Differences between older and newer Imperial euphoniums

Discussion in 'The Rehearsal Room' started by MoominDave, Nov 4, 2012.

  1. MoominDave

    MoominDave Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,487
    Location:
    Oxford
    Late Imperials (60s/70s) as I recall blow larger than early Imperials (pre WW2 - often also labelled 'Class A' or 'Solbron') - am I right in thinking this? Does anyone have any bore size numbers? How about the bell? Is the needed mouthpiece shank size different? Been a long while since I had one of each on hand to compare...
     
  2. DMBabe

    DMBabe Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,480
    Location:
    Oxford nowhere near the sea
    You're too young to talk about it being a long time since you handled older model euphs!:rolleyes:
     
  3. cockaigne

    cockaigne Member

    Messages:
    408
    Location:
    Kirklees, West Yorkshire
    I played an Imperial on the TUC march the other week; not sure of its vintage but it certainly took a small shank mouthpiece. Probably just as well, as if I'd played on the 2G as normal I doubt I'd have had any lip left by the end...
     
  4. MoominDave

    MoominDave Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,487
    Location:
    Oxford
    Late Imperials took a medium shank mouthpiece, as I recall?

    And Di, it's been 20 years...
     
  5. GordonH

    GordonH Active Member

    Messages:
    390
    Location:
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    I used to play Euphonium and I had a euph bought from Kitchens of Leeds around 1985 which was badged as "Imperial Besson by Boosey and Hawkes". It was identical to a Sovereign apart from the bell which was smaller. It took a bass trombone mouthpiece and it was in bright silver plate.
     
  6. MoominDave

    MoominDave Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,487
    Location:
    Oxford
    Interesting... Was it manufactured with a large shank mouthpipe or had it been retrofitted, do you know?

    My question originally arises from a potential interest in having this done to an Imperial euph.
     
  7. GordonH

    GordonH Active Member

    Messages:
    390
    Location:
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    No, it was built that way in the factory.
    I have seen the odd one for sale and they go quite cheaply.
     
  8. simonium

    simonium Member

    Messages:
    597
    Location:
    Hayle
    That's the same set-up as a Besson Sovereign 966 banjo. 11" bell, medium bore (what it is I don't actually know) and a large mouthpiece receiver. I've had mine for about 3 months and absolutely love it - the band certainly prefer the sound over the 967 I was using.
     
  9. GordonH

    GordonH Active Member

    Messages:
    390
    Location:
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    Actually, I think you are correct. After B&H stopped making the "Imperial Besson" I had there was a gap and then they reintroduced it as a sovereign because soem military musicians prefered the smaller euphonium. I might be wrong. I am sure a Euphonium nerd could comment.
     
  10. fsteers

    fsteers Member

    Messages:
    81
    The 1978 B&H spec sheet lists the bore of the Besson Imperial as 14.72mm (.579") through the valve section and 16.mmm (.650") for the fourth valve.B&H switched to large shank receivers in 1974. Prior to that, Imperial receivers were medium shank. I have a copy of the letter to dealers announcing the change tucked away somehwere. I'll see if I can dig it up.
     
  11. I played on a pre 74 instrument with Dalkeith Burgh band many years ago, it was HP and came with a LP tuning slide, it took a medium mouthpiece 4AM if a recall.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice