Broomfield, CO: Willson 4v non-comp euph $1k

[arpthark]

https://denver.craigslist.org/msg/d/bro ... 12016.html

[MiBrassFS]

That’s an older one, too. I *think * it was before they were labeled as the 2704. BIG bell throat. I’m kinda impressed by the one sitting here. With a bit of clean up, the one in this ad could be a good player at a real bargain price, too!

[bloke]

With that design, they did some things whereby they attempted to "compensate" without a Blaikley System...so some of the tuning is "interesting"...but whatever.

- 4th valve seems to be "tuned" to 2-4 and 1-4, and seems to be too long to use by itself (whereby the player would choose 1-3).
- 2nd valve circuit is quite long as well, which defines some of the 2nd valve pitches as "good", but the middle-range "A" is usually remarkably flat (so - again - 1-3 for that A as well).

[MiBrassFS]

If the 4th circuit is too long on it, I would think that it would be easy enough to shorten it at the larger of the two 4th slides. Flat 2nd (“A”) slide (= Willson/Kurath euphs)? A bit more finagling, but straight forward doable. Not much finish left to worry about!

I still contend (not to be being contentious… Heh, heh…) that this could be good, inexpensive, and useful euph.

[bloke]

I think they're fine...just different.

4-valve non-compensating doesn't accomplish very much...and there sure are tons of those instruments paid for by hapless taxpayers.

At least, the Kuraths were thinking, and trying to make the 4th circuit (without benefit of Blaikley) do some more useful things in the low range...

...and those valvesets (probably Bauerfeind) were excellent.

[MiBrassFS]

This guys getting a bunch of free bumps!

I have been entertained by the one here. I owned a 2704 years ago that was a rotted out junker (someone threw it into a deal to sweeten the pot - probably should have thrown it in the dumpster). The geometry seemed to be different (valve block placement, slides, etc.) by my cloudy memory. The one thing that strikes me (ouch…) is that people look at these and think “Wilson’s version of a Yamaha YEP-321.” Totally not. The one here is MUCH bigger. Good? Bad? Just different. The one here right now is easy to steer and puts out a bunch of sound. Like I said, I’ve been entertained.

[arpthark]

Do these have small, medium, or large shank receivers?

How do they compare to, say, a King 2280?

[LeMark]

I looked one of those in very good condition for a while to add a fifth valve to and eventually just made that modification on my king. The king intonation is pretty much point and shoot and the stories I had heard about the Wilson, mostly from Joe, kind of scared me off of one

[gnimoyw]

I emailed with the guy and confirmed it has a large shank MP. I live ~10 mins away. This guy always has a smattering of interesting things for sale on Craigslist, never see them elsewhere (except every once in a while he has an eBay auction).

[bloke]

I looked one of those in very good condition for a while to add a fifth valve to and eventually just made that modification on my king. The king intonation is pretty much point and shoot and the stories I had heard about the Wilson, mostly from Joe, kind of scared me off of one

...but the young fella in Michiana would surely disagree, just because...

[MiBrassFS]

I looked one of those in very good condition for a while to add a fifth valve to and eventually just made that modification on my king. The king intonation is pretty much point and shoot and the stories I had heard about the Wilson, mostly from Joe, kind of scared me off of one

...but the young fella in Michiana would surely disagree, just because...

Not in Michiana, not young (although, not as old as YOU, you fossil…), can’t be me!

Joe scares off a lot of people about a lot things (heh, heh…). Not sure why… I’ll contend that his barks are mostly in his bytes…

————————————————

I’m not countering anyone else’s opinions, just mentioning what I’ve noticed from a purely coincidental experience I’ve had. These are relatively rare/unknown around here.

These are not like other similar-looking, inline, four valve, non-comp euphoniums. Much more “tenor tuba-ish,” maybe? They’re pretty “BIG.” Their “patterns” are not like a “321” to me, either.

As I mentioned above, they’re not a Willson “321” at all. I have found the one here fun and entertaining.

[bloke]

@MiBrassFS

No. Someone else is in Michiana. Not you. They haven't (at least, not yet) posted in this thread.

The 2704 set up is unusual, but not unusable.

[MiBrassFS]

@MiBrassFS

No. Someone else is in Michiana. Not you. They haven't (at least, not yet) posted in this thread.

The 2704 set up is unusual, but not unusable.

Ya know, after I posted and before I had a chance to check back, I realized what you were referring to… I was going to modify my post.

You’re just too fast!

[bloke]

I sold a few of those 2704 instruments in the somewhat early days of Willson, perhaps 5 to 8 years after they became a recognized name in the United States (DEG was still their importer, but had moved over to Taiwanese instruments for marching instruments - post-Kurath/pre-Brazil instruments) and the mod. 2900 euphoniums were selling like hotcakes to the military and to students who could round up $1500 bucks or so.
Again, the 2704 noncompensating instruments (which are set up to sort of compensate due to circuit lengths) can be played well with a few fingering strategies, and yes they put out some sound. One of them that I sold new was handed back to me a year or two ago buy a now quite old gentleman who wasn't playing it anymore. It was still in brand new condition and I sold it to an older lady somewhere across the country who wasn't quite as old as the old gentleman, and she's very happy with it in her community band. For school use, there were some things about their construction that were good and some things that weren't so good. They didn't have big caps over the outer bows, so when kids smashed them up they were a little easier to repair, due to the lack of much double layer metal around the circumference, but they were also built in a sort of open shape with long delicate braces, and anything that involves the adjective "delicate" doesn't particularly serve the young scholar community in a particularly good way. I think - around that time - new Yamaha model 321 euphoniums were about 600 bucks in lacquer finish (from the wwbw place that was operating out of a house) and I picked up a nice fine-threads metal-guides new-looking silver used one for myself for about 300 bucks. This was before they spent all that time and money on promoting themselves, and there was no such thing as a yamabot band director, back then. ...They had to attract customers with low pricing... and we were still on the end of the era whereby things from Japan were viewed - at that time - as things from China are viewed today.

[MiBrassFS]

I have a 321 in lacquer in super condition I bought from the original owner at a “gift” price. He said that he had bought it new in 1969! As he is a tuba player, this euphonium mostly sat. Our, yours and mine, seem to be different from later versions of the 321.

On the Willson… this one here is as you described, no reinforcing caps or even wires on the outer upper bow. I think that and the minimal bracing contribute to the nice response, but I would NOT want to place it in hands of a young scholar in today’s school settings unless under the supervision of a band director with pretty good classroom management skills.