Best All-around Euphonium

[jaredsan]

Yamaha 321 is reliable and is a really decent horn. If youre going to use it well and abuse it this might be the best "all around" horn. The other horns are more fragile, or at least cause more grief when damaged becuase of the price of the horn.

For most other brands you should get your hands on one and decide for yourself. A few sessions with some of the "big name (willson, besson)" horns, and one is bound to stick out to you personally.

> Meinl-weston also makes a decent baritone, but consistency might or might not be an issue..

[oldbandnerd]

I have been researching that very issue my self for about a year now. Most recently I found this forum about 4 months ago.
I have ask many questions here and have gotten plenty of responses. The information I have gathered here and from talking to other euphonium players around my home town has led me to one conclusion. The Yamaha YEP 321 is the overall winner for the catgorie of "BEST ALL AROUND " . I have play one . I have also played a Besson and a King 2280. Both are very good horns .The Besson being the better of those two. But for middle of the road quality, sound ,intonation and just damn fun to play it always seems to come back to the YAMAHA !!

The other euphoinum player in my local community concert band plays one . He and I are about equal in playing ability.
But he always blows me away !!! By the way I am playing on an old bell-forward Besson 764 three valver. It is a nice horn. It has a really big , fat sound ,especially in the low end of the staff .
I hope this helps you . Good luck in your search

[Rick Denney]

What is the best all around euphonium out there?
Yes, a tough question but let's keep this objective shall we?
Money not an issue,
No biases,
And no hype.
Just pure stats and experience.

Stats? How does that arrive at "best". And experience? How does that transfer from one to another?

But since opinions are easier than experience and perhaps not quite as unhelpful as stats, my choice would be the Willson 2900, with the smaller bell. Not only is it playable with a good sound, but it also won't lose you any respect amongst the euphonium artist types...assuming you can play it.

If money were an object, I'd get a Weril 980. Same idea as the Yamaha but with a large shank receive and thus a wider availability of mouthpieces. And cheaper, too.

Rick "whose personal favorite as a tuba player would have to be the more specialized Willson 2975" Denney

[Bob Mosso]

I played on a YEP-321 in high school, I still recall it as the best Euph I've ever played, great tone, somehow playing became easier on that euph. But, I've never played on the more pricey horns like the Bessons and Willsons.

Captian Sousie had some very nice things to say about the Willson 2704 in the thread "Opinion: YEP321 or BE7065?".

Are compensating horns really better? Seems all the extra twists and turns to go thru the long stroke valves twice would impact the tone quality.... I'm going to stick with non-comp for now, just figure out the fingerings and slide settings that work best for the horn you're playing.

Bob

[Rick Denney]

Are compensating horns really better?

That's an open question. Certainly, most folks can achieve their full capabilities on a non-compensating euphonium. I can achieve my full capabilities on a three-valve Conn baritone with a smashed bell and leaky valves.

But I have to say that the Willson is a great euphonium, compensating or no. If there is any ill effect from the compensation, I can't tell it either as a player or as a listener.

The poster specifically took money out of the equation. I would assume that any dedicated euphonium player for whom money is not a consideration would be thinking first of a compensating euphonium, unless they had a compelling reason not to. Lack of money is one such reason, in which case the Weril seems like a better way to preserve money than the Yamaha.

Rick "who thinks a euph player would never have to justify the choice of a 2900, which seems to me as good a way to approach the answer as any" Denney

[Dylan King]

I think I would go with the Stealth.

[Captain Sousie]

I am always open to changing my mind and I hope that this statement doesn't curse me forever.

I have never met a Willson euph that I didn't like. I have met a few that I love, but none that I didn't like. I personally would go with the 2900 as the best all-'round but the 2704 is probably the best for the money.

I am also curious, why hasn't anyone mentioned a Besson? I thought that they were a favorite among a lot of euphonistas.

Sousie

[Highams]

I have to say that after many, many years on euphs. the Willson is far superior in every aspect including workmanship. I have tried as many models as I could get my hands on, and for me nothing comes close.

www.euph9.freeserve.co.uk

[Rick F]

If money were no object, I would think about trying a Hirsbrunner. Not sure if I like the Stealth model above though. That's pretty flashy for my tastes. The silver plating on the HB's are among the best. Of course, if it doesn't play in tune, what good is a shiny horn?

[dmmorris]

I've played the YEP321. Good horn by all counts...and easier for me to mess with 'cause the 4th valve ain't on the wrong sig of the horn. My son is a eupher and has played a 321 all through HS, but we recently found him a used YEP642 at a good price. Holy-mother-o-pearl.....this thing plays! I can drop a little Laskey 30G tuba mouthpiece into the large-shank receiver an crank-out lots of solid low notes...in tune! It's middle registar is sweet & dark & juicy. I can't play in the upper registar even with a Shilke 51D, but i'd bet with the right chops it would be killer. This baby is easily superior to the YEP321 and was at about the same price break gently used as a new silver YEP321 one.

[pg]

What is the best all around euphonium out there?

The one that you practice and get good on. All the other ones aren't worth the money.

