Conn 5xj

Davy · Post by **Davy** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 12:35 pm

Hey all!
I want to get a C.G. Conn 5xj CC Tuba for college. Anyone who has played or owns one have anythoughts on them?

Thanks
-Davy

MikeMason · Post by **MikeMason** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 12:43 pm

I owned a 52j for a while.It didn't quite suit me as a quintet horn,which is what I bought it for.The new owner seemed quite happy with it though.I suggest a tubenet search.Lots of good stuff.Use 5xj,52j,54j,and 56j.Should be plenty of opinions...

iiipopes · Post by **iiipopes** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:55 pm

One of my friends had a 56J for awhile, and I got to sit beside him. If anyone could bring out what a 56J had to offer, it would be him, being a 20 year Navy veteran.

OK. The 56J is a great American toned tuba. You want it, you got it in spades. With one exception: the 5th valve. Everything derogatory about the 5th valve is true, unfortunately. The reason it looks like an add-on is, well, damn the truth, it is. Conn took Matt Walters' wonderful prototype, ran it through the damned cost analysis, and came up with this arrangement of the 5th valve instead. My friend took it off. He called Conn, got the appropriate straight tubing of the appropriate diameter, had a local tech excise the entire 5th valve and tubing, installed the straight, and his tone and the overall tone of the tuba just went through the roof, literally.

Bloke has made comments about the "popularity" of taking the 5th valve off. Well, I've sat right beside it and I've had the opportunity to try it from the business end and hear it both in the next chair and across the performance hall. Sometimes, the truth just hurts.

But as I said at the beginning, there is no other real American toned CC out there. None. Buy one, and budget a thousand to have Matt Walters re-work it to have the 5th valve, if you really think you need it, done properly. Otherwise, just bypass it and forget it. You don't really need it on this particular instrument, as all the slides are in great position, and the inherent intonation is good enough anyway.

MikeMason · Post by **MikeMason** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 9:18 pm

I've actually owned/own both a 52j and a Thor.Very dissimilar horns.I paid MUCH less than the current price and actually made a small profit when I sold it.It was a fun horn to play but had some weird intonation things,suspect workmanship,a bit of a foggy sound,and just wasn't the sound I was looking for at the time for a quintet horn.Having said all that,it was a good tuba,but not for the full going price they are now.I think they would make an excellent tuba in the 5k range,but not too much more.The Thor is a fine machine that begs to be driven fast and dangerously....(i should be writing add copy for glossy brochures

).

Steve Inman · Post by **Steve Inman** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 9:35 pm

No disagreement with the comments above. I use my 56J for everything -- from quintet to community band to brass choir (~12-15pc) to church orchestras -- all amateur to semi-pro groups. Its upper register is fairly agile, and as Mike notes, it does have a bit of a "broader" sound -- evidently even the 52J has this tendency. (Mike called it "foggy".) The "advantage" of this is that it isn't too focused for a foundational sound in a small-medium orchestra (unless of course you WANT that sound). It works "okay" for quintet on the other end as well, although I tend to prefer my Yamaha Eb for its clarity (the trumpets in my group like a big bass voice).

So, this horn would be a very reasonable choice for a college CC tuba. I would guess the 52J to be better for quintet and the 56J to be better for a larger sized ensemble.

Regarding the 5th valve, the post above extolls either removing it or replacing it. I do find the 235 Db to be a little stuffy, and since I do find the horn to be a nice "general purpose" tuba, I am considering the "Matt Walters .807 in. 5th valve mod". But in general, the horn doesn't have any serious issues as it is.

Intonation on mine is pretty good. E in the staff = 12, Eb = 23. "A" at the top of the staff is better as 3rd valve. Other than these occasional alternate fingerings, I don't pull any slides with mine.

Last I heard, Melissa Williams (tuba instructor at Butler University, Indianapolis) was using the 56J as her primary horn and plays in a variety of groups with it. Didn't Kyle Turner used to play a 54J?

Cheers,

MileMarkerZero · Post by **MileMarkerZero** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 8:35 am

Davy,

Check your PM

MikeMason · Post by **MikeMason** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 9:54 am

I'm not yet convinced of the Thor's allaroundness.Haven't tried it yet with quintet,but I suspect it'd be a bit much.

