Posted by Klaus on September 22, 2002 at 11:19:15:
The Blaikley compensation system seems less disputed in euphs, than in tubas. A recent poster wondered how a pro player could play a top valved tuba in performance, even if this happen every day in the UK.
My personal attitude towards the auto comp system is, that it is superior to anything else. IF the bore through the valve cluster is sufficiently generous! And if the expansion of bore in the leadpipe is fast enough.
This attitude make me a strong endorser of the very richly sounding comp members of my collection: the 1967 B&H Imperial Brit style 3 valve baritone, the 1995 YEP 641 euph, and the 1999 Besson 981 Eb bass.
Whereas I sadly mus admit, that I have yet to try a comp BBb, that is a true contrabass and not just an oversize euph. My experience of course is limited to Besson and Yamaha. I have not had the chance to put my hands on a Willson or a Courtois yet.
Compers come in 3+1 and 4 front piston set ups. Some very competent musicians maintain, that they can not adjust to the 3+1 set up, even if it is by far the optimum, when it comes to ergonomics. I have a bit of a problem understanding the problems with that adjustment. I have fourth valves in my left thumb, index, and middle (works best on the 3+1 euph and the 3+2 baritone) fingers plus in my right pinkie. Imagine the tubelength needed for note you want and you are flying.
Some of the critics of the auto comp system basically don't understand that system. For them I have scanned the illustrated explanation, that came with the 1978 B&H catalogue from which also come the scans about the mid-low brasses at the site linked to below.
Klaus
PS: As usually you will have to sign up to an open and non-posting Yahoo group. Makers so far represented in the scan files of more or less old catalogues are:
Alexander
B&H (Besson)
B&S (with Weltklang)
Conn
Glassl
Miraphone
Skylark (just for the fun of it)