VMI 2103 verses Jupiter 582L

[iiipopes]

Both of these tubas are about the same size, and are considered good, solid, 4/4 BBb instruments, with "on page specs" similar bore and bell. The VMI, of course, takes the traditional rotary approach, and the Jupiter a new modular and open wrap design approach on its piston valve block, which in comparing old and new pictures even seems to have been tweaked up in the past couple of years. They both cost roughly the same.

Please post your playing experiences and other thoughts, impressions, pros, cons, etc. In my university community band, our director is getting into some advanced literature that is starting to leave my beloved Besson wanting for range and dynamic, and the street price is at the top of my budget, if I have to purchase new.

Please, I played a Miraphone in grad school. Two guys in band each have one. They are great. If I wanted a Miraphone, I would have gotten one already. I also have access to all the Yamaha I can stand. I'll leave the vanilla for my ice cream. I want something a little different.

Thanks for your posts.

[Roger Lewis]

I've spent a fair amount of time with both of these horns and they are both worthy of consideration.

The Jupiter is a bit heavier, due to it's construction but it has a powerful, more "American" sound, good tuning and easy ergonomics. The pistons are a little more work than the rotary valves, but the horn plays well. WIth the right springs, it would probably be even easier to play.

The VMI has more of a "German" sound to it, a comfortable spring tension and "throw" to the rotary valves. The bore is conservative so it doesn't require a ton of air to get the horn to play well. The Jupiter is also on the smaller bore side (though I don't remember what it is). The VMI is taller and this gives it the "sound" and a little more projection, I think (be careful...opinion included in this post). It also has good tuning and the sound has a bit more fundamental in it, meaning a little less color but a little more "weight" to the sound.

Between the two - both good for the price - MY preference (underscore MY) would be for the VMI, just for the sound, projection and playability. I like rotary valves because I'm too old to work that hard. Your mileage may vary and this is MY OPINION, based on MY PREFERENCES. You will find people on both sides of this comparison, because they are both good horns in that price range.

Roger

[Tom Mason]

I bought 2 of these for my high school band in Missouri. Both were the late 90's/early 2000's version that has been improved on since.

I owned a 2005 model up to Christmas of 2006. It had a better valve set, and was heavier construction than the earlier models. I believe that the bore on these are .720's. It had a good projection, but I had to use a larger than normal mouthpiece (Mar. H1) to get some warmth back into the sound that is referred to as an asset in the VMI model.

As far as the use that you are referring, I wouldn't have a problem using these horns in a high school / community band setting. Just be looking for an alternative mouthpiece or other option if you are looking for that darker warm sound. (I believe mine came with a Bach 18 clone).


Tom Mason

[iiipopes]

Thanks, guys. Anyone else?

[fpoon]

Are you using a Besson Eb and just need to get something more suited for the low register?

I had access to a Jupiter 582 in high school and wasn't a big fan of it. Granted, it was a development cycle or two ago so I'm sure the horn has been made better over the last couple of years, but the one we ended up with had odd intination and a sub-par valve cluster. They were always a bit slow. Also felt "clogged" (for lack of a better term) on certain notes, most memorably middle Bb.

Never played the VMI.

If you are willing to consider other horns, I would strongly suggest a King 2341. With the prices I found the Jupiter at (musicians friend), you could get the King for about a grand cheaper (baltimore brass).

[iiipopes]

No. Please read my signature: BBb 3-valve comp. As with all comps, for moderate literature it can't be beat, but for literature that needs low & heavy response with quick dynamic changes in the low register, it can be sluggish. That's what I'm running into. The mid and high registers are great, but it's just not enough.

[fpoon]

My bad.

[Alex F]

Until recently, I owned a VMI 2103 which Roger picked out for me in 2005. I found you can get a big sound with a relatively small amount of air going in. It was also a well built horn with good valves, as one would expect from VMI of late.

I also played, very briefly, a Jupiter 582 that my teacher had purchased as a studio horn. The ergonomics that horn did not work for me but the sound seemed decent. I would judge the build quality as somewhat below the level of the VMI, but not by much. It was certainly heavier than the VMI.

For what my opinion is worth, either one would be OK but my vote goes to the VMI.

[iiipopes]

Bob1062 -- you're missing the point: it's the inertia of the low range of a compensating valve block; I want to stay with a BBb; and I got to try out a Conn2J for a month on loan from my undergrad when I got it fixed up for them. Too small. Moreover, I'm not going to spend more than absolutely necessary on My Besson that I brought home for only $411 including shipping.

[iiipopes]

Well, the consensus seems to be going for the VMI. I really appreciate all the input.

Since bloke said the "only" problem with the "old" versions was the flat 5th partial notes, can anybody tell me if that has been addressed in the current 2103's?

(PS -- the only people so far I have seen who "raved" about a 582, instead of being non committal or mildly positive about it have been bass trombone doublers -- go figure!)

[ken k]

I had a student who had bought a Conn International, which if I am not mistaken was basically a stenciled VMI 2103. The horn was a killer (meaning it was great!). He eventually went the academic route and "upgraded" to a CC. I truly regret that I did not have the 3K he wanted for the horn, when he was selling it. I would have loved to have bought that horn, but I really would not have many occasions to play the horn and I couldn't justify (espeically to the wife) the expense. Balitmore Brass had it for awhile, but last time I visited their site it was not there so I assume it sold. However, there was an old Schneider there that looked suspiciously similar, as bloke eluded to earlier.

I have played a Jupiter but it was a long time ago and was basically a few toots at Dillons, so I can not truly comment on it other than I was not moved one way or the other. It certainly did not shout "buy me!"

Defintely go for the VMI.

ken k

[tubanerd]

Can't talk to the Jupiter, but I've been playing the Brook Mayes stencil of the 2103 for almost 6 years now in community bands. It was recommended to me when I was looking and I'd still recommend it.

[jonesbrass]

I'd definitely do the VMI, too. I've had students who purchased VMI horns, and was impressed by the quality of construction. I've played the Jupiters at the Frankfurt MusikMesse, and didn't really think they were that great. They have come a long way, though. Just my $0.02.

[iiipopes]

Here's a detail I can't find anywhere: on the Jupiter 582, the 4th valve expands to .788 from the main bore of .732.

Does the bore on the the VMI 2103 expand at the 4th valve from its main bore of .748?

[Rick Denney]

Here's a detail I can't find anywhere: on the Jupiter 582, the 4th valve expands to .788 from the main bore of .732.

Does the bore on the the VMI 2103 expand at the 4th valve from its main bore of .748?

The proof of the pudding is in the tasting, not the recipe.

Rick "who doesn't think an expanded fourth-valve bore is always an advantage" Denney

[iiipopes]

You're right, it's not. I'm used to dealing with design specs, not performance specs. Let me phrase it another way, aimed at those who are actually playing VMI 2103's now, or have significant experience to remember its characteristics:

I'm not so concerned about the actual size of the bore, and I'm not so concerned about the actual response of the low F, E nat or Eb as I am about getting a smooth transition from BBb to CC, for example, as well as other intervals in the low range whether by step or by interval.

My Besson valve block, not only a comp but becoming worn, on low F, for example, speaks very well, but the transition from BBb to CC coming up or going down a scale or phrase almost feels and sounds like two different tubas. As a contrast, the Conn 2J 3/4 CC I recently got to play for awhile while I was having it tweaked back up to top condition for my undergrad music department had a very smooth transition from its open CC to 4th valve D.

I know that there has to be some inertia and transition from adding well over 70 inches of cylindrical tubing going from open to 4th valve, but I'm looking for as smooth a transition as possible.

[iiipopes]

More research has turned up this picture of the two of them side by side:

[Rick Denney]

My Besson valve block, not only a comp but becoming worn, on low F, for example, speaks very well, but the transition from BBb to CC coming up or going down a scale or phrase almost feels and sounds like two different tubas.

Something I didn't mention in the PM was that it isn't just the length of the tubing, but also the number of turns, that creates that stuff feel. It may not be a result of valve wear at all, though that could be contributing to the problem.

The 1-3 combination on a 3-valve compensator routes the air through the first valve branch, the third valve branch, the third valve tubing back to the first valve to go through the compensation ports, and then the compensation loops for the first valve. That's at least four reversals of direction and six or seven right-angle turns in valve openings, not to mention the right angles in the ports of a top-action tuba.

In contrast, the fourth valve of the 2103, like most rotary tubas, has two right angles in the valve, two gentler right angles near the valve, a big loop and a tuning-slide crook, which is wider than most top-action arrangements. There's just a lot less to fight the progress of the air, irrespective of valve bore.

