Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Meinl-Weston 'Fafner' horn


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

Posted by Tony E on October 09, 2003 at 01:33:09:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Meinl-Weston 'Fafner' horn posted by sidelines on October 09, 2003 at 00:14:54:


I had to go back and look at the Mick Again post to see what got you so fired up. I didn't take Mick's intent to be patronizing. After another read, it still seems to me like Mick is just trying to understand where Ralph thinks he's going to be doing most of his playing. I didn't take him to intend sarcasm. I'm not sure what the complaint is. Ralph asked a question about a horn. Mick and I both gave our opinion based on our experience. Mick followed up to get more information. How is that "a who gives a shit disagreement?" Maybe I'm missing something.

Some of this goes to artistic tone concept. There are a number of posters on the board who I respect that feel that ALL larger horns are too broad or full bodied (not loud) in their sound to work well in smaller ensembles. I think that's a tone concept (with the exception of pieces where the composers intent is clearly for something light and lean). I've heard many performances and recordings that I liked where a big horn is used in a small ensemble. I've also heard many performances and recordings that I liked where a very small horn is used. Personally, I usually use a big horn in small ensembles, but not always. Over the years I've mostly owned 4/4 BBbs. So, perhaps the different assesment that Mick and I have regarding the versatility of the Fafner has nothing to do with the Fafner per se.

But, the point I was trying to make, is that as far a big horns go, I think the Fafner has an unusually clear and focused sound. I agree with Keating Johnson's description when he calls the sound "soloistic". That's not a word one normally attaches to a 5/4 horn.

Not looking to offend anyone this evening.

Tony E


Follow Ups: