Euph for doubler - YEP-321 vs new Jinbao 3+1 compensator?

[Kevin Hendrick]

People, People... Listen to this: Get a Yep-321, Swap the lead-pipe, Buy a Schilke 57 ( or another *large* Euph Mouthpiece,ie. PS-solo, G&w Lehman Style, Bach 2/3, Doug Yeo)

1. Press valves 1-2-3-4
2. Drop Jaw slightly
3. BLOW LIKE CRAZY
4. Pull First Slide out to tune.

What do you get? Yes, you got it. A Nice Low B natural... ( You might have to lip it down)

Yeah, a half-step at least! On a non-compensating Bb euph, 1-2-3-4-and-pull-the-1st-slide gives you a C, not a B natural. The reason it works on a comp is that the compensating system throws about a half-step's worth of extra tubing into the mix (that's what it's for). If you're getting an in-tune B natural with your procedure above, you're lipping the pitch further off-center than you think.

[Wyvern]

When I get a new model in stock, I like to get impartial feedback from decent players I know on that instrument and on recently getting in the JinBao compensated euphonium have taken around to bands where I play and given to the principal euphonium player asking if they will try and let me know how they find it. I do not want to be selling rubbish - only decent playing instruments!

Three experienced euphonium players (one ex-Royal Marines band) have now tried the JinBao and to my surprise instead of just having a quick blow and going back to their own, all played it the whole rehearsal. Feedback I have got has really amazed ME! They all thought it better playing than their regular euphonium (B&H Imperial, Besson Sovereign and Coutoius respectively) with comments such "it is much more open", "the notes slot better" and "I have never found a euphonium so easy to pitch with the basses". All are interested in buying one when I get in more stock

I don't know if they are generally that good, or by chance I got an exceptional instrument?

[mclaugh]

Yes, you have listed THREE pieces that use a B natural.... Out of a total repertoire that could potentially include 15000 pieces.... Even if you list 25 more pieces that include Bs I still won't be convinced that the 'compensating' system is an absolute necessity.

It is if you're playing those pieces.

People, People... Listen to this: Get a Yep-321, Swap the lead-pipe, Buy a Schilke 57 ( or another *large* Euph Mouthpiece,ie. PS-solo, G&w Lehman Style, Bach 2/3, Doug Yeo)

1. Press valves 1-2-3-4
2. Drop Jaw slightly
3. BLOW LIKE CRAZY
4. Pull First Slide out to tune.

What do you get? Yes, you got it. A Nice Low B natural... ( You might have to lip it down)

If you can't do this, you probably won't be able to do it on a 642 type horn anyway...

Sure you can ... in the practice room, when you've got plenty of time to set up and don't have to worry about unimportant things like playing in tempo, in rhythm, and maintaining the musical line.

By your own admission, you haven't played any of the pieces pgym identified. So how, pray tell, can you so confidently assert that people can play the low B naturals in those pieces in tempo, in rhythm, and in their musical context by using the procedure you outlined?

[PMeuph]

Sure you can ... in the practice room, when you've got plenty of time to set up and don't have to worry about unimportant things like playing in tempo, in rhythm, and maintaining the musical line.

By your own admission, you haven't played any of the pieces pgym identified. So how, pray tell, can you so confidently assert that people can play the low B naturals in those pieces in tempo, in rhythm, and in their musical context by using the procedure you outlined?

Have you played those pieces?

I never asserted that the B natural could be played in that context, I just said it could be played. A decent player could surely find a way of playing it if it were essential.


Look up those pieces...Just google them. They're Grade 5-6 pieces. If you play that level of pieces you'll likely have a compensating euphonium. (Most likely because you're in a service band)

Again, we're arguing over 3 works that are probably performed rarely. My point, and I still stand by it, is that a Compensating Euphonium is not an absolute necessity, it is only necessary 0.1% of the time.... (Considering there are 25 works out of a repertoire of 25,000 and that all repertoire gets played equally)

Philosophically, If you are an amateur or a college student and you can't play the note because it is out of range, What is the worst that will happen to you? An amateur nothing would happen...absolutely nothing...PERIOD. A student, you might lose several percentages on your final mark, or you might a director that is understanding.

