Posted by Rick Denney on June 20, 2003 at 17:52:09:
In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Is it me? posted by danny on June 20, 2003 at 16:45:16:
The lighter sound was first. American euphonium players used to use smaller equipment than they do now, such as the Conn Constellation and various double-belled instruments of relatively small bore. My 1937 Reynolds euphonium has a bore of about .56" and a 10" bell. It wasn't until the 50's that the compensating Besson came to the U.S., and that represented a big step to larger equipment.
But I think the main difference is that the role of the euphonium has been different in British musical circles than in the U.S. In a brass band, which is an old tradition in Britain, the euphonium is squeezed into a smaller gap in the tonal palette, between the (British-style) baritone and the Eb tuba. In the U.S., the euphonium/baritone has a little more tonal room between a bank of contrabass tubas and French horns. There's more room down than up in that gap. So, a euphonium with a lot of bottom in the sound fits in the U.S.-style wind ensemble, and contrasts nicely with the prominant trombones, while a brighter euphonium sound fits better in a British brass band.
Rick "who thinks U.S. euphoniumists are just following tuba players into deeper tonal concepts" Denney