homogeneity of sound that mixed brands (and even different horns of the same brand) could not match. I believe that is what gave Winston Morris' ensemble that "Tech" sound. Now he lets the kids play whatever they have. I think he has had some difficulty getting the oval horns. In my opinion, the group does not have that "sameness" of sound in the front row.

But to actually answer your question: the horns were not that much fun to play. They had MANY intonation problems. Octaves did not line up, crazy fingerings to even get close, stuffy low register... Hardly anyone used them for solo recitals. But, oh that ensemble sound.

All that being said, I have heard some guys really play well on them, but they could probalbly make a trash can sound good.

Carroll

[imperialbari]

I was sure that if anyone was exposed to a greater number of these instruments it would be you.

The ovals are out of fashion here now, but they still are very common in Germany, even if real euphs are getting a stronger foothold there also.

Since my juanian rant I have acquired two oval Kaisers myself:

http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/yo ... pg&.src=gr

http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/yo ... n+pre-1930

I love them for their elegance and playability, but if I were hired for a Jericho-type demolition job, I would take my YEP 631.

Klaus

[CJ Krause]

***

[CJ Krause]

***

[imperialbari]

im trying to remember and it seems it had a European shank which limited it on mouthpieces but i used a BB1 on it and man it played great.

upper register was sweet and easy and lots of projection

i would love to play one of these in Gold or in the case of Cerveny, very very red brass

All true.

My pre-1930 Cerveny is extremely red and very sweetly sounding.

I use a DW4AM mouthpiece for it.

The Eser in C somehow appears to have had its "Bb-length-tubing" changed to C by being cut from the leadpipe end. Anyway I use the same modified Yeo signature mouthpiece, which I also use for the YEP641 and the bassbones.

Sorry for implicitly referring to my first postin on the thread. The photo links are there.

Klaus

[euphdude]

Yeah, I got one of those Violinking Chinese oval euphs this past winter. Not a bad axe! I finally took the plunge after I played a fellow tuba-euph lister's horn at TUSAB-TEC. It has a very nice tone, although it can't match the modern horns for power, projection, intonation, and openness in the low register.

[Lyle]

I have an older Mirafone 5- rtry valve (c1970) and use a BB1 mpc.
The tone is great & even throught the register.
Intonation issues are no greater than with any hand-made horn.
The tone is brighter with a smaller-depth mpc.
If you like the rtry valve Mirafone tubas, you will like this horn.
Please don't compare Chinese horns to Mirafones.

Lyle

[euphdude]

I've never had the chance to compare my Violinking oval with a Miraphone or a Cerveny, but Glenn Call (former euph player in the Marine Band) has and he swears the Violinking horns are better. I doubt I'll ever use it over my Sovereign euphonium for playing solos, but it certainly isn't a bad horn. My violinking oval doesn't have booming lower register like the British style compensating horns, but neither do the Miraphones or Cervenys that I've played. Hopefully I can do a side by side comparison next year at TUSAB-TEC.

[imperialbari]

One thing we shouldn't forget is the original mouthpiece concept of at least the Cerveny ovals.

I found an Amati 3RV oval Tenorhorn some 20 years ago, which I suggested the local railway band, which I had conducted, to buy because it could be had for a rather small sum.

Like my 50+ years older Cerveny oval Bariton (told of higher up this thread) the Amati Tenorhorn had the so-called European receiver. The truly odd thing is, that these two instruments despite their very different dimensions, aside from the receiver diameter, came with similar mouthpieces.

Bot had a Cerveny 12C, where rim and cup are copied from the Bach 12C, and the shank has dimensions like the Denis Wick M models. The only difference being, that the pre-1930 mouthpiece came in plain brass and the circa 1975 mouthpice cam in silver plate.

I later joined the railway band as a plain member (the uniform to be seen at the avatar) and had the chance to try the Amati Tenorhorn with the 12C mouthpiece again. Tt could be played up to the 16th partial like a flugelhorn.

I tried to make the band sell it to me, as it was not in regular use, but they wanted a higher price, than the buying price I originally had negotiated down for them.

Somehow I see a resemblance between Amati, Cerveny (modern era), Weril, and even the St. Petersburg BBb. I could write long lists of technical shortcoming. But one actually can make these cheapies work as relevant musical tools.

What I have seen from mainland China, has been more concentrated on making a good visual appearance at the first sight, whereas the musical workability has been forgetable. I rather prefer the Czech, Brazilian, and Russian approach.

Klaus