Bill Troiano · Post by **Bill Troiano** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 12:03 pm

I think they're great horns. I bought one of the earlier ones, so the cost back then was around $6000. Plus, Conn lengthened a few of the tuning slides after the earlier prduction models, as they found some were a little short. Mine has the shorter 1st valve slide, but I don't find it to be a problem. I never have it pushed all the way in - that's all. Also, Conn eventually changed the main tuning slide from the earlier models to be a reversed tuning slide on the newer ones.

So, I have an earlier 52J with the original production items. My son has a 56J that we bought from Dillon last year. I picked my 52J from a batch of 5 at Dillon's at the time. Of course, they all sounded different and I remember one being especially stuffy in comparison to the others. Mine had a sparkle to the sound and I immediately knew I wanted that one. Matt made a few tweaks to it over the years too. My son's 56J also had a tone the had a ring to it in comparison to the 3 others that we tried at the time. His has slightly better intonation than mine.

Recently, I posted regarding the removal of the 5th valve. I substituted plastic tubing in place of the valve. I posted some pics too. Well, I'm still playing it without the 5th valve. Matt is going to replace the plastic tubing with the actual brass tubing next month.

So, the bottom line, for me, is that if you can find a 5XJ at a reasonable price and you like the way it sounds, you have a good all around, all purpose tuba. Then, have the 5th valve removed and you'll like it even more!

Chuck(G) · Post by **Chuck(G)** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 12:22 pm

Bill, with the 5th valve removed, have you compared your 52J against a King 2341 BBb?

I'd be curious to learn how they stacked up against one another.

Bill Troiano · Post by **Bill Troiano** » Tue Jul 17, 2007 3:30 pm

Hi Chuck. No, I haven't compared it to a 2341. Presently, I don't know of anyone in the area with one, but if they have one at Dillon when I go there in Aug., I'll try and make a comparison. What I recall about the only 2341's that I played a few years ago was that they were BBb's that felt like CC tubas as far as focus, and response. I'm sure that they could be quite similar in that regard.

iiipopes · Post by **iiipopes** » Wed Jul 18, 2007 8:34 am

Yeah, sometimes it actually makes them better!

MartyNeilan · Post by **MartyNeilan** » Wed Jul 18, 2007 9:32 am

tubashaman wrote:i dont want to have a negative name around fellow tuba players, and just let me know what i can do to get a positive name around here...

tubashaman wrote: i think some remedial grad school (or undergrad classes) should be considered for Mr...

Just one example, I am not about to start a huge bashing thread - been there done that with the "sissie" who has long since sold his tuba he had no business owning in the first place. Nobody hates you here

There are just better ways of phrasing things without coming off as a know-it-all when you don't (yet) have the goods to back it up.
It is OK to say that something is not in an appropriate range for a certain level of ability, but that is different than calling someone out on a public forum.
(Of course, feel free to hurl creative insults at regular members of this board)

EDIT: posted about the same time as Scooby, who wasn't afraid to call me out a year and a half ago when I was being a big asshole.

Chuck(G) · Post by **Chuck(G)** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 2:13 pm

DavidK wrote:It played very nicely and a little more freely than my King 2341. My guess is the following:
1. The Conn has wider tubing in the 4th valve. andpossibly in the mian tuning slide also,
2. The slightly shorter and unobstructed air path of a CC.
3. The air didn't have to bump through the rotor.

I know it's hard to draw conclusions about a 2341/56J comparison mostly because of point (2). But I don't follow your point (3)--the 2341 doesn't have a rotor either--and has a remarkably similar valve set, bell, and bow set--for thousands less.

My thought was that King could simply make a slightly cut-down 4PV version of the 2341 and have basically the same horn. I'm not completely sold on making the 4th valve loop larger, though I know a lot of tubas have the feature.

Chuck(G) · Post by **Chuck(G)** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 4:24 pm

DavidK, I guess you nailed it.

The 5xJ is really a King in Conn's clothing and not too different from a 2341 BBb in construction. If the big 4th valve on the Conn horn is a big benefit, then it follows that the 2341 might benefit from the same treatment (are you listening over there in Eastlake?)

Sans the 5th valve, the real difference seems to boil down to "its a CC not a BBb".