Hey Guys - Since returning to playing after being unable to play for six years, I have picked up a couple of euphoniums. Previously I had owned euphoniums made by many of the major manufacturers, including the old Yamaha 642/842, Willson 2900, Besson 967 (pre-York vintage), Besson 968 (German made), and the Yamaha Neo 642. I also owned one of the early Schiller (old Yamaha 642 copy) and a Wessex Dolce. Of these, before my 6 year layoff, the Neo 642 was my favorite overall, followed closely by the 967 (my former pre-York vintage had poor valves). I recall being impressed in the elephant room at the Army conference over the years with the Miraphone 5050, Sterling virtuoso, and the Adams, but there is only so much you can tell in those noisy environments - and all of the nicer instruments I've actually purchased, I've always been able to try in a more quiet, intimate, space before buying. None of my local dealers stocked these other instruments years ago, but now there are two shops not far away from me that are Adams dealers.
With that background in mind, when I decided to take the plunge back into euphonium playing, my acoustic guitar habit somewhat limited how much I was willing to spend right now. Thanks to great reviews and descriptions from Larry and Mark on this forum, and elsewhere on the internet, I decided to order myself a JP274. It was clear that the clone instruments are either old Yamaha 642 inspired (like my former Schiller and Wessex) or Besson sovereign inspired like the JP274 was purported to be. As someone who always liked the classic Besson sound above all else, the JP274 seemed like a safe bet. While I was waiting on the JP274 to arrive, I looked around for used accessories on eBay, reverb, etc. I found a good deal on a used Wick practice mute, but I found an intriguing ad on Craigslist for a nearly new euphonium that was entitled "Dillon 967." I've bought music and accessories from Dillon at the Army conference, but this looked just like a 967 Sovereign - and it was being offered for a killer deal and was in nearly new condition. So I picked that up before the JP274 arrived. And the Dillon 967 blew me away - it reminded me a lot of my old Neo. It wasn't nearly as free blowing as I recall my former genuine Besson 967 - but man, it has the tonal sweetness. Intonation is excellent except for high Bb concert which is very sharp. Everything about this instrument looks like a Besson - the valve buttons, the leadpipe, etc. look quite distinct from the JP horns and all other Chinese made euphoniums I've seen - the only giveaway that this isn't a Besson is the lack of the U-shaped braces and the very elegant Dillon logo (please see attached).
The JP274 arrived later, and I was very curious to see how it stacked up to the Dillon. It is definitely a more free blowing instrument - and ironically, the tone reminded me a lot of my former Besson 967 than my Dillon 967- the JP has a very big and broad tone, and it is easier to play than the Dillon, but the tone isn't quite as "sweet." Intonation is similarly excellent, but the high F# and G below high Bb were fairly sharp. The dreaded 6th partial might have been the most spot on any instrument I've ever tried.
Fit and finish on both were superb - my impression is that they are clearly better than the Schiller and Wessex I had previously in tone, fit, and finish. These feel heavy to me, and more substantial than the former Schiller for sure. Mechanically, I think these are flat out better than the former Yamaha pre-Neo 642 (poor tuning slide fit) and my pre-York Besson 967 (very sticky valves) - and the valve action certainly isn't worse than the Willson. Only the valves on the German made 968 and my former Neo were clearly better than these. I gotta say, folks, I'm really impressed. I was worried I wasn't going to be satisfied with these two less than premium instruments, but I'm tickled. I will treat myself to something nicer in a couple of years, but I really can't find a fault with either of these.