Page 2 of 2

Re: Eastman 534 vs the 562

Posted: Mon Apr 01, 2024 7:17 am
by MikeMason
I’m 3 months in on my Eastman 825vg. Very happy. Using a Laskey 32b. Good fit for me. I see no need for a c tuba for my needs

Re: Eastman 534 vs the 562

Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2024 12:27 pm
by rodgeman
I am very happy with mine.

Re: Eastman 534 vs the 562

Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2024 11:57 pm
by Doc
The only reason I sold the 562 was to get a 496. Otherwise, it was a very good instrument.

Re: Eastman 534 vs the 562

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2024 5:52 am
by LeMark
Hey doc, can you compare those two directly? What do you feel the hagen does better than the 562? Am I right in saying they feel similar, but the miraphone is larger?

.

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2024 12:38 pm
by Dents Be Gone!
I agree, guys. This is the way to go.

Re: Eastman 534 vs the 562

Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2024 11:52 pm
by Doc
LeMark wrote: Sat Apr 06, 2024 5:52 am Hey doc, can you compare those two directly? What do you feel the hagen does better than the 562? Am I right in saying they feel similar, but the miraphone is larger?
The Hagen is bigger in most respects. It plays like a 5/4 tuba, whereas the 562 plays like a 4/4+. The Hagen has a deeper, richer, broader sound; it isn’t a 497, but it can punch pretty big. The 496 has a larger bore, and I prefer that.

The Miraphone valves are superb. And my 496 is a 5v, whereas the 562 was a 4v. I don’t require a 5th valve on a BBb, but I am SO glad I got one. The new upgraded model based on the 562 with 5v and bigger bell will likely be a really good instrument, but for a few dollars more, the 496 should be considered.

I also like that I can easily get a variety of sounds from the 496. Soft and round, light and flowing, or a true angry kaisertuba/daisy-cutter. The 562 is pliable in terms of sound, but not nearly as much as the 496.

The intonation and response on the 496 are superior, but the 562 was VERY good.

While there are no flies on the 562, the 496 felt, looked, and sounded like an upgrade. I do not regret getting the 496 at all. Had I not been able to afford it, I would have kept rocking the 562.

Re: Eastman 534 vs the 562

Posted: Wed Apr 10, 2024 2:52 pm
by peterbas
.

Re: Eastman 534 vs the 562

Posted: Wed Apr 10, 2024 3:37 pm
by hrender
Dillon's here in the US lists a 825G for $7,922.40 (lacquer) although they have a demo horn for $4995.00. They list a 496 for $10635.00.

Re: Eastman 534 vs the 562

Posted: Wed Apr 10, 2024 4:00 pm
by bloke
peterbas wrote: Wed Apr 10, 2024 2:52 pm Isn't the price difference a lot greater?
Here in Europe a 496 costs 11.000€ for a 4 valve.
Eastman 562 is 6.000€ and the 825VG (5 valve) is 6.700€, the difference is a lot more than a few dollars.
Different parts of the world have different price structures.
I continue to claim (ok: OPINION) that Yamaha stuff (based on what it is, and how much of it is built) is roughly 110% overpriced (here)...YET they have name recognition.
That having been said (based on what I've seen online, and I'm prepared to be corrected) that just about the most expensive place to buy Yamaha stuff is Japan.

Re: Eastman 534 vs the 562

Posted: Wed Apr 10, 2024 4:08 pm
by peterbas
.

Re: Eastman 534 vs the 562

Posted: Wed Apr 10, 2024 6:49 pm
by OhTubaGuy
The US site only shows a CC version of the Thunderbird. My bandmate plays one and loves it. He says it’s just as nimble as a 4/4 CC, but has the output of the 6/4 when needed.

Mack’s US site lists their YorkaZo 5000 5/4 as the largest BBb option:
https://mackbrass.com/tu5000-5%2F4-bbb-tuba-zo

.

Posted: Sun Apr 14, 2024 5:01 am
by Dents Be Gone!
I agree, guys. This is the way to go.

Re: Eastman 534 vs the 562

Posted: Sun Apr 14, 2024 5:51 am
by LeMark
It does seem to be very easy to avoid paying full retail on them. I certainly didn't