42B v. 88H again!
Glen McDowell
Having read most of the historical info on this subject on Deja, I'm curious
as to whether Bach has gotten their QA/QC act together. Also, what are/were
their problems, workmanship/build quality, inconsistant tonal quality, or
perhaps all this and more? I've heard that the new Conns have improved
vastly from offerings of the recent past. For me, mail order is a viable
option, so the quality issues are significant to me.
Thanks,
Glen
Speed RacerX2K
there will be one real gem. When I bought my 36 I had to try about 5 or 6
different horns and a bunch of horn slide cominations. As for the new Conn's,
I'd have to say they are very nice horns. In my opinion they are nothing
compared to the horns from the 70's or so but alot of people like them. Hope
it helps a little.
Sacqueboutier
> Bach's Q\C is still not that good. But I'd say for every 5 lemmings you find
> there will be one real gem. When I bought my 36 I had to try about 5 or 6
> different horns and a bunch of horn slide cominations.
Remember that a horn that is bad for one may be good for someone else.
There are few really bad Bachs, but you will have to play several to find
one that suits you. That is true of any brand name. Edwards offers a
large variety of combinations for this very reason.
> As for the new Conn's,
> I'd have to say they are very nice horns. In my opinion they are nothing
> compared to the horns from the 70's or so but alot of people like them. Hope
> it helps a little.
The newish Conns are quite nice, but I still can't play them as loud as
a Bach or Edwards without reaching the breaking point. In the US, Bach
and Edwards are fairly standard in the *major* orchestras. The exceptions are
LAPO where they play Conns, but much altered Conns from the early years...
modified by Minick...and Cleveland, where they play Benge (!). The rest
play Bach and Edwards. If you want to sound like them or get jobs in
their orchestras, you need to play similar equipment.
--
Don Patterson
(who plays an Edwards in the US Marine Band)
* Trombonist
* "The President's Own"
* United States Marine Band
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Dale J. Cruse
news:39034E91...@dclink.com...
>If you want to sound like them or get jobs in
> their orchestras, you need to play similar equipment.
>
> --
>
> Don Patterson
> (who plays an Edwards in the US Marine Band)
Don,
I'm really surprised to hear you say that. So, if I buy an Edwards, will I
get to sound like you? I agree that if you are the caliber of player to win
an audition with one of the major symphony orchestras (or even the major
military music ensembles), that you will want to play on a like-modeled
instrument. But for someone of your standing in the trombone community to
postulate on a message board like this, read by many young, influential high
school and college students, that to sound like your favorite player, you
should play the same equipment is dangerous. I played a Holton Lewis Van
Haney model bass trombone, studied with Ed Anderson, Jared Rodin, and
Charlie Vernon, and I didn't sound like any of them - I sounded (in terms of
tone quality) closer to Dave Taylor. Why? It had nothing to do with my
equipment, it had to do with the sound that I had in my head being projected
out the end of the bell. I listened to Taylor's stuff a lot and his sound
was what I had in my head when I played. If I may say so, I think that on
this list, we concentrate on equipment talk waaayyy too much. I say forget
about "playing the trombone," and concentrate more on "playing music." My
$.02 worth.
Dale J. Cruse
(who doesn't play an Edwards and isn't in the Marine Band)
actikid
> I'm considering getting back into playing after a long (30 year) hiatus.
> Having read most of the historical info on this subject on Deja, I'm curious
> vastly from offerings of the recent past.
I have been hearing multiple cases where people go to large Bach and
Conn dealers in order to sort through many parts until they can find a
combination that is in good condition. It is one thing if the purpose
of the expedition is to try different combinations of features, all of
which are manufactured with consistent quality. But the stories I hear
suggest that there are a lot of bad slides out there. In particular,
there seem to be many complaints of Conn slides that stick in 2nd or 3rd
position. The really uncanny thing about this is that some folks seem
to accept this as normal. Apparently some people think it is OK to be
sold an instrument that must take a trip to the Slide Doctor before it
can really be used.
I don't have any first hand knowledge of these situations. Personally I
would be happy to buy either a 42B or an 88H at the right price, but I
would insist on it being delivered in perfect condition.
Bobby Knight
<clip>
> If I may say so, I think that on this list, we concentrate on equipment >talk waaayyy too much. I say forget about "playing the trombone," and >concentrate more on "playing music." My $.02 worth.
>
> Dale J. Cruse
> (who doesn't play an Edwards and isn't in the Marine Band)
What a breath of fresh air! I was told, at an early age, to study
English and history as much as the trombone. The reasoning was that
there is nothing more boring than talking about mouthpieces, trombones
and sticky slides. It has been my great fortune to work with the best
in this field, and I can tell you that conversations limited to those
subjects are a subject of great derision. They just aren't the answer
to being a player!
bk
actikid
> I'm really surprised to hear you say that. So, if I buy an Edwards, will I
> get to sound like you?
I didn't read nearly as much into Don's comments as you did. I took his
message to be mainly a factual observation that most of the North
American symphonic sections are playing either Bach or Edwards. For
better or worse, the pattern seems to be that a certain type of
equipment is expected in certain circles.
I completely agree with your point that the horn does not make the
player. But it is also a fairly well accepted point that 88Hs can't be
pushed as hard as the traditional Bach/Edwards configuration (i.e. heavy
yellow brass bells, orchestra weight slides, squared slide bows, etc.).
The 88H is a completely different instrument, IMHO, and I wouldn't find
it objectionable for an employer to specify the type of equipment.
actikid
>
> This is all good but, unfortunately does nothing to obviate my problem of
> having no instrument upon which to be "playing music". Your kind and
> considered response will be sincerely appreciated.
