Yamaha 642 Neo

[JTJ]

The Tuba Exchange got one in and I have spent about an hour on the instrument using an Alliance DC2 mouthpiece, playing it and comparing it to the Besson 967.

First, it should be called the 642 Neo. That is on the case and is what is engraved on the bell. 642 only appears on the second valve. Yamaha is obviously branding it so.

It is a very good horn indeed. I liked it a lot. It sort of splits the difference in sound between the standard 642 and the Besson Sovereign -- but more to the Besson side than the old 642 side. It has that lively, buzzy resonance with a colorful sound field which is representative of the Besson and Besson clones. Nice harmonics. But it stays a little more to the strong core sound concept, which is the traditional American view of a proper euphonium sound, than does the Besson. The sound is a little less open than the Besson; the sound may be richer and more complex, though, than the Besson.

Intonation is the same old good 642 intonation and, FWIW, it has a much better high B natural (treble C#) than the Sovereign.

You can really tell this is a euphonium tweaked by and for brass banders.

I want to put some other mouthpieces in it and see how it plays, especially with the SM3U and the Heritage 3AL.

John

[JakeGuilbo]

Yamaha 642 Neo

Does it have the 842s shortened 1st valve tubing or is it still long?

[JTJ]

Yamaha 642 Neo

still long, i believe. c was a little flat even with the 1st valve slide in all the way.

[euphdude]

Yamaha 642 Neo

Since this new horn is based off of the old 642, can we assume that the leadpipe placement is similar? The 842 inexplicably put the leadpipe much lower on the bell like Willson does, requiring the player to either hold up the instrument or requiring some sort of external support like a pillow. I found that very annoying. The old 642's leadpipe placement was perfect for me, allowing a comfortable posture while resting the instrument on your lap while playing.

[JTJ]

Yamaha 642 Neo

I believe the main changes from the original 642 are in the leadpipe taper and the bell taper. I haven't played the original 642 in a while but the Neo is comfortable to hold and play.

[JTJ]

Yamaha 642 Neo

From the Yamaha Neo Facebook page:

"The new Neo is based around the design of the YEP-642 (Maestro). The main difference between the two models is the bell of the new Neo, along with the first branch which have been completely redesigned. Part of this redesign includes a new thicker gauge metal. One of the many positive effects this has had is that it enables the player to balance a deep lower register with a light upper register."

Not sure about the light upper register, but it has a deep lower register. The instrument has more blowing resistance than the traditional 642.

[JTJ]

Yamaha 642 Neo

I decided to buy the Neo and sell my Sovereign 967. The Neo does a lot right: it has a smooth, even response from top to bottom; a dark, focused sound; wonderful, deeply resonant, low and mid-range sound; a good singing high range; and great intonation.

Plus I like the more focused sound of it compared to the 967.

The downside it that it blows less freely that the 967, but that is as much a matter of playing it in than anything else.

It plays beautifully and plays with a beautiful sound. Hats off to those Brits who did the mods to the original 642.

[JakeGuilbo]

Yamaha 642 Neo

AndyCat on TubeNet posted this video from Yamaha showing the Neo Tuba and Euph with playtests:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...tKryE&feature=youtu.be

Very beautiful sounding instrument!

[RickF]

Yamaha 642 Neo

Darn, I was just up at TubaExchange this past Monday. If I had made it up there a bit earlier (before John bought it), I could have tried it out.

[JTJ]

Yamaha 642 Neo

Hi Rick, let me know when you are in town if you've got the time to visit.

I've been working to find the best mouthpiece for me on the horn; so far the Alliance 2 is working out the best, really opening up the sound. Watching the video, it looks like Walsh may also be using an Alliance.

John

[tjonp]

Yamaha 642 Neo

Originally posted by: JakeGuilbo

AndyCat on TubeNet posted this video from Yamaha showing the Neo Tuba and Euph with playtests:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...tKryE&feature=youtu.be



Very beautiful sounding instrument!