If you are a professional (is. service band) than you have a compensating Euphonium and this whole point is moot!

[Rick Denney]

Philosophically, If you are an amateur or a college student and you can't play the note because it is out of range, What is the worst that will happen to you? An amateur nothing would happen...absolutely nothing...PERIOD. A student, you might lose several percentages on your final mark, or you might a director that is understanding.

Not a good argument. Nobody else may care if I don't play a note, but not being able to play it will diminish my own satisfaction, and since satisfaction is the only compensation I receive for most of the music I play, a satisfaction cut is like a pay cut.

A student who could afford an instrument that can play the notes, and who does something musical instead, will probably not be penalized, unless the student is able to get a better instrument and just refuses to.

But Dr. Sloan can buy what he wants, and both of these instruments are, I'm given to understand, coming from a worthy source that will provide honest and expert guidance. I doubt he'll suffer going either way. But given the specifics of these two examples, the Chinese instrument would be mighty tempting. If he buys it, he'd better start planning to drive to the Army conference now. He's already on the hook to bring his freshened BAT. He can even bring his son and have an excuse to bring the euph along.

Rick "reserving a trial in return for all this brilliant free advice" Denney

[sloan]

But given the specifics of these two examples, the Chinese instrument would be mighty tempting. If he buys it, he'd better start planning to drive to the Army conference now. He's already on the hook to bring his freshened BAT. He can even bring his son and have an excuse to bring the euph along.

Rick "reserving a trial in return for all this brilliant free advice" Denney

Actually...bringing the son might be extra incentive to give AmTrak another shot at it.
Last year, I was set to take the train, and AmTrak canceled!!! There's economy in scale if TWO people make that trip by train.

Of course, that applies to two people driving, too. Perhaps more so - with two drivers it becomes a 1 day trip; I've been splitting it into two days lately (when I drive). But then, I'd have to teach him to drive a stick...and then I would have to buy a new clutch. Or...we bring my wife's wagon. Not my favorite for highway driving - but I suppose some compromises must be made.

Excellent plan - I'll run it by him and see what he thinks.

[Tom Coffey]

We all got pretty far from the original post, so this probably doesn't matter much. BUT...
I got mis-quoted there, and I am not sure how that happened, since most quotes are actually completely verbatim here because of the computer quote function.
If anyone is still reading and wants to look at my post at the top of page 2, I said most doublers don't need a compensating system. A subsequent poster picked up on that and said nobody needs it, but that was not my language. My idea came from (now past) experience as a doubler, using the euphonium mostly on church gigs. I don't play any of the referenced rep as a euphonium player, and would not presume to have an opinion on compensating systems for those who do.
However, the OP and his son are doublers, not military band soloists. A Yamaha, a Weril, or maybe even a JB are probably all fine for that application.

[pgym]

We all got pretty far from the original post, so this probably doesn't matter much. BUT...
I got mis-quoted there, and I am not sure how that happened, since most quotes are actually completely verbatim here because of the computer quote function.

My apologies, Tom.

In cutting out the part of your post embedded in PMeuph's reply to your post, I inadvertently left the quote header from your post, and didn't double-check that the quote was properly attributed before hitting "Submit."

Again, my apologies for the mis-attribution.

pgym.

[Tom Coffey]

No problem--I am glad to know how it happened. And, it was pretty academic, by then, any way. It will be interesting to hear what the OP gets and how it works out.

[PMeuph]

No problem--I am glad to know how it happened. And, it was pretty academic, by then, any way. It will be interesting to hear what the OP gets and how it works out.

FWIW, my "rebuttals" are there and I knew that the original controversial post is (about nobody needing a comp system) is mine. I hope I didn't give the impression that I was misusing your point.

[JCalkin]

In keeping with the original topic...

I'm looking into getting a "doubler's" euph also, but my list does not include the 321 (tone quality not to my taste).

