First post. Other than the leadpipe placement, has anybody compared an Yamaha 842s to the relatively new 642ii? Given that the instruments were the same market price of $5000 (new 642ii vs. ebay 842 - appears new), what are your thoughts?
First post. Other than the leadpipe placement, has anybody compared an Yamaha 842s to the relatively new 642ii? Given that the instruments were the same market price of $5000 (new 642ii vs. ebay 842 - appears new), what are your thoughts?
Sit tight and wait for the really informed responses ... meanwhile, I can tell you that there has been a good bit of discussion on the Forum about the 642ii, and some who have tried it are quite taken with it. Until the replies come, you could search back through the 'euph brands' discussion threads and start informing yourself! You won't have to go back too far to find what you're seeking.
Totally different instruments, ergonomically and in terms of sound and response. I've owned both and have decided that I like the 642 Neo (642II) better then the 842: I love the Neo sound. I only liked the 842 sound.
if at all possible, play both of them. If you said you absolutely had to get a euph for brass band, you would try the 642 Neo first, because it was developed by brass band players for brass band use: it blends wonderfully well with other brass. If you want an instrument for American wind band, either could be considered. If bling is an issue, the 842 with its gold trim wins.
John
Echoing, what everyone else has mentioned so far....adding that the 842 supposedly has reinforced bow-bend plate and there has been some discussion regarding the ergonomics of the 842s lead pipe placement. Still, try them both if you are serious.
Euphs:
Miraphone 5050 Ambassador
Wessex Travel (Tornister) Euphonium 'Maly' ER154
Yamaha 201 Baritone
Mp: Wick SM4 Ultra X
Groups:
The San Diego Concert Band
Thank you for your thoughtful comments. Thanks, JTJ, for relating your experiences with both instruments and your opinion of the "neo" sound.