Thanks guys! I'm taking a couple horns in for a cleaning this weekend and I'm going have my tech order a 621 mouthpipe assembly. I appreciate both of your thoughts on this My 321 is in really good shape so this doesn't seem like a bad investment. I'm thinking it might be better to put that money into altering the horn and perhaps improve the way it plays/sounds as a byproduct. Now that I'm on Greg Blacks, and loving them, it'd take nearly $300 to get a small shank edition of my chosen large bore mouthpiece (4.5G). When I played Storks (4.5), it wasn't a big deal to order a small shank version as they run about $70 or so new. I like my my sound on it and so do the people who call me to play it. With the 321, I've had great results sound wise with the same mouthpiece I play on large tenor. I'm not looking to size up to a mouthpiece that a full-time dedicated euphonium player might choose to match with a larger instrument. This horn could easily see someone through high. This horn saw me through middle school and early high school before I upgraded to my current horn, and I took great care of it during that time. I do a lot of pit orchestra work, so that's where 95% of my euphonium playing happens which admittedly isn't that frequent. It is four valves, non-compensating, which makes it great for the serious student musician. You can get a small shank mouthpiece with a really large (1.5G-ish or even larger) rim and cup, but the throat and backbore can only get so large before you run out of metal. It's not so much a matter of rim/cup size as it is a matter of throat and backbore. The 321 is quite a small euphonium, so I'm not really sure how much bigger you can go on the mouthpiece (vs readily available small shank pieces like Schilke 51D or Wick 4AY) before winding up with something unbalanced. If anyone has a good lacquer 321 they want to swap for a Wessex Dolce (in need of polishing…) let me know. I’ve always felt the compensating euphs were stuffy down low (including all the nice ones). It’d be perfect with the pitch finder and 5th valve. It’s also super stuffy in the compensating range. I have a Wessex Dolce that is just not cutting it pitch wise (the 321s ive played have been much better). On the way back from my last euph gig I resolved to do just this. In my opinion, it turns the YEP-321 into a lean, mean performance machine. A person might need to go through a European retailer to get a YEP-621 receiver/leadpipe.īassclef.if you can get a mouthpiece receiver/leadpipe from a YEP-621, you will be set. Availability of parts for Yamaha instruments can be unpredictable. It looks like those horns are available in Europe. I guess there was not much of a market for them here. I remember seeing three or four of those horns here in the states back in the 1990s, but then they vanished. Thanks Jim.yes, the YEP-621 was the model I was thinking of. A main tuning slide trigger (for tuning) of some kind is also a great upgrade. Add the plug-in 5th valve, and those horns compete quite well with the compensating models. Ymaha sells the 621 (large shank, non-compensating) leadpipes and it's an easy job for a good repair person to swap it for the standard pipe. Something about the large receiver opening into a smaller leadpipe made it tough to control the PP dynamics. I've also played some where just the receiver was changed on the existing leadpipe, and they played OK, but I found them hard to play soft on. Last edited by RandyL 08-03-2015 at 01:39 PM.I used to own a 321 with a Yamaha 621 leadpipe on it - great improvement. Then guess when happens when you grab the handle and pick it up? Not pretty! The clasp-style closures pretty well eliminate this problem. It is easy to close and THINK you have latched style #3 when in fact you have not pushed the top down far enough for the latches to actually catch. In my opinion, the change from #3 to #4 was very good. Personally, I'm especially interested in the date when Style #4 began to be used others may be more interested in the transitions between the older styles. Style #4 (from an auction that dates the instrument to 2009). Style #3 (from an auction that dates the instrument to 2004). Here are the cases, as far as I know in chronological order (pictures from various eBay auctions). Even better would be authoritative input from Yamaha on the question, if anyone has access to the right person within the company to inquire. If anyone is knowledgeable about the approximate date ranges for the cases pictured below, it would be a service to the euphonium community if you could share your best recollection of the dates when they were used. Of course I realize that a euphonium is not in its original case in every case (ahem). I have googled about a good bit in search of information about the years that these cases were used, as an aid to determine an age range for these instruments. From watching eBay auctions, I have noticed at least 4 different case styles that Yamaha has used with the 321 model (and perhaps others).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |