John Packer 274 and 374 review/comparison

[iMav]

Decided to start a new thread with a new purpose.

I will soon start putting together a comparison (/review) of the JP274 and JP374 (w/trigger).

What do you want to know?
What do you want to see?
What do you want to hear?

[58mark]

I am interested in what you have to say, but I've already done that comparison, and in my opinion, the 274 is the superior instrument as far as tone, response, and intonation. Let's see if you agree

[iMav]

I am interested in what you have to say, but I've already done that comparison, and in my opinion, the 274 is the superior instrument as far as tone, response, and intonation. Let's see if you agree

The 374 must be one of those "love it or hate it" horns. Those that like it...LOVE IT. And then there is everyone else... LOL

From a recent poster on facebook:

I own a JP374 Sterling and IMHO, it compares to the Adams or a Willson 2950 or 2960.

If ever you try a 374 Sterling, you will definitely sell your E3. I picked mine above a Willson 2960ST and both Yamaha 842 and 642 Neo at Dollon Music in NJ. And price was no object for me...

Amazing diversity of opinions!

[Ajeasley]

I played what I think was a 374 about 10 years ago at the army conference. It was a compensating horn with JP Sterling branding. It was a noisy convention area and I didn't have a tuner with me, but I recall being blown away by the horn.

It sits at a weird price point - considerably higher than other compensating imports from East Asia, but far less than anything coming out of Europe or Japan, and even at a noticeably lower point than a similar spec Shires Q (both horns being mostly Asian manufacture with heavy input on the design from the US/UK respectively). I'd love to know more about the build quality over the long haul of the 374 and if it compares favorably with more expensive horns.

[iMav]

I played what I think was a 374 about 10 years ago at the army conference. It was a compensating horn with JP Sterling branding. It was a noisy convention area and I didn't have a tuner with me, but I recall being blown away by the horn.

Yep. That would definitely be the JP374.

It sits at a weird price point - considerably higher than other compensating imports from East Asia, but far less than anything coming out of Europe or Japan, and even at a noticeably lower point than a similar spec Shires Q (both horns being mostly Asian manufacture with heavy input on the design from the US/UK respectively).

There are a couple resellers that are currently drop shipping them for near dealer pricing.

I'd love to know more about the build quality over the long haul of the 374 and if it compares favorably with more expensive horns.

John Packer does quite a lot of business with public schools…so, they seem to hold up quite well in those abusive environments…UNLIKE your typical, Chinese stencil horn.

[euphlight]

Is the 274 really better then the 374? I know Algirdas Matoniz of the River City Brass plays on the 274 not the 374.

[iMav]

Is the 274 really better then the 374? I know Algirdas Matoniz of the River City Brass plays on the 274 not the 374.

Opinions are definitely divided!

I’ll add my uneducated opinion to the mix soon.

[ivanhouston]

This is a good topic and I also wanted to chime in. I got permission from Matonizz to share his answer to me several months ago, comparing the JP274 and 374 and how they compare to professional models:

