TubaForum.net

Review of the 279:
Good playing tuba. Intonation seemed very acceptable. Everything about it is what makes the Yamaha a good tuba that has been produced for decades. I still wish it had a 16" bell at the very least, maybe bigger

Review of the 179.
They didnt bring one

bloke wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2025 2:35 pm Oddly, they now offer (while still offering this model) a very similar model...which is (rather than "very similar to a YBB-621") "just like a YBB-621".

It's nomenclature is 279B. I've not sold one yet.

me...??

I'm in love with their model 379B (squatty/rotary/compact/large bore/big sound).

I constantly mourn the fact that there's really no Eb option within that concept of horn design. I LOVE my Eastman 853 Eb, but I would gladly learn to use more valves if it meant going back to rotors.

LeMark wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 2:52 pm I still wish it had a 16" bell at the very least, maybe bigger

Doesn't the Mack Brass "copy" have a 16" bell?

They only offer that design in the CC model, but yes they have the larger bell available

The TU422L has a 16” bell.

https://mackbrass.com/tu422l-3%2F4-bbb-tuba

But that one is not based on the Yamaha 621. It's a similar but different tuba

LeMark wrote: ↑Wed Feb 19, 2025 11:35 pm But that one is not based on the Yamaha 621. It's a similar but different tuba

It says it was based on the Yamaha YBB-103, and wasn't the 621 derived from that? To me, the bell profile looks nearly identical. I imagine the bows would be different, since the 103 had the long leadpipe that enters the valves "backwards" whereas the 621 has the shorter leadpipe that enters from the top.

Tubajug wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 2:54 pm

LeMark wrote: ↑Wed Feb 19, 2025 11:35 pm But that one is not based on the Yamaha 621. It's a similar but different tuba

It says it was based on the Yamaha YBB-103, and wasn't the 621 derived from that? To me, the bell profile looks nearly identical. I imagine the bows would be different, since the 103 had the long leadpipe that enters the valves "backwards" whereas the 621 has the shorter leadpipe that enters from the top.

They are different tubas in every way, except approximate size

LeMark wrote: ↑Wed Feb 19, 2025 11:35 pm But that one is not based on the Yamaha 621. It's a similar but different tuba

I dunno. I’ve never played either, but the wrap and valve layout is pretty much identical.

Mack 422 BBb:



Yamaha 621 BBb:

The bore, branches and bow are thicker on the 621 than the 103

Significant difference in the bore size for sure

bloke wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 10:41 am

sdloveless wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 7:20 am If either of you have an opportunity to A-B a 179 and 279, I'd love to hear about your impressions.

Even as I have already sold a 279, I still haven't played one.

Funny-ish story. I had a lesson tonight with a guy named Grant Moore. I took lessons from him a few years back and he had a 184. When I showed up this evening, he had a JP279C. He teaches at a nearby college and told me he got tired of dragging his horn back and forth, so he picked up this one to keep at home. I didn't try playing it, but I listened to him and thought it sounded a whole like like a 621 and quite a bit like my JP179B. A few visual differences that I noticed while sitting there. The valve buttons are larger on the 279 and have a knurled rim. The 4th valve is not dropped down like on the 179. It has no strap rings, which I thought was fairly odd considering the horn they copied. We're meeting again in a couple weeks. If I don't forget I'll ask if we can put them side by side and do a more thorough comparison.

I really don't understand the purpose of the 279B, as (best I can tell) the bore sizes, bell and body bows are identical to the 179B, the difference being that the 179B specs are all the same as the Yamaha BB-621 and - additionally - the 279B appearance/config are all the same as the BB-621...

...but why should I bother wondering...I've already sold some 279B's, just as I've sold quite a few 179B's.

The valve circuits are wrapped differently between the two, leadpipe looks higher on the 179 (?) The valves slides look more accessible on the 179. Might be more bracing on the 279

if the bore size is the same and the thickness of the brass is the same, I think I would probably like the 179 more. It's a shame they didn't bring both to TMEA so I could have done a real head to head