Medium bore trombones - why?

MStarke · by **MStarke** » 2022-03-20 4:08 p.m.

I sometimes really like playing my Blessing medium bore (0.525) straight trombone. And there are certainly even better ones in that size.

But I still cannot figure out in which real life situation I would regularly prioritize it over other options in my stable.

Symphony orchestra: Large bore

Wind Orchestra and brass Band: probably large bore

Chamber music (brass ensemble/quintet, trombone Ensemble): Alternating between large and small bore

Big Band: Small bore

(Not playing any small Jazz ensemble stuff)

Etc...

I could imagine very specific situations or individual pieces where a medium bore would make Sense, but no general rule. E.g. Bolero, maybe a movie program or a downscaled section for a choir concert.

I also understand that it's a good compromise for situations where you don't really know what repertoire is coming (and you cannot bring multiple trombones) - but how often does this really happen?

And I see the point for people that want to play or afford only one trombone or don't feel "ready" for a large bore.

But if you are thinking in general terms - where does it fit? Is there any setting where you are expected to bring a medium bore?

(I am also aware that in the jazz scene at least some people play less Standard equipment and there may be more room for individual preferences. But also there the general choice is not a medium bore)

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2022-03-20 4:26 p.m.

As the former owner of a couple 36s, the current owner of a King 607F and future owner of another 36...

:idk:

mbarbier · by **mbarbier** » 2022-03-20 4:39 p.m.

I've been playing a medium bore as my daily horn professionally for about 15 years, I find it fits my playing quite well. It's sort of a frankenhorn, but more or less a conn88 with medium bore slide (but Benge prototype bell that's a bit different material than they normally are) with a 6.5ALish mp.

I mostly play chamber music, solo stuff, and improvised stuff (more free/not jazz stuff) so I tend to have a lot of sound leeway, but Im also pretty active freelancer in LA so have to fit in professionally. I've always had quite an easy time playing quite loud so I find it's no problem to keep up in orchestra with it, but flexible enough that still works well for commerical and big band stuff. I find I have to be a bit more conscious of my sound concept/how I play in those situations, but orchestral stuff was my schooling so it makes sense. It also can allow stuff to be a lot lighter, which string players tend to not mind, especially since a lot of chamber orchestras I play with regularly are one to a part.

I like it a lot more than switching horns between gigs- just find it works much better for me to work with the horn to get the sound I want than to change unless it's to play bass or valves.

Pezza · by **Pezza** » 2022-03-20 4:45 p.m.

For those who want to sound like a trombone & not a slide baritone!

The line between large bore & bass is getting blurred. I prefer medium bore, Bach 36, it gives the sound I want. I tend to try & play large bores like a bass, and thus don't get the result I want.

jorymil · by **jorymil** » 2022-03-20 5:31 p.m.

Because I'm not a professional, and the players I want to sound like play/played similar-size horns. I really love the sound Jimmy Knepper got out of his 36, and currently, I like the sound that David Marriott, Jr., and Nick Finzer get out of their medium-bore horns. I probably wouldn't play a .525 horn on big-band lead or playing in a traditional Tiger Rag/St. James' Infirmary kind of setting, but it works for me.

I'd also say that the more you need to rely on public transit, the tougher it is to carry around multiple horns. Here in the US, there aren't too many cities where that's the case, but NYC, SF, and Chicago spring to mind. I used to live in Boston, and I definitely would have hybrid car/subway trips.

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2022-03-20 5:48 p.m.

As a 3BF player, I have no idea what the point of a medium bore is. If I wanted to be lazy or cheap, and play everything on one horn, that would be the horn I'd use. But I can have both a 3BF and a 396-A, and they fit together in one case .... So the medium bore is trying to get hired for a job that doesn't exist.

MStarke · by **MStarke** » 2022-03-20 7:05 p.m.

[quote="mbarbier"]I've been playing a medium bore as my daily horn professionally for about 15 years, I find it fits my playing quite well. It's sort of a frankenhorn, but more or less a conn88 with medium bore slide (but Benge prototype bell that's a bit different material than they normally are) with a 6.5ALish mp.

I mostly play chamber music, solo stuff, and improvised stuff (more free/not jazz stuff) so I tend to have a lot of sound leeway, but Im also pretty active freelancer in LA so have to fit in professionally. I've always had quite an easy time playing quite loud so I find it's no problem to keep up in orchestra with it, but flexible enough that still works well for commerical and big band stuff. I find I have to be a bit more conscious of my sound concept/how I play in those situations, but orchestral stuff was my schooling so it makes sense. It also can allow stuff to be a lot lighter, which string players tend to not mind, especially since a lot of chamber orchestras I play with regularly are one to a part.

I like it a lot more than switching horns between gigs- just find it works much better for me to work with the horn to get the sound I want than to change unless it's to play bass or valves.[/quote]

I totally believe that this works for you and that you make this sound great. And it makes sense for me in this special combination. However this is more a rational of "For my overall playing profile a medium bore is the compromise that works best for me" than "a medium bore is the perfect horn for a certain setting"...

Matt_K · by **Matt_K** » 2022-03-20 8:03 p.m.

I tend to have a strong preference for a medium bore on 3rd in a big band. Does a better job at bridging the gap to the bass, at least for me.

And if I’m the only trombone player, I almost always bring a medium bore. Gives me more timbral flexibility. That includes brass quintets and commercial stuff like a 10 piece “little” big band or smaller combo stuff. Small bores are great for cutting and blending with a trumpet section but I tend to want a slightly darker sound when I’m in smaller contexts. But I’m a super bright player so that is by no means meant as a universal statement

CalgaryTbone · by **CalgaryTbone** » 2022-03-20 8:22 p.m.

There's not too big a market for .525 horns, but the situations I've heard them used in successfully are:

Big Band (particularly 3rd chair) - Steve Turre plays one all the time.

Broadway - Jack Gale played one - good choice for a show that has a mix of commercial/legit styles.

Brass Band - good choice for getting some brilliance in the sound at a single forte. Wind Ensemble could also benefit from this size.

Smaller orchestras or lighter repertoire. 1st part on Pops where there might be a combo of styles. Good for 2nd trombone with alto on 1st. Jay Friedman likes a Bach 36 for Bolero.

Some solo playing - French repertoire or Arthur Pryor style repertoire.

Much of this rep. can be done on other sized instruments as well, but some players find a .525 to be just the right fit for these uses.

Jim Scott

BGuttman · by **BGuttman** » 2022-03-20 8:54 p.m.

Jim pretty much nailed my feelings too.

I have a Bach 36C that has become my "jack of all trades" horn. It goes when I don't know what I'm playing. It will do the gig much of the time. For 1st or 2nd in Big Band I tend to use a smaller bore (Conn 40H, Martin Imperial). For Dixieland ensemble I tend to use the smaller bore (Martin Imperial). I love my 36 for 1st in Concert Band. I like it in Orchestra for French rep -- especially stuff like Debussy; or for "L'Histoire du Soldat". The 36C does great in Quintet. Especially when the tuba player is using something smaller than a foghorn. And for pit, the 36C is a dream. Especially for amateur productions where they are always telling you to play softer under the cast.

CheeseTray · by **CheeseTray** » 2022-03-20 10:02 p.m.

I like them in certain specific environments:

1. Playing with very small, (usually freelance) orchestras supporting a choir (often a church choir or semi-professional chorale). The trombones are always too loud. You can get a little brilliance at a lower volume with less work.

2. Some orchestral pops situations; backing up pop singers or doing Broadway style stuff where you want to sound a little more commercial.

3. Small chamber groups, particularly if the music is tiring or has a consistently high tessitura; again, less work in avoiding being "too prominent."

4. Some recording work. It provides a brilliance that records better than a .547

ArbanRubank · by **ArbanRubank** » 2022-03-20 10:04 p.m.

Everyone needs a medium-bore horn. You simply can not have enough trombones AND when you think you do - you don't if you don't have a medium-bore. What are they good for? Absolutely nothing.

Bach5G · by **Bach5G** » 2022-03-20 10:14 p.m.

I like playing my .525. I can take it anywhere. Even bass once, because I had a trigger.

hyperbolica · by **hyperbolica** » 2022-03-20 10:55 p.m.

I think smaller bore are historically more accurate for most existing written music. Big bores are mostly promoted by academics and certain orchestral players. I only know a couple people who play 547.

I like the lighter sound and feel, the wider range of available articulation, less muddy sound, better blend with the trumpets, more distinctive sound from the horns, and on and on.

Kdanielsen · by **Kdanielsen** » 2022-03-21 12:08 a.m.

[quote="CheeseTray"]I like them in certain specific environments:

1. Playing with very small, (usually freelance) orchestras supporting a choir (often a church choir or semi-professional chorale). The trombones are always too loud. You can get a little brilliance at a lower volume with less work.
[/quote]

Yes. Brilliance at a lower volume is key. Sometimes you need that ff sound at mf, and more importantly you need that mf sound at p. It's nice to be able to make a full trombone sound without obliterating some poor community choir.

CalgaryTbone · by **CalgaryTbone** » 2022-03-21 12:14 a.m.

Yes, I forgot Brass Quintet. John Swallow played a .525 for much of his time in the NY Brass Quintet, and so did Ron Borrer (sp?) in the American Brass Quintet. Not many people do that these days, but a lot of quintet rep. would benefit from a lighter instrument in that chair.

Jim Scott

hyperbolica · by **hyperbolica** » 2022-03-21 10:40 a.m.

[quote="CalgaryTbone"]Yes, I forgot Brass Quintet. John Swallow played a .525 for much of his time in the NY Brass Quintet, and so did Ron Borrer (sp?) in the American Brass Quintet. Not many people do that these days, but a lot of quintet rep. would benefit from a lighter instrument in that chair.

Jim Scott[/quote]

Chamber music is by definition for a smaller space. Doesn't need a full blast instrument. Smaller horns are more nimble, lighter, easier to play.

spencercarran · by **spencercarran** » 2022-03-21 11:19 a.m.

On the one hand is the argument on versatility - with the right mouthpiece and sound concept, a medium bore can be made to work serviceably well in settings where the "default" choice might be either a large bore orchestral horn or a small jazz horn. If you don't have the money or storage space or frequent playing/practice opportunities to justify owning multiple tenors, it can be a reasonable jack-of-all-trades option.

The other side of my argument for a medium bore tenor is that in many settings it is actually the correct musical choice. Big orchestral tenors are meant for, well, big orchestras, and most of us don't play in those. Lots of orchestral repertoire is more appropriate with a lighter sound, so unless you've got a concert of all loud Romantic pieces the big tenor isn't necessarily the best choice there either. If you're in a wind band, which often involves doubled parts, the type of sound that top orchestral players produce would be completely inappropriate and overwhelm the rest of the ensemble. 3rd bone in big band, as Matt mentioned, is another spot where 0.525 with F is the ideal instrument. Chamber music and pit orchestra both are good places for an instrument with a bit more weight to the sound than a small bore, but lighter than an orchestral horn.

TBH, my question would be where is a 0.547 tenor ever really justified, outside of a big orchestra (and even there it's not always the best choice).

baileyman · by **baileyman** » 2022-03-21 12:12 p.m.

Medium bore in big band only after 1965. Before then it's .500 max. And the bass, if any, would match the timbre not the other way around.

asmith · by **asmith** » 2022-03-21 12:27 p.m.

[quote="CalgaryTbone"]Yes, I forgot Brass Quintet. John Swallow played a .525 for much of his time in the NY Brass Quintet, and so did Ron Borrer (sp?) in the American Brass Quintet. Not many people do that these days, but a lot of quintet rep. would benefit from a lighter instrument in that chair.

Jim Scott[/quote]

I really like a medium bore horn in a quintet if I am playing bass trombone instead of tuba.

Also, they can be a great transitional horn for students that are ready for an F-attachment but not a large bore. We have a few teachers around my area that really like the Eastman ETB428MG for that exact reason, plus it's pretty cheap.

deanmccarty · by **deanmccarty** » 2022-03-21 12:45 p.m.

I love a medium bore instrument… I used to have a Bach 36 with gold brass bell and lightweight slide… it smoked on salsa gigs…

Then I got a Rath R3 and it was even better…

playing third in a big band is perfect… put shows, especially if you have an attachment. However, I have a bass, a large bore, and a small bore… I found that I was playing the R3 less and less so I sold it… but it was my favorite horn.

tbonesullivan · by **tbonesullivan** » 2022-03-21 1:23 p.m.

Wasn't Ralph Sauer using a .525 bore Conn 8H not long before his retirement in 2006? I think it had an 8 inch bell as well, at least the one that was for sale at the Brass Ark did. For a principal player, depending on the repertoire, a .525 bore horn can be perfect. Of course, that depends on what the musical director wants for the orchestra.

For chamber music, pit, etc, I think a .525 horn with an F attachment is just about perfect.

hornbuilder · by **hornbuilder** » 2022-03-21 2:08 p.m.

The similar question could be asked.

Large bore horns. Why??

DougHulme · by **DougHulme** » 2022-03-21 2:15 p.m.

Dennis Wick always said for a brass band it should be .525 horns for 1st trombone .547 horns for 2nd trombone. I fully agree with him. Its rare these days to see anything other than large bore trombones in brass bands. That, I believe, is because we see kinship to Orchestral players because of the 'classical' style of playing they both have in common. Whereas I believe the sound and instrument 'weaponry' of a brass band is much closer to a big band/dance band where of copurse it is common place to find .525 horns... Doug

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2022-03-21 2:39 p.m.

[quote="hornbuilder"]The similar question could be asked.

Large bore horns. Why??[/quote]

When played well, make some of the most beautiful trombones sounds that exist.

hornbuilder · by **hornbuilder** » 2022-03-21 4:13 p.m.

So beautiful sounds can't be made on smaller bore instruments?

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2022-03-21 4:17 p.m.

[quote="hornbuilder"]So beautiful sounds can't be made on smaller bore instruments?[/quote]

That would be putting a lot of words in my mouth!

Bach5G · by **Bach5G** » 2022-03-21 4:20 p.m.

If you asked for memorably beautiful trombone, the man in the street might respond with Tommy Dorsey or, maybe, Urbie Green or Bill Watrous. I might be hard pressed to come up with J Alessi or C Lindbergh if I were asked.

imsevimse · by **imsevimse** » 2022-03-21 4:37 p.m.

[quote="hornbuilder"]The similar question could be asked.

Large bore horns. Why??[/quote]

Yes, that question is also relevant. In the settings I play I've found that a Bach 36BO is about as big it needs to be. I'm not playing the heavy stuff in a symphony orchestra. The symphony orchestras I play in, when that happens are often small community symphony orchestras and they do not play heavy symphonies by Mahler or operas by Wagner. I think it is easier work on first part to blend with my .525 horn. A Bach 36BO is also good for first part in Brass Band and Windorchestra. It is my preferred horn in those situations. It fits next to .547 horns.

/Tom

hornbuilder · by **hornbuilder** » 2022-03-21 4:47 p.m.

[quote="Burgerbob"]<QUOTE author="hornbuilder" post_id="174272" time="1647893583" user_id="3205">
So beautiful sounds can't be made on smaller bore instruments?[/quote]

That would be putting a lot of words in my mouth!
</QUOTE>

<EMOJI seq="1f608" tseq="1f608">😈</EMOJI> <EMOJI seq="1f642" tseq="1f642">🙂</EMOJI>

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2022-03-21 4:51 p.m.

It's important to remember that trombone sizes are not exactly a zero-sum game. Just because someone uses a large bore somewhere (or anything else), doesn't mean you can't use something you want!

Here's my example of stellar, pinnacle trombone sound... and no, I didn't force Alain to play this on his .547, he chose it!

<YOUTUBE id="5YsL6TWpBlc">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YsL6TWpBlc</YOUTUBE>

spencercarran · by **spencercarran** » 2022-03-21 4:52 p.m.

[quote="Burgerbob"]<QUOTE author="hornbuilder" post_id="174263" time="1647886138" user_id="3205">
The similar question could be asked.

Large bore horns. Why??[/quote]

When played well, make some of the most beautiful trombones sounds that exist.
</QUOTE>
Awfully big caveat there <span class="emoji" title=":wink:">😉</span>

I'd bet that a large majority of trombonists I've encountered on 0.547 tenors would sound appreciably better if they just switched to 0.525.

GabrielRice · by **GabrielRice** » 2022-03-21 4:56 p.m.

[quote="hornbuilder"]The similar question could be asked.

Large bore horns. Why??[/quote]

I for one would love to hear what would happen if my colleagues played medium bores in orchestra settings more often.

Also, 3/4 and 4/4 tubas.

#old #tired #idontalwaysloveplayingsoloudanymore

LeTromboniste · 2022-03-21 5:52 p.m.

[quote="GabrielRice"]<QUOTE author="hornbuilder" post_id="174263" time="1647886138" user_id="3205">
The similar question could be asked.

Large bore horns. Why??[/quote]

I for one would love to hear what would happen if my colleagues played medium bores in orchestra settings more often.

Also, 3/4 and 4/4 tubas.

#old #tired #idontalwaysloveplayingsoloudanymore
</QUOTE>

100% agree. I think the orchestral trombone scene would benefit tremendously from more varied equipment. Medium and even certain small bore horns can sound fantastic on 1st trombone in a large chunk of our repertoire.

Same with smaller tubas. One of my biggest pet peeve is hearing people play massive tubas on parts originally for ophicleide or various serpent-family instruments. The sound from these instruments was completely different, and composers wrote for them in an accordingly completely different role, which often isn't the bass of the brass (particularly serpent parts are almost never acting as the bass or support of the brass). Playing those parts on big tubas massively denatures the sound of the brass section. Very small bass tubas and even euphonium do a much better job of getting the role of the part right.

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2022-03-21 6:00 p.m.

That's assuming that composers would have stuck with serpents, etc, even if modern tubas and trombones had been available to them. I doubt it. Why?

We don't play them anymore. We're the same people with the same ears. Do people gravitate towards instruments that sound worse? Probably not. I think players (and composers!) gravitate towards instruments where the audience goes "whooooa, that was the hugest brass sound I ever heard".

Bach5G · by **Bach5G** » 2022-03-21 6:19 p.m.

If modern instruments had been available, composers might have written differently. Maybe everything would include a massive brass climax. Or maybe not.

But they wrote what they wrote for the instruments they had at their disposal. That was likely the sound they had in mind.

CalgaryTbone · by **CalgaryTbone** » 2022-03-21 8:34 p.m.

One other reason that .547's are in use more is that a lot of composers/arrangers are not very clear on the difference between tenor and bass trombone. I see a lot of parts nowadays with lots of trigger notes in the tenors and very low range overall, even in Pops repertoire. Bad scoring - thick muddy writing, but unfriendly to a smaller bore horn in every way. Worst of all worlds, since the low writing and large horns both add to the muddy texture. Add close mikes for everyone and it is the musical equivalent of a slow moving mudslide. Very few people study orchestration anymore - charts are produced by someone that took a semester of theory and owns Finale.

These charts are all technically playable, but aren't in sync with the sound that would be supportive of the music being played. Also, there are a lot of shows, ballets, etc. where someone has done a "reduction" so what was a section of 2 or 3 players is now just one. I played a run of "West Side Story" where there were prominent low "C's" and at least one high "E flat". No horn to use for that but a .547 tenor.

Jim Scott

hyperbolica · by **hyperbolica** » 2022-03-21 8:59 p.m.

547 is at the extreme end of the tenor size range, and yet schools push a lot of students into that extremity. Advanced players can handle the bigger size and make it sound good, make it louder, as it sometimes needs to be. But I'm not as convinced that can be said for your average student.

BUT... most students aren't at the extreme end of the spectrum, and really shouldn't be playing that big size. I think a lot or maybe most students would be better on King 607/608, and I know there is a cheap Bach 525. You see a fair number of Conn 52h on ebay, so they are being bought and used.

The nicest M&W I've played was the 525 prototype. My favorite Rath is the R3. My orchestral horn is a '58 8h with a 525 slide (sometimes have to temper it with a larger mouthpiece). For quartet/quintet I'd swap out the 8h bell section with an 88h section.

I frankly think almost everything sounds a little nicer if you go down a bore size or two. The sound really does get dull on 547. The last trombone choir I played in I used my 48h for the high parts. Yes, I had to work to keep it reeled in, but don't we all?

I played 88h exclusively for ~30 years. 88h is on the more sparkly end of the 547 spectrum. I played 42b when I played with the Navy, because, as they said, "we need to make 15 sound like 60".

Once I started experimenting with smaller bores, it opened up a whole new world. Having lived in the classical world for so long, I was definitely a bore snob. We shouldn't keep imposing this prejudice on kids. There's nothing wrong with 547, I'll pick it up for 3rd parts, even light bass parts, or if I have to really put the hammer down with a big loud orchestra (which I haven't had to do for ~25 years). 525 (and yes, smaller) gives more definition to the sound, and is kinder to older players ;o)

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2022-03-21 9:57 p.m.

The student argument doesn't hold water, I think. If the aim is to produce hirable, say, orchestral musicians, then you need to train them on the equipment that people are being hired on. If a student can't hack the required equipment...

This goes for any technical school. You name it. You wanna be a 18 wheel truck driver, you gotta drive an 18 wheel truck

It's a completely different story if you're going to be the one who tries to change the business and the culture. Good luck!

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2022-03-21 10:02 p.m.

Be the change you want to see. I play plenty of smaller bore stuff myself... in the right settings!

The pros are using big horns in orchestral settings 95% of the time, period.

whitbey · by **whitbey** » 2022-03-21 10:44 p.m.

Except for my bass bone everything I play is duo bore. I usually play 547/562 in orchestra and band. For me it is a 547 that does not fight back. But the air goes fast. So I got a 525/547 slide. Doug E gave me a larger shank for the 525/547 so it plays like a 547 horn. But the air goes easier.

I practice the 525/547 horn the most and use it in quintets. I have used it in orchestra when all I do is soft and high because it is easier. All the solos and Rochut play nicer with the 525/547.

Back in the 80's I was playing only a Bach bass. Ended up playing 1st parts mostly. I had a bigger and smaller lead pipe with 2 different MP. I thought one size smaller was not enough difference to buy a second horn. SO I bought a 525 Bach. It was too small for a most stuff. Later I flipped to a 547 horn and sold the 525. I gotta say the 525/547 horn does play like a 547. my 525/547 and 547/562 are all Edwards parts and mix and match easy.

So while I do duo bore, A little smaller is good, if you get the big there when you need it.

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2022-03-22 12:26 a.m.

Why medium bore? Because large-bore is not the only answer to every situation. Right tool for the job and all that.

Like hyperbolica, I once (several decades ago) was a large-bore advocate. That was when I was mostly playing in large symphony orchestras in pretty large halls, or brass quintets. And large-bore is what folks were playing back then.

Now (unlike Burgerbob and his professional colleagues) my classical playing is mostly smaller orchestras, in smaller halls. I find that it's easier to balance with the rest of the section (and the smaller ensemble) with my Conn 79H (0.522" bore) than with my 88H, especially on the non-romantic, non-bombastic literature. I can certainly make it work with either, but I don't have to hold back as much with the 79H, which still produces a magnificent orchestral sound. I also just acquired an SL2547 slide for the 88H, which I may also try in the smaller orchestra setting. The 79H is also great for my current brass quintet, and for solos or small ensembles in churches. I'm happy to have a tool for every occasion. [Conn 88H for Tchaikovsky and Mahler; Conn 79H for Ravel and Bizet, perhaps even King 3BF for Mozart.]

quiethorn · by **quiethorn** » 2022-03-22 1:04 a.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]The student argument doesn't hold water, I think. If the aim is to produce hirable, say, orchestral musicians, then you need to train them on the equipment that people are being hired on. If a student can't hack the required equipment...

This goes for any technical school. You name it. You wanna be a 18 wheel truck driver, you gotta drive an 18 wheel truck

It's a completely different story if you're going to be the one who tries to change the business and the culture. Good luck![/quote]

Equating elementary school kids' trombone sizes to 18-wheeler driving school. That's a new one... :idk:

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2022-03-22 1:58 a.m.

[quote="quiethorn"]<QUOTE author="harrisonreed" post_id="174325" time="1647914229" user_id="3642">
The student argument doesn't hold water, I think. If the aim is to produce hirable, say, orchestral musicians, then you need to train them on the equipment that people are being hired on. If a student can't hack the required equipment...

This goes for any technical school. You name it. You wanna be a 18 wheel truck driver, you gotta drive