Hi Ivan, they are completely different euphoniums in terms of how they feel, sound and are built. Unlike for example where Besson Prestige is a small step up from Sovereign with few minor differences JP274 and JP374 share few things in common. 374 plays much more similar to Sterling Virtuoso since it's basically a copy of it with parts machine rather than hand made or Wilson. It is heavier, has darker sounds but at the same time is much stuffier and requires a lot of physical output to make it work. It has a trigger option which 274 does not have. 274 on the other hand plays much more similar to Besson. Less stuffy than 374, not as dark sounding but darker than horns like Jupiter Xo or Yamaha 842. Weighs a little less which ergonomically speaking I prefer but is much more solid, sturdy and heavier than any other euphonium at that price range on the market that I've ever tried. Mechanically speaking they are very identical in terms of valves (neither horn is great at it). They use same plastic valve guides with no metal insert which makes it quiet but overall not very reliable. Cheap and easy to replace but can be annoying. Even the top line horns can be very different model to model and brand to brand. Normally the big difference between intermediate euphoniums and pro line euphoniums nowadays are better crafted mechanics (smoother and quieter valves, better moving slides, better threading on valve caps), finish (nicer looking silver plating or better silver lacquer) and intonation (good pro horn will have no flat notes and and maybe 6-10 sharp/sharper notes within main two octaves). The reason why I prefer jp274 is because the intermediate qualities (less reliable valves, not as smooth moving slides and less accurate threading on caps) is something that both 274 and 374 share, intonation wise both are have the professional level standard with exception of 274 having one awkward flat note (low concert Eb. I use 1+4 or slightly lip it up to fix it), overall balance in terms of projection, centering, tone and response time (stuffiness) I prefer 274 (not saying is better but it's my personal preference. some people like more resistance, some less and so on) while price difference is quite substantial. At the same time JP374s is the only trigger horn at that price range that I recommend, just not the one I prefer. Whereas JP274, it's the best bang for your buck on the market. Since I started recommending that horn I've spoken with dozens of players who bought it. Same feedback from everyone. Not perfect but outstanding for price range. Hope this answers the question friend. Thanks for supporting the channel and glad you enjoy the content! Matonizz

[iMav]

Algirdas has been pretty consistent in preferring the 274 to the 374. I would say that the valve cap threading is very good on both (compared to Jinbao horns for sure)… no discernible difference to me compared to the E3 (regarding ease of use, tendency to cross-thread (doesn’t), etc).

So, put him in the “not a fan” column for the 374.

im going to weigh them both tomorrow and maybe do some playing on both if my hand doesn’t ache too much.

[comebackplayer]

Decided to start a new thread with a new purpose.

I will soon start putting together a comparison (/review) of the JP274 and JP374 (w/trigger).

What do you want to know?
What do you want to see?
What do you want to hear?

I'm new enough to euphonium that one of my main questions is sound concept and projection. The bigger bell/heavier instruments probably are wider/broader/(maybe darker?) but I honestly don't know if this is true. I think sometimes those of us playing prefer the sound behind the bell on larger instruments but I wonder if they "speak" as well. I'd also be interested in the ergonomics of the two, since leadpipe placement can make a big difference. I'm also curious what you think is identical (valves, etc.).

[TheJH]

Larger bell models generally sound a bit more broad.

Then again, you can only test that with two models that are the same aside from the bell (such as the Besson 967 vs 968).
For example, comparing my Sovereign (12" bell) with my Willson 2960TA (12.5" bell) is not a good indication because they're different beasts altogether.

[iMav]

Larger bell models generally sound a bit more broad.

Both the 274 and the 374 have 12” bells. (Different bores though)

[comebackplayer]

That's true. I was also thinking of how the 374 has a different bell and leadpipe material (and as you note, bore size). I'm just curious how that will affect the sound (or not). Jupiter uses gold brass bells on a lot of their instruments (I have their flugelhorn and piccolo too) and I can't tell a particular difference. I've wondered if this is for sonic properties, because it reduces the chance of redrot, or some other reason.

[iMav]

This is what ACB has to say on the topic…

• Yellow Brass: this bell is an excellent mix of materials for all-around work as this material is very versatile. The sound is clear and brilliant at all dynamic levels, with a good core and great projection.
• Gold Brass: like the yellow brass bell this is a very versatile material - a near perfect blend of warmth and projection. The gold brass brings a depth to the sound which is very smooth, rich and dark, however it is still a lively and agile instrument. It responds quick and easy.
• Red Brass: the Red Brass bell material is an ideal choice for the soloist who is looking for the richest, warmest, thickest sound available. Higher in copper content than our other two bell choices this provides the player with the smoothest transitions from note to note. Articulations are veiled (although with a lighter Red Brass bell option it is greatly improved) and sound shape is overall a bit wider in shape.
• Sterling Silver: Sterling silver is a very versatile material but also much more dependent on the individual’s particular ability level. Therefore we recommend this bell option for the serious amateur or professional. The general characteristics are the bell is much darker.

[iMav]

From what I’ve read of the various concentrations/percentages…

“High grade” brass = red brass