The brass instrument optimization program presented in Part I has been used in a variety of practical cases, demonstrating its power for the improvement of existing brass instruments. In the first and possibly most difficult step, bore lists describing the instrument’s geometry have to be obtained. Sometimes data can be imported directly from a CAD system, otherwise mechanical measurements must be done. Next, the dimensions which are to be varied by the program have to be specified. Constraints can be defined. Specific parametric modification rules representing typical working steps of instrument makers (inserting sleeves, narrowing and widening of certain areas) can be applied. Finally, optimization targets have to be defined. Any combination of intonation, impedance magnitude matching, shape, or envelope goals in user-defined frequency intervals is possible. The optimizer will search for the best possible compromise. During the optimization run, all activities can be observed on screen, and target parameters can be adjusted dynamically. In practical examples, real instruments have been optimized and the proposed modifications have been performed by an instrument maker. Measurements and evaluation results made before and after the modifications have been compared. It was shown that the actual performance improvement matches the predicted one well.