I just posted this on TubeNet and thought I should probably share it here as well!!
First the Adams, with which I'm most familiar, had 2 new experiences for me. The brought a prototype with valves that were top sprung (my suggestion) and short action. That was great fun to try. I love both ideas on the valves. It did not seem to play quite as freely as the normal Adams horns, but maybe that's the price you pay for the short action. Since I'm not a full-time player at this point, not to mention the years creeping up on me, a little help with valves is welcome. I also played the new E3 model. That has a different leadpipe and different shape to the large tubes and bell. Nice horn! It has a bit deeper sound (more gravitas?) and still feels as friendly as my own E1. I may consider switching to the E3, but I need to spend more time with one first.
Wessex front-valve compensating. As said already, it was less free in the compensating register. But it was a fun horn to play. It took me a minute to get used to the sound being close to my left ear instead of my right ear! I am excited about this horn, too, particularly if the Wessex folks can free up the low-register response. I've begun to think that the front valves are a little easier on the body because your arm is not stretching back. I did a tuning test on it, and overall it was as good as the Dolce, but with tendencies that were different in some ways. You can see the results here and compare with other models if you like:
http://www.dwerden.com/Intonation/
Yamaha was an interesting experience. I mostly tried the 842, and I thought it played very well. The sound seemed more robust than the early models I tried (years ago); in any case it was a good sound. Response was very good. That was interesting, because the valve alignment was off! I talked to the reps about it, and they said that they ship from the factory with pads under the finger buttons that are too thick, but then when they are played for a month or so they tamp down and produce good alignment. I can't be totally sure, but I think that is the first time I have seen that. That fact that the horn played so well is a sign that the basic design is quite good and can withstand a little bump in the valve area.
I played briefly on the Besson horns. I was anxious to try the 967 because I had not played that one at previous shows (not enough to notice anyway). It is a very nice horn in their lineup. The trigger would be desirable on this horn, as it is on the Prestige, but my understanding is that Besson does not yet offer the trigger in the USA. Can anyone confirm or correct that? The valves on that horn were the most sluggish of the ones I tested, but I'm positive that was just the "display horn" problem. It just needed a wipe down and fresh oiling. I point that out not as a criticism of Besson at all, because it is pretty much thought by everyone that their valves are excellent. It is just something you should keep in mind as you are trying horns. Exhibits are NOT the place to judge valve quickness!
I played on the Willson saxhorn, and that was fun. It was quite different for me, as a "normal" euphonium player. The sound was very sweet, and would be a fine fit for some music... better than a euphonium. If one could own both a standard euphonium and one of these, I'm sure they would find a good use for the saxhorn. I also got some time to play the 2960. This was to double-check my opinion from the last ITEC. I think that model is my own personal favorite among the Willsons.
I played a bit on the Miraphone 5050 and thought it felt just like my memory said. It probably has the largest sound of the current horns, and it's a nice sound at that. It takes a bit more work to play, but it is still what I would call an easy-responder. It would not be my choice for recital work or chamber playing, but it would fit nicely with a large ensemble, I think.
I played very briefly on the JP Sterling 374 and the Eastman compensating euphonium. They both played nicely within the "clone" realm, but I was kept by other business from playing either as much as I wanted to. I can't even say which I liked better. Maybe next ITEC.
Baltimore Brass had an older Besson on display (medium shank, so before 1974). I was reminded what sweet horns these were in their days. The smoothness of response is not up to our current standards, and the sound is not as huge as we seem to want, but there is still that "magic" to the old Besson sound. If I had one sitting around, I'd probably play it at gigs now and then just for the fun of it.
As always, I play as many horns as I can so I understand the differences, plusses, minuses, etc. That was how I started to think about Adams in 2010/Tucson. After the rounds this year, I am still very sold on my choice of the Adams (in case anyone was wondering). But I have to say again that we are lucky ducks indeed to have so many fine choices. Of the pro horns I tried this year, I would not turn up my nose at any of them! There was not a dog among the pro horns I tried. My general advice is for serious players to try all the top brands, because not everyone will agree with my own choice. I see no reason to change that advice, or to tell anyone to save time by not trying one of them.
Let me take a minute to say that I appreciate all the vendors who came to ITEC. They give us a marvelous shopping opportunity and they help keep the event in the black. It's a real service (yes, profit-motivated, naturally) to have horns, equipment, music, etc. to check out. The folks at the exhibits seemed engaged and knowledgeable.
Along those lines, I just heard of another conference where the competitors who win prizes are given something like Monopoly money that they can use at any exhibit. What does everyone think of that idea? I would be a way for ITEC to further support the vendors, for one thing. But it means you can't sock it away in your college fund or your someday-horn fund.