Metal Thickness

[tbonesullivan]

I'm not trying to be obstinate, but what is that comparison useful FOR? What does it give you an idea OF? What does it provide to you other than just knowing the raw data on thickness? From the discussion I'd be expecting something like "Here are the differences and similarities I measured for a few instruments, and so we can conclude that ...." ???

I would think it's more useful if everything else is equal, so that some type of generalization can be made. Of course this would only really matter if it is a company where you have the options of a thicker or thinner bell. This translates quite well to other musical instruments, where people can become obsessed with materials and things that can be easily measured. It is a lot easier to get this way when you deal with things like modular trombones, which make it easy to swap out one bell for another. I don't really see modular euphoniums or tubas coming anytime soon.

[bbocaner]

It's somewhat handy if you have brand X and like the way it plays and are thinking about ordering an Adams, for which they give you a choice of metal gauge, and would like a starting point.

There are a lot of different variables other than thickness. But generally I'd say that thicker metal is more consistent over the dynamic range of the instrument and capable of a bigger sound (to an extent) whereas thinner responds more quickly and is more flexible and easier to play (again, to an extent).

[franz]

I am only an amateur player and, even if I have been doing it for over 50 years, I have several limits compared to some of you who are much better at playing brass than I am, but I can make some considerations: Adams specifies the thickness with which he builds euph, while other brands do not. We have established that the Prestige is 0,6: Besson says that Sovereign differs from Prestige solely by the thickness of the bell. I played with that of my friend who plays with me in the band, a lacquered English made, bell in two pieces: it is much lighter than mine ( I would say 0,5 mm thickness bell ), it is more ready and responsive than my Prestige, the sixth partial is only slightly high, dark sound, a very good instrument but, in comparison, I prefer mine. In 2012, on the occasion of the international competition " Flicorno d'oro" in Riva del Garda ( my band ranked first in the first category) I had the chance to try out the Miraphone 5050 Ambassador at a stand and it made me a very good impression. I recently had the opportunity to try another one and this time it didn't satisfy me: it didn't even seem a distant relative of the one tried in 2012. Of the Adams I tried recently an E3 0,6 yellow brass, which I found fantastic, and a E1 0,6 red brass that I didn't particularly like. I had the chance to try a few other euphoniums, including a York Eminence 4052, a Willson ( I don't remember the model), a Yamaha 642, a Yamaha Neo and a Courtois 167 II: among all these I preferred the sound of the Prestige I bought. Coming soon, as a gift for my retirement, I intend ( wife permitting) to buy a beautiful Adams E3 0,7 yellow brass without trigger which, according to the clues collected in this forum, should be the ideal euph for me.

[John Morgan]

I am only an amateur player and, even if I have been doing it for over 50 years, I have several limits compared to some of you who are much better at playing brass than I am, but I can make some considerations: Adams specifies the thickness with which he builds euph, while other brands do not. We have established that the Prestige is 0,6: Besson says that Sovereign differs from Prestige solely by the thickness of the bell. I played with that of my friend who plays with me in the band, a lacquered English made, bell in two pieces: it is much lighter than mine ( I would say 0,5 mm thickness bell ), it is more ready and responsive than my Prestige, the sixth partial is only slightly high, dark sound, a very good instrument but, in comparison, I prefer mine. In 2012, on the occasion of the international competition " Flicorno d'oro" in Riva del Garda ( my band ranked first in the first category) I had the chance to try out the Miraphone 5050 Ambassador at a stand and it made me a very good impression. I recently had the opportunity to try another one and this time it didn't satisfy me: it didn't even seem a distant relative of the one tried in 2012. Of the Adams I tried recently an E3 0,6 yellow brass, which I found fantastic, and a E1 0,6 red brass that I didn't particularly like. I had the chance to try a few other euphoniums, including a York Eminence 4052, a Willson ( I don't remember the model), a Yamaha 642, a Yamaha Neo and a Courtois 167 II: among all these I preferred the sound of the Prestige I bought. Coming soon, as a gift for my retirement, I intend ( wife permitting) to buy a beautiful Adams E3 0,7 yellow brass without trigger which, according to the clues collected in this forum, should be the ideal euph for me.

Franz,

I know what you mean about "wife permitting" from some of my friends, but my wife NEVER says "no" to me regarding buying a new horn. I am lucky. I have owned 2 Besson 2052 Prestige euphoniums, one of them was not very good, and one was very nice. But my Adams E3 is, in my opinion, better than the Besson. And better (more like different from because the Miraphone was stellar) than my Miraphone M5050, which I really liked (2nd best horn I have owned).

Here's to your retirement (from what?) and having a "permitting" wife and your future Adams E3!!

Speaking of my Besson, it had a lousy or almost non-existent high B natural (bass clef). I am right now running through a solo that I will play with our Rapid City Municipal Band next Wed, July 31st. It is called Valtzz! for Euphonium and Wind Band. And it has the infamous high B natural right in the piece. I can do it fine with the Adams!! Yippee!!

Here is a link to the solo: https://charlesbooker.com/product/va...and-wind-band/ Take a listen, this is a really nice solo for euphonium.

