Doug Elliott XT vs EUPH series redux

[ernstlanzer]

I have a EUPH series piece, and I've been thinking recently about trying out an XT series piece. I know there were a few comparison discussions when the EUPH series first came out, but I always tend to be a bit wary of first/early impressions--it sometimes takes a while to really have perspective on all the different subtle qualities of a mouthpiece.

My impression is that most folks feel XT with a deep cup was a good option back when Doug only made "trombone" mouthpieces, but now that there's a specific euphonium line, EUPH is the way to go. When I first talked to Doug and started experimenting with different parts a year or two ago, the XT series wasn't even part of the discussion, and I didn't even think to bring it up.

Is XT still a viable options? Why might someone choose XT over EUPH when playing a large-shank compensating horn? Anyone with significant experience on both care to give their impressions? Anyone revise their initial impressions of the EUPH series, or move away from it for one reason or another?


Here's my perspective: I'm generally quite happy with my EUPH 104/I/I8 on my Wessex Dolce. It's stable and accurate, it has a deep and full tone, an excellent dynamic range, and is very free blowing. In terms of playability it works great for me.

But the tone does lack a bit of the "shimmer" and the ability to color the sound that my previous favorite piece, the 3al, had. And I miss that. I began wondering whether XT might work for me when I saw a recent post in the trombone forums that compared different series with the same rims and cup depth. The thing is, although I'd love more flexibility and a touch of sheen/shimmer, I wouldn't want to lose the depth and fullness of tone I currently have. I felt I could have it both ways with the 3al (although there were other drawbacks with the 3al that make me prefer the DE piece overall).

I know there's always the option of threading a 3al for Doug's rims, and I may indeed do that at some point. But right now I'm more interested in folks' experiences with the two different series.

[mbrooke]

Having used both the XT and euph cups, I think the euph cup works better. The XT is going to give you a more focused sound, which given your liking the "shimmer" of 3AL, you probably will not like. To me, the Wick "shimmer" is really just a lack of focus in the sound. That is, less core and more over tones. Some people like this and some people don't. One thing you can try is to get an "s" shank from Doug. These shanks have a slightly narrower taper than his standard shanks, so they fit in a bit further. This opens up the sound and maybe makes the sound a bit brighter and less focused. This may give you a more of that Wick "shimmer".

Mike

[ernstlanzer]

Thanks - that's exactly the kind of thing I wanted to hear.

Yeah it's definitely the more ringing overtones I'm looking for. The Wick is great because you can manipulate those overtones for more or less brilliance depending on the shape of your mouth/throat cavity. That flexibility is a bit lacking on the DE.

From your description the XT is perhaps closer to a 51d type of sound? Still wouldn't mind experimenting with it, but maybe not what I'm looking for.

I'll contact Doug about an "s" shank. Thanks!

[mbrooke]

Thanks - that's exactly the kind of thing I wanted to hear.

Yeah it's definitely the more ringing overtones I'm looking for. The Wick is great because you can manipulate those overtones for more or less brilliance depending on the shape of your mouth/throat cavity. That flexibility is a bit lacking on the DE.

From your description the XT is perhaps closer to a 51d type of sound? Still wouldn't mind experimenting with it, but maybe not what I'm looking for.

I'll contact Doug about an "s" shank. Thanks!

No. For me the XT is very different than the 51D. To me, the XT has a bigger, perhaps brighter sound. When it comes to a very sweet, mellow sound, the 51D is hard to beat. But, it (and the BB1) tend to lock you into a particular type of sound. The XT is much more flexible with regard to producing the sound you want. However, I found it lacks a certain richness, especially if you tend to push too hard. The DE euph cup gives a bigger, warmer sound, but is still much more flexible than a 51D. I would suggest that you compare them in a larger room, and have someone listen. It can be difficult for the player to really hear what is going on.

Mike