YBB-641 Valve Spring question

[mbc9ie]

My 641 is 21 years old, and I want to replace the valve springs. I know I can order the factory replacement ones, but can I buy other springs that are stronger than stock? Any input would be helpful.

Thanks
J

[Dan Schultz]

To each his own, I suppose. However... I can't imagine why you would want to replace the stock springs with stronger ones. If it's a matter of trying to speed up rotors that have become sluggish... perhaps it's time to take your horn in for a good chemical cleaning and routine service.

[mbc9ie]

I bought it off Ebay a year ago and it was "just cleaned" per the Reciept from the repair shop when I purchased it. I wasnt sure if the springs weaken over time. and was just curious if they made a tad bit stronger ones.

[Jay Bertolet]

You maybe don't have to buy new springs to achieve the desired effect. I also prefer rotary valves that respond very quickly. I had my repairman tighten the existing springs and it worked perfectly. I wouldn't try this myself, I'm sure I would scratch the horn up and maybe hurt myself in the process but a qualified technician can do this for you pretty easily. I've had many a player look at me glassy-eyed and wonder how I even press my valves. To each his own...

[mbc9ie]

when I was in college I played on a Conn 25J my first 4 valve horn then they bought me a new 641... and then i didnt play for 11 years. I bought my own 641 and never remembered the valves being so heavy. I love the horn, it brings back some good memories.

[mbc9ie]

do they just spin one side of the valve spring back around? or do they stretch them and put them back on?

[tubarepair]

I bought it off Ebay a year ago and it was "just cleaned" per the Reciept from the repair shop when I purchased it.

"Just Cleaned" by a repair shop always makes me chuckle a bit. I can assure that one's shop definition of a chemically cleaning and another's can be totally opposite. I've visited shops where a chemical cleaning consists of pouring a cleaning agent - sometimes just dishwashing detergent - down the leadpipe, swirling it around until it comes out the bell, and following with water. Not a chem clean in my opinion.

A proper chem cleaning includes removal of all valves and slides, de-greasing, a dip in an appropriate acid or ultrasonic cleaning, cleaning and hand polishing slide tubes, cleaning and alignment of valves, thorough rinsing, thorough drying, proper lubrication of slides, valves, linkages, and valve cap threads, replacement of water key corks (springs if necessary) reassembly, polishing of any plating and play test.

A shop that does the above "cleaning" charges an amount commensurate with the job.

Daryl

[Jay Bertolet]

I've been told (by technicians) that it is not a good idea to stretch the springs, but rather to wind them tighter. If Joe says its okay to stretch them, I would believe him, I'm sure the difference of opinion is just different schools of thought. For me, it made sense to wind them tighter because that is reversible. Stretching may not be. The important part is getting the springs on the horn you own exactly the tightness you want. After all, you're paying for the privilege!

[mbc9ie]

And tahts what I am worried about making something worse by over thinking it, and there is a good chance I am mis-interpretting a weak spring for a heavy valve, if that makes sense.

[Dan Schultz]

And tahts what I am worried about making something worse by over thinking it, and there is a good chance I am mis-interpretting a weak spring for a heavy valve, if that makes sense.

It is virtually impossible for those of us who know how to correct whatever problem you think you may be having without actually seeing the horn in person. And yes.... you may not have a problem at all. Just are expecting something from the equipment that it won't do.

[tubarepair]

Just are expecting something from the equipment that it won't do.

C'mon...I always look at the strings of my tennis racquet when I miss a shot.

[J.c. Sherman]

The springs on these are strong... but cheap; cheap enough to give yourself piece of mind by replacing them (where you'll also learn they're fitted pretty tightly to the shaft).

But it won't work.

Yamaha's are finicky bast^%$s. They like their factory oil, BIG time. But these have the tightest tolerances on the planet, and it's really, really finicky to get lightning speed out of them. The have to be cleaner than heaven's beer steins, and lubricated lightly with something very light, with a good (Yamaha) bearing oil.

Then take 'em out and clean them frequently for their new "break in" time and they should be smooth and quite fast. Not the fastest in the world, but pretty damn good.

