Willson 2900 bell throat size?

[MiBrassFS]

The Willson 2900 hasn’t been all that common around these parts.

Does anyone happen to know how the Denis Wick big black practice mute (not the smaller red one that can be stored in the bell in a case) fits the 2900 bell? Does it basically bottom out or does it sit out a little bit?

Thanks for any info!

[bloke]

.

[bloke]

Yeah I deleted my post because I didn't see the word practice and only saw Denis Wick mute. I shouldn't have tried been trying to read these posts from my phone screen.

[MiBrassFS]

I think both the straight and practice mutes are the same body. A couple of holes and corking are the differences.

[bloke]

I think both the straight and practice mutes are the same body. A couple of holes and corking are the differences.

OK...The "practice" version still has the mixing bowl on top.

The corks shipped (with the so-called "straight" mute) are quite thick.

I NEVER trimmed mine.

It sat VERY high in my 2900 euphonium (probably "medium high" had I cut the corks way down, but - again - I never did that).

I've stated before that my CURRENT (B&S-made, but NOT "Besson"...much more like this: https://store.weinermusic.com/products/ ... lver-751-s) compensating euphonium features and extremely large-funnel bell.
Fortunately (for me), having never trimmed those corks, the same Wick metal "straight" mute comes pretty darn close to bottoming out.

The Willson bell profile (again: referring to "funnel" and not to "pancake") isn't particularly large, and the close to 12" pancake (more recent version as well as 2950) I don't believe has anything to do with the funnel dimensions of the bell.

I did use my Wick straight mute with the 2900, but - with no cork trimming whatsoever - it rode high.

[MiBrassFS]

Ok, thanks for that. The reason I ask is that this non-comp Willson here has a very large bell >funnel<. Mutes sit deeply in it similar to the big Hirsbrunner or Adams E3 (and I image the MW/B&S) bells. With unmodified corks, they essentially bottom out. It’s unlike what I remember the 2900 or 2950 (I owned a 2950 briefly years ago) bells to be. I don’t know anyone with a 2900 to do a side by side, but pretty sure I have the answer now.

Big sound. Good pitch. Plays easy. Shorter than compensator valve action. Pretty cool.

[bloke]

Ok, thanks for that. The reason I ask is that this non-comp Willson here has a very large bell >funnel<. Mutes sit deeply in it similar to the big Hirsbrunner or Adams E3 (and I image the MW/B&S) bells. With unmodified corks, they essentially bottom out. It’s unlike what I remember the 2900 or 2950 (I owned a 2950 briefly years ago) bells to be. I don’t know anyone with a 2900 to do a side by side, but pretty sure I have the answer now.

Big sound. Good pitch. Plays easy. Shorter than compensator valve action. Pretty cool.

I believe I've responded in the same way to another post (and this isn't supposed to be argument fodder, and they will may have backed off of what I'm about to describe at a later date in manufacturing), but when Kurath came out with the four pistons in a row non-compensating answer to the Yamaha 321, they built in some attempts at pitch compensation which helped a limited number of things and messed up a lot of things. The #4 circuit was excessively long - which helped 2-4 and maybe even 1-4, but it messed up C really badly for fourth valve and it even messed up low F.

They also elongated the #2 circuit to accomplish some of the same things, but - again - it messed up more things than it helped, in my opinion. With many Wilson euphoniums (the compensating ones) the B-flat tuning note is flatter than most of the other pitches, with - the second circuit extra long - it made the A even flatter than it already was. When these were made, I sold some of them to schools new, as the pricing was pretty attractive. (Back then - when they were first being sold, their pricing through DEG wasn't "nose-bleed", as it is today.) Many of us recall that - back then - Kurath made a few of the DEG marching instruments and a student tuba - none of which featured fancy prices.)

Anyway, a couple of band directors bought these from me who were retired from the military playing euphonium, and they insisted that I take the second valve slide assemblies apart and shorten them. I didn't blame them. They weren't so annoyed by the extra long fourth circuits, because they could have their students play pitches with 1-3 and then 2-4.

[MiBrassFS]

I remember those long 2nd valve slides on the Willson compensators. Always odd to me. I have a feeling someone fire wrenched on this 2nd valve slide and adjusted it. The alignment was off enough that it was tough going in and out. Pitch seems ok and not too long, so that’s good!

[bloke]

just fwiw...
The overly long #2 circuit - to which I was referring - is something that I've only personally encountered on the non-compensating/in-line model 2704.
The reason that the A on the 3+1 compensating model 2900 is flat (again - in my experience) is only because the model 2900 4th partial is flat (and not that the #2 circuit is too long).

When I owned a 2900 and "tuned" it, I tuned the (so-called) "tuning note" (4th partial B-flat or A) flat, so as many other pitches on the instrument were not sharp. (Quite a few claim that the high range on those instruments is sharp, whereas it's actually that the middle-range B-flat (often used as a tuning note) is flatter than most everything else...thus they end up with a great deal of the instrument being unnecessarily sharp-natured.)
Though flat, the 4th partial (model 2900) is quite easy to favor up top pitch (though sure: it requires listening and - well - remembering to do it).

These things can often be confusing, and (me: guilty as charged) sometimes takes quite a while (with a particular instrument and its particular quirks) to realize actually what is, and which are the *best/easiest workarounds for those quirks.

Were it that you had seen more of these (with more opportunities to have played them) I wouldn't have typed as much "bloke jazz" here...
...Also, others (per always) will report conflicting experiences/opinions.

_________________________________
*Another example could be the flat 3rd partial F with (many, but not all) Holton model 34X tubas. Something else with those Holton's is that the 2nd partial - with those models -is just about as sharp as the 6th partial...so how "flat" - really - is the 3rd partial, when the main slide has been pulled out to favor the sharpest partials (2 and 6) with those models?

[MiBrassFS]

The compensators have a too long 2nd valves slide, too.

Google “willson 2900 flat second valve…” That 2950 I had did for sure!

[bloke]

Whatever...I resign...' just ain't worth draggin' this out any further...

The Willson 2900 hasn’t been all that common around these parts

.

They have been fitted - over the years - with valvesets manufactured by various subcontractors, so (as some peeps like to use this expression) "Your mileage may vary."

[MiBrassFS]

Whatever...I resign...' just ain't worth draggin' this out any further...

Ha! Too late! You already did!

It’s just a design choice made in Flums. All instruments have onboard compromises, even compensators. Not necessarily a criticism.

[bloke]

To address complaints (and without fooling around with cutting the little outside slide tubes mounted to the 2704 knuckles) I ordered (not stupid-expensive, back then, and actually in-stock at DEG) the shorter 2900 #2 outside slide tubes, and then ground/filed down the inside slide tubes on the removable slides...quick/easy/bloke-is-lazy.

oh yeah...Besides shorter 2900 #2 slide tubes, I'm now remembering that I also had to use a coarse file (finishing with a fine file) to take down the 2704 knuckles themselves. (No saw would fit in there without headaches and probable user boo-boo's.)

As a 2900 owner/player (we had a few of them thar thangs down in these-here necks-o'-the-woods), the rest of the #2 circuit-alone pitches were/are all - pretty much - up to pitch, other than (acoustically-flat) 4th partial A.

[MiBrassFS]

Welcome to Western Tennessee…, where all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the Willson 2900 2nd valves aren’t too long…

[bloke]

Welcome to Western Tennessee…, where all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the Willson 2900 2nd valves aren’t too long…

They're too long for fourth-space A, but - otherwise - not.
There are only 4-valves (ok...defacto 7) on those compensating things...That's not enough to tune every pitch in the range of the instrument.

Dave Werden agreed with me that - with his comparative euphonium tuning charts, if he moved the (so-called) "tuning" B-flat and A downward, that a whole bunch of other stuff on the chart would no longer be sharp...(I have no idea whether he ever went back and adjusted it.)

People need to stop thinking of a single pitch (some middle-range B-flat or A) as a "tuning note".
For most written music for individual brass instruments, there are well over thirty pitches to tune.
Another dumb thing (particularly these days - after the boring executive directors of orchestras walk on stage and run their mouths for nearly five minutes at curtain) is "tuning" at the beginning of concerts...how so very anti-climactic. Everyone has access to tuners ($1X.XX pocket size, or downloaded to their phones for free). Fiddle players no longer just gut strings. Music halls have HVAC. Tuning is absolutely archaic. Have the first fiddle player's butt already in their seat, and send out the friggin' music director !

Willson: I'm no apologist.
- don't own one no mo'
- don't sell 'em (no longer seem to be particularly requested by the market, and damned expensive)

I tend - though - to be an apologist for what is.

[MiBrassFS]

Welcome to Western Tennessee…, where all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the Willson 2900 2nd valves aren’t too long…

They're too long for fourth-space A, but - otherwise - not.
There are only 4-valves (ok...defacto 7) on those compensating things...That's not enough to tune every pitch in the range of the instrument.

Dave Werden agreed with me that - with his comparative euphonium tuning charts, if he moved the (so-called) "tuning" B-flat and A downward, that a whole bunch of other stuff on the chart would no longer be sharp...(I have no idea whether he ever went back and adjusted it.)

People need to stop thinking of a single pitch (some middle-range B-flat or A) as a "tuning note".
For most written music for individual brass instruments, there are well over thirty pitches to tune.
Another dumb thing (particularly these days - after the boring executive directors of orchestras walk on stage and run their mouths for nearly five minutes at curtain) is "tuning" at the beginning of concerts...how so very anti-climactic. Everyone has access to tuners ($1X.XX pocket size, or downloaded to their phones for free). Fiddle players no longer just gut strings. Music halls have HVAC. Tuning is absolutely archaic. Have the first fiddle player's butt already in their seat, and send out the friggin' music director !

Willson: I'm no apologist.
- don't own one no mo'
- don't sell 'em (no longer seem to be particularly requested by the market, and damned expensive)

I tend - though - to be an apologist for what is.

No argument on that!

[bloke]

The overwhelming majority of 3rd valves on brass instruments (pushed in to the best spot for most applications) are also TOO LONG for the fourth partial 2-3 pitch (or - if pushed in short enough for the 4th partial pitch - are way too short for the 2nd-partial 2-3 pitch).

This seems to be the most-ignored tuning issue with brass players (C instruments: middle-range G-sharps or B-flat instruments: middle-range F-sharps).
The Swiss contrabass tubas (Hirs./Adams and Will.) seem to have monkeyed around with their tapers so-as to shift this issue to the THIRD partial 2-3 pitches (oddly, in opposite-to-each-other directions - Hirs.=flat vs. Will.=sharp)

again: only a handful of buttons for 30-something pitches

The taper of an instrument (I suspect/believe) controls when and how severely the "flat fourth partial / sharp 2nd partial" stuff kicks in, and how much. I don't believe there is any "golden-fleece / magic taper". There ARE (when mouthpipe tubes are more conservative in their expansion) instruments whereby it's easier for players to push/pull pitches this-way-and-that (without having to resort to mechanical adjustments).

Most All brass instruments tuning characteristics suck - in some way or another. SOME - which were more recently designed - don't suck nearly as bad as a much larger percentage of models - designed/built in the distant past - sucked.