TubaForum.net

Did Yamaha make a YEB-201?

bloke wrote: ↑Tue Jun 21, 2022 8:14 am All three of these YBB – 321 instruments that belong to this middle school are now put back together and working well.

bloke wrote: ↑Tue Jun 21, 2022 7:01 am 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.

All that to say, I enjoyed my time with my 321.

2nd tenor wrote:I can makes guesses - some might even give correct answers - but what’s not quite clear to me is why having four non-comp valves is OK on a BBb but not on an otherwise similar Eb, the problems must surely be common?

Rick Denney wrote: ↑Wed Jun 22, 2022 7:58 am The 321 is not much different than the Besson Stratford I played for a year when coming back after grad school. I switched to a Cerveny-made Sanders cheapie and it was a breath of fresh air.

I played a borrowed 321 at a Christmas event in San Antonio pre-pandemic, and though I appreciated the use of it, it was hard to hold, had wonky-bad intonation on the Eb in the staff, and it made my tremor worse. It requires relaxation that is made impossible by the unbalanced and top-heavy ergonomics.

I admire anyone who can make it work, but why put all that effort into a 321?

Rick “not on the same planet as the 621 F tuba” Denney

bloke wrote: ↑Wed Jun 22, 2022 8:02 am

2nd tenor wrote:I can makes guesses - some might even give correct answers - but what’s not quite clear to me is why having four non-comp valves is OK on a BBb but not on an otherwise similar Eb, the problems must surely be common?

The horribly-out-of-tune/not-useful low pitches on a NON-compensating four-valve E-FLAT tuba are several steps HIGHER in pitch than with a similarly-plumbed B-flat tuba...so the "useless" range of pitches (without frantic slide-pulling or hollow-sounding difficult-to-steer "false tones") on an E-FLAT tuba lie within the commonly-written pitch range of tuba music.

Still...with 4-valve NON-compensating B-flat tubas, the 2-4 pitches are "ugly" sharp...and (with many such B-flat tubas) aren't particularly easy to adjust (by pulling slides) "on-the-fly". Some players of these B-flat tubas "split the difference" (half-ugly C/F and half-ugly E-B), and some others epically pull the #1 slide for C/F and have the 4th circuit extended long enough (if enough available length...??) to tune the B/E. ...LOL...and some others just happily-or-unwittingly play the B/E "ugly".

2nd tenor wrote: ↑Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:08 am

All that to say, I enjoyed my time with my 321.

Maybe I’m completely wrong but sometimes good enough is good enough. No doubt some reasonable instruments will cap or eventually cap what a very skilled player can do, but the great majority of other players may never reach that cap. To quite some extent I’ve also found that: ‘it ain’t what you’ve got that matters it’s what you do with it’.

bort2.0 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 22, 2022 10:26 am In high school, I used a YBB-201 (the 3-valve, BBb version). The school didn't have much (any) money for instruments and stuff, so this was "the tuba" and more-or-less the standard issue tuba for our 25(?) high-school county. Well, except for the rich schools. They got the 321 with their fancypants 4 valves.

I started playing tuba in 9th grade, and made all-county and a bunch of other "honor bands" and stuff with that YBB-201. Didn't make all-state, but didn't poop all over the audition either.

But... I absolutely HATED that tuba. Particularly, the incredibly awkward size of it. Very tall. Not particularly "big" (i.e., very 4/4) for the amount of physical size of the tuba. That enormous hard case was obnoxious.

I think I was in 12th grade before I ever was live and in-person with another "real" tuba. Once, I sat next to a Miraphone 186 player (who was blatting the hell out of it and proclaimed the tuba as a piece of Shirt). Another time, in the 6 tuba section, I was second chair, and the last two chairs were from the "rich" high school. One guy had a Ziess BBb, the other a Cerveny Piggy. They also both proclaimed their tubas as being pieces of Shirt. I didn't like any of those 3 guys.

I played my YBB-201 well, and at the limit of what I was able to do with it.

When I got to college, I was issued a school-owned B&S PT-3, and I used that throughout college. Not a perfect tuba but ergonomically a WORLD better, and sound was about 2 worlds better.

After college, I first used a Miraphone 188 when I was on a band tour in Austria. Ergonomics were perfect. Sound was perfect. Intonation was nearly perfect. I was -- and still am -- blown away by that tuba. So naturally, I *didn't* buy a 188 for another 7 or 8 years... and then once I found a great 188, I sold that and haven't gone back to it. Sometimes -- like today -- I'm questioning what in the heck I'm doing to NOT own a 188.

I am what I am... and luckily, they've made lots of 188's. But never in my life will I go back to one of these tall Yamaha tubas, I can't stand them.

bloke wrote: ↑Sat Jun 25, 2022 8:23 am A common slogan (including today in another thread in another forum) is that the "player is everything".

The overwhelming majority of cars - sold new/stock at dealerships - would not win any automobile races (even with THE BEST driver against "pretty good" drivers).

I would not be deemed - by my colleagues nor my employers - to be the tuba player that I am (such as I am) WERE it that I was using stock/school-grade equipment.