Touche! To your original question, what to buy/consider. I wouldn't
necessarily avoid the Bachs or Conns even though their quality may be
less consistent than one would like to see. But if you buy a new one,
insist on nothing short of perfection, considering the amount of money
you would be spending.
However, you might want to consider another path. If you have not been
playing for thirty years, I would expect it could be another 2-3 years
before you will be at a point where your playing is limited by the
horn. You might consider a "step-up" horn from the Blessing, Yamaha, or
Getzen line while you are working yourself back into shape. The quality
from all three of these companies seems to be good and you can save
yourself a few bucks while you decide what you really want to play in
the long run.
In particular, if you like the 88H, a lot of folks are pleased with the
Blessing B88 at about half the price.
Glen McDowell
This is all good but, unfortunately does nothing to obviate my problem of
having no instrument upon which to be "playing music". Your kind and
considered response will be sincerely appreciated.
Thanks again,
Glen
Bobby Knight <bkn...@verio.net> wrote in message
news:3903A379...@verio.net...
Dale J. Cruse
stupidest people in the world meeting and immediately asking each other what
size drumsticks they use. I'm not saying any of us are stupid, but too much
equipment talk makes us all dull boys and girls. Apologies to Glen, who we
obviously have not helped solve his dilemma.
Dale
Neal
savings from a pro horn. If yu are interested in a new horn, and nothing
else will do, then buy what meets your expectations and your wallet. But if
you want the best horn, used or new, that you can afford, look at used pro
horns. But still play as many as possible, to see what feels good to you. If
you are going to play for more than 2 or 3 years, you ought to put your
money into a horn from which you could get a return on your investment
should you want a slightly different horn in the future.
It seems you're looking at symphonic trombones, so there's no question
either the 42B or 88H would be suitable, depending on your situation and
tastes. The Bach is generally a "louder" instrument than the Conn, meaning
that it can play soft, but it responds better at loud dynamics than the
Conn. Some feel the Conn tone is superior. Ultimately, you need to play the
horns before making a decision. It matters little what our lips say about
your future horn.
actikid wrote in message <3903C574...@my-deja.com>...
Speed RacerX2K
>Conn dealers in order to sort through many parts until they can find a
>combination that is in good condition. It is one thing if the purpose
>of the expedition is to try different combinations of features, all of
>which are manufactured with consistent quality. But the stories I hear
>suggest that there are a lot of bad slides out there. In particular,
>there seem to be many complaints of Conn slides that stick in 2nd or 3rd
>position. The really uncanny thing about this is that some folks seem
>to accept this as normal. Apparently some people think it is OK to be
>sold an instrument that must take a trip to the Slide Doctor before it
>can really be used.
>
>I don't have any first hand knowledge of these situations. Personally I
>would be happy to buy either a 42B or an 88H at the right price, but I
>would insist on it being delivered in perfect condition.
Has anyone in this group ever sent there slide into the "Slide Doctor?" If so
you anyone give me some feedback on how good the work done is? Is it really
worth the $60?
Neal
term in general. have a guy who fixed up my slide for a LOT less than $60.
Speed RacerX2K wrote in message
<20000424134702...@ng-fd1.aol.com>...
Sacqueboutier
> "Sacqueboutier" <don...@dclink.com> wrote in message
> news:39034E91...@dclink.com...
>
> >If you want to sound like them or get jobs in
> > their orchestras, you need to play similar equipment.
> >
> > --
> >
> > Don Patterson
> > (who plays an Edwards in the US Marine Band)
>
> Don,
>
> I'm really surprised to hear you say that. So, if I buy an Edwards, will I
> get to sound like you?
You are reading things into my statement that weren't there. I don't
appreciate that. Besides, you most likely would sound much better
than me. :-)
> I agree that if you are the caliber of player to win
> an audition with one of the major symphony orchestras (or even the major
> military music ensembles), that you will want to play on a like-modeled
> instrument. But for someone of your standing in the trombone community to
> postulate on a message board like this, read by many young, influential high
> school and college students, that to sound like your favorite player, you
> should play the same equipment is dangerous.
I disagree. I think it's sound advice.
> I played a Holton Lewis Van
> Haney model bass trombone, studied with Ed Anderson, Jared Rodin, and
> Charlie Vernon, and I didn't sound like any of them - I sounded (in terms of
> tone quality) closer to Dave Taylor. Why? It had nothing to do with my
> equipment, it had to do with the sound that I had in my head being projected
> out the end of the bell.
...and the alloy of the bell and the shape and flare of the bell and the bore
of the
horn and ...well...there are a lot of factors in the equipment...just as many
as in
your and my faces.
> I listened to Taylor's stuff a lot and his sound
> was what I had in my head when I played. If I may say so, I think that on
> this list, we concentrate on equipment talk waaayyy too much. I say forget
> about "playing the trombone," and concentrate more on "playing music." My
> $.02 worth.
--
Don Patterson
* DCP Music Printing
* Professional Computer Music Typeset
* Music Arrangements
* don...@dclink.com
Sacqueboutier
> "Dale J. Cruse" wrote:
> > I'm really surprised to hear you say that. So, if I buy an Edwards, will I
> > get to sound like you?
>
> I didn't read nearly as much into Don's comments as you did. I took his
> message to be mainly a factual observation that most of the North
> American symphonic sections are playing either Bach or Edwards. For
> better or worse, the pattern seems to be that a certain type of
> equipment is expected in certain circles.
Thank you for noting that.
>
>
> I completely agree with your point that the horn does not make the
> player. But it is also a fairly well accepted point that 88Hs can't be
> pushed as hard as the traditional Bach/Edwards configuration (i.e. heavy
> yellow brass bells, orchestra weight slides, squared slide bows, etc.).