--paul;

[Ryan_Beucke]

I think it's mainly preference. A lot of people here express that their best horn would be a Willson 2900. Personally, I do like the 2900, but the only horn that I found that I like better than my 642 is an 842. Also, as Bloke said, every horn has flaws. You could take a look at all of the horns the players in my studio have, and see just that

There are 4 people with 2950s. They all have the consistant Bb and A out of tune as well as the middle-high register, and a couple have more bad notes. On one of them, the Bb on the top space is horribly flat. One of them, the part of the spit valve that is soldered onto the horn fell off and had to be soldered back on, and another one the pearl on the number two valve fell off.

One guy has a 2900, which plays a little better in tune, but the valves began seizing very badly after a year.

One guy has a Hirsbrunner, which has some pretty bad notes.

Me and another guy have 642s, and I haven't played his, but mine has some bad notes as well.

Of course, I'm sure these problems happen to some peoples horns and not to others. Those guys chose those horns because they felt that they are the best for them.

[9811matt]

I've found the 642 to be consistent between several different examples of this horn. If it has certain tendencies, then most all of them are the same way, and I've learned to compensate for them. I currently play a mix of a Willson 2900, 2 Yamaha 642s, and an late 60's Besson.

Observations...

The Willson 2900 is indeed built like the proverbial tank. It can take more abuse than a modern Besson, and not show dents (as readily, but ANYTHING can be broken if hit just right). Response is even, but the overall feel of the instrument is quite "compact". A 2900 will back up on you at anything over a FF.

The old Besson has a pitch-center a mile wide. You play out of tune, and it very happily plays out of tune, with a beautiful smooth, (not too) dark sound. Short valve stroke, but kind of a long reach to the 4th valve. Phenomenal soft response. Only problem with the Besson, is that it'll "fuzz" out at anything over FF.

The same soft response, and lack of upper volume may be found on the Yamaha 842. If I were to play a single modern instrument for myself, and not in a concert band setting, then the 842 would be it. Lovely for chamber works, quintets, etc, but it lacks the projection at high SPL (Sound Pressure Level) needed to sing over a band.

This leaves me with the Yamaha 642. As far as an all around horn goes, the 642 seems to cover all the bases. What it gives up in soft response (which it still has plenty of, only demurring slightly to the 842 and vintage Besson) it makes up in maintaining focus at FFF and higher volume levels, with the appropriate mouthpiece (a SM3 in my case). I've played two primary 642s and lots of school/demo 642s since 1995, and would have to recommend it for a developing euphoniumist with aspirations of playing professionally.

The Yamahas also have the shortest (most ergonomic) reach between the 3rd valve tubing and the 4th valve, making them ideal instruments for those who may have smaller hands, not sized to the Besson or Hirsbrunners.

For an instrument that plays darn close to the level of these professional horns, the Brasswind's "Allora" euph for $1600 in silver, is a 4 valve (3+1) horn which, at least in the example I played at the Midwest Clinic, plays better than any other non-compensating horn I've held. Eyes closed, I don't know that I could tell the difference between it and the old Besson. A superior choice to the Willson 2704 or Yamaha 321. The 321 is designed as a student instrument, and without modification, the leadpipe is too far down on the bell for the average sized adult, resulting in an awkward playing position. Yes, I do own a YEP-321S as well (#003957).

This has grown lengthy, but I'll be happy to elaborate on any point described here, in a followup...

Matt Summers

[Alex F]

For an instrument that plays darn close to the level of these professional horns, the Brasswind's "Allora" euph for $1600 in silver, is a 4 valve (3+1) horn which, at least in the example I played at the Midwest Clinic, plays better than any other non-compensating horn I've held. Eyes closed, I don't know that I could tell the difference between it and the old Besson. A superior choice to the Willson 2704 or Yamaha 321.

This Allora looks a lot like a MW451 w/p the compensating tubing. Actually, I think MW does, or did, make a non-comp euph

[Rick Denney]

But its finding the horn that fits the player, wouldnt you agree?

Well, of course. But that wasn't the question. The question was which euphonium was the best all around instrument, regardless of cost.

All of the instruments mentioned have their artist-grade proponents, and must therefore be capable of producing artist-grade results.

But they all seem to have faults that take them out of consideration for a significant percentage of the euph-playing population. I once watched a euph player sitting next to me spend most of a rehearsal trying to make that gold-plating tuning thingy go back together on his new Prestige after it sprayed its guts all over his lap. Every brand seems to have issues.

It's just that the 2900 seems to have the fewest issues. That, to me, makes it the best all-round horn with cost out of the formula. That isn't the same thing as being the very best horn at any one thing.

Rick "whose extremely battered Besson is all he will ever need" Denney

[JTJ]

I believe the Yamaha 642 is the best all around euphonium. It has the characteristics one would expect from such a designation: no real enemies, receives faint praise, few complaints, yet can be, and is, played by artists at the highest levels. And no one ever says you made a mistake buying your 642, although they will say "did you try the...?"

John

Who bought his 642 after a playoff between Willson, Besson and Miraphone, but who would like to give the 842 a try someday.