I found the comment about the lack of a trigger to be interesting. It's noteworthy that Yamaha is the only major contender that doesn't provide a trigger out of the factory, and I've always wondered if that was due to some lack of R&D on Yamaha's part, or an indication of Yamaha's confidence regarding the intonation of their instruments. Judging from his comment, it would seem to be the latter!

[RickF]

Yamaha 642 Neo

"euphdude" asked about the lead-pipe height on the Neo. Yes, it's the same height as the 642 and NOT low like it is on the 842. I downloaded some images and tried to make a comparison picture. The Neo is on the left, the center picture is the 642 (lacquer) followed by the 842 on the right.



Even from this crude picture you can tell the lead-pipe height for the Neo is the same as the 642. Also... they moved the lyre holder to the first slide... a good move I think.

[JTJ]

Yamaha 642 Neo

Rick makes a good point about the lyre holder, which was moved. When I used to play a standard 642 it would gouge my left hand; nice to get it out of the way. A small point about intonation: I have to pull the tuning slide far less than in most euphoniums to tune to 440.

[davewerden]

Yamaha 642 Neo

Originally posted by: tjonp I found the comment about the lack of a trigger to be interesting. It's noteworthy that Yamaha is the only major contender that doesn't provide a trigger out of the factory, and I've always wondered if that was due to some lack of R&D on Yamaha's part, or an indication of Yamaha's confidence regarding the intonation of their instruments. Judging from his comment, it would seem to be the latter!

That sure sounds like it - their confidence in the intonation seems quite high. I haven't tried one yet, but it would be nice to know if they have made serious changes to the intonation of the 641/2. It is not greatly improved (and it was already quite good), I still think a trigger could be a useful addition for intonation alone. However, a trigger adds weight, maintenance, cost, and affects the vibrating qualities of the horn. The first three of those factors are easy enough to consider. Some buyers of the Sterling, for example, don't feel the need for a trigger, or at least don't feel the tradeoff's are worth it. But I'm a wimp about bending pitches, even with the fairly even scale of the Sterling, and I have gotten very comfortable having the trigger available. It's hard for me to comment on the last factor. I haven't taken enough time to really know how an otherwise identical horn would respond with & without a trigger.

Frankly I can't imagine intonation so good that no player would feel a trigger is useful in some situations. Not every player would feel the need, but I think there is no way to make the horn perfect as long as we are using a 4-valve system. For the sake of argument I'll assume the 6th partial is perfect. That is not the end of the intonation story.

If the 1st valve is tuned correctly, 12 is probably sharp. But it's easy enough to tune 3 to cover for 12. But(2) if you do that, then 23 is probably going to be sharp. But(3) if you tune 3 so it centers the 23 combination, then you don't have a perfect choice between 12 and 3. And what if you actually need to play a low B natural, just above pedal Bb? It is quite sharp on every compensating horn. It's fairly easy to lip, but a trigger would help, just as a trigger can offer help with the 12 vs. 3 issue.

I've heard some players on the old Bessons do a really good job playing in tune with all the normal fingerings and no trigger, so that seems to prove that a trigger can't be called a necessity. To me, it's like the various euphonium stands, pillows, etc. You don't have to have one to play, but it can make life easier if the trade-off's aren't a problem for you. Same with a trigger.

So if I had to guess, I'd say Yamaha might feel that the weight and possible affect on vibration aren't counteracted enough when you're dealing with an already good scale. Seems like they should offer the option, though.

It's also possible they aren't happy with the design and operation of any triggers they have seen; they really like tidy engineering, and that's not a phrase I would apply to euphonium triggers.

[JTJ]

Yamaha 642 Neo

The NEO slots well, and the notes, especially in the 6th partial, can be bent into tune easily. That isn't to say a trigger would not be useful -- it would -- but it isn't needed nearly as much as with some other instruments I've played.