[J.c. Sherman]

A common quirk with the 641 tubas (the adjective that comes to mind here is "annoying", rather than "finicky") is that they build up green corrosion behind the bearings...which - over time - pushes the bearings out...which causes a (finicky...??) CLANK every time a finger lever is depressed.

You canNOT compress the corrosion out of the way simply by tapping on the bearing. To get rid of the CLANK, you MUST take the rotor all the way apart, get rid of the green crap, and reassemble (driving the bearing home).

For the quality of sound, intonation, and other factors, I can't imagine anyone (as SOMEONE had to buy each one of these "brand-new") picking one of these over a 186.

+1 (except I like the "Alex-y" potential over the Miraphone 186s sound... so I did pick it)

[toobagrowl]

I just couldn't resist...

For the quality of sound, intonation, and other factors, I can't imagine anyone (as SOMEONE had to buy each one of these "brand-new") picking one of these over a 186.

Different strokes for different folks...
I can't imagine anyone picking a Mira 186 over a M-W 25 or VMI 2103, but they do...
I agree that the YBB 641 is overpriced, but I'd take it's M-W ish sound and low range over the Mira 186's too-tubby-and-too-lean-at-the-same-time sound and low range.

[J.c. Sherman]

Funny, I found with:

1) making sure the midpoint joint on the leadpipe was clean and
2) putting a large receiver on it (like the horn it's based on had), and
3) removing the silly excess solder on the fourth tubing

Mine went from just fine to bad-a$$! I ran it past a few others and all agreed... bad-*** bottom end.

Yes, the G is squirrelly... I'm looking for a cure, but I'm unbothered... my 1st is vented and I use 3 when passing through it. NBD.

Out of the box, they are more capable of controlled power... and provide a more broad sound, IMHO. True, they do not have the character of the 186... but I wasn't looking for BBb for the lighter material a 186 well suits. I wanted this for Prokofiev >: )

Sure, in the long run I'll probably throw down on something a bit more refined out of the box, but I mostly want a BBb for dance band, large Dixie bands, and orchestra. The 186 would be a little puny for these uses, and I hate the legato of the 186, myself.

To each their own... I'm not a screaming fan of the 25s either, but once in a while a good one passes through...

J.c.S. (owner of the 641 "weapon")

[Dan Schultz]

..... I can't imagine anyone picking a Mira 186 over a M-W 25 ....

I'll venture a guess that 99% of the folks on this forum even know the difference between a Meinl model 20 and a model 25.

[toobagrowl]

@ bloke - Like I said, different strokes for different folks. I just don't care much for the 186 sound. It's not bad, it's just not to my liking. From my experiences, I'd still take a YBB 641 over the 186, and take the M-W 25 (both old and the newer B&S-made models) and VMI 2103 (and it's various B&S 'stencils') over both the Mira 186 and YBB 641

..... I can't imagine anyone picking a Mira 186 over a M-W 25 ....

I'll venture a guess that 99% of the folks on this forum even know the difference between a Meinl model 20 and a model 25.

Dunno what this has to do with this, but I believe the M-W 20 was slightly smaller (smaller bell & bottom bow) than the M-W 25. I played an OLD model 20 as one of the tubas I used at the first college I attended. It had the old 'S'- links and "W. Meinl-Weston" diagonally across the front of the bell. The bell had a kranz/wreath.
It was heavily used, but still a good player. Sounded a little 'grainy' or 'rough' under the bell and up close, but rich and deep from a distance, typical of many M-W's.
For a while, I thought it was a 25, but soon realized it was a 20 because it was noticeably smaller than the other 25's I've seen and played. It was said that Bill Bell himself tested/played that particular tuba, but I dunno if that was true or just tale
I believe the M-W 20 hasn't been made in many years. I think I'd still prefer the M-W 25 (even the new ones) over it anyway, as the old 20 was a little too small for my taste.

[Lee Stofer]

I agree with Bloke that simply winding the spring another complete turn on a rotor lever is too much, but I do not like pulling the springs to tighten them either. There is a better way. And, I would not suggest trying any of this at home, just as a disclaimer.

For really good rotors, there needs to be a) a really free-spinning rotor that is not overly-heavy

b) a linkage that operates with a minimum of effort, and

c) a lever with a spring that is just tight-enough for optimum speed, but
not heavy.

I have re-worked a couple of these Yamaha Euro-copy horns, and part of the solution was making a jig, and drilling aircraft-style lightening holes in the rotors, to reduce weight. The rotating weight makes a big difference.

I also have found that the screw-together joint at the bottom of the valve lever has a plastic sleeve inside. Yes, you can get by with never having to oil that joint, but it drags and slows down the whole assembly. I have tediously worked on the plastic sleeves until the assembly fits a bit looser, then put some Hetman #15 Ball Joint Lubricant on it and assemble, and you have a truly fast, responsive linkage. The metal ball joint at the stop arm end is very good on these horns.

I then remove the lever bar rod and screw,and all of the levers. I check the lever bar rod to see that it is not distorted, damaged or dirty, and start fitting the levers back on, one at a time to check the action and feel. Springs may lose a little tension over time, but they rarely if ever wear out. For optimum action, I find that the spring end should, from it's resting point to hooking behind the bar, have to turn about 180 degrees, give or take a few degrees. A compression turn of 270 degrees will be stiff, and 360 degrees will definitely start preparing you for carpal tunnel surgery later.

To adjust the spring, I remove it from the lever, figure out what percentage of a turn (or degrees) I need to unwind it. I hold the spring coils with needle nose pliers through the coils, then grasp the spring end (about 1" worth) with key-bending pliers and unwind until the resting point of the spring end is approx. 180 degrees from where it would be compressed on the instrument. On the other hand, if the valve springs are a little too stiff and the spring ends are sufficiently long-enough, I would wind the spring just a little to get it to the 180 degree area. If there are a large number of coils and winding the spring would start to cram the coils together, I would unwind instead, even of it is most of an entire turn. I do a little at a time, to avoid messes, and when everything is working right, I trim the excess from the spring ends as needed.

To deal with end-play in the Yamaha rotors which have no provision for adjustment of this, I've found that it is easy to chuck the bottom caps in my lathe, drill out a small hole, then tap the holes with 3mm x .5 threads. Now, Mirafone adjustment screws will fit and work perfectly, and end-play is a thing of the past. And, with no end-play, the bottom bearings are more likely to stay in place.

These tubas, when repaired and set-up properly, can really get a rather Alexander-like sound. And, if you get the valves detailed-out to where they work as well as the rest of the instrument, this is quite a fine instrument. All this holds true for the YCB-661, also.

As for the Meinl-Weston 20/25 comments, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that the model 20 is closer to the size of the Mirafone 186, both 4/4 tubas, and the model 25 with it's larger body is a 5/4 tuba.

[Dan Schultz]

yep. Miraphone finally introduced the model 187 as an answer to the model 25. It seems as though I rarely see any new model 20's these days.

+1 ... yup, yup.

Here's an image of a Meinl 25 next to a Miraphone 186. I commented earlier that 99% of the folks on the forum didn't know the difference between a Meinl 20 and 25 in a joking sort of way. Lee had it right when he said the 25 had a larger bell and bottom bow. ... but didn't mention that both the 20 and 25 have the exact same bore and valve section.

I get kind of chuckle out of the bell and bottom bow being the only differences because this was done during a period when 'bigger was better' in the eyes of marketeers and school music teachers.... and also while DEG was managing the distribution of Meinl tubas in the US.

I don't think just a bigger bottom bow and bell warrants a jump from 4/4 status to 5/4 status. Either they didn't 'get it right' with the Meinl 20 and corrected the design flaw with the bigger bow and bell... or it was just a feeble attempt to garner market share over the Miraphone 186.

[toobagrowl]

The M-W 25 is more of a large 4/4+ tuba - similar in size to the Mira 187. Not quite 5/4 in size.

http://www.meinlweston.com/melton-meinl ... 5-228.html

If you look on the Meinl-Weston website, there are no model 20's to be found. Don't think those have been made in years.

Now, back to Yammy valve springs...