642 question

[JTJ]

I recently picked up a 642 to test. (No I still play the Miraphone 5050 as my main instrument).

Does anyone have a solution for padding that bloody lyre holder on the 3rd valve slide which gouges my left hand as I hold the instrument in proper form to pay the 4th valve. I think if my hand was sized just a little differently I could use the thing as a thumb rest. But alas, no.

John

[vito4cal]

642 question

John:

It must be hand size and you must have bigger hands than me. I find the lyre holder a very convenient place to rest my thumb. Wow the serendipity of be a short fat guy.

John Gibson

[RickF]

642 question

John,

I'm not sure how different the lyre holder location is between the 642 and 641, but on my 641 it bothered me some years ago so I added a small piece of vinyl tubing that softened it. I lost that piece of plastic but it doesn't bother me anymore as I now place my left thumb between the third valve slide... as if I was pressing down the trigger. Don't know if this helps, but see picture below:

[JTJ]

642 question

John -- good to have the right sized hands!

Rick, I'll try that, but probably would have found that position if it would work for me. But I can be slow to catch on sometimes....

If I decide to keep the 642, I guess I could have it removed at the cost of marring the finish.

Thanks!

John

[JP]

642 question

I haven't noticed this problem with the Schiller which is really similar (if not identical)to the 642. Anyone know if the lyre holder is in the same position on these two horns?

[vito4cal]

642 question

Originally posted by: JTJ

John -- good to have the right sized hands!



Rick, I'll try that, but probably would have found that position if it would work for me. But I can be slow to catch on sometimes....



If I decide to keep the 642, I guess I could have it removed at the cost of marring the finish.



Thanks!



John

John:

I am curious why you obtained a 642 when you already have a fine axe. IIRC someone on this forum called the 642 the Buick of euphs.

John "playing my Buick" Gibson

[euphdude]

642 question

someone on this forum called the 642 the Buick of euphs.

The Buick of euphs? BOO! The 642 is one of my all time favorites. I ultimately parted with it (sold it to one of Rick F's friends) not because it didn't do just about everything very well, but because of the ergonomics of the false hand piece kept aggravating my tendonitis. My Schiller is a 642 copy, and as long as I don't play any extended fast runs with it, my tendonitis doesn't bother me. I love my Schiller because it is a 642 copy. My criticisms of the horn are very minor: 1) I think the 842 responds slightly better, but the heavier gauge 642 stands up to higher volumes better and has a darker sound. 2) The 842 has improved ergonomics on the false hand piece, but put the leadpipe receiver is much lower on the bell, necessitating either having to hold the instrument up or using a pillow. 3) The Willson's intonation was ever so slightly superior, but not by much. 4) I prefer the tone of the Besson euphs slightly to the 642, but again, not by much. 5) I prefer the speed and tactile feel of the valves of the German Besson euphs over anything else I've ever tried, including my new Sterling.

Sterling euphonium owners will say my next statement is blasphemous, but I think my new Sterling is only slightly better than the 642 (or even my Schiller) with respect to all of these attributes, except for the tone. Don't get me wrong, I'm in love with my new Sterling and I got it made just the way I wanted, but with the exception of its glorious tone, the rest of the differences are pretty subtle, or even non-existant, depending other factors. The point is this dedicated amateur thinks the Yamaha 642 is one killer horn and I'd still be playing it if not for my tendonitis.

[JTJ]

642 question

The Buick of euphs was a phrase I use a while back to compare it to the GM cars of the golden age of the 1950s, when it was positioned right below the Cadillac. This was in no way a slight of the instrument.

I agree almost word for word with euphdude. That is one of the best summaries of the 642's strengths I've read. I am enjoying playing it, although it does not have all the beauty and power of the sound of the 5050, it has a superb sound. If I keep it, it would be used in small groups.

John, I am always fooling around with a 2nd euphonium. There are times when I just want to play something different. I'm lucky in that I have a good relationship with the Tuba Exchange. I buy horns from them and they sell the ones for me which i do not want to keep. In the last 5 years my main instrument has been a 642, an 842, then a Willson 2900 BT shank, then the Miraphone 5050. I bought and ultimately sold all of them except the Miraphone, which I think will be my main horn for life -- they are simply no negatives for me with that horn. And I have sold all the others. There is a mint condition used Besson 2052 on the Tuba exchange site for sale which is a horn I own. Ultimately, I decided a trigger is not for me so I took it in for sale. If you want one, I can recomend that one with no hesitation.

Now i am fooling around with a 642, which is even better than I remembered.

But the Miraphone 5050 is even better.

John

[JTJ]

642 question

Just a few notes from my experience with a new 642:

* The sound is closest to the BT shank Willson 2900 of any horn I've played. If you take the Willson sound, lighten it up some so it is not so thick, add a slightly larger bell with a bit more dispersion, have it be more flexible and free blowing, you have the 642. To me -- and I am sure some will dispute this -- it plays like a tweaked BT shank 2900.

* We all talk about the German Besson valves -- they are the best. But no one has better tuning slides than Yamaha, for fit, finish and action..

* Unlike some manufacturers, Yamaha does a good job of sending out a clean horn, without a lot of manufacturing gunk in the slides.

John

[Euphdad]

642 question

I'll throw my .02 into this discussion as the day before Thanksgiving my son and I spent about 4 hours at Dillon whittling down the choices for his replacement horn. He has played a 1967 Besson New Standard in raw brass for the past few years. Since we had a repair emergency a month or so ago he has been playing a 642 in school that's a loaner from his Euph Prof. Repairs on a 40 year old horn are rougher than on a new horn which is a problem for us as he's 8 hours from home and the repair shops we trust, also, it's become quite evident that the new horns have really made great strides in valve design, speed and smoothness. There is also the incessant polishing that comes with a raw brass horn. Anyway, we are searching for a new horn

Matt at Dillon laid out a buffet of horns for him including a 642, 842, Willson 2900 and 2950, Besson 2051 and 2052, Hirsbrunner Stealth and a Miraphone 1258. We are very interested in the Miraphone 5050 but they won't be available until Late December, early January (we have reserved one of the 5050's coming in). He tried each of the horns with several mouthpieces and obviously those that fit with his regular mouthpiece the 4ABL. Anyway, while he has liked playing the 642, the feel and the action are very nice according to him and it blows really well, he still feels that it is slightly too bright for him. The 842 was knocked out very fast as way too bright. He really didn't like either of the Willson's and felt they were a bit stuffy to blow and again too bright for his tastes. One other thing he noted that the valves were no where near the quality of the Bessons.

The Hirsbrunner is neat looking but that's about it. Sound, action, feel just not up to par with the others.

He felt both the Sovereigns were too light for his tastes. He really liked both the Prestiges. He was thrilled with the valve action and he felt that both horns had the warmth he was looking for.

The surprising horn of the lot was the Miraphone 1258 (I guess the equivalent of the Sovereign), not sure if it's still being made or not since the M5000 came out but regardless the sound was very impressive. The horn itself was a bit small for his tastes but it played with a nice rich deep throat that was pretty amazing all told. The horn's also got some real nice weight for it's size.

I had hoped that Sam's Sterling would last until we got to try it but Alas Sam found a buyer a couple weeks ago so there wasn't a Sterling in the mix. As I don't have the financial wherewithal to order a Sterling for the test and return it, etc. I doubt one will make the mix choice., Dillon doesn't carry Yorks.

Anyway, based on all this we are anxiously awaiting the 5050's arrival and it's test against the Prestiges. He'll be home on the 18th and sometime after that we'll have our decision.

[JTJ]

642 question

If he liked the 1258, but thought it was a bit small, I suspect he is going to find the 5050 is for him.

John

[Euphdad]

642 question

I do also John and we like what we've read about the 5050. My only concern is that it's a 12+ bell which might be somewhat large for solo work. Ideally of course he should probably own two euphs but finances being what they are......

Anyway we have good expectations for the 5050....

[JTJ]

642 question

I think the large bell works fine for solo work in this case. I've played three solo events on the 5050: a recital with piano, "Endearing Young Charms" arr. Dave Werden with the Triangle Brass Band, and David Gillingham's "Vintage" with the Triangle Wind Ensemble. In all cases I got good comments on sound and expressiveness. My guess is that because Demondrae is primarily a solo performer, the horn was intended and optimized as a solo instrument, although it is also a wonderful ensemble instrument.

[davewerden]

642 question

Actually, I don't find a large bell at all a problem for solos with ensemble. It works very well, and if I were still doing mostly band playing I would have the larger bell version of the Sterling.

The large bell is by nature less focused. That's not a problem in a big hall with a big group. But for solo & piano work it can be less good. In those settings, a little smaller, more focused sound works better. But with a band in a good-sized hall, a broader sound seems to cover the room better.

Since most of us only have one horn around, you can make either concept work in either situation. Now, if I can just get Sterling to build me a matched set of large & small bells along with a double case...

[Euphdad]

642 question

My son's euph prof. feels that over the next 4 years my son will be performing over 90% in an auditorium (even his juries) and that the larger belled horn will work well to fill the space. My son intends to continue on to a DMA and perhaps at that point we'll tack on a second horn.

All said and done I want him to be satisfied and happy with his choice. He's an excellent and dedicated musician and has earned that much.