Euph valves: 3+1 v in-line

[Alex F]

Just about all the pro-level euphoniums have the "3+1" valve arrangment. Can anyone explain the rationale for this arrangement versus the 4 in-line set-up found on other euphs.

It looks like most of these side-mounted fourth valves are larger than the three on top. Is this done to enhance the tonal quality of the horn? It does not appear to be the most ergonomic set-up. A player has to reach all the way around the body with the left hand to activate the fourth valve.

[tjonp]

Having played both kinds of horns, I find the 3+1 configuration to be more comfortable. I would rather use my left index finger then my right pinky. Having to reach around the horn isn't really an issue; if you're holding the instrument correctly, the fourth valve is positioned where your left hand naturally lies.

I do suppose there are mechanical reasons as well; 3+1 seems rather well suited for compensating horns.

[Randy Beschorner]

Bloke writes:

I always chuckle when I hear euphonium players explain that the "reason" they purchased a 3+1 setup instrument was because of their "weak pinkie". Yes, the pinkie finger is obviously weaker than the others, but nearly all instrumentalists use the pinkie for extensive applications. The examples are far to numerous and obvious to discuss.

From the perspective of a person who owns a 3+1 euphonium and loves it as well as a four rotary valve BBb and an in-line 4 Eb tuba, I find it equally humorous to hear the explanation from tuba players that using the left hand is unnatural. For all those instruments causing the musician to use their right pinkie, most of them also make use of the left hand in fingerings as well. Try playing a six valve rotary tuba without the left hand. Try playing a 5 valve euphonium without the left hand.

Both systems work. Enjoy which ever you like the best and respect the other fellow who goes a different route and still plays up a storm. If you want to spend time debating an issue, why not go to the off topic forum and argue which is better, Apple Macs, Wintel PCs, or a Linux based system.

Randy "I think the left nostril nose flute is better" Beschorner

[elimia]

Below is an explanation by Dave Werden for the 4th valve side placement on compensating euphoniums (from http://www.tubaeuph.com/eu-articles-comp.cfm). It amounts to more than simply a weak pinky issue, although I admit I am just plain out more comfortable with the side mounted valve, an easy ergonomic fit. We could also debate the straight shift versus automatic transmission in the same light.

Besides the more solid sound and chromatic flexibility, I find compensating euphoniums to have a much more solid response. I find sixteenth note slurs to be a lot cleaner on a compensating euphoniums.

Ryan

------------------------------------------------------------------

4th-Valve Placement :a "Side Issue"

While many manufacturers place the 4th valve immediately next to the 3rd, Hirsbrunner and Sterling-Perantucci place the 4th valve halfway down the right side of the instrument, intended to be played with the left hand. While this can be justified by simply noting the relative weakness of the 4th finger of the right hand, there is also a consideration relating to the compensating system.

Euphoniums are essentially conical-bore instruments. That is, their tubing is almost constantly expanding from the mouthpiece to the bell. The most notable exception to this is found within the 1st, 2nd & 3rd valves, where the bore size is constant. However, the separation between the 3rd and 4th valves allows the connecting tubing to expand gradually as it approaches and passes through the 4th valve's tubing, maintaining a more constant taper. For example, in the case of the Sterling-Perantucci euphonium the main bore (measured at the 2nd valve) is.592". At the compensating loops it has expanded to .630", and it expands to .670" within the remainder of the 4th valve tubing. By preserving a more conical bore through this area, freedom of response and consistency of tone are enhanced.