It is not very well known, as far as I know. The fellow who wrote it (for Matthew Murchison) is Charles Booker, a retired Army Band director. I have played this once before, so this will be my second performance of this very fun to play piece.

John

[franz]

Franz,

I know what you mean about "wife permitting" from some of my friends, but my wife NEVER says "no" to me regarding buying a new horn. I am lucky. I have owned 2 Besson 2052 Prestige euphoniums, one of them was not very good, and one was very nice. But my Adams E3 is, in my opinion, better than the Besson. And better (more like different from because the Miraphone was stellar) than my Miraphone M5050, which I really liked (2nd best horn I have owned).

Here's to your retirement (from what?) and having a "permitting" wife and your future Adams E3!!

Speaking of my Besson, it had a lousy or almost non-existent high B natural (bass clef). I am right now running through a solo that I will play with our Rapid City Municipal Band next Wed, July 31st. It is called Valtzz! for Euphonium and Wind Band. And it has the infamous high B natural right in the piece. I can do it fine with the Adams!! Yippee!!

Here is a link to the solo: https://charlesbooker.com/product/va...and-wind-band/ Take a listen, this is a really nice solo for euphonium.

It is not very well known, as far as I know. The fellow who wrote it (for Matthew Murchison) is Charles Booker, a retired Army Band director. I have played this once before, so this will be my second performance of this very fun to play piece.

John

Off course, the high B has been a problematic note to be obtained with certainly on the Prestige, but working on it with the right mouthpiece now comes out beautifully and in tune. It is not a note that is easily found in euphoniums scores, but when it happens you need to be ready and sure not to take a stick. Sometimes certain notes are difficult to obtain because they are rarely played: the instrument is never played on same partials, for example on alternative positions, and the rare times that they are used have a sound worse than that obtained with conventional positions. Sometimes I hold the 4th valve pressed an play with an instrument in F. The first few times is a bit strange, but then it becomes automatic to correct the pitch with the chops and also the sound and the instrument improves gradually that the partials are emitted in the new positions. Try and tell me if this statement can be shared.

[guidocorona]

Hello Franz da Varese, do you, or anyone else gathered around this fine euphoholic watering hole, know what the bell thickness of the Miraphone M5050 might be? ... I play-tested M5050 at ITEC 2019, and promptly fell in love with it... Besson Prestige and Adams E3 0.70 YB being my close seconds favorites ex equo.

Saluti, Guido

[franz]

Hello Franz da Varese, do you, or anyone else gathered around this fine euphoholic watering hole, know what the bell thickness of the Miraphone M5050 might be? ... I play-tested M5050 at ITEC 2019, and promptly fell in love with it... Besson Prestige and Adams E3 0.70 YB being my close seconds favorites ex equo.

Saluti, Guido

No, I'm sorry, I don't know the thickness of the Miraphone: the sample I tested in 2012 I liked very much, it had,among other things, a wonderful easy natural high B.

[John Morgan]

Off course, the high B has been a problematic note to be obtained with certainly on the Prestige, but working on it with the right mouthpiece now comes out beautifully and in tune. It is not a note that is easily found in euphoniums scores, but when it happens you need to be ready and sure not to take a stick. Sometimes certain notes are difficult to obtain because they are rarely played: the instrument is never played on same partials, for example on alternative positions, and the rare times that they are used have a sound worse than that obtained with conventional positions. Sometimes I hold the 4th valve pressed an play with an instrument in F. The first few times is a bit strange, but then it becomes automatic to correct the pitch with the chops and also the sound and the instrument improves gradually that the partials are emitted in the new positions. Try and tell me if this statement can be shared.

Well, on both of my Besson Prestige euphoniums, I definitely "took a stick" when I tried to play a high B natural. The Miraphone M5050 plays it beautifully. My Adams plays it very nice, not 100% perfect, but about 95% fine. I do try and use various fingerings with that note and others up high.

I am not quite sure what you mean by "Try and tell me if this statement can be shared".

By the way, Franz, my wife Linda's mother was born and raised in Trieste, Italy. She married Linda's father after World War II. Linda's father was an Army soldier and met her mother after the war.

[djwpe]

Hello Franz da Varese, do you, or anyone else gathered around this fine euphoholic watering hole, know what the bell thickness of the Miraphone M5050 might be? ... I play-tested M5050 at ITEC 2019, and promptly fell in love with it... Besson Prestige and Adams E3 0.70 YB being my close seconds favorites ex equo.

Saluti, Guido

I’ll measure my 5050 in the next couple of days.

Don

[guidocorona]

Thank you so much djwpE... Very much looking forward!

Guido

[jkircoff]

I have an Adams E1 with a sterling silver bell and .55 metal thickness. It has a brighter sound than my Sterling Virtuoso that I attribute rightly or wrongly to the metal thickness...although the sterling silver bell is undoubtedly a factor as well.

[djwpe]

I finally got around to getting out my micrometer and I tried to measure the metal thickness on my 5050. Alas, there is no flat surface for the anvil of the micrometer to bear on, so the measurement is useless.

I do do own an ultrasonic thickness gauge, so I’ll try that, but I suspect the plating may make it inaccurate.