Rick "who thinks both the Jupiter and the VMI will have a much more open fourth valve/1-3 combination" Denney

[iiipopes]

Hey bloke -- thanks for sharing your experience. Now you know why I'm so reticent about my whole tuba situation.

I told my band director last night how frustrated I was that he was choosing music that was at the limit or even getting beyond the limits of my tuba, and how I was going to have to spend bucks on a new one. He ignored me. This compounds the fact that he thinks I'm out of tune, but I know I'm in tune relatively speaking (I have the tuner to prove it) and everyone else won't pull or do anything else to compensate the usual culprits: a little bit for 1-2, alternate fingerings where needed, etc. So I'm in tune with the rest of the band, but out of tune in my section. Another way I know I'm in tune is that I've played with various guys who have really good CC tubas, including one particular 56J with the 5th valve taken out so it's much more open and twice the tuba the stock configuration is, and one Kalison come to mind, and when we sit together we absolutely lock in tune, in spite of the pitch differences of the horns.

That kind of pissed me off even more, but I'll get over it because I like to play. Unlike the majority of the players, who obviously don't even crack open the folder between rehersals because of the kind of sectional note rehearsals he has to do with some sections during rehearsals, when we're supposed to be working on putting stuff together with what he wants out of interpretation, etc., I spend literally hours during the week trying to get some of this more difficult stuff right. He's just going to have to deal with me, even if I don't get a new tuba.

End of rant. Now, meanwhile, back at the ranch, or this thread, I get the best of all possible worlds next week. The most laid back guy in the section has a Star, which is a stencil of the older VMI, or Weltklang, etc. He has had it refurbished, and is in top shape, with the slightly tighter body, tall 16 or so inch bell and horizontal tuning slide. I tooted on it for just a couple of minutes at the end of rehearsal last night, and I did come to one immediate conclusion: it does NOT like my Wick 1 mouthpiece; intonation just completely unravelled on me, and the 5th partial was really flat. But of course, this was at the end of rehearsal on an unfamiliar horn, instead of at the beginning. As bloke indicated, I'm really spoiled on the intonation of my Besson. So, next week I'll drag out the rest of my mouthpieces and take with me to see if it likes one of them, like my Bach 18.

In addition, another band director friend has a fairly new Jupiter 582 at his high school. He is going to arrange for me to borrow it for a rehearsal so I can actually get some good blow time through it more than just a toot.

So I'll have both right there together I can get good comparison details on. What more can you ask for, short of buying one of each and returning the one you don't like? -- I know guys who do that routinely, whatever the product is. I just can't do that, not from a money situation, although that is an issue, but unless it's somewhere like Mouthpiece Express who expects you to do that and advertises they'd like you to do that so you get the exact mouthpiece you want, well, it's just not right. End of second rant.

This has been quite an adventure. It's one thing to shop for a "decent" tuba when you are purchasing your first one, and just about anything that you can stand to stay in the same room with on your budget will work. Once you have a good tuba, it's really difficult to find one that actually has measurably superior performance for the money, especially after you've gotten used to its personality quirks.

Thanks for hanging in there with me, guys. This thread has gone on a lot longer than I ever anticipated. I hope the discussion for the price point helps out others, as well.

Stay tuned for the next episode, when Uncle....

[The Big Ben]

Band directors....

If you have never had a band/orchestra director hire a Seattle Symphony professional to play your part (on the night of the performance) after 8 weeks of rehearsals with no complaints said to me, I got one on you.

Little community orchestra with amateurs and a few semi-pros who consider it slumming and an orchestra director with delusions of grandeur. Amongnst other things dropped on my stand first rehersal is a part written for trumpet in "D". I am playing a B-flat. I play it fine, transposing as I go and practice it for 8 weeks. Another was a Bach thing that really needed a picc. I learned to play it on a standard B-flat and hit all the notes in tune. Many, many, many hours spent learning those tunes only to be replaced at the last minute. I guess I was supposed to buy a "D" horn and a picc.

And then there was the next orchestra director who only wanted to play showtunes. Arrgh.

Seems you are going to get real time practice on the two horns you are comparing. Good for you. You will be able to make a choice based on real facts...

(Progress is being made with my tuba learning. I'm starting to get all the open tones and the notes open-F and below. I got a Kelly 25 and start by playing the upper register as far as I can go and, once kinda loosened up, switch to the Helleberg and start moving through the low notes and, after about 15 min., I can get the open F and lower. I do that for about a half hour and stop.)

Jeff