TubaForum.net

OK...

The LAST of the three HATE-horns bottom bow is beat to $h!t (just as were the other two).

These (at their COMPLETELY stages) are VERY EXTENSIVE, YET "good enough" repairs, and I need to get this p.o.s. fixed and in the fixed-pile.

I usually show you pictures of when I'm COMPLETELY DONE with something...but here are some rare INTERMEDIATE REPAIR pictures.
...and I STILL didn't show any BEFORE pics...I'm always in a hurry (so you're not going to see many stages or videos from me...NEVER - EVER), but - this time - you're seeing at least this:

Here's the bottom bow (NOPE: NOT the one from the 321 instrument being repaired but) from my hopeless-crap YBB-201, that was in the attic.

This is the one that had the completely-closed small side, BUT the main curve (including the cap) was in MUCH better shape than the one on the YBB-321 to be repaired.

...so I beat out the DOUBLE-LAYER (with cap) bare-handed (with a curved rod with a c. 1-1/4" flattish ball screwed on to the end (wham-wham-wham...etc.) until the bottom bow cap (and bottom bow) double-layered were good enough to (tomorrow: after sleep, coffee, and breakfast) run through the dent machine.

the completely-closed small end (with compound creases): I annealed it, Mrs. bloke did some rebound work, I did some hammering (with a ball pein hammer...not a dent hammer) and (so far) it's looking thing good. With another annealing treatment, and a quick "good enough" going over with the dent machine, this formerly-horrible (probably, the reason the instrument was discarded by some school...??) bottom bow will be ready to transplant on to the instrument.

OK: WHY didn't I just fix the 321 tuba's OWN bottom bow...??
---------------------------
> because the double-layer part of it (with the cap) was totally creamed. Yorkboy GAVE me (thank-you) a "pretty good" condition used 201/321 cap, but I STILL would have had to repair all that $h!t and solder on the other cap...TOO MUCH WORK/TIME !!!

Again, this p.o.s. YBB-321 has less broken/ruined stuff, so (I'M REALLY HOPING) it will be done by TOMORROW, and I can move on to other schools' busted stuff.

Making forward progress...

OK...
Here are some pictures of the (all three of them were horrible, but...) the horrible bottom bow that I just pulled off of 321-from-Hell #3.

Also are pictures of the (also FORMERLY horrible, but more quickly repairable) bottom bow from the garbage model 201 I pulled down from the attic. This thing (the DONOR model 201 REPAIRED-good-enough bottom bow) isn't going to win any beauty contests, but this is as much as I'm going to do. There's MUCH more to do to this smashed-up instrument, and limited remuneration.

The one pulled off 321 #3 (which will be tossed in the junkpile is the upper one, and for formerly-attic-junk one (which will be installed on the instrument) is the lower one:


Here's the replacement one (the FORMERLY-CLOSED-FLAT small size)


upper view of the repaired attic one, that's going on 321 #3
I had to do SOME repair of the capped/double-layer part, but not as much as I would have had to on the original one:


side view of the same:


last picture of #3's ORIGINAL bottow bow, which will be tossed in the junk:


Not everything I do is this amazing "Check this out...This old beat-up thing looks JUST LIKE NEW !!! " stuff.
Quite a bit of what I do is "Hey bloke, this needs to be good enough " stuff.

Yes, I can imagine for the school market, getting things back to ‘reasonably tuba shaped’ is the name of the game. Anything past that requires LOT of time. Whereas getting it from ‘really nice’ back down to ‘reasonably tuba shaped’ takes a kid very little time. That would definitely be a losing battle in any band’s budget, unless accompanied by one heck of a lesson in responsibility for said student and their parents.

The small side of this bow was slightly too large. I didn’t beat anything down through it to stretch it, but nevertheless it’s a little bit too large. I just annealed it and worked it down with a big rounding ring. Now, it’s going through the dent machine, again.
I’m so tired of these ____ things.

I got the small side of the 201 bottom bow on to the 321, and it doesn’t look forced; it looks right.
The large side of the 201 bow was a little bit loose, and I had to fake it the other way.
these old only-four-serial number Yamaha tubas: I wonder how consistent they were…??

Custom!

This one is all back together, and just needs some bell dent removal and a look at the valves. The casing knuckles on this one were worse than those on the other two, so repairing the knuckles made the valves a little draggy - which I’ll need to remedy today.

I pushed out a few huge dents from the lower part of the bell section, but I’m going to do most of the bell dent removal with the tuba completely soldered back together, so I don’t break braces loose - where the bell is attached to the everything else.

As much as I think these instruments are a bad fit for schools – being tall and top-action (and nowhere near as titanic as the old Bessons that they copied), I do agree with their decision to shorten the number three slide assembly when they came out with the subsequent “-II” version. Those long tubes take a beating – as well as the braces that support them – 100% of the time.

Just to add balance to the thread: the e flat 321 really is a good horn. Compellingly sound, easy facility,great price used for amount of horn. Could use a 5th valve,which can be had if you try hard and/or get lucky. I just couldn’t/didn’t want to spend the effort learning e flat fingerings. The 321 euphonium: most people know about it. Really a lot of horn for the money, especially used. 5 th valves available if you try hard. Easy to play, nice sound. A million of them out there. So . ALL 321’s aren’t hell. I,also, have no use for the 321 b flat. So many better options available for less, especially new pricing considered.

Agree that the YBB-321 not a very good choice for schools. Too tall, heavy, and not ergonomic at all. I’ve played a few over the years, and they all blew stuffy and sounded lackluster. The problem, as I see it, is that band directors have somehow been brainwashed to think Yamaha can do no wrong. I think it’s a lot like the early days of personal computers, there were many brands and businesses didn’t know what to buy, but then IBM got into the game and businessmen got the mindset that “nobody ever got fired for buying IBM”. Likewise, Yamaha instruments have become the knee jerk reflexive default for band directors. On top of all the other problems I noted above, the biggest problem I saw in my career was the plastic valve guides, the ring shaped ones that sit atop the valves. They wear easily and were always jumping the slot. And of course the kid would not tell you something was wrong and just kept playing, resulting in a tone akin to farting into a garbage can.

Most everyone, now, does top-mounted plastic guides.

Kids trash 'em, but (as with a bunch of stuff) they would last most adults a lifetime.

YOUR topic: brand-buying

It's really easy to (rather than researching various makes/MODELS to just buy an oft-repeated brand name.
After all...band directors aren't spending their own money, so what if better stuff costs about 40% as much, and the COMPLETE financial collapse (as people are - still, for the moment - are still able to pretend that dollars have some sort of value) hasn't yet quite made itself apparent to those who aren't paying attention - and/or to those who (until they find themselves without) don't care.

Those who make me chuckle the most are those who state that they don't want any Chinese instruments, and then buy all Yamaha.

Congrats to Dave Fedderly for "stepping out of the way" (ie. not being a shopkeeper, when the shitstorm really hits) at 23:59:59

Judging by the amount of work done to these 321’s each one must earn Bloke a packet … Here in the UK I had just a few hours work done on my Sovereign and I’m trying to forget what it cost me, but maybe the School's get a better rate than a one off customer.

In a way the 321 sounds like the gift that never stops giving, ideal if there’s no other more interesting work. Fix the 321, get paid, give back to school , give to children, children break it, send it back for repair and so on. Yes, it’s repetitive work but it’s all income, the work is familiar and it’s paid for. Some kids might even learn how to play a Tuba in the process.

Is the economy about to go down the pan? Inflation is bad here and will erode the buying power of what money my Mrs and I have managed to set aside, oil is a stupid price and the badly managed pandemic knocked the economy. I don’t see a lot of joy ahead, but I could be wrong,

Is the 321 a good choice for school use? I’m thinking that it’s big and heavy so it’s probably not ideally suited to teenagers - not all are strong, not all have perfect co-ordination and not all have much idea about spacial awareness. Is Yamaha a bad choice for schools? We pretty much don’t have schools buying instruments anymore and certainly nothing that would even remotely cost what a Yamaha BBb costs.

Just to add balance to the thread: the e flat 321 really is a good horn.

I suspect that you’re right there and I’d quite like one. I’ve seen a few on-line videos of a particular one being played quite well by some old guy in Germany (?) and I’m of the rare opinion that compensating valves are more weight and bother than they’re worth.

This band director has been teaching at this middle school so long, that she's become an old friend.
I went to her wedding, and she had cried in front of me, when a past principal did something to screw up her band program.
To give you an idea of how long ago...She's stopped dying her hair.

These were done on budgets with limits of only $500 per invoice/instrument (a trip BACK to the grocery to buy a FEW THINGS that were left off the list, plus a half-tank of gas), so these were sort of 50/50 "being paid" and "working for free"...with the paid part being charged at 50% normal charge...(I guess 3/4ths off. )

Each year, they only have been 'stuck back together".
They had all gotten to the "everything moving that isn't supposed to, and nothing moving that's supposed to" stage.
I'm a bit of a soft touch.

I don't hate them because of all the donated time; I would have hated them just as much at full rate.

...and Yamaha pistons (though I'm not a fan of Yamaha instruments in general) seem to be pretty durable...These tubas' pistons ACTUALLY have worn/pitted pistons.

Wasn’t the YBB-321 the poster child for Yamaha setting up production in mainland China? Like possibly as early as the 1980s, when the third valve plumbing got rerouted?

I’ve never played one that impressed me, but my high school having one (and 3 x 2340s) gave me early exposure. The one at my high school sucked, and a couple others I played sucked when I ran across them in high school and college, so I never sought them out on purpose.

Almost everyone that I’ve run across that was using a YBB-321 instantly sounded better on something else.

Nonetheless, that horn has likely made Yamaha a lot of money over the years.

Yes to all.
Probably the only Yamaha tuba I dislike more is the BB-641.
My favorite of theirs is the defunct EB-631, and I think they make the best Yorkaphone - even though people who have never played one and who have never played the original York disagree vehemently.

bloke wrote: ↑Sun Jun 19, 2022 6:45 pm Yes to all.
Probably the only Yamaha tuba I dislike more is the BB-641.
My favorite of theirs is the defunct EB-631, and I think they make the best Yorkaphone - even though people who have never played one and who have never played the original York disagree vehemently.

As I understand it the YEB-631 and it’s replacement model are copies of a (EEb) Besson Sovereign - alternative bell sizes and lead-pipe height are / have been available. IMHO the Besson design was better in the smaller bell sizes.

I’m wondering, is Yamaha’s YEB-321(EEb) a copy of some other instrument?

I would have to say that the YEB – 321 is a non-compensating copy of the old 15 inch bell compensating Besson E-flat, in the same way that why BB – 321 is a non-compensating copy of the old 17 inch bell (later 19) compensating Besson B-flat.

I’ve never found much use for a four-valve non-compensating E-flat anything (vs. a three valve).
That 15” bell Yamaha tuba plays well, but I don’t see that the fourth valve does it much good.

bloke wrote: ↑Mon Jun 20, 2022 7:49 am I would have to say that the YEB – 321 is a non-compensating copy of the old 15 inch bell compensating Besson E-flat, in the same way that why BB – 321 is a non-compensating copy of the old 17 inch bell (later 19) compensating Besson B-flat.

I’ve never found much use for a four-valve non-compensating E-flat anything (vs. a three valve).
That 15” bell Yamaha tuba plays well, but I don’t see that the fourth valve does it much good.

Just clarification for me please (I see few Yamahas here)
The YBB 321 is the same as a YBB 201 but with four instead of three non-comp valves?
The YEB 321 is the same as a YEB 201 but with four instead of three non-comp valves?
All four instruments are based on Bessons / Boosey and Hawkes Imperial, but with the valves made non-compensating.

Intonations issues aside for my use (in a reasonably able but community based Brass Band) I rarely if ever need the fourth valve for its low range, I play an Eb Bass and low pitched notes (beyond concert pitch Bb?) are supplied by the BBb’s - the bass line is split and chorded between us. Reduced low range excepted I’m wondering whether the simpler airflow three valve instruments actually play better than the four valve instruments?

Speaking with regards to the YBB-201, it doesn’t play any better than the YBB-321. They both stink.

The YEP-201 doesn’t really play any better than the YEP-321 either. But those both play pretty well.

In both cases, the 3 valve horn is obviously lighter.

Did Yamaha make a YEB-201? If so, I’ve not seen one to my recollection.

I don’t know of a three valve version, unless it was marketed in the UK and places like that for elementary school students and nowhere else…(??)

That my only point was that I don’t think a non-compensating fourth valve on an E flat instrument does much good. I’ve owned a few sousaphones and tubas like that. The 2-4 A and E were still sharp, low A-flat was no good, A random low G worked, but nothing else down low worked - until E-flat. I might’ve been able to do something with an extra long 4th circuit, but they were never long enough to pull out that far.

Even the factory fifth valve on the YEB – 381 wasn’t the correct length, and therefore wasn’t any good for anything.