Meinl-Weston euphonium: How's your compensating range response/intonation?

[bloke]

I picked up this (remarkably-near-new-condition-and-would-pass-for-a-demo) Meinl-Weston STENCIL (store brand) euphonium, a while back.

It blows open (like an Adams/Hirsbrunner and - more important than "feel" - as "feel" has NOTHING to do with music, also offers that Adams/Hirsbrunner "tuba-like" resonance), and (no b.s.) the only intonation things that find that I must do are to
- play the two lower (normal range of the instrument) G-naturals with the third valve, and
- when and upper (not "screamer", but upper) E-flat lingers (and intonation is critical) add the #3 to the first valve.
Any other intonation issues fall well within the "listen and adjust" minor issues, whereby (depending on chord function) the instrument's natural intonation tendencies might be right on the money, or might ask for some gentle favoring (read: "in tune").

I'm aware of two generations of "Meinl-Weston" euphoniums...with the first generation (and my own impression, when trying one of the early generation ones in their very early days) garnering a reputation for somewhat stinky intonation. This instrument is not that, and I feel lucky to have stumbled across it. I'm just not much of a "main trigger" type of guy (not with any brass instrument), so I find this instrument to be very appealing, to me.

That preamble having been composed...
Do any of you (who might also own these instruments) find (even though this is a VERY "open" instrument") the very low compensating range to be quite "stuffy"?

If your answer is "yes", I suspect it's not really "stuffy", but - rather - your #3 compensating slide circuit may be INCHES too short.

I found that slide (on this instrument) to be unusable, and I added four (count 'em) FOUR inches to that circuit.
Having done so...
- low C-sharp (a pitch that I rarely encounter) is over 10c flat (OK...if a first-inversion A-major chord, that's PERFECT...or if "blasting my guts out"...riding sharp - also "perfect")
- low C (a commonly encountered pitch - when covering ophicleide or bass trombone parts) is just about perfect.
- low B (also rarely encountered, and - realistically - mathematically impossible to "square" with low C - using the same length circuit) is about 10c - 15c sharp, BUT...now (at least) RESEMBLES a B-natural, and (again) is perfect (no "favoring") for a first-inversion G#-minor chord.

...so only "low C" is SUPER-DUPER GOOD (the most likely-to-be-played pitch, of the three...and with ALL 3+1 compensating instruments, one must face such decisions), and the other two pitches are now usable.

Because it extends out so far, I removed the pull RING and installed an (underside) pull NIB.

Hey bloke, why didn't you lengthen to outside slide tubes?

I did not, because - due to the geometry of the upper main bow of the instrument (ie. lack of clearance) - I would not have then been able to remove this much-longer slide.

The only other issue with this instrument: A=440 tuning defines (at least, if the room temperature is in the mid-60's, and I pick up the instrument and play it "cold") that the main slide be pushed all the way in...so (as the main slide ferrules are LONG) I may well take that slide apart, and remove (mmm...I guess...??) 3/8" of length from each of those ferrules - which would leave 3/8" on the instrument.
I'm planning on using it (tuba and bass trombone charts) on an Episcopal Christmas Eve evening-AND-midnight masses gig, and - if you've been in many of those churches - the choir loft is sky-high and in the BACK, it's going to be PLENTY warm, up there - so no rush to monkey with the main slide...

bloke "I guess I'll go shine 'er up, and shoot some clear on this ugly slide...

[bloke]

[everettmp]

I LOVED the sound of the MW euphonium I had a while back.

I LOATHED its intonation, as you might remember.

That sound with good pitch would be a nice horn.

[bloke]

As this was an incognito "stencil" instrument, I wasn't sure of what it ACTUALLY is until I received it (other than I could tell that it was built in the B&S Markneukirchen plant, and not in the old Geretried plant).
I believe there were two or three generations of these (at least two model designations, and probably - some non-publicized within-the-later-model improvements), and the final generation - probably - involved that computer program that offers a "best all-around-set-of-compromises" (intonation) bore taper from one end to the other.
Based on what I'm experiencing with this instrument, I may (??) have lucked into one of those...(??), as I have certainly experienced some particularly wonky intonation with M-W euphoniums that I've repaired/tested in the past.

This instrument will be put to it's first REAL test on Christmas Eve (technically: and barely into Christmas), but
- with this particular instrument - (again) I'm only mashing alternates for three pitches (the two lower normal-range G's, and - maybe-or-maybe-not - adding the 3rd valve (to the 1st) on just-above-the-stafF E-flats.

All euphoniums (as they are tubas) offer SOME goofy tuning.
Anyone who claims their euphonium plays "PERFECTLY IN TUNE WITH NO ADJUSTMENTS" (I suspect) falls into one of these categories:
- not particularly sensitive to tuning
- a dealer in that particular make of euphonium.

I know that Micah (quoted below) is not attempting to claim that about his replacement euphonium.

...and the main point of this thread is the fact that there was an epic "math" error (simply) in the length of the #3 compensating circuit, and not-so-much anything about the overall intonation characteristics of this instrument.

sound:(again, per Micah's remarks)...Yeah, so far, this is the MOST "tuba"-sounding euphonium I've ever owned...but there's one more (very respected make) European-made comp-euph still sitting up in the attic...It doesn't really need very much work at all (perhaps two LONG days' worth, it's valves/slides are perfect - actually NEW, and it's not even dented), has been sitting up there for ages, and needs to be brought up to snuff and tested against this M-W stencil.

I LOVED the sound of the MW euphonium I had a while back.

I LOATHED its intonation, as you might remember.

That sound with good pitch would be a nice horn.

[tubaing]

@bloke are you suggesting this as a mod that a lot of people may consider for their euphoniums because this is how compensating euphoniums are commonly made or is this just a quirk to this particular horn?

I've found that the 3rd valve compensating loop on my Wessex Festivo is too short for my likings as well... "all the way out" isn't far enough out.

[bloke]

This particular one was absurdly too short.

It’s funny that you mention that brand and that “short“-coming, because I’ve discussed this before (in relation to 3+1 compensating instruments) and had that company‘s owner butt into the thread, and brag that they addressed that issue on all of their models that are compensating.

The length of the number 3 compensating circuit on any on any Blaikley system 3+1 instruments should be as follows:

234 - flat
134 - in tune
1234 - sharp

That’s the best that it can be, and usually the 134 is most commonly written in music.

[tubaing]

The slide on the left is the 3rd valve comp loop. On the right is the 2nd valve slide. Maybe it is 1 inch longer (total) than the one that was featured on your MW?

[bloke]

yeah…
I can (literally: visually) see that that circuit ain’t gonna do it.

What is the o.d. of the inner slide tubing?

[tubaing]

What is the o.d. of the inner slide tubing?

.667

[bloke]

I have some 17mm o.d.
When we get this big order project squared away, I will hand you a chunk of it.

[the elephant]

I greatly improved my Kurath F by lengthening the 5th slide four inches. I did the same with my old Mirafone 180 F: I lengthened the 4th slide SIX INCHES and suddenly it had a solid low C. It is funny how they do the math, but because of how the horns are wrapped up the math refuses to cooperate. It seems to me that an honest effort by some makers with some models could lead to simple improvements like this that totally revamp a tired line of horns...

[bloke]

ok...same instrument...

Since I've decided to play that one passage of "The Christmas Song" on this instrument, BESIDES the fix - shown above (to the way-too-short #3 compensating slide), I decided to shorten the MAIN tuning slide (more work involved, because I always tend to ALSO precision-align altered slides, when in the process of changing their length...and a main slide is about the most difficult to precision-align) of this instrument, because it could only BARELY manage to get it up to A=440 WHEN WARM...and I'll be picking it up COLD to play that passage (and yeah: I'll be playing it for dough, so it's particularly important to not suck).

I managed to shorten it - overall - about 3/4 of an inch...so now, an 1/8" pull will "do" A=440 when I pick it up off the floor and blow into it "cold".

Of all the mouthpieces I own (and I've never liked this mouthpiece before) a Wick SM3 plays THIS particular instrument the best.
I'm certain that - were I playing it with some sort of "stock" mouthpiece, it would have played at 440 with no problem.

I shortened the slide bow - which ended up being the "hard way" and "the most hand-work/brass-reshaping way"...OK...I'll do it another way, next time, but it's done, it works, and it's time to put a new finish on it - and to call it "done".

(I'd like to find some new (very thin) top cap donut felts, but I'll probably have to resort to putting washers under the buttons - even though the top caps' risers (skinny) are not designed for articulation.

I'm really liking this instrument, particularly now that I've remedied the "stupid stuff".
(and possibly...??...the "stupid stuff" is why I was able to pick it up for a "stupid-low" price...)

[bloke]

ok...I have to get on with my day/life, so I only polished and re-lacquered the ugly parts...
' good enough for me...