Re: Re: Re: Amanti Euphoniums.

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by K on January 01, 2004 at 16:36:45:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Amanti Euphoniums. posted by Michelangelo on January 01, 2004 at 15:56:25:

I believe we are in total agreement despite the obvious linguistic trappings.

If you find rotary valved Amatis, the only thing wrong with them is the engraving, as they not only have the characteristics of Cerveny instruments. They are Cerveny instruments.

Steven Mead is a great diplomat. In another context he has expressed his not too strong love for rotary valved "euphoniums".

That does not hint towards problems with either SM or the rotary instruments. The true problem is, that the oval Kaiser or non-Kaiser Baritone (plural in German) are called euphoniums, which they definitely are not.

The term "euphonium" should be reserved for the tenor-baritone-bass range instruments coming out of the British instrument-making tradition. They have reached their peak in the 3+1 pistonned compensating version. There are several makers of this type since the original Blakley patent expired around 1970. Which one to take is a person choice. My choice is the Yamaha YEP641 with the equivalent Hirsbrunner as a strong runner up. Some of the old Imperials with the midsize receiver also were good in my opinion.

The oval Kaiser or non-Kaiser Baritone (again plural in German) should be evaluated on their own terms. Their dynamic bandwith cannot match that of the much more sturdily built piston compensators, even if the ovals for may players will have an advantage in the softer dynamics. The oval Bariton has its own beautiful voice and fulfils its tasks in German type settings.

I have two oval Kaiserbaritone, one in C and one in Bb, the latter a pre-1930 red brass Cerveny. Fine instruments, so it only tells something about my personal being biased, that the YEP631 is the one, where I feel myself most at home.


Follow Ups: