sonofjabba Posted November 30, 2005 Share Posted November 30, 2005 did you refurbish the King 2 valve Euph????? I only marched that horn one season, but I still miss it. It needed a major overhaul when I marched it. But it was a nice horn. Even if you couldn't play it, it was still impressive visuallly. Even when the bell section was dangling from your elbow and the valve section was still in your hand, it was still impressive.That's a nice refurb of the contra. Was that a Kastul 3 valve? As I wonder how that < 20yo horn got in that bad of shape to start with. How much did the refurb cost? The King K-80 Euph is a nice horn. My guy will repair it back to playing condition if its reasonably complete. Both Pistons there, no missing slides or major parts. Call the guys up at www.thebandroom.biz. You can ship it to them for an estimate. If you don't like what he tells you the most it costs you is the shipping. Be sure to tell them Pat Hollins suggested them. They are a little slow right now, so it would be a faster turn around for you. I march parades with the Kanstul 3 Valve Euphonium. It isn't as balanced as the king. The Kanstul is a little bell heavy. The Contra wasn't what I would call overhauled. It was demangled, and cleaned up. The Labor was 300 dollars for the dent work, and that included a chem clean, felts, springs and corks. I bought a new mouthpipe from Kanstul, since it was MIA. I'm into the horn with a new Pro-Tec Bag for about a grand or so. Still cheaper than the 6600 for a new one from Kanstul. By the way, this is a Prototype Like the other horn I sold a few months ago on here. My guess is this horn was made in the 1984 - 1986 Range. Charles can correct me if I'm wrong. :-) So it is about 20 years old. It is also MUCH heavier than the newer contra's Jerry my repair tech mentioned that the brass on my horn is super thick and heavy, Quoting. "It's like old Besson Brass." Also mention the excessive amount of cursing it took taking the dents out of the horn. A lot of disrespect caused this horn to become practically scrap. Its a passion of mine to see horns like this get the proper repairs, and a home that it will be taken care of for years to come. This horn I hope will serve me well in the Reilly Raiders for many years to come. Yes I'll miss the 2 year old Corps Issued Kanstul But now I have my own Contra. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bssop97 Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 (edited) A lot of the sops (like yours truly) are on 1 1/2 C's but a 3 C is the minimum requirement. I did the 1c ( I even played a schilke 20 at one time) for years which is the same size as a 1 1/2C but with a different rim shape. The more I studied, the smaller the piece I went with. One of these days I want to pick the brain of some of these brass staffs logic behind this, I've heard somethings that make pros throw fits over. Bud Herseth (trumpet god, Chicago Symphony) played a 7b for many years. Now Bud would have to change pieces for 90% he would march with. IMO... diameter dosen't matter but cup depth and backbore size does. BTW... Not trying to bring down a staff (thats why I delated your corps name), I just do not agree with the logic that many use. Edited December 2, 2005 by bssop97 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow_7 Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 My guess is this horn was made in the 1984 - 1986 Range. Three valves weren't legalized until 1990, so there'd be a lot of forward thinking if it is that old. Someone around here has a prototype too. I think their serial number is 7 or was it 4. A very low number. Although it is in a lot better than that horn was / is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravedodger Posted December 3, 2005 Share Posted December 3, 2005 My small group has a Kanstul prototype 2 valve contra with s/l# 1002. Kanstul started rolling out the three valve prototype contras in the fall/winter of 1990, if i remember correctly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravedodger Posted December 3, 2005 Share Posted December 3, 2005 I did the 1c ( I even played a schilke 20 at one time) for years which is the same size as a 1 1/2C but with a different rim shape. The more I studied, the smaller the piece I went with. One of these days I want to pick the brain of some of these brass staffs logic behind this, I've heard somethings that make pros throw fits over. Bud Herseth (trumpet god, Chicago Symphony) played a 7b for many years. Now Bud would have to change pieces for 90% he would march with. IMO... diameter dosen't matter but cup depth and backbore size does. BTW... Not trying to bring down a staff (thats why I delated your corps name), I just do not agree with the logic that many use. I believe the point of staff requiring a larger mouthpiece is for darkening tone and building endurance. With younger players this helps quite a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bssop97 Posted December 3, 2005 Share Posted December 3, 2005 I believe the point of staff requiring a larger mouthpiece is for darkening tone and building endurance. With younger players this helps quite a bit. Change somebodies size would not help endurance. I would of had to change sizes in most corps I would of marched with and I could play for hours. By most players standards, I use a large cup but it us is smaller than a 3C. I play on a 4md Warburton (slightly bigger than a 5c) but I have a 24 throat (bach is a 27) and a 10* backbore ( bach is a 7). Their is another way to change the tone on the mouthpiece rather then giving the player a Larger diameter cup. Going with a deeper cup can do this. Large throat and backbore can too. All the breathing and exercises a corps does should help with darkening the tone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mchromik Posted December 3, 2005 Share Posted December 3, 2005 As a general rule of thumb, a larger mouthpiece allows for more volume of sound as more of the lips are vibrating. But that also means that there is generally a decrease in endurance (relative to a smaller cup) for the same reason. The timbre of the sound is more affected by cup depth and shape as well as mouth and throat position. The old Bach mouthpiece manual covers this well. The idea I was taught was to play on the largest mouthpiece you can tolerate while still allowing you enough endurance to get what playing you need to done. My experiences bear most of this out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravedodger Posted December 3, 2005 Share Posted December 3, 2005 Change somebodies size would not help endurance. I would of had to change sizes in most corps I would of marched with and I could play for hours. By most players standards, I use a large cup but it us is smaller than a 3C. I play on a 4md Warburton (slightly bigger than a 5c) but I have a 24 throat (bach is a 27) and a 10* backbore ( bach is a 7). Their is another way to change the tone on the mouthpiece rather then giving the player a Larger diameter cup. Going with a deeper cup can do this. Large throat and backbore can too. All the breathing and exercises a corps does should help with darkening the tone. Doh. Umm. That must be my worst post ever. I don't know why I said endurance. I guess I shouldn't post before going to bed. Oh well. Anyway...what was I saying? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinSop85 Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 (edited) Fever Trumpets: Bach 3c's Mellos: Dynasty Mello 6 Edited December 5, 2005 by KevinSop85 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.