Yamaha 641 vs. King 2341

[8vabasso]

Looking for a horn for a student. Thoughts on this comparison????

[8vabasso]

If you have one of these, what mouthpiece are you using for King or Yamaha?

[Rick Denney]

The King would be my choice every time. I've never been a fan of the 641, though I hear there were a few that turned out well.

But when you ask about the King 2341, you really ought to identify the vintage. The current 2341, with the short, one-piece bell is a somewhat different animal than the old 2341 with the tall, removable bell. I would, however, prefer either of those to a 641. Of the two, the tall-bell model will be much cheaper on the market, and that may affect the choice. Without that consideration, though, I would prefer the newer one.

They are more efficient, too, and will provide a student with a better sound for the air he provides. That may be a good thing or not, but I always think a good-sounding tuba will more likely lead to a good-sounding tuba player--he'll be motivated to play it more.

Rick "who never really understood Yamaha's objectives with the 641" Denney

[WakinAZ]

I've owned and played both.

641 - big, dark German sound. Tone is what it is, lots of fundamental. This horn has only one sound, it does not really matter what mouthpiece you plug into it. It can take about as much air as most people can put into it, due to its larger bore size, bottom bow and bell throat. Consistently well-built. I've only played two and I like them both. Most folks here on TubeNet do not like these horns.

new 2341 - more colorful "American" type sound. Build quality questionable, somewhat variable from horn to horn - mine sucked. Can be overblown due to moderate bore size. Chunky, compact profile like all the cool kids were playing when this one was designed. Probably more of a one size fits all as far as ensembles you could play it in, including quintet.

old 2341 - more colorful "American" type sound. Build quality generally very good and consistent from horn to horn. Condition and past repairs will be the wild card here. Hard to find one with an upright bell, especially one with the more proportional 19" bell vs. the original 22". Taller profile than the new one. About the same efficiency and ability to play loud, since valveset is the same bore as new, although the valves on all my old Kings were better fitting and smoother than my new one.

Eric ""who understands Yamaha's objectives with the 641 - to copy a Meinl-Weston" L.

[TubaCoopa]

These two tubas are a great example of the contrasting feel and sound between German and American tubas. If a test play is out of the question, then I would go with whatever style sound is desired; German or American. You really can't go wrong either way. Those horns brought me all the way through high school.

[iiipopes]

Student = King: durable, easy to play, intonates well, good tone.

Yamaha: valve problems, thin metal, may sound good "out of the box" but over time will have more maintenance issues.

[iiipopes]

Let's put it this way: over the course of the years, I've had the necessity to borrow tubas here and there at times I didn't own one, or the one I had at the time was in the shop. Regardless of model, whenever I would borrow a Yamaha, I would have to take it straight to the shop to get something sorted out from either neglect or damage or simple non-use before I can even take it home to practice. With all the Kings I've played, I pop out the valves, oil them, and I'm off and running.

[TUBAD83]

Student = King: durable, easy to play, intonates well, good tone.

Yamaha: valve problems, thin metal, may sound good "out of the box" but over time will have more maintenance issues.

I have also heard this about Yamaha horns, but having played them in college and in the army (and just received an 11 year old YBB 321 in excellent condition), I found them to very well constructed and great sounding instruments--never had a maintenance problem with them at all.

Having played both horns, I personally prefer the 641: I found it to be more versatile and easier to play. The King is more durable and would be a great choice if there was a preference for pistons. Either horn would work well.

[WakinAZ]

... Yamaha: valve problems, thin metal, may sound good "out of the box" but over time will have more maintenance issues.

Disagree completely on these points. Yammie pistons can be a challenge, but my 641's rotaries were solid and smooth, likewise with another I had on trial. Metal thickness was more than adequate, same or better than most horns.

I agree the old Kings may be more bulletproof, but in my limited experience the 641 is not a problem horn mechanically.

Eric "thinking iiipoops' experiences might say more about the kind of horns people are willing to lend out than they do about Yamaha build quality" L.

[Bob Kolada]

I think the Yamaha-valve-problem thing is a tuba-news thing, as not ONCE have I ever had a problem with any Yamaha valves on any Yamaha instrument.

[WakinAZ]

Well, their pistons can be too tight, and their valve guides can be unfriendly. Although I check in on TubaNews from time to time, we all know where the *real* tuba forum is.

Like the new avatar, Bobster - is that something from "Futurama"?

[Rick Denney]

I think the Yamaha-valve-problem thing is a tuba-news thing, as not ONCE have I ever had a problem with any Yamaha valves on any Yamaha instrument.

Extrapolating from personal experience is always risky.

I think both of you are wrong. I've surely seen King tubas that had valve issues, and some of the newer ones had valves that were as loose enough to make one thing they'd been played for decades. And while I love my Yamaha 621 F tuba and have played it extensively for nearly 20 years, I have had my share of valve issues with it, too. Especially when I played it outdoors. I had to lap the valves and still find that they are exceedingly picky about valve oil.

Rick "who did play that Yamaha professionally" Denney