Weril 4-Valve Euphonium

[davewerden]

This is a horn that might sell for a lower price than the Yamaha 321. Any comments?

[SteveMcGovern]

Weril 4-Valve Euphonium

[Moved from another topic]

I have heard that the Weril 4v euphonium is a good instrument, and an excellent value. But I've never seen or played one myself.

[davewerden]

Weril 4-Valve Euphonium

I had a chance to try one at Tubonium a couple years ago. It was only a short test, but it seemed like a nice horn. At first glance I'd say I didn't like it as well as the King 4-valve non-comp that was at the same show (and would probably be around the same price).

[prototypedenNIS]

Weril 4-Valve Euphonium

From what I've heard, review wise, was that the slotting was good (perhaps better than the 321), and the tone was good. They have some problems with the lacquered finish.
">http://www.hornguys.com/euphonium.htm

here it's cheaper and "gives the Yamaha a run for its money"

Many players seem to like to take 321's and add an oversized leadpipe off of a discontinued 621 on it... Small shank isn't quite right so some people (many colleges it seems) believe that this gets the job done in bumping an instrument up to a pro horn. The Weril already has a Large shank receiver on it and is actually designed with a large shank mouthpiece in mind.

wwbw has the 321 for 1000 more than the Silver plated Weril at hornguys and hornguys has the 321 is "close to" a 700$ difference, a little over 50% more than the Weril.

I'd like to add, my store doesn't sell either of these.

[keithbarton]

Weril 4-Valve Euphonium

I missed this post for some reason. For those who don't know, I went 30 years without playing from 1971 to 2001. I bought a Weril 4 valve euphonium in January, 2001. Had the 4 valves right there under your right hand fingers, no 4th valve down low for your left hand. In 2004, I sold it for a 1970s model Besson. I wanted a bigger bore, heavier horn with a fuller sound. The Weril was ok but it didn't give me that big sound I wanted. Craftsmanship was ok, but I thought the metal on the horn, overall, was a little light-weight. In 2002, I played When Jesus Wept with the Weril. A few years later, I sent the recording of that concert to my mentor, Arthur Lehman, and apologized for the puny sound the Weril had. He wrote back that it sounded marvelous, he liked it. So, the Weril is ok but in my opinion not up to snuff for me. I don't want a new Yamaha or Besson or anything else, since I have two Boosey & Hawkes Imperials, one of which belonged to Arthur and the other was built in 1946. To me, these are "Cadillac" horns. I don't think I'd be happy with anything else, except may be a Besson Prestige, which I'm not likely to get anytime soon. $$$

[GMEuphonium]

Weril 4-Valve Euphonium

I owned and played a 4 valve Weril euphonium. I actually took it to Interlochen where the euph/tuba professor told me that my tone was too bright. That was the first time I had ever been told that and after a little listening and experimenting, I concluded that my tone was a little on the bright side however, the horn was not helping me out at all. I did not like the horn, it was a silver 4 v (not 3+1) with a large shank. Previsouly I played a yamaha yep 321 (4 valves) and liked it better than the weril. I ended up selling the weril euphonium on ebay for about $800 (in just about new condition). The best thing about it was the case, it would have survived in a hurricane.
I think the horn was made very well, it had a good feel to it, the intonation was good and I had no problem with the valve action (the yep321 had problems from the beginning). I would say that it was a step up from the yamaha 321 but I did not like the tone it gave me.

[JBrassLee]

Weril 4-Valve Euphonium

I am resurrecting a very old post here but I thought I would chime in for the sake of folks researching this forum to decide which horn to purchase. I purchased a Weril 4V Inline euph in 2007. It was in silver. It played beautifully with the mouthpiece it came with, but I don't remember what size it was.

The valves on this horn were aweful! They felt like they were full of sand paper. I looked inside the valve and found a black toothpaste like substance that had run down the inside of the valve casing and into the first valve slide. It was actually on the outside of the 1st valve inner slide if that makes sense. I think it may have been lapping compound. Anyway, I was very disappointed with the valves.

The bell had been damaged in shipping so with everything, I was able to send the horn back to the dealer with no problems.

I think it would have been a great horn if the QC was a little better. I have no idea what Weril is doing now but I wouldn't say they are high quality from what I saw. I wouldn't even say they are any better than the stuff from China.

Thanks

[prototypedenNIS]

Weril 4-Valve Euphonium

Above I had actually posted that my work doesn't carry them. We briefly picked them up after and had some of the Holton stencilled ones available through Conn Selmer.

The valves weren't that great. We didn't have issues wit the lapping compound remaining in the horn (though I have seen this on repairs) but it seemed like the valves were lapped with a very coarse compound. This became less noticeable as the valves got worked in over the years.

The horns are also made with lighter gauge brass so they are more susceptible to damage. The cases are very durably built though.

All in all, I rather liked them. With a relapp in shop, they made for a great horn for cheap. The company also makes a fantastic basic valve trombone as well as a pro one.

A couple of years ago I'd say they were well better than the Czech and Chinese. Given companies like Eastman popping up, I'd say the Chinese are catching up though.

[JBrassLee]

Weril 4-Valve Euphonium

When you say it seemed like the valves were lapped with a very course compound, that is exactly the way I would describe how these Weril valves felt to me. They felt cheap and gritty, like they were plated with sandpaper instead of nickel.

[uieuph]

Weril 4-Valve Euphonium

My ex played a Weril. I remember the valves on it were always problematic. It's not a bad horn per se. It fit in well in community bands where there were solo lines for arrangements of Duke Ellington and Rogers & Hammerstein.

[prototypedenNIS]

Weril 4-Valve Euphonium

Originally posted by: JBrassLee

When you say it seemed like the valves were lapped with a very course compound, that is exactly the way I would describe how these Weril valves felt to me. They felt cheap and gritty, like they were plated with sandpaper instead of nickel.

more like they looked like they were polished with a medium grit sandpaper.

[loren]

Weril 4-Valve Euphonium

Okay, FWIW. I recently bought (off eBay) an ex-middle school Weril I980 It had the usual complaints one would expect from such a horrific start in life. After a week in my local repair shop, it plays beautifully. I had the work necessary to function done and didn't worry about cosmetics. Mouthpipe and valve knuckle dents were removed, bell was straightened, second valve was honed a bit, etc. Valves are wonderful and honestly from 10 feet away it looks great...total investment so far, a bit under $500.00

[prototypedenNIS]

Weril 4-Valve Euphonium

Hopefully it will also sound good from 10 ft away!