Any better horn than a Yamaha 354E -and if YES: Which one? And why?

[JohnD]

Hi, folks!

My Yamaha 354E plays VERY nicely, intonation and response are great.
Now, it was about 800 -900€ .

I do play bigband and 1st chair sinfonic brass band, semi-pro. Mouthpiece is an .104" / 26.5mm Klier Exclusive 4. Fat sound.

Which other small bore justifies a price 3 -4 times as high? And why in your opinion?

Thanks, John

[hyperbolica]

A lot of people have nice things to say about the 354, but I find some of the Yamahas to be a bit dull, or one dimensional. It's all personal taste. I'd play a lot of small-ish horns before the 354. Conn 6h, 48h, 32h, 78/9h, 8h, King 3b, Getzen 3508, 1050, Olds Recording, Martin 4501 Urbie Green, etc. You can find all of these used for the price you mention or less, except maybe the 3508.

If I were to get a new horn and spend real money, I'd get a Greenhoe GC2 or a Rath R1, R2 or R10, don't know which. The greenhoe in particular just has a comfortable feeling, like it's an extension of you, without the quirks that can come with other horns. I'm generally a Conn guy, but the Greenhoe was modeled with a Conn sound in mind, and the Brits are famous Conn lovers, which the Rath horns seem to inherit.

Generally, there's also a difference between bigband and brass band. Bigband you probably want a brighter sound on the upper parts, and symphonic band a broader, darker sound usually associated with a larger bore. Here in the US there's this annoying trend for people to play big horns in big band, so the sound gets lost easily. Likewise, small horns in symphonic band don't blend as well, and tend to be obnoxiously harsh.

So, "better"? Better is in the eye of the beholder. You have to try a lot of stuff to be able to compare for yourself.

[spencercarran]

If it works, it works. My college marching band bought a batch of 354s one year and I was surprised at how well and easily they played - not at all like what I was expecting from a "student" instrument. Held up solidly when I raised the dynamic level, could still produce a decently dark sound. I wouldn't have hesitated to take it into a serious symphonic band setting.

There's fancier horns out there, and some that may rank higher in anyone's individual preference, but I don't think there's anything sufficiently "wrong" with the Yamaha that it's critical to replace it if it feels comfortable for you and conductors/section-mates aren't complaining about your sound.

[Digidog]

A question such as this, comes down to individual preferences.

I played the same 354 as my very first horn at 10 all the way through high school, until I was admitted to college at 23. I really liked it in many ways, but as my range progressed I found that my way of playing didn't work with the horn. In the upper registers my tone lost energy and core, and every Yamaha I've played have behaved like this to me - through a 695, to a 891 ending with a 697.

The 354 is a great horn for its price and - to me - for specific use, like as a combo horn or for medium- to low-register use.

[Briande]

Is the 354 a good horn for its usual price? Yes. “Are any better”? Yes. Lots of better horns (as mentioned by hyperbolica.)