To add another element to this discussion, what about the King 2280 vs. the aforementioned instruments? It's a bigger bore 4V top action, and some others have praised it (though I have heard all of that praise second hand).

[tbn.al]

In keeping with the original topic...

I'm looking into getting a "doubler's" euph also, but my list does not include the 321 (tone quality not to my taste).

To add another element to this discussion, what about the King 2280 vs. the aforementioned instruments? It's a bigger bore 4V top action, and some others have praised it (though I have heard all of that praise second hand).

I've had my 2280 for about 3 years. I sold my Marzan FA comper because I couldn't justify keeping it around for the 3 or 4 times a year I used it. Made enough profit off the sale to pay for my O-99 and mods. I love the King. It is top action and I would prefer front, but that is the only thing bad I can think to say. The response, intonation, silver finish and tone color are wonderful! The best thing is that I have less than $500 in it, so it doesn't hurt me to set it in the corner for weeks on end. I played the TT part to the Planets on it this year and I was pleased with the results. I would not go back to the Marzan. As a doubler the King is all I need and I don't cry when I look in the corner at hundreds instead of thousands of dollars.

[MartyNeilan]

Nobody REALLY* needs a compensating euphonium in any situations(amateur or pro)...

Does anybody really NEED a euphonium??

[Rick Denney]

Isn't its name a euph-emism for baritone horn?

Joe, Joe, Joe. You are better than that.

Rick "who doesn't need to hear hackneyed and ancient middle-school band director jokes on Tubenet" Denney

[mclaugh]

Have you played those pieces?

Look up those pieces...Just google them. They're Grade 5-6 pieces. If you play that level of pieces you'll likely have a compensating euphonium. (Most likely because you're in a service band)

Dude, on this side of the 49th parallel, Grade 5 is intermediate/late intermediate level difficulty. Hell, if you'd have bothered to check out the the videos of Exultaté on YouTube, you'd have seen that half of them are by high school bands, and they all turn in creditable performances.

As it happens, I have played all three: the Lam (which George composed while a grad student at Duke) with Duke Univ. Wind Ensemble (made up of non-music majors), and the Hazo and Debussy transcription with the Durham Community Concert Band, neither of which begins to approach the level of a service band. But that's neither here nor there.

I never asserted that the B natural could be played in that context, I just said it could be played. A decent player could surely find a way of playing it if it were essential.

Notes played in isolation are not music: they're simply noise. If you can't play a note in it's musical context, you can't play it. You may be able to get the note to sound, but you're not playing it.

Again, we're arguing over 3 works that are probably performed rarely.

YOU are arguing over the three works; the rest of us are arguing about what those three works represent, namely, the question of whether euphoniumists--be they professionals or amateur--as opposed to euphonim doublers and dabblers, should be held to a standard of performance excellence commensurate to that expected of every other orchestral and symphonic wind musician--a standard that, at a minimum, implies the ability to play every note in time, in rhythm, and in tune across the entire chromatic range of the instrument--or just settle for "good enough." It's obvious which side of the argument you come down on. Just because you're willing to settle for "good enough" doesn't mean anyone else has to.

My point, and I still stand by it, is that a Compensating Euphonium is not an absolute necessity, it is only necessary 0.1% of the time

It doesn't matter how frequently or rarely a piece is played: if you're called on to play the piece, you damn well need to play the ALL the notes in time, in rhythm, in tune, in context, and on demand. If you can't, and don't care that you can't, that's your privilege; but don't pretend you're anything more than a valve banger, because you certainly can't be considered a musician.

PMeuph wrote:
Philosophically, If you are an amateur or a college student and you can't play the note because it is out of range, What is the worst that will happen to you? An amateur nothing would happen...absolutely nothing...PERIOD. A student, you might lose several percentages on your final mark, or you might a director that is understanding.

Not a good argument. Nobody else may care if I don't play a note, but not being able to play it will diminish my own satisfaction, and since satisfaction is the only compensation I receive for most of the music I play, a satisfaction cut is like a pay cut.[/quote][/quote]

+1

WE'VE UPPED OUR STANDARDS. UP YOURS!

[sousaphone68]

I'm contemplating the acquistion of a euph for use by TWO doublers: I hack away at tuba; my son is a strong trombone player - we both could benefit from access to a euph.

The classic answer to this question has been the Yamaha 321. 4V inline, non-compensating. As produced, I believe it accepts a small shank - but a commonly recommended "upgrade" is to swap out the receiver so that it can accept a large shank.

And then there were the Werils...which seem to have fallen from favor.

The flavor of the month might be Jinbao - fully compensating 3+1.

The prices (econo-rehab 321, with receiver swap vs. shiny new Jinbao) are pretty close.
The pluses and minuses appear to balance. So...opinion time!

The most valued opinion would come from someone who has actually played both (an exception will be made if you are the Resident Genius). Keep in mind
that the players are both doublers - one with a tin ear...and one with a highly trained ear.

Vote early, vote often (but please...explain your vote!)

just thought I would remind people what the OP's question was.
I have a non compensated 3 +1 euph that although stencilled Virtuosi England is more than likely a Jin Bao it takes all of my standard tuba mouthpieces and is perfect for me and my 10 year old to learn on and it only cost my €150 on eBay I have lent it in the past to the Euph player in the band I play in and while I doubt he would buy one he has asked to borrow it again.
Have any of the posts helped you to decide what to do?

[sloan]

just thought I would remind people what the OP's question was.
I have a non compensated 3 +1 euph that although stencilled Virtuosi England is more than likely a Jin Bao it takes all of my standard tuba mouthpieces and is perfect for me and my 10 year old to learn on and it only cost my €150 on eBay I have lent it in the past to the Euph player in the band I play in and while I doubt he would buy one he has asked to borrow it again.
Have any of the posts helped you to decide what to do?

Yup. 3+1 compensating Jinbao is "on order". Perhaps it will have arrived when I return from next week in Germany.

[augustus]

Have you played those pieces?

As it happens, I have played all three: the Lam (which George composed while a grad student at Duke) with Duke Univ. Wind Ensemble (made up of non-music majors), and the Hazo and Debussy transcription with the Durham Community Concert Band, neither of which begins to approach the level of a service band. But that's neither here nor there.

Really?

[PMeuph]

Have you played those pieces?

Look up those pieces...Just google them. They're Grade 5-6 pieces. If you play that level of pieces you'll likely have a compensating euphonium. (Most likely because you're in a service band)

Dude, on this side of the 49th parallel, Grade 5 is intermediate/late intermediate level difficulty. Hell, if you'd have bothered to check out the the videos of Exultaté on YouTube, you'd have seen that half of them are by high school bands, and they all turn in creditable performances.

As it happens, I have played all three: the Lam (which George composed while a grad student at Duke) with Duke Univ. Wind Ensemble (made up of non-music majors), and the Hazo and Debussy transcription with the Durham Community Concert Band, neither of which begins to approach the level of a service band. But that's neither here nor there.

I never asserted that the B natural could be played in that context, I just said it could be played. A decent player could surely find a way of playing it if it were essential.

Notes played in isolation are not music: they're simply noise. If you can't play a note in it's musical context, you can't play it. You may be able to get the note to sound, but you're not playing it.

Again, we're arguing over 3 works that are probably performed rarely.

YOU are arguing over the three works; the rest of us are arguing about what those three works represent, namely, the question of whether euphoniumists--be they professionals or amateur--as opposed to euphonim doublers and dabblers, should be held to a standard of performance excellence commensurate to that expected of every other orchestral and symphonic wind musician--a standard that, at a minimum, implies the ability to play every note in time, in rhythm, and in tune across the entire chromatic range of the instrument--or just settle for "good enough." It's obvious which side of the argument you come down on. Just because you're willing to settle for "good enough" doesn't mean anyone else has to.

My point, and I still stand by it, is that a Compensating Euphonium is not an absolute necessity, it is only necessary 0.1% of the time

It doesn't matter how frequently or rarely a piece is played: if you're called on to play the piece, you damn well need to play the ALL the notes in time, in rhythm, in tune, in context, and on demand. If you can't, and don't care that you can't, that's your privilege; but don't pretend you're anything more than a valve banger, because you certainly can't be considered a musician.

PMeuph wrote:
Philosophically, If you are an amateur or a college student and you can't play the note because it is out of range, What is the worst that will happen to you? An amateur nothing would happen...absolutely nothing...PERIOD. A student, you might lose several percentages on your final mark, or you might a director that is understanding.

Not a good argument. Nobody else may care if I don't play a note, but not being able to play it will diminish my own satisfaction, and since satisfaction is the only compensation I receive for most of the music I play, a satisfaction cut is like a pay cut.

+1

WE'VE UPPED OUR STANDARDS. UP YOURS!

Dude, thanks for letting the world know you have to results to cheap insults when trying to have a discussion. (You are entitled to your opinion, you are not entitled to be rude. Cheap puns, insinuations about people and insults of nations are irrelevant and contribute absolutely nothing to this discussion.

Honestly, I will continue arguing if you me want to. But, I honestly feel it is not worth it. If you had spend 3 seconds reading my original recommendation and looking at my signature. You would have notice that I: 1. recommended the Jinbao; 2. own a Yamaha YEP-642.

Again, If you could read, there are other ways of playing the B nat (Faking, 1234 with slide pulls, 5 valve horns). Points you don't acknowledge. Hence the "REALLY needs" in my point. (Tune your frigging fourth slide to e)

I draw a line in music, if a part is really poorly written (which rarely happens with edited music by professional composers, but happens a lot in music by local "arrangers") I play it another way. (I have played a LOT of shitty music written by "hacks") If a part is ineffective ( ie. is the part just a poorly written tuba part. After all, why would there be a b nat in a euph part? The timbre? (maybe, but it still doesn't seem like a great reason most of the time)

(I don't buy that crap that all composers music is sacrosanct. There are good and bad composers, just like there are good and bad musicians. If I play music that I don't feel is worth the paper it is printed on, well I tweak it.)

I buy the argument about satisfaction, I really do. But not playing one note, that is usually used ineffectively by composers, will not dissatisfy me. I honestly feel, that since wind-band music is played by amateurs, if the composer writes a B nat he is being selective. He/she is writing music that is intended for college/pro bands. I have played in such level bands, I have earned money playing the euphonium (yes, really, a sizable amount too, enough so I that have two degrees and no debts and a full stable of horns at home)

I love my 642, and I liked the jinbao. Are they an absolute necessity to play all the music I have played. NO.

Furthermore, let's be honest, give a comp euphonium to a beginner musician, even a sometimes a high-school musicians. Some might have great instincts, be good musicians, but not be able to play that note. Not being able to play one note does not make you a bad musician.

The last ironic issue that I want to raise, is that Euphoniums are not Tubas! Players, composers, arrangers, and directors are sometimes guilty of treating the one like the other. A solid high range is ten-fold more important than a low range on the euphonium. The only B natural that should be a discussion topic among euph players is the High B.

In the end, it doesn't really matter. The OP got the compensating euph. That is great for him! And that is all that matters.

[Bob Kolada]

The last ironic issue that I want to raise, is that Euphoniums are not Tubas! Players, composers, arrangers, and directors are sometimes guilty of treating the one like the other. A solid high range is ten-fold more important than a low range on the euphonium. The only B natural that should be a discussion topic among euph players is the High B.

I think they're more often/too often treat like FRENCH HORNS instead. There are too many alto and tenor instruments in a band to have euphs playing where they're stuck most of the time. I occasionally dream of an orchestral low brass section with 2 tenor trombones, 1 bass, 1 euphonium playing in the normal bass trombone range BUT linked more to the tuba, and 1 tuba. THAT would sound awesome and would have such a better transition of sounds!