John Packer 274 and 374 review/comparison

[comebackplayer]

It was interesting to me for several reasons:
-I do see gold brass offered as alternatives for trumpets by Yamaha and Jupiter (on Yamaha it's an option and Jupiter it's often by default, I think). I cannot hear a difference.
-Silver leadpipes are rare on trumpet (the only maker I know that uses them is Carolbrass) and pure silver bells are super rare because they have a reputation for being really soft and also projecting differently
-Red brass I've seen more often on flugelhorn bells but relatively rarely on trumpets or other instruments (I think Jupiter uses it for leadpipes)

I'm just curious what the sound will be like. My euphonium teacher recently compared more symphonic euphoniums to euphoniums that are used more in small ensembles. I'd imagine that there are desirable traits for soloists also, but I'm not familiar enough to know if that typology is true (i.e., is the 274 more for a large group and 374 more for soloists, or is the 374 just an upgraded 274).

[iMav]

I can probably get a few recordings in my "streaming" room today. (fairly small space with dampening tiles on the walls...use for live streaming conversational content... We'll see how bad things sound in there.)

[Arnbone Euph]

Looking forward to your sound comparisons, iMav, but take it easy on the carpal tunnel issues. I have very fond memories of the sound, weight, and feel of the 274. I didn't mind the resistance and felt I blended in well with the band, even carried above it when it was needed. Also played it in a tuba euphonium trio (other euphonium had an older compensating Yamaha euphonium). It worked well in this small ensemble. I'll be getting my serviced Sterling back either end of this week or by Jan 9 (tech promise). I obviously won't be able to compare its sound to my distant memory of the 274, but with my minor run through of scales and Fantasie Brillante on the day it arrived, I don't think I'll ever be tempted to go with another horn, unless like Druby, the weightiness and resistance of it start to challenge my aging body too much, and then I would likely follow in the footsteps of the ADAMS enthusiasts (although as a glutton for punishment, I might lean toward the A2 rather than A3. I'd be tempted to go A1 with silver bell, but worried about its projection ability from the back of the concert bands I play in; wouldn't hesitate to use A1 with small ensembles).

[ivanhouston]

In full disclosure, I own a few horns including the JP's. The 274 has an 11.8 in bell and the 374 has a 12.24 in bell. I'm always hesitant to talk about what I have, lol. I feel like my collection is a bit much to own. But, I'm fine with it!

What's interesting to me is that the bores can be different sizes in different horns of the same brand.

[iMav]

Huh. So John Packer outright lies about the bell sizes on their website?
(editorial issue perhaps?)

Guess I need to go grab at least a string to verify they are different. (Not that I don’t trust you…I just figure I should check personally if it goes against what the vendor says.)

[iMav]

Well, there you go. The bell on the JP374 IS bigger than the bell on the JP274.

Website is INCORRECT!

[ivanhouston]

Yeah! There are a few sites that could use some updated specs. The weight listed for the 274/374 is correct I believe.

[ivanhouston]

My personal take: I LOVE the 274, it compares very well to the 1992 967 Sovereign I have. I also like the 374. To me it's heavier, darker, and may loose some of the "prettiness" due to sounding more robust.

[iMav]

My personal take: I LOVE the 274, it compares very well to the 1992 967 Sovereign I have. I also like the 374. To me it's heavier, darker, and may loose some of the "prettiness" due to sounding more robust.

So the bell size and bell material have the effects on sound that one would expect. (at least generally)

[ivanhouston]

Long Post!
This is another answer I received some time ago from DF Music regarding the JP278 & 378 tubas, but I believe it can apply to the 274 & 374 euphoniums:

While the bore and bell size are the same the JP378 has a lead pipe designed by Sterling which provides improved feel and response. The JP378 also has a hand spun bell, versus a machine spun bell. Hand spun bells have a different resonance that is preferable by most players. The 378 also comes with a slightly different case but they are both excellent cases, the 278 case is just a little lighter and a touch bulkier in design, but nothing major. The last difference is the 80/20 brass. I'm not sure how familiar you are with brass so I apologize if you already know some of this.

Brass is a metal alloy meaning it is composed of different metals. The main 2 components used in most brass instruments are Copper and Zinc. In 80/20 brass it's 80% copper 20% zinc. The JP278 is 70/30 brass. The more Zinc you put into the brass the harder and more brittle it gets. There is a fine line between hard enough to maintain structure and too hard that it is brittle. Many inexpensive imported instruments use Brass with lower levels of copper (copper is expensive) to save money. Typically below 60% copper. The metals tend to crack easy especially around bends and braces and is nearly impossible to repair if dented and bent.

80/20 brass is very common for high end instruments as it is strong enough to withstand wear but also great resonance and is malleable enough to be repaired and worked on if dented or damaged. 70/30 is also a good mix but does lack some of the depth and warmth of the 80/20 in terms of sound. This is why the 378 is made from the higher end brass but also one of the reasons it costs more.

[comebackplayer]

I thought a bit about this when I bought my XO. I'd watched the Matonizz reviews and he had described both the XO and the Adams as not projecting as well. There's been the recent discussion here on "big euphoniums" (bells above 12 inches, over 10 or 12 pounds, etc.). To me I think these instruments have the more tuba like, fuller sound. I love playing my euphonium and like the sound, but I could definitely see the difference in size, weight and material accounting for people's mixed feelings about the difference between the two instruments. On trumpet, a smaller bell almost always projects better/has more "core" and this is also part of the difference in sound between baritone and euphonium, right? But bigger bells are also often more fun for the player, since you can hear your playing more clearly and the sound has more spread and depth.

On the yellow v. red brass: I understand the difference in types of brass, but coming from trumpet, JP's description feels a bit gimmicky to me. The classic professional trumpets have usually been made using yellow brass, and variations (gold brass, red brass, copper, sterling silver, titanium blends, carbon fiber) tend to be smaller lines. I've never heard anyone refer to red brass as higher quality before this. I also can't believe there's a huge difference in material cost or workability, but maybe I'm wrong.

[iMav]

The “high grade” terminology for red brass is not a music industry term…but one taken from the metal alloy world. It is terminology used by that industry. Higher copper content brass simply IS considered higher grade brass.

Its relative “quality”, specifically in regards to sound, projection, etc is certainly a matter of taste (and is only one of several factors effecting those qualities on a horn).

BTW, the various brass type descriptions were taken from Austin Custom Brass’s website…specifically on their page where you can customize your own Adams horn. So, not John Packer’s characterization but either ACB or Adams’.

[comebackplayer]

I just thought it was a funny term. When I search trombonechat or trumpetherald or this page that phrase ("high grade brass") doesn't appear. It does show up on Alibaba so it makes sense that it comes from manufacturing/exporting. I watched some of the JP videos and they described as if it's a special brass, but it's quite common in brass instruments.

[Sara Hood]

Well, there you go. The bell on the JP374 IS bigger than the bell on the JP274.

Website is INCORRECT!]

Or the website rounds their numbers. The difference between 11.8 inches 12.24 inches is not even half an inch. I can easily see either of those numbers being rounded to 12 inches for simplicity of communication and the ease of the folks developing the advertising copy and/or website. Can any of you spot a difference of 0.44 inches in circumference between two circles by just eye balling it? I don't think that I would unless I had both in front of me at the time and I was deliberately looking for differences.

I am an accountant by profession and exactness in numbers is something I stand behind. But even to me, this quarter inch rounding in either direction for the horn bells is no big deal (laughing/teasing). Now if we were talking about the thickness of the metal making up our horn, or the size of the valve casings and/or pistons, that would be a different story. In those places a hundredth (0.01) of an inch makes a difference.

- Sara

[TheJH]

Half an inch is a full centimeter, especially if you have both horns next to eachother, it's kinda easy to see the difference... if you look from above.
From the side, probably not so much.