TubeNet

Just looking for some people with little to a great deal of experience with one of these horns. After I sell my F I've considered the idea of getting a cheap euph to knock around with for my own leisure, and I like my 410, so I'm assuming if it's the same craftsmanship and playability it'll be a simple choice. Just looking for a review, thanks!

I had a Schiller one for a while. Both the Schiller and Mack horns are made by JinBao in China. I liked it a lot. The only reason why I sold it was because I wasn't playing it, and I could use the cash towards my Hirsbrunner.

Anyways. It has a good sound, good intonation. You need to work the valves in, and just be careful. They dent easily.

short review:
http://www.dwerden.com/forum/showthread ... Qr5mygpD-c" target="_blank

bighonkintuba wrote:short review:
http://www.dwerden.com/forum/showthread ... Qr5mygpD-c" target="_blank" target="_blank

Thanks!

My Mack euph is a treat. As mentioned on Dave Werden's Forum, the valves need need some wiping and oiling. After that mine are now very slick and quiet. The intonation for me at least is surprisingly even. The 5th partial (d), which is usually a bit flat, for me lips right into place without even thinking about it. (My solfege training helps me focus right on the center of the pitch, not necessarily where the horn wants to go.) So does the sharp 6th partial (f) and its companion 1st Valve E flat center in just fine. No real need for a trigger.

The only concern I have is that when I tune, I have only about 1/8 inch wiggle room on the main tuning slide. Though so far, this has not been an issue with groups that play at or around A 440.
When the horn is cold, I'm stuck 'til it gets up to temp.

A few weeks back, I played a Willson and compared them back to back. For $7+K, the Willson was indeed a fine instrument. Its feel, like most Willson instruments, felt very "sturdy", not necessarily heavier, it just had a slightly more dense feel to it. (I think that is due to the unique Willson bracing) It's sound had that certain Willson "presence" to it, but that is something that is very subjective and to me does not really relate to the functioning qualities of the instrument. I did find that the lower register at the bottom of the BC through the pedal register was far superior and open on the Mack, something that surprised me.
I felt the Willson was, by comparison, slightly more stuffy in that register.

For the record, the obvious differences on the 2 instruments that I had no control over were the medium shank receiver and lacquer on the Willson. The Mack was a large shank and bright silver.
These may or may not have factored into my observations.

Now the Mack is based on the Yamaha (I believe) and as such is a different instrument by comparison.

Was I ready to sell the Mack and pop for the Willson? NO. Was I envious? No, not at all. I am very satisfied with the Mack and would recommend it to any euphonium player. Of course personal tastes, etc, will influence your choice.

While I am a doubler on the Euph, I do take it very seriously and look for every way that I can get a better sound, facility, and pitch. Were I a world class soloist, perhaps I would prefer to have a top tier horn, but aside from the prestige, the gap is closing on the "imports". When they find that there is a greater market for a more "custom" instrument, I believe they will enter the market. We already see that with BMB, Packer, Eastman,Wessex and Mack with the Wiseman CC.

You are smart to ask others what they think. I did a lot of research before I popped for mine and it helped give me the confidence to go ahead and make the purchase. Now, I don't think I would have much hesitation at all.

TubaZac2012 wrote: if it's the same craftsmanship and playability it'll be a simple choice. Just looking for a review, thanks!

I've had that euph for about three years. Couldn't be happier with it, and I've played "name" brand euphs for which I wouldn't make an even trade.

Great reviews and help thus far!