> The 88H is a completely different instrument, IMHO, and I wouldn't find
> it objectionable for an employer to specify the type of equipment.
Please allow me to reiterate that I find a good Conn to be a wonderful
horn. If I could find a good condition early 60s vintage Conn, I would
buy it a heartbeat (if not too expensive). Superb for solo and chamber
work and find for orchestral when excessive volume isn't needed.
My earlier observations are really just that, observation. It is a fact
that the most prominent horns in the major US orchestras are
Bach and Edwards. Did I say they were the "best" horns? No.
However, that sound is expected of you when you show for those
auditions. (The principal player in the USMB doesn't even like Edwards!)
BTW, after rereading my sig in the first post, I realized that it did come
across as a little snotty. I apologize.
Sacqueboutier
> I assume the original poster was referring to Larry Minnick on the West
> Coast. He's the one who customizes the trombones of the L.A. Philharmonic
> section. He did some amazing work on the horn I played (though admittedly
> before I bought it).
Unfortunately, I think I heard that he passed on last year. Is this true?
Dilshad Kasmani
The "Slide Doctor" is Dr. John Upchurch. He does some amazing work!
I've had one slide worked on by him, and one slide with him now. He charges
$65, but that includes a complete cleaning, dent removal, tube
straightening, and Teflon coating.
I can't say enough good things about the quality of his work. He's a great
guy to boot! His webpage is at www.slidedr.com .
Good luck,
Dilshad
"Sacqueboutier" <don...@dclink.com> wrote in message
news:390504D1...@dclink.com...
Dale J. Cruse
Coast. He's the one who customizes the trombones of the L.A. Philharmonic
section. He did some amazing work on the horn I played (though admittedly
before I bought it).
Dale J. Cruse
"Neal" <nea...@javanet.com> wrote in message
news:8e2dah$4pq$2...@bob.news.rcn.net...
Dale J. Cruse
If I read something into your posts that wasn't there, I genuinely
apologize. However, I still maintain that we all talk about "equipment" too
much and would all be much better served by talking more about "music."
Dale
"Sacqueboutier" <don...@dclink.com> wrote in message
news:39050235...@dclink.com...
> "Dale J. Cruse" wrote:
>
> > "Sacqueboutier" <don...@dclink.com> wrote in message
> > news:39034E91...@dclink.com...
> >
> > >If you want to sound like them or get jobs in
> > > their orchestras, you need to play similar equipment.
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Don Patterson
> > > (who plays an Edwards in the US Marine Band)
> >
> > Don,
> >
> > I'm really surprised to hear you say that. So, if I buy an Edwards, will
I
> > get to sound like you?
>
Neal
Dale J. Cruse wrote in message ...
>However, I still maintain that we all talk about "equipment" too
>much and would all be much better served by talking more about "music."
Can we discuss golf without talking about clubs? Can we really recreate a
master chef's recipes without knowing about the pot (s)he cooks in?
Equipment talk might be techy and boring, but it is a part of the
trombonist's job. Talking "equipment" IS talking "music" IMHO.
John Lowe
JohnL
Sacqueboutier wrote:
>
> "Dale J. Cruse" wrote:
>
> > I assume the original poster was referring to Larry Minnick on the West
> > Coast. He's the one who customizes the trombones of the L.A. Philharmonic
> > section. He did some amazing work on the horn I played (though admittedly
> > before I bought it).
>
> Unfortunately, I think I heard that he passed on last year. Is this true?
>
Bobby Knight
Neal wrote:
<clip>
>Talking "equipment" IS talking "music" IMHO.
One humble opinon noted, but the original poster qualified his opinion
by saying "too much". IMHO he's correct.
bk
Elliott Moxley
laying off the trombone for 30 years you were not planning on auditioning for a
major orchestra or D.C. Service band. If this is the case, I think you would be
better off finding a music store with a large stock of instruments and find one
that feels comfortable and sounds right to you. Most local dealers have prices
considerably higher than say, The Brasswind, but you may be able to negotiate a
better deal if you quote a mail-order price. I would think it's worth paying a
little more to be able to try out different brands and models, and walking out
with the particular one that you like.
Problems to look for would include sloppy solder joints; lacquer blemishes;
etc., a new horn should look perfect. Also, blow air through the instrument - a
"hissing" sound may mean a glob of solder on an inside joint. Play sustained
notes in different registers - the tone quality shoud be even. A "bad" horn may
be fine in 1st-2nd positions, but the tone will start to break up and just be
more difficult to sustain in the lower positions. Pull the F-tuning slide out
without pressing the trigger - there should be a popping sound indicating a
tight seal. The slide may be a little rough, but it should not stick in one
particular spot. New slides need frequent cleanings and may not be at their best
for many weeks; but a slide that hangs up in one position or feels too tight
overall should be avoided. Also, take the slide section and cover both holes
tightly with you palm/thumb; pull the slide out quickly, and release the
pressure. There should be a popping sound, indicating a good seal.
Bach does not use the most durable lacquer, I've heard that this is because the
use a type that interferes the least with the vibrations of the brass. Anyway,
most used Bachs have at least some lacquer wear. I wipe mine down after playing
it, and sometimes clean it with Pledge, and the lacquer still looks pretty good.
I have heard of problems with solder joints coming loose on Bachs, namely on the
spit valve and trigger, but personally I haven't had any problems with mine.
Of course you will not sound the way you will eventually like to sound anyway,
so if you can take along another trombonist, it would give you a chance to stand
back and listen to the differences in tone qualities. Don't worry if you don't
know one well - most would jump at a chance to do this, and feel flattered at
being asked.
