TubeNet

I've played a fair amount of Yamaha tubas in my playing career, and I have observed something. Their intonation is...variable. My high school used YBB-641s, and I felt that ALL of them had terribly sticky and clunky valves (admittedly, that may have been the result of high-schoolers playing them all day), and awful intonation. I just know that on the one I was playing, middle C was effectively unusable first valve and horrendously flat open. A at the top of the staff was always off. I tried every combination of fingers, slide kicking, and adjustment. Nothing seemed to work. Same thing with F# at the top of the staff. G at the top of the staff was almost unusable. It was just so sharp that it may as well have been Ab. My school had 5 or 6 other 641s, and I played maybe 3 of them. They all had similar problems. The intonation was always bad in the higher middle register. On the other hand, I really like their F tubas and some of their CC tubas. I've played them at various shops/events, and I like most of them. I just feel like manufacturers like Meinl-Weston/Melton/B & S and Miraphone have more consistency overall in the quality of their instruments. I've never played a Miraphone or a Meinl that I absolutely hated. However, as I said, I've played some atrocious Yamahas. Has anyone else observed this wide smattering in quality in their products? Just an observation and a question.

I'm not sure that you're using Yamaha's best offering (the YBB-641) as your basis for comparison despite the fact that you may have played several of them. That model is generally known to be "ok" overall but some of them are exceptionally good. In my opinion, Yamaha copied a good design but then made some adjustments that made the instrument (yeah, I know...subjective) more "playable" but less interesting to listen to.

School instruments are generally not great examples to use as your basis for comparison either. It's likely they're suffering from poor care and maintenance as much as anything with is coloring your outlook on them. Plus, high school students are not always the best players to demonstrate or evaluate what a tuba can and cannot do. I mean no offense by that at all...players of ANY level trying any tuba may (or may not) hear things that truly are a result of their own playing strengths and weaknesses.

I find your comment regarding consistency and quality re: Yamaha to be interesting. I find their tubas and euphoniums to be among the most consistent in build quality and playing tendencies. Their "professional" level instruments such as the YFB-621 and 822 tubas are as close to universally accepted as exceptional as you'll find the in the tuba world, with several other models that are, perhaps, less popular but still highly regarded.

Now, maybe the Yamahas you have access to do suck. Maybe those pitch issues would be there for any player. We don't know. I've always personally found the 641 tuba to be (like I said earlier) "ok." They play fine and are predictable...nothing totally out of whack pitch wise. I find them a bit "tight" (stuffy???) but otherwise acceptable.

Every manufacturer makes duds. EVERY tuba (even the really cheap stuff) requires hand fitting and assembly. It's all only automated to a point. These means that every single one can turn out different despite being assembled from identical parts. I've had some B&S, MW, Miraphone, and even Hirsbrunner instruments in my hands that I thought were terrible but all were well built, ultra high quality instruments. In some cases others agreed with me, in others they thought it was just me on that instrument that was a bad combo. Point being...who knows, but I sure wouldn't label Yamaha as inconsistent/poor quality/bad intonation any more than any other brand.

The thing that gets people going about Yamaha tubas (typically the F tubas) is the tone. The F tubas play very well, are known for having killer low register playability, and pretty manageable intonation but they just sound rather..."plain." Take my F tuba of choice, for example (MW 45-SLP)...*I think* I have Yamaha 822 playability and a much more colorful "German flavored" sound from it. There are others that think they sound too much like a CC tuba or that an F tuba has to be a "real" German rotary tuba to sound 'right.' Oh well...

Is it possible that Yamaha just didn't really "get" making rotary tubas? Everything else they make has piston valves. Maybe the rotors were just outside of their expertise?

Edit: I forgot about the rotary CC tuba they used to have (861?). I think people kind of liked them, but they are rare, and I've never tried one to know for myself.

bort wrote:Is it possible that Yamaha just didn't really "get" making rotary tubas? Everything else they make has piston valves. Maybe the rotors were just outside of their expertise?

Edit: I forgot about the rotary CC tuba they used to have (861?). I think people kind of liked them, but they are rare, and I've never tried one to know for myself.

I think it's a reasonable conclusion to come to regarding their tubas. They've got pistons figured out, it seems, but haven't ever had the same success with rotary tubas.

There were two models (more?) of rotary CC tubas they built at one time...maybe up through the late 1990s or early 00's, I'm not totally sure. One was more of a traditional look (think Miraphone 186) and the other was a compact instrument more like a Cerveny piggy. I have never even seen, let alone played, one of the larger CC tubas, but the compact one I did try some years ago I thought was neat (good, I guess), but it has been so long that I really can't say much more than that about it...only played it once.

Oh right... I forgot about the 661. I tried one about 10 years ago at BBC when I bought my VMI tuba (like the one Joe is selling now). I had a choice between the 661, an MW-32, and the VMI. I don't remember the 661 specifically, but all 3 tubas played very well, and I bought the VMI because it was the least expensive, and played as well as both of the other tubas.

I know the models I was playing were not meant to be top of the line. I'm just saying that at the same time I had to play those, I was playing a Cerveny 681 at home, and I liked it a lot more. Furthermore, I've been a pretty good relative tuner since I started (no absolute pitch or anything, but not bad). And I played plenty of Miraphone 186s around that time, finding almost all of those to be worlds better. As for the maintenance thing, it seems unlikely that bad treatment would cause intonatiom like this. The valves I could see, but the intonation no. Perhaps I just have a tendency to be out-of-tune on Yamahas. I suppose it could be my mindset.

I played on my school's Yamaha YBB-641 for the first year of college. I would wager that 99% of the problems I had with the horn were really shortcomings of my playing ability. That being said, the only problem I experienced out of the ones you listed was the G at the top of the staff being sharp, but using the third valve and lipping a bit solved that problem pretty reliably. The valves worked fine and didn't make too much noise. I think being a university horn, it was probably maintained better than those your high school had.

I wasn't a huge fan of the sound that the horn produced, particularly in the lower register...but once again, that was probably me. The horn certainly didn't limit my playing, though, and I know for a fact that I grew a lot as a player in a year playing on it. It certainly made a fine school horn, and perhaps that's where it really works the best.

I'm not a big fan of the YBB-641 tubas. I mean... why should I mess with them when I have other great tubas.

Joking aside.... the biggest flaw I've seen in the YBB-641 is the fact that ALL of the slides need to be out quite a bit to make the horn play reasonable in-tune. Yamaha builds all of their stuff at A=442.

All of the slides have to be pushed back in for the horn to fit in the stock case. Go figure!

I like all 4 of mine.

I'd be happy with a 641 too, but, like all tubas, they need to be played correctly to get the desired results.

I should add that mouthpiece choice can certainly play a part, so perhaps start with the stock mouthpiece and then experiment.

You guys are forgetting about the YCB-861 CC tuba that was 40" tall with a 17.75" bell. That was a very fine playing Alex 163 copy. I did cut the first slide so that I could play D in the staff with just first valve, but otherwise I found it to be very in-tune and easy to play CC tuba with a sound that others could hear and tune to.

Having worked at a music store for 20 years now, I noticed that people will play and sound to the level of their ability regardless of the tuba. A better match of a tuba to the player, just lets them sound their best with the least amount of work. Case in point is Roger Bobo. He sounds like himself on Miraphone or Yamaha tubas.

As for the Yamaha YBB-641 tuba, that is a fine playing and very in-tune tuba. The large bore, minimum gap In the mouthpiece receiver and larger than average leadpipe beginning diameter yields a tuba whose "slots" are so subtle that it is easy to play out of tune. Because of smaller beginning leadpipe and greater gap in the mpc rcvr area, many people find the Dillon DBB-641 BBb tuba at one third the price of the Yamaha to be easier to play in-tune. It has the same great intonation tendencies as the more expensive Yamaha, but resists people wanting to lip it out of tune.

Some people want and need a tuba with wiggle room. Others need tighter slots. We each have in mind an ideal tuba sound. Find the tuba that lets it come out to play with the least amount of work.

I find Yamaha tubas to be high quality and very consistent. And I like the response and intonation on most I've played -- they play well for me.
But I will admit Yamahas do tend to sound rather "vanilla" or "bland" compared to other tubas. It has it's place. I just find the typical Yamaha sound to be "pleasant-but-'colorless'". Some models have a bit more 'color' than others. But I suspect Yamaha may use a different alloy than the German makes, and this contributes to the "vanillaness" of Yamahas.

I'm not too sure why everyone keeps jumping to the "good players are good on any instrument" argument. That's true, but it's also kind of a red herring. The question is whether or not Yamaha is good in your opinion, not how much instrument choice matters. I agree that instrument choice has almost no bearing on whether or not someone is good at playing the tuba. However, I like how I sound on some instruments more than others. I would think that would be true of all instrumental musicians.

Yes. Yamahas are very overpriced IMO. For example, the YBB-641 costs a whopping $9469.99
http://www.musiciansfriend.com/brass-in ... otary-tuba" target="_blank, but the classic Miraphone 186 costs only $8490.00. http://www.wwbw.com/Miraphone-186-4U-Se ... 13827.wwbw" target="_blank
And the Miraphone's better.

**********

Yamaha does research the market, and makes sure they aren't the low price leader in any category of instrument. They figure their products are worth a premium price, and want them to sell on the merits of the instrument.

Also, the 641 includes a hard case at that price, and the Miraphone does not. Yamaha offers a bit better parts availability and a more inclusive warranty. I could see some buyers saying that the 641 at about $1K more is still a fair price.

Ferguson
/seems a bit high to me

**********

I believe that German manufacturing costs/tariffs are much higher than those of Japan, which is why a Volkswagen is far more expensive than a Honda of about equal quality (no car brand fighting, please). That's why it really doesn't make sense that the Japanese would charge more for a ripped off design.

**********

Eh...I'm not pretending to know anything about cars. The important thing is that Yamahas should be cheaper as they are usually copies of other manufacturers' instruments, and Asian manufacturing generally costs less than German. I just can't fathom how very much these tubas cost, considering the fact that the corresponding models of Miraphones or Meinls are just better. Besides, if you look at the info on the 641, Yamaha openly admits to copying the designs of Miraphone, Meinl-Weston, and Cerveny. I just can't really see any reason to cough up so much dough for yet another Asian copy of a European instrument (JinBao, anyone?).