XO1632 vs XO1634

[ChicaBone]

XO1632 vs 1634?

What's your preference and why? There was a post on this a few years ago but am wondering if people have changed their opinion since then. Quality, tone, versatility etc. Thanks.

[Slydeguy]

Hopefully Philip Jones will see this and chime in....he's the cat in the know with these!

[ChicaBone]

Thanks SlydeGuy. I’m curious to know if people’s perspectives have changed about the XOs after a few years.

[atopper333]

I can’t really speak on the 1634, but I did have a 1632 for a while…it was a beautiful horn and I wish I could have kept it…bills and adulting has a way of doing that!

I also had a xo1032 for a period of time. To me, the 1632 was leaps and bounds a better horn than the 1032. While playing the 1032, the partials were all over the place, very little notes were ‘true to position.’ And no matter what mouthpiece I used, it always was sharp. The lacquer finish and solder joints were well put together, but the horn just seemed heavy.

The 1632 had none of those issues. Partials and overall tuning were great, the horn was very flexible and extremely comfortable in the high register, the slide was downright excellent (had the lt model), and it played well for me at any dynamic.

I have heard the 1632 will break up at louder volume. That wasn’t my experience, but then again, I am a novice and no where near the powerhouse that a lot of others can be when it comes to fff style dynamics…

I like newer XO horns. To me they seem a good quality instrument. I would say though, I got my 1632 for a steal and probably wouldn’t have taken a chance on it has it been around normal pricing….

[HermanGerman]

The 1632 is a nice horn for lead trombone especially when there is a microphone. Kind of 2B+
But the 1634 is my favorite horn:
like a very good King 3B but better response, more open and bigger sound...fantastic lightweight slide.
The bell is more medium weight while the 1632 is a tad too light for me..

[ChicaBone]

Thank you everyone. I recently had the opportunity to try a 1632 and it's a really nice horn. I compared it to a King 2B which I was able to play for a month. I found the sounds similar but the XO was warmer (it had a rose bell). The slide on the King was horrible though. I cleaned it, lubed it, repeated it and it was very scratchy. Not impressed for a new bone. Unless of course if there's a work in period that I am not familiar with.

My next step is to try a 1634. I think from what I've read that would be a good horn for me. Overall, I'm impressed with the XO quality and playability.

Thanks for your reponses!

[ssking2b]

Both the 1632 and the 1634 are fine horns! I prefer the 1632 with the rose/gold brass bell. The major difference is the bore size, and bell size. If you prefer a .508 bore, the 1634 is the trick. Both horns have many colors in the sound and do not break up at louder volumes, if you are supporting your air correctly! also the 1632 has a 7.5 inch bell with a bigger throat in the flair than say, a 2B or 2B+. The 1634 has an 8 inch bell and the flair throat is larger than on the 1632, to suite the 8 inch bell. I have no problem playing the 1632 in the low register, and on up into the stratosphere. I use a customized mouthpiece (11C sized, sort of, with a skeletonized exterior, and the throat ventura is only 1/64 inch smaller than the standard throat on a Bach 6.5 AL) on my horn. Others I know who play the 1632 play a Marc 8H, or 6.5AL, and one of my friends plays a Bach 6 3/4C with a throat opened to the size I use. I customized the throat for him. The horns are physically light intentionally, but they have been engineered to allow playing at mic levels thru blastissimo.

[ajeasley]

I would imagine that this would boil down to preference of .500 or .508 horns. I've heard positive things about both horns.

Personally, I had a 1634 in yellow brass for a bit that I bought used. Intonation was great, it sounded lovely (darker than a King 3B or Yamaha 891Z, to my ears), and was laughably easy to play. I'm in the process of selling it (shameless plug that it's on consignment at Austin Custom Brass) as it just didn't quite suit me.

For me, the 1634 would go from mellow to bright when I pushed it hard. This could have been a "me" problem - I was born and raised musically on the euphonium and may well be using the wrong airstream for a smaller horn.

My King 3BF can take more input without breaking up and sounds good, but the partials aren't as consistent as the XO and response isn't as good. My 891Z isn't as tonally 'interesting' to play, but the tone is more consistent across dynamics while matching the XO in ease of playing.

If you want a .508 horn, the 1634 should definitely be on the shortlist.

[ChicaBone]

Nothing wrong with a shameless plug. If it’s in Austin, TX it’s too far for me otherwise I’d would look at it. Sounds like I need to try the 1634.

Thank you for your honest thoughts.

It sounds like not too many people have changed their minds about it over the past few years. I’ve come across very few negative comments. A testament to the XO line.

[ChicaBone]

Nothing wrong with a shameless plug. If it’s in Austin, TX it’s too far for me otherwise I’d would look at it. Sounds like I need to try the 1634.

Thank you for your honest thoughts.

It sounds like not too many people have changed their minds about it over the past few years. I’ve come across very few negative comments. A testament to the XO line.

[Bleek]

I played a 1632 yellow brass for about six years in a lot of situations and I can honestly say I never really found a situation it didn’t work in. For versatility I think the yellow brass version works better in situations with more volume that needs a bit of cut. However the red brass was absolutely beautiful in small settings, but probably less versatile?

I still have it but bought a Shires MG because I’ve realised that every now and then I like to change up my horn, it keeps me interested and I enjoy it! But the 1632 is a really great horn. I hadn’t played it for almost 6 months after getting my Shires and played it the other week; very different instruments but with the price difference between those horns the XO still felt like a great trombone.