As far as Bach 42B v.s. Conn 88H, either one would be a good choice - think of
them as being different, but not better or worse. I "grew up" playing Conns,
but found a new Bach 42B (gold brass bell, lightweight slide, open wrap) about 8
years ago that I love. My husband has a great Conn 88H from the mid-60s. Some
of the differences I have noticed are:
1) The Bach feels like a slightly bigger horn - a little more open; takes a
little more air; wider hand-span due to a wider slide and trigger placement;
but for the same volume of air it seems to produce a little more sound/volume.
Both have a really resonating sound with lots of overtones, but the Conn may
have even more of this. But the newer Conns I have briefly tried sounded a
little more "flat" to me than either the Bach and the older Conn.
2) The Bach is a very forgiving instrument - it seems to always help me out,
even on bad days. As long as I can get enough air into it, it can make
adjustments to my embouchure/whatever and get a fairly uniform sound.
3) The Bach is a little easier to play and gets a brighter sound in the upper
register, but I prefer the sound of the Conn on the lower notes - around C in
the staff - and below; it just sounds beefier. This could be due to the
lightweight slide on the Bach.
4) The Conn has a closed wrap F attachment, the Bach open wrap; but I cannot
feel a difference in the response, openness, volume, or anything else between
the two that I can attribute to the design.
( ducking; waiting for flames!)
The important thing is that you get a horn that you are happy with. When you get
a horn that is comfortable to hold, well-balanced, has a great slide, is easy to
play and can get the sound that you hear in your head, it becomes a joy to play
and you will have a hard time putting it down! On top of that, you probably
want a trombone that gets "respect" from other players - again you won't go
wrong with the Bach or Conn. Just stay away from the intermediates - they won't
satisfy the above. And don't dismiss a well-maintained used horn - they may be
the best find of all.
Good Luck,
Sue
Glen McDowell wrote:
> I'm considering getting back into playing after a long (30 year) hiatus.
> Having read most of the historical info on this subject on Deja, I'm curious
ke...@worldnet.att.net
<edm...@earthlink.net> wrote:
snip
>Glen, correct me if I'm wrong, but let me take a wild guess and say that after
>laying off the trombone for 30 years you were not planning on auditioning for a
>major orchestra or D.C. Service band.
snip
>Of course you will not sound the way you will eventually like to sound anyway,
>so if you can take along another trombonist, it would give you a chance to stand
>back and listen to the differences in tone qualities. Don't worry if you don't
>know one well - most would jump at a chance to do this, and feel flattered at
>being asked.
>
Why not buy a used cheapo until you...
a...decide you really want to stay at it
or
b. you're chops return sufficiently for you to make a good
comparison.
I've been away for 20 years. After 4 months of practice i am able to
percieve many more differences between my king 4-b and my wifes 88h.
still prefer my king. BUT have noticed some nice things about the conn
i've overlooked.
kent
GRIZ
wrong-brand oboe, or bassoon! The universuties are not subtle about
dictating the brand of a $16,000.00 bassoon, & feel no remorse at all
the fix it puts people into! Well meaning parents, who remortgaged their
homes, to buy their college-bound kid a BBb tuba (without consulting a
H.S. band director! Who should've known!), only to find out it's an
unwelcome, unteachable instrument in most colleges, ask me how thiscan
be fair!
If you were to buy a new home, & then find out it was built with
K-mart tools & hardware, it might not bother you, too much.
But if you're about to undergo surgery, you wouldn't like to think the
surgeon bought his/her surgical tools at a flea-market! Or that the good
Dr. got a B- in any part of his/her schooling!
Well, the universities take their music tools that seriously! Like
surgical equipment!
Unfair, but all too true!
PASSING THE TORCH
KEEPING THE FIRE OF
BRASS ALIVE ! ! GRIZ
http://community.webtv.net/PAPAGRIZBONE/GRIZ
http://community.webtv.net/PAPAGRIZBONE/GARYKURBISWEBPAGE
!
Sacqueboutier
> Don,
>
> If I read something into your posts that wasn't there, I genuinely
> apologize. However, I still maintain that we all talk about "equipment" too
> much and would all be much better served by talking more about "music."
>
Fer sher. Yes, music would be a much more worthy subject than
the latest "What-type-of-slide-cream-is-best" thread. These get
tiring. However, this being a "trombone" forum, one must
expect much of the conversation to revolve around trombones...
ie. our equipment.
Sacqueboutier
[snip]
Very wise words.
Dale J. Cruse
to play? I went to Ball State University and Indiana University and neither
school ever dictating what trombone you must play, though I can't speak for
any other instrument. Though I do know that the euphonium players almost
exclusively played Wilsons (or Willson or Willlson or whatever), presumably
because that's THE model to play. But in the 'bone world, many different
models are totally acceptable. Just curious as to which schools are
dictating and their justification.
Dale
"GRIZ" <PAPAGR...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:9449-390...@storefull-283.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
JS SS 84
J. Cruse" <djc...@usa.net> writes:
>Out of curiosity, which colleges are dictating what trombones students are
>to play? I went to Ball State University and Indiana University and neither
>school ever dictating what trombone you must play
I don't know how things are now, but back in the 50's if you were a trombone
player majoring in music at Indiana University, it was HIGHLY recommended that
you play a Conn 88H. These horns were obtained directly from the Conn factory
on an individual basis and "auditioned" by the trombone guru himself (at that
time Thomas Beversdorf). He also made his own mouthpieces, which (as closely
as I can tell) approximated a Bach 3G with a standard shank. I'm still playing
my Beversdorf mouthpiece today on a King 3B Silversonic.
John Sunday
The Villages, FL
Sacqueboutier
> Out of curiosity, which colleges are dictating what trombones students are
> to play? I went to Ball State University and Indiana University and neither
> school ever dictating what trombone you must play, though I can't speak for
> any other instrument. Though I do know that the euphonium players almost
> exclusively played Wilsons (or Willson or Willlson or whatever), presumably
> because that's THE model to play. But in the 'bone world, many different
> models are totally acceptable.
Why is it different for euphoniums? Why is the Willson *THE* model to
play instead of the Boosey, Sterling, Yamaha, or whatever else. Could it
possibly be the particular tone quality the Willson produces that the
others just can't get? That's the same way as it is with the Bach 42B.
I would gather that most trombone players studying in college aspire to
play in an orchestra. They are striving for the perfect tone quality that
orchestras are looking for. The Bach tone color is predominant in US
orchestras. This is the basis for my observations and opinions.
Tim Dowling
Sacqueboutier wrote:
> "Dale J. Cruse" wrote:
>
> > Out of curiosity, which colleges are dictating what trombones students are
> > to play? I went to Ball State University and Indiana University and neither
> > school ever dictating what trombone you must play, though I can't speak for
> > any other instrument. Though I do know that the euphonium players almost
> > exclusively played Wilsons (or Willson or Willlson or whatever), presumably
> > because that's THE model to play. But in the 'bone world, many different
> > models are totally acceptable.
>
> Why is it different for euphoniums? Why is the Willson *THE* model to
> play instead of the Boosey, Sterling, Yamaha, or whatever else. Could it
> possibly be the particular tone quality the Willson produces that the
> others just can't get? That's the same way as it is with the Bach 42B.
> I would gather that most trombone players studying in college aspire to
> play in an orchestra. They are striving for the perfect tone quality that
> orchestras are looking for. The Bach tone color is predominant in US
> orchestras. This is the basis for my observations and opinions.
It was of course not always so. I can assure you all that the Conn 88H is very
much alive and well in English and European orchestras. I know many people think
it's old fashioned to play a Conn in an orchestra. Still there must be a lot of
lovely old Elkhart Conn sitting under these peoples beds. You don't often see the
classic ones for sale. I've always been perfectly happy to play an Elkhart 88 in
my orchestra. I can't say I've ever found it lacking in power, and you can't beat
that characteristic warmth and response. - And it fits best in the style and
character of the orchestra I play in. I just find I can colour the sound that
much easier on a Conn (and I -have- tried a Bach for a year or so) . And the new
ones are good too. I've tried out Yellow brass, rose brass and Sterling silver
bells (in the orch) and been very pleased with the results. Each to his own. I
think it's a pity that there is such a misconception about them. I know they have
themselves to blame- you couldn't get a good one for years. Things are different
now.
Just an opinion!
Tim Dowling
(Residentie Orchestra, The Hague)
ke...@worldnet.att.net
wrote:
>
>Why is it different for euphoniums? Why is the Willson *THE* model to
>play instead of the Boosey, Sterling, Yamaha, or whatever else. Could it
>possibly be the particular tone quality the Willson produces that the
>others just can't get? That's the same way as it is with the Bach 42B.
>I would gather that most trombone players studying in college aspire to
>play in an orchestra. They are striving for the perfect tone quality that
>orchestras are looking for. The Bach tone color is predominant in US
>orchestras. This is the basis for my observations and opinions.
Hi Don,
If you were blindfolded and sat and listened to a proficient player
play the same music on various brands of same bore size bones could
you pick out the 42B?
I'm certainly no pro but I think instrument selection starts first
with the "feel" to the player and his own perception of his sound.
Secondly, and probably the one that most affects what's hot, is peer
pressure/emulation of excellent players.
Really why are Kings better for jazz, Conns for small ensemble work,
and Bachs for large Orchestra? I suspect because along the way an
influential musician played them. Dorsey on kings and so on
Now I don't think that this is such a crime as some. Confidence and
belief in ones equipment is an essential part of the mental attitude
on must have in any endeavor of excellence. It doesn't matter too
much if a young player selects a bone 'cuz his teacher has that brand
and is a great player or if he tries a few and says "i like this one
best". In either case one ends up with an instrument he "believes in"
I had a teacher who liked kings, another who liked holtons, and one
who was an 88H Freak. I bought the king because of the first teacher.
At the ultra pro level i still think that this kind of things exists
But now the player has the ability to detect subtle differences that
many if not most players will never be able to detect. These
differences, i believe, are perceived more by the player rather than
the audience, hence my original question.
Interesting side note. Someone did a study of beer drinkers who swore
that their brand was the best and that they could detect their brand
from the mob of inferior products. Blind tasting revealed that they
could not, in fact, tell any of them apart. (they are all crap but
that's another group :o) ).
Well some ramblings that I hope don't offend and please realize that I
am only an amateur.
Kent
cdmmcnamara
There was a time when the 88H was the sound, period.
American orchestras have become much louder. The 88H was/is not capable of
that level of volume without the tone "breaking up" due to the thin wall
bell that is instrumental in producing the 88H's sound and responsiveness.
The Bach 42 and Edwards "6 Million Dollar Man approach to trombone building"
are capable of that level of volume. This does not mean that many of us
would not rather play on a good 88H; if I were a soloist that would be my
first choice but I'm not my needs require a volume level that the 42 can
provide. Granted with a 42 I have to work a little harder but when I have to
push the melody line over top 5 other trombones, a tuba, a french horn, an
euphonium and too many trumpets, all at fortissimo, I can.
D. McNamara
cdmmcnamara
>If you were blindfolded and sat and listened to a proficient player
>play the same music on various brands of same bore size bones could
>you pick out the 42B?
</SNIP>
I'm betting that he can.
D. McNamara
monte...@my-deja.com
I am also only an amateur, but let me tell you a story. I started back
playing on a 35-year old Olds student horn. Played it for 6 months.
Bought a King 606, small shank, noticed a difference. Played it a year,
could only hit a G above bass clef solidly.
Bought a 35-year old Conn 8H, large shank (thanks to all the folks here
who gave me advice!) Use a Bach 6 1/2 AL mouthpiece.Sqeaked out a Bb
above the staff just pooting around while trying it out. After a year,
can count on the Bb as a reasonably reliable note, can hit a fairly
solid pedal Bb.
3 months ago, bought a 25-year old King 2b in great shape. Small shank
(.491 bore right?) Use a Bach 6 1/2 AL mouthpiece. Guess what? I have
a somewhat harder time playing the higher registers, but can do so.
Interesting that I can play a pedal G with the King 2B, where I can't
hit a pedal Ab with the Conn.
The Conn has a warmer, richer sound that my WIFE can discern, while
she thinks the King has a brassier tone. I agree with her and I have
been playing steadily for only 2-1/2 years.
The point of this disjointed narrative is that yes, different horns have
different tonal qualities that the inexperienced can perceive. I think
I could tell the the difference between the King and the Conn,
blindfolded and one-handed (no fair, I'm always one-handed ...)
I can tell you that of the 4 horns I have owned, I love the sound of the
Conn the best. There is something about the way it responds that makes
me think I am sharing intimate secrets with the audience. Maybe I will
develop a similar rapport with the King, it's a neat horn.
My somewhat drunken ravings.
Monte B
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
ke...@worldnet.att.net
>
SNIP
>
>3 months ago, bought a 25-year old King 2b in great shape. Small shank
>(.491 bore right?) Use a Bach 6 1/2 AL mouthpiece. Guess what? I have
>a somewhat harder time playing the higher registers, but can do so.
>Interesting that I can play a pedal G with the King 2B, where I can't
>hit a pedal Ab with the Conn.
Yeah, same thing here. My king just pops out lower notes but needs
some coaxing up above, my wifes conn is just the opposite.
>
>The Conn has a warmer, richer sound that my WIFE can discern, while
>she thinks the King has a brassier tone. I agree with her and I have
>been playing steadily for only 2-1/2 years.
Interesting indeed I'll have to get my wife to try that.
>
>The point of this disjointed narrative is that yes, different horns have
>different tonal qualities that the inexperienced can perceive. I think
>I could tell the the difference between the King and the Conn,
>blindfolded and one-handed (no fair, I'm always one-handed ...)
>
>I can tell you that of the 4 horns I have owned, I love the sound of the
>Conn the best. There is something about the way it responds that makes
>me think I am sharing intimate secrets with the audience. Maybe I will
>develop a similar rapport with the King, it's a neat horn.
>
>My somewhat drunken ravings.
Pass me one please.
Well some day I'm gonna get me to a big store and try them all just
for kicks.
kent
S. Crawshaw
> >3 months ago, bought a 25-year old King 2b in great shape. Small shank
> >(.491 bore right?) Use a Bach 6 1/2 AL mouthpiece. Guess what? I have
> >a somewhat harder time playing the higher registers, but can do so.
> >Interesting that I can play a pedal G with the King 2B, where I can't
> >hit a pedal Ab with the Conn.
>
> Yeah, same thing here. My king just pops out lower notes but needs
> some coaxing up above, my wifes conn is just the opposite.
My King 606 and 4B are both quite capable of playing from pedal F to super
F -- although lack of regular practice makes this unlikely most days!
On the 606 in particular it's quite reasonable to play continuously
between top F and super D without _too_ much grief (which is useful for eg
Mozart alto parts...)
Maybe I ought to try a Conn to see what I'm missing ;-)
Stuart
PS Hello all, first posting to this list.
Sacqueboutier
> Sacqueboutier wrote:
>
> > "Dale J. Cruse" wrote:
> >
> > > Out of curiosity, which colleges are dictating what trombones students are
> > > to play? I went to Ball State University and Indiana University and neither
> > > school ever dictating what trombone you must play, though I can't speak for
> > > any other instrument. Though I do know that the euphonium players almost
> > > exclusively played Wilsons (or Willson or Willlson or whatever), presumably
> > > because that's THE model to play. But in the 'bone world, many different
> > > models are totally acceptable.
> >
> > Why is it different for euphoniums? Why is the Willson *THE* model to
> > play instead of the Boosey, Sterling, Yamaha, or whatever else. Could it
> > possibly be the particular tone quality the Willson produces that the
> > others just can't get? That's the same way as it is with the Bach 42B.
> > I would gather that most trombone players studying in college aspire to
> > play in an orchestra. They are striving for the perfect tone quality that
> > orchestras are looking for. The Bach tone color is predominant in US
> > orchestras. This is the basis for my observations and opinions.
>
> It was of course not always so. I can assure you all that the Conn 88H is very
> much alive and well in English and European orchestras.
I realize that, and it is quite good that it is still in favor over there. It's
a great horn. What I speak of is reality in the US. Look in all of the
major orchestras and you will find Bach and Edwards in the vast
majority of them. I didn't say it was the best thing, it's just the way
things are. If someone aspires to play in those groups, one should
get the same equipment in order to have a better chance of making
the sound they are looking for.
Sacqueboutier
> On Thu, 27 Apr 2000 11:32:30 -0400, Sacqueboutier <don...@dclink.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Why is it different for euphoniums? Why is the Willson *THE* model to
> >play instead of the Boosey, Sterling, Yamaha, or whatever else. Could it
> >possibly be the particular tone quality the Willson produces that the
> >others just can't get? That's the same way as it is with the Bach 42B.
> >I would gather that most trombone players studying in college aspire to
> >play in an orchestra. They are striving for the perfect tone quality that
> >orchestras are looking for. The Bach tone color is predominant in US
> >orchestras. This is the basis for my observations and opinions.
>
> Hi Don,
>
> If you were blindfolded and sat and listened to a proficient player
> play the same music on various brands of same bore size bones could
> you pick out the 42B?
I think I could, but that's not the point. I'm not on any of the audition
committees. You can bet your bottom dollar that Joe Alessi, Jay Friedman,
Mark Lawrence, and Nizan Heroz can all (blindfolded) tell the difference
between Bach, Edwards, and Conn. Alan Barnhill, too. Ralph Sauer could
tell the difference, but he would prefer the Conn. I know that the
principal
in the Marine Band can tell the difference in a heartbeat. He's done it
many times, and rarely misses.
>
>
> I'm certainly no pro but I think instrument selection starts first
> with the "feel" to the player and his own perception of his sound.
> Secondly, and probably the one that most affects what's hot, is peer
> pressure/emulation of excellent players.
No doubt, but at some point, one must consider what is marketable
where one wants to play.
>
>
> Really why are Kings better for jazz, Conns for small ensemble work,
> and Bachs for large Orchestra? I suspect because along the way an
> influential musician played them. Dorsey on kings and so on
No necessarily. At one time, Conn was the horn found in almost all
of the major orchestras. As those sections started cultivating a larger
darker and louder sound, the Conn's just didn't work any more. Mose
sections went to Bach. Chicago went Holton for a while, but then went to
Bach. With the advent of Edwards, several fine players and sections have
gone for that that. It all has to do with the particular strengths of the
horns.
Sacqueboutier
> <SNIP>
>
> >If you were blindfolded and sat and listened to a proficient player
> >play the same music on various brands of same bore size bones could
> >you pick out the 42B?
> </SNIP>
>
> I'm betting that he can.
>
> D. McNamara
I wouldn't bet real money on that, but I know people who can.
Tim Dowling
Sacqueboutier wrote:
> >I wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > It was of course not always so. I can assure you all that the Conn 88H is very
> > much alive and well in English and European orchestras.
>
> I realize that, and it is quite good that it is still in favor over there. It's
> a great horn. What I speak of is reality in the US. Look in all of the
> major orchestras and you will find Bach and Edwards in the vast
> majority of them. I didn't say it was the best thing, it's just the way
> things are. If someone aspires to play in those groups, one should
> get the same equipment in order to have a better chance of making
> the sound they are looking for.
>
Yes certainly and I agree with you actually. I think it's a pity nonetheless. There
ought to be more variety. I suppose one could go to Edwards and order a trombone just
like a Conn 88H- they could theoretically do it.
Still it's realistic to expect that if one aspires to an orchestral career, one
should play on the prevailing equipment. It was exactly this logic that caused me to
change to an 88H from the Holton TR150 that I had as a student. That (the 88) was
what the pros played in Australia 20 years ago (and I'm talking about Mike Mulcahy of
the CSO!, who was then in the Melbourne Symphony- playing on an 88H).
I'm not really dogmatic about it really. I switched to Bach for a while to fit in
with my (then ) new section here in Holland. It was a good trombone- no problem. But
in the end I just feel more at home on an 88H. Good blending is more in the head than
the metal, I think. That said, I always enjoy it if the second player is playing on
an 88. Also a factor is the size of the hall. It's not such a big place (1900 seats)
where I play . We certainly don't need to play at anywhere near the volume of Chicago
or New York. I'd have to admit that I theoretically could get more decibels out of a
Bach or Edwards. I just personally don't need them. If you do need them then play on
an instument that can provide them, of course.
I wouldn't be surprised if there are new trends in the future. Shires seems to
building a good reputation, even if the big names are sticking to Bach and Edwards.
The new Conns are fine- absolutely. Yamaha too. What would happen if Joe Allessi
suddenly switched brands?
Dale Cruse
end if he switched to a Parrot! Seriously though, when a major player like
Alessi switches brands, then devotees of that person's playing often migrate
to that new brand. A King 2B used to be just about the only "jazz" horn that
people would buy because of people like J.J. Johnson, Kai Winding, and many
more. But a few years ago, when J.J. switched to a Yamaha, suddenly that
sort of "legitimized" the new brand and people were willing to try them
out. And many discovered that they are fine horns. When one top-level player
switches, it seems to cause a small ripple in the trombone community. When a
group switches (Cleveland Orchestra trombones playing Benge), then more
people take notice. Then, when you get several groups switching to a certain
brand (New York Phil. and CSO trombones switching to Edwards), then most of
the industry takes notice and switches accordingly. Or not.
Dale
"Tim Dowling" <tdow...@casema.net> wrote in message
news:390D54FC...@casema.net...
Sacqueboutier
> Sacqueboutier wrote:
>
> > >I wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > It was of course not always so. I can assure you all that the Conn 88H is very
> > > much alive and well in English and European orchestras.
> >
> > I realize that, and it is quite good that it is still in favor over there. It's
> > a great horn. What I speak of is reality in the US. Look in all of the
> > major orchestras and you will find Bach and Edwards in the vast
> > majority of them. I didn't say it was the best thing, it's just the way
> > things are. If someone aspires to play in those groups, one should
> > get the same equipment in order to have a better chance of making
> > the sound they are looking for.
> >
>
> Yes certainly and I agree with you actually. I think it's a pity nonetheless. There
> ought to be more variety. I suppose one could go to Edwards and order a trombone just
> like a Conn 88H- they could theoretically do it.
Funny you should mention that. I play on the Edwards 333CF bell. It's
a 24 gauge bell made on the Conn 88 mandrel. It's a fantastic bell that
produces the rich warm sound very similar to the Conn, but I can play
it loudly when called for. It's the compromise I've found. I love the sound
of this horn. BTW, if you shop for an Edwards, avoid the duo bore slide...
it feels a bit too woolly for my taste.
>
>
> Still it's realistic to expect that if one aspires to an orchestral career, one
> should play on the prevailing equipment. It was exactly this logic that caused me to
> change to an 88H from the Holton TR150 that I had as a student. That (the 88) was
> what the pros played in Australia 20 years ago (and I'm talking about Mike Mulcahy of
> the CSO!, who was then in the Melbourne Symphony- playing on an 88H).
> I'm not really dogmatic about it really. I switched to Bach for a while to fit in
> with my (then ) new section here in Holland. It was a good trombone- no problem. But
> in the end I just feel more at home on an 88H. Good blending is more in the head than
> the metal, I think. That said, I always enjoy it if the second player is playing on
> an 88. Also a factor is the size of the hall. It's not such a big place (1900 seats)
> where I play . We certainly don't need to play at anywhere near the volume of Chicago
> or New York. I'd have to admit that I theoretically could get more decibels out of a
> Bach or Edwards. I just personally don't need them. If you do need them then play on
> an instument that can provide them, of course.
Very wise words.
>
>
> I wouldn't be surprised if there are new trends in the future. Shires seems to
> building a good reputation, even if the big names are sticking to Bach and Edwards.
> The new Conns are fine- absolutely. Yamaha too. What would happen if Joe Allessi
> suddenly switched brands?
That would require him to change his mind on the sound he wants. This would mean
that auditionees would need to make that sound. Therefore, they would be better off
getting the horn that will give them a better chance of making the Alessi looks for.
BTW, Alessi plays Edwards and most of his students at Julliard do so as well.
Sacqueboutier
> For some people, the world might come to an end. This list might come to an
> end if he switched to a Parrot!
Hmmm...there's a Monty Python sketch in there somewhere.
> Seriously though, when a major player like
> Alessi switches brands, then devotees of that person's playing often migrate
> to that new brand. A King 2B used to be just about the only "jazz" horn that
> people would buy because of people like J.J. Johnson, Kai Winding, and many
> more. But a few years ago, when J.J. switched to a Yamaha, suddenly that
> sort of "legitimized" the new brand and people were willing to try them
> out. And many discovered that they are fine horns. When one top-level player
> switches, it seems to cause a small ripple in the trombone community. When a
> group switches (Cleveland Orchestra trombones playing Benge), then more
> people take notice. Then, when you get several groups switching to a certain
> brand (New York Phil. and CSO trombones switching to Edwards), then most of
> the industry takes notice and switches accordingly. Or not.
Again, I'm not convinced that it's a case of sheep following the leader. It's
more
of a realistic attempt at producing the sound necessary to get the job one
desires.
>
>
> Dale
>
> "Tim Dowling" <tdow...@casema.net> wrote in message
> news:390D54FC...@casema.net...
> > What would happen if Joe Allessi
> > suddenly switched brands?
actikid
>
> This is about the best response I have read on this matter. I've done all my
> legit playing on a 1965 Elkhart 88H since I bought it (used) in 1976. Lately,
> though, and independent of anything I've read here, I've noticed that the Conn
> doesn't seem to project all that well in a big orchestra that I sometimes play
> in. Playing second on the Pines of Rome, for example, I found that I couldn't
> hear myself too well on a recording made at a recent concert. And it wasn't
> for a lack of effort, either; I was tired after that concert!
>
> I took a chance on a 42G on eBay, right after I heard the Pines recording, and
> after my repairman worked on the slide, wound up with a horn that will project
> over the full orchestra, if it has to. So, my current plan is to use the Bach
> for orchestra, and the Conn for quartet and quintet work.
I think it is important to be clear that when we talk about "Bach and
Edwards" we really mean the prototypical configuration of Bach 42
(emulated by Edwards) designed for power. This is the heavy yellow
bell, squared off slide bow, orchestral slide, etc. Nowadays, the
Edwards line is completely configurable and the Bach line has a nice
range of configuration. With Edwards, you can configure "Conn-style"
slides, alloys, weights, buffing, finishing (unsoldered rim), and bell
taper. In other words, it is not the "Edwards" per se that is powerful,
it is the configuration. As more and more players move to this sort of
configuration, the 88H type of horn (whether it be a real 88H, a B88 or
an Edwards with those same configuration choices) is being poshed to the
side.
I haven't seen it mentioned much here that Conn is now offering a better
selection of bells, including yellow and sterling. These configurations
should be more powerful. If you love the 88H, but feel you are working
too hard to keep up in section, maybe a different 88H bell choice is the
way to go. (Of course, with Edwards, Bach, and Shires, you can change
this on the fly, giving you the best of both worlds.)
Elliott Moxley
cdmmcnamara wrote:
This is about the best response I have read on this matter. I've done all my
legit playing on a 1965 Elkhart 88H since I bought it (used) in 1976. Lately,
though, and independent of anything I've read here, I've noticed that the Conn
doesn't seem to project all that well in a big orchestra that I sometimes play
in. Playing second on the Pines of Rome, for example, I found that I couldn't
hear myself too well on a recording made at a recent concert. And it wasn't
for a lack of effort, either; I was tired after that concert!
I took a chance on a 42G on eBay, right after I heard the Pines recording, and
after my repairman worked on the slide, wound up with a horn that will project
over the full orchestra, if it has to. So, my current plan is to use the Bach
for orchestra, and the Conn for quartet and quintet work.
By the way, Don Patterson "snipped" and gave credit to me for a post that he
liked a week or so ago that was actually written by my wife, Sue. We share the
same email address, it seems-
Elliott Moxley