Maybe a new euphonium?

[Ryan_Beucke]

I posted this in another forum, but I thought I'd ask here too.

I'm considering getting a new horn, although there's nothing wrong with my 642. I blew a litle through a friends 2950 the other day though, and I was really impressed! Some of the things that I liked were the shorter valve stems, easier and more centered high range, and a clearer tone. I have a dark sound to begin with, and I think sometimes the 642 makes it too dark, so that's one reason I may want to go to the 2950 or 2900. I've heard a lot of good things about the 842 also though, and when I played a little on one a few years ago, I liked it a lot.

But does anyone who owns or has played an 842 know if the valve throw is shorter than on the 642? That's something that's been bothering me on my horn, and I definitly liked the easier action on the Willson. Also, does the 842 have a brighter tone than the 642?

If anyone can help me, I'd appreciate some good advice and arguments for or against me selling my horn, plunking down another nearly 2000 and then taking a day to drive across states to play test a bunch of horns.

Once again, I know that my horn is fine, and I am not saying anything is wrong with 642s, I just feel that it's worth it for me to play the horn that suites me best.

[ThomasDodd]

If anyone can help me, I'd appreciate some good advice and arguments for or against me selling my horn, plunking down another nearly 2000 and then taking a day to drive across states to play test a bunch of horns.

Nothing can help the valve travel other than a new valve set. Might as well get a new horn for what swaping those would cost.

The sound though might be helped a lot with a different mouthpiece. Trie lots. Different cups, throats, and back bores. Maybe even some different materials, like stainless or titanium or lexan. Maybe a cutom design?

[Ryan_Beucke]

Eh, I've tried a whole bunch of diff. mouthpieces, I'm pretty much set on my 51D as the best for me. I've noticed some changes in sound with different ones, but haven't been happy with the comfort of other kinds.

[Z-Tuba Dude]

I too, was noticing that the valve stroke on the 642 seemed long. Does anyone know if it is longer than the stroke on the 641?

How does the 642 compare, as far as the stroke is concerned, to the Hirsbrunners, Willsons, ....et. al.?

[The Impaler]

Both of the euphoniums I've owned in the last twelve years were purchased more out of necessity and convenience more than desire. I got a Willson 2900 for $2800 twelve years ago, and it suited me very well for ten years. Then about a year and a half ago, I found a Yamaha 842 for around $3500, and I felt I couldn't pass it up. Bottom line? Get what you want within reason and make it work for you. All the top quality euphs and tubas out there are great instruments, and alot of us could do a lot better learning to play the horn than micromanaging our choices for a new one. That being said, I'd probably be considered an equipment freak by my friends. I like having and trying a lot of mouthpieces, and I enjoy playing new horns. But when it comes down to practice time every day, it's right in line with what I do everyday, and it doesn't matter whether it's my 842 or my Besson 983, or which mouthpiece I'm using. It's right down the line. That's what I'm after.

Sorry for the long reply that might've drifted a bit off topic. Best of luck searching for a new horn, I hope you find exactly what you need, but don't trivialize the absolute necessity of day in and day out discipline practice.

[Ryan_Beucke]

if you're looking for way to brighten your sound, the 2900 delivers.

I actually had a chance to play on a friends 2900 the other day too, and I really enjoyed the clarity of sound it gave me. The valves were having problems, although I won't hold that against all 2900s. The high range and low range (more expectadly) was harder than I thought it would be though. I'll definitly make sure I play all of the 2900's and 842's I can before I decide though, to give a fair comparison. Thanks for the post!

[manatee]

Dark is bad, and bright is good for euphonium?

What about Besson? Are they no longer an option for an excellent euphonium? I heard a kid from Julliard tell me that they only blend well with other Bessons.

[Ryan_Beucke]

No, I didn't mean that bright is the sound to look for in a euph...I just happen to have a fairly dark sound on my own, and coupled with a dark horn, I come out very tubby and muddy sometimes.

I played a few bessons a couple years ago, and they didn't seem to fit me well at all. I found them to be way too stuffy, although that's just me. Another eupher I know played the same bessons and fell in love with them.

[Chuck(G)]

Generally speaking, valve travel is a function of bore. Big bore=long valve stroke. There are exceptions, such as the old Conn short stroke (available on the old Connstellation euphoniums). And it's possible for a manufacturer to design a valve set with a longer stroke than absolutely necessary, but that'd be just plain stupid.

[Louis]

The bores on the 2950 are much wider than the 2900 producing a blunter darker sound which isn't what you want. Plus the 2900 is smaller in length as well as bore width, softening the pitch even further.

The bores on the 2900 and 2950 are the same: .591" main valve bore, .670" 4th valve, .632" compensating bore.

http://www.willsonbrass.com/willson.php ... =Euphonium

The difference is at the beginning and the end: The 2950's receiver is that of a bass trombone (as most Yamahas and Bessons have), while the 2900 has the traditional euphonium ("medium shank") receiver. That may differ from USA to Europe too. And the bells: 12.25" on the 2950, 11.5" on the 2900.

I've found that the 2900 has a better focused sound, especially in the upper register. The 2950 has a kicking low register, but some clarity in the very high range is sacrificed. You can really open up on a 2950, by the way. It can take pretty much all you can give! How valuable is that? That's up to you.

By the way... I'm an amateur, and I can tell the difference.

Both are very high-quality instruments. Just awesome... Very well made. When properly maintained, it's tough to match the quality of the valve action on these two instruments. Between these and the Yamahas and Bessons and some others... There are plenty of good horns to choose from.

Regarding the original question... I don't think you'll find the Willson 2950 as your solution if you think your sound is too dark. But rule nothing out without playing them first.

Louis

[manatee]

Just to clarify, the yamaha 201 and 321 take a small, (tenor trombone) mouthpiece shank. I really don't know why as the bore of the horn is big enough for a big shank.