Re: 2J vs. 3J


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Richard Murrow on August 01, 2001 at 09:05:51:

In Reply to: 2J vs. 3J posted by Curious on July 31, 2001 at 22:03:31:

Curious,

Both horns are considered 3/4 tubas, the lead pipes are the same and hoth do say Conn on the bell, but thats pretty much where the similarities end. The 3J has an 18" bell, the 2J a 16 1/2" bell. There is a fair amount of difference in the way the tubing is wrapped in the valve sections of both horns. The 2J which came along earlier and was discontinued with the introduction of the 3J actually had a completely different set of valves. At the time the 2J was built Conn had moved their operations to Abilene, TX (no longer there, now in EastLake, Ohio) and had taken over what was once the Olds/Reynolds factory. Consequently the valves in the 2J were exactly the same as the valves in the old Renolds Contempra tubas. The 3J was completely redesigned. Although the bore at the valve is the same, the valves on the 3J are MUCH shorter and faster. The 3J has better bracing and protective plates on vulnerable spots on the horn, like the bottom bow and the side where the players left hand sits. Both horns are very efficient, easy playing small tubas and work great in chamber music, jazz, and as a soloistic small cc tuba. I've owned both, still have a 3J and feel that while they were both good for what they were designed to do, the 3J is definitely the better choice. However, neither are made any more. The new Conn tubas (56J & 52J) and the sister UMI company, King, with the new King 2341 BBb tuba are all terrific! The 56 & 52Js and the King 2341 are 4/4 tubas and the quality and consistency are excellent! If you have a lead on a 2J or 3J and it plays well get it. If not and you are looking for a horn that will do all that they will do and more, check out the new models, you won't be disappointed. I hope this helps.




Follow Ups: