Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 51

Thread: Euphonium Upgrades

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Indianapolis area
    Posts
    1,003
    .....
    Last edited by Snorlax; 07-15-2020 at 12:07 PM.
    Jim Williams N9EJR (love 10 meter CW)
    Formerly Principal Euphonium in a whole
    bunch of groups, now just a schlub.
    Shires Q41, Yamaha 321, 621 Baritone
    Wick 4AL, Wessex 4Y, or whatever I grab.
    Conn 50H trombone, Blue P-bone
    www.soundcloud.com/jweuph

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Indianapolis area
    Posts
    1,003
    Quote Originally Posted by Fujiifilm View Post
    Regarding the 5th-valve add on for the Yamaha 321, apparently they were made by Kanstul for Stauffer Brass. TheHornGuys still has the listing and description (with photos) on their website for archival purposes:

    https://www.hornguys.com/collections...-321-euphonium

    Interestingly, they note that Yamaha several decades ago (before they had started producing compensating euphs) had produced a similar 5th-valve add on.
    Thanks for this reminder, Fujiifilm! Here is an excerpt from the explanation on HORNGUYS. COM :

    This rotor tunes to a flat whole step. That means the low Eb is right in tune played as 4-5. You can also think of the "flat whole step" tuning as being a whole step in F, just like most tuba fifth rotors. The rotor is easily removable so you can return to a four valve instrument when you prefer less weight. The valve lets you play the entire chromatic scale down into the pedal note range, using fingering patterns that are the same as most any five valve tuba. Here are the fingerings for the notes below the bass clef with five valves:

    • F 4
    • E 2-4
    • Eb 4-5
    • D 2-3-4
    • Db 1-3-4 or 3-4-5
    • C 2-3-4-5
    • B 1-2-3-4-5
    • Bb 0

    In any case, it isn't worth $675 to me. ;-)
    Last edited by Snorlax; 07-15-2020 at 11:35 AM.
    Jim Williams N9EJR (love 10 meter CW)
    Formerly Principal Euphonium in a whole
    bunch of groups, now just a schlub.
    Shires Q41, Yamaha 321, 621 Baritone
    Wick 4AL, Wessex 4Y, or whatever I grab.
    Conn 50H trombone, Blue P-bone
    www.soundcloud.com/jweuph

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Sacramento, CA area
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by Snorlax View Post
    *I wonder if manufacturers keep to the same basic designs due to an orthodoxy among euphonium players?
    My money is on "YES!" Over the last year or two I have been casually looking into the physics of why horns sound the way they do, how they are made, etc. And basically all my questions come back to an answer of, "Because that is how it is done. It has been that way since back in the day, and nothing since works any better." Manufacturers definitely have an orthodoxy of how to make horns that sell. Players have an orthodoxy for what makes a good horn when they go shopping. The two reinforce each other's assumptions, because that is all that is available in the marketplace. This is true for more than just the euphonium.

    Little new gets developed unless someone conceives something totally out of the box, and can get a big name to be willing to try it and promote it. Innovation can be a risky business.

    - Sara
    Last edited by Sara Hood; 07-15-2020 at 03:00 PM.
    Baritone - 3 Valve, Compensating, JinBao JBBR1240

  4. #34
    i recall Project Euphonium promoting a euph that had some interesting bits. i think the air goes into 3rd valve first or something, reducing the bends that usual euph has. But it didnt caught on and it was discontinued. it was touted as an innovation before production stopped.
    Last edited by ChristianeSparkle; 07-15-2020 at 08:16 PM.
    "Never over complicate things. Accept "bad" days. Always enjoy yourself when playing, love the sound we can make on our instruments (because that's why we all started playing the Euph)"

    Euph: Yamaha 642II Neo - 千歌音
    Mouthpiece: K&G 4D, Denis Wick 5AL

    https://soundcloud.com/ashsparkle_chika
    https://www.youtube.com/user/AshTSparkle/

  5. #35
    For Snorlax

    The King 2280 would let you switch the tuning slides on the fourth valve to tune in at Eb. This gives the chromatic scale down to Bb.

    From https://www.hornguys.com/products/ki...oist-euphonium

    "Fourth valve in Eb: If you reverse the fourth slides and pull them to their extremes, you can tune the fourth valve to Eb by itself.

    F 1-3T
    E 1-2-3T
    Eb 4
    D 2-4
    Db 1-2-4
    C 2-3-4
    B 1-2-3-4

    The low notes all settle in pretty well without any trigger added. And let me say this: Low Eb played on one .600" valve is completely captivating. I want to play it again and again. Loud. This pattern makes a bit more sense to me than the above Fourth_in_E pattern, but of course, your mileage may vary. The drawbacks still include having to play 1-3 and 1-2-3 with that fourth piston button sort of in the way, and also not being able to set your horn down on the bell due to the extended fourth slide."

    That page has lots of interesting information. The YEP-321 used to have an extended third valve slide. So maybe instead of a 5th valve you could have an extended 4th valve slide? Just an idea.
    Cerveny BBb Kaiser Tuba
    __________________________
    “Don’t only practice your art, but force your way into its secrets, for it and knowledge can raise men to the divine.”
    ― Ludwig van Beethoven

  6. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by Sara Hood View Post
    My money is on "YES!" Over the last year or two I have been casually looking into the physics of why horns sound the way they do, how they are made, etc. And basically all my questions come back to an answer of, "Because that is how it is done. It has been that way since back in the day, and nothing since works any better." Manufacturers definitely have an orthodoxy of how to make horns that sell. Players have an orthodoxy for what makes a good horn when they go shopping. The two reinforce each other's assumptions, because that is all that is available in the marketplace. This is true for more than just the euphonium.

    Little new gets developed unless someone conceives something totally out of the box, and can get a big name to be willing to try it and promote it. Innovation can be a risky business.

    - Sara
    This is true. I do give kudos to Wessex for the Festivo. It was nice to see someone stretch the possibilities a bit.
    John 3:16


    Conn Victor 5H Trombone
    Yamaha 354 Trombone
    Conn 15I Euphonium

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Indianapolis area
    Posts
    1,003
    Quote Originally Posted by ChristianeSparkle View Post
    i recall Project Euphonium promoting a euph that had some interesting bits. i think the air goes into 3rd valve first or something, reducing the bends that usual euph hasb didnt caught on and it was discontinued. it was touted as an innovation before production stopped.
    Thanks for that info! I had never heard of that company before. Some interesting instruments there...as well as a few interesting translations!
    Jim Williams N9EJR (love 10 meter CW)
    Formerly Principal Euphonium in a whole
    bunch of groups, now just a schlub.
    Shires Q41, Yamaha 321, 621 Baritone
    Wick 4AL, Wessex 4Y, or whatever I grab.
    Conn 50H trombone, Blue P-bone
    www.soundcloud.com/jweuph

  8. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Snorlax View Post
    Thanks for that info! I had never heard of that company before. Some interesting instruments there...as well as a few interesting translations!
    They seem to be quite famous, Rick mentioned them before, and even mentioned the owner by name! Unfortunately, I was unable to dig out that particular euph that they had. It's no longer on the website and the facebook post was from 2 years back or so. But I recall they definitely tried to mess with the leadpipe to reduce the bends. I thought it was quite cool but it never took off.

    But yes, that shop has very interesting instruments! A clone of most of the major brands with a detailed guide on picking the right one for you. Looking for a British sound? Looking for more resistance? Want a more neutral/American sound? They have a euph that will suit your needs, with tons of choices of plating too! Not sure about the quality, but price wise, it seems to be in the higher range for China-made budget euphs? Would definitely love to test one of them one day!

    I've never seen or heard of them outside of Japan though, only 1 sale on Reverb for it from Australia (also 2 years ago when I saw it)
    Last edited by ChristianeSparkle; 07-15-2020 at 09:11 PM.
    "Never over complicate things. Accept "bad" days. Always enjoy yourself when playing, love the sound we can make on our instruments (because that's why we all started playing the Euph)"

    Euph: Yamaha 642II Neo - 千歌音
    Mouthpiece: K&G 4D, Denis Wick 5AL

    https://soundcloud.com/ashsparkle_chika
    https://www.youtube.com/user/AshTSparkle/

  9. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Snorlax View Post
    I wonder if the premise of Bevan's statement about disdain for slide-pulling and extra valves holds today?
    Points to ponder:
    *If the Blaikely compensation system is so efficient, why do so many euphoniums require a trigger?
    I've still got to think that a fifth valve would offer just as much in the low register as compensation does, PLUS offering a
    number of potentially intonation-correcting alternatives for the usual suspect notes...all without foot-long valves. A fifth valve
    could also take a larger bore, thus facilitating low-register clarity and response. Most horns now are dual-bore, anyway.

    *Tubists are certainly not averse to five or six valves these days...maybe euphoniumists might not gripe about five.

    *The euphonium is already non-ergonomic enough...would a fifth valve make it that much more non-ergonomic? There could be some reduction in weight and expense, since there would be no need for special valves and the odd tubing off the back of the valves--and parts could well be made from existing stock of valves and tubing.

    *Somewhere in my vast trivia files I have a spreadsheet, perhaps created by Dr. Young, showing RMS intonation errors for different systems. IIRC, the system with the least average expected intonation error was the three-valve compensation system. I can't recall, though, if it included a five-valve option, nor can I call the exact methodology.

    *I wonder if manufacturers keep to the same basic designs due to an orthodoxy among euphonium players?
    Euphoniums don't require a trigger, in my opinion. There are two notes on my round stamp that need adjustment or false fingering - top B (A bass Clef) and top G (F). I think the trigger is a design feature included to partially disguise the complete lack of innovation in euphonium design. The biggest innovations I can think of in recent times, admittedly from a Brit-centric / B&H and Besson viewpoint, are the move to larger bores circa 1974, the advent of the dismal floating lead pipes circa 1993, and main tuning slide triggers around about 2000ish. Adams are making great strides, but regrettably will probably never sell much in the UK because traders are conservative and overly cautious, Besson are too dominant in advertising and sponsorship, meaning customers won't have the choice. As for other "developments", making the instrument lighter to increase responsiveness is advertising jargon to explain away cost cutting.

    As for slide pulling, I doubt any top euphonium player would countenance this for an instant, when you'd be adding a playing mechanism that isn't necessary as things stands, likewise a fifth valve. I suspect that an extra valve and associated tubing would weigh the same, and probably more than the compensating system. For the determinedly amateur brass band player, you would end up with two valves to ignore.

    I've been lucky in the past to sell euphoniums for a living, and to have owned a tremendous number of them. I play in a brass band and if that's not the definition of furious traditionalism I don't know what is, which is why you only see British styles euphoniums, baritone horns, and tubas. And why I suspect that no brand seeking to break into the brass band market has ever made anything that doesn't owe a huge debt to B&H Sovereign designs.
    Nowt

    Retired

  10. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Snorlax View Post
    Thanks for this reminder, Fujiifilm! Here is an excerpt from the explanation on HORNGUYS. COM :

    This rotor tunes to a flat whole step. That means the low Eb is right in tune played as 4-5. You can also think of the "flat whole step" tuning as being a whole step in F, just like most tuba fifth rotors. The rotor is easily removable so you can return to a four valve instrument when you prefer less weight. The valve lets you play the entire chromatic scale down into the pedal note range, using fingering patterns that are the same as most any five valve tuba. Here are the fingerings for the notes below the bass clef with five valves:

    • F 4
    • E 2-4
    • Eb 4-5
    • D 2-3-4
    • Db 1-3-4 or 3-4-5
    • C 2-3-4-5
    • B 1-2-3-4-5
    • Bb 0

    In any case, it isn't worth $675 to me. ;-)
    Some years ago I created a spreadsheet that takes as input a valve setup, and outputs the theoretically best available fingerings over the range, along with their cent tunings. For this set-up, it outputs the following (noting that we're in transposing pitch here, with my apologies - it was created with a brass band head on):

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ValveSystem10a.jpg 
Views:	4 
Size:	20.4 KB 
ID:	7798

    For further reference, here's the list of alternative fingerings that it comes up with:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ValveSystem10a_alt.jpg 
Views:	0 
Size:	20.5 KB 
ID:	7799

    It suggests 2-3-5 as much closer to ET pitch than 2-4 for the transposing F# (concert pitch E).
    For the Eb(Db), it picks out 3-4-5 as close, but 1-2-4-5 as closer. 1-3-4 it flags as only an emergency possible fingering, due to huge sharpness - which of course one could solve with a pull slide, but there's no need when 1-2-4-5 is available.
    For both D(C) and C#(B), pull slides are needed to get close.

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •