Posted by Steve Dedman on May 27, 2002 at 10:00:57:
In Reply to: M. Weston 2145 vs. Conn 56J posted by Opinions Wanted on May 25, 2002 at 22:07:45:
When I bought my 56J, I tried a 2000 alongside it. My preference was for the "American" sound of the Conn. Your taste might be different from mine, however. For me the Conn had a better blow to it than the MW, and was more comfortable to hold. Having not tried a 2145, I can't comment precisely on that horn. I do know that the 2000/2155 is the bigger brother and certainly bigger than the Conn, but I felt I was able to get more quality sound out of the Conn. Perhaps not quite as many sheer decibels, but the sound that comes out of the 56J projects extremely well without having to force it. At very low dynamic levels, it speaks easily and clearly. At loud dynamic levels, it doesn't break up easily. Plays very well in tune to my ear with an ensemble. The Conn is made to be a workhorse. Were I a pro, I would probably want an extra cannon for Prok. and a few other pieces and a small F tuba for the French stuff and high solos. But the Conn really works equally as well in a large ensemble, a quintet, or on solos. I wouldn't hesitate to use it as the primary horn. There aren't many things a 56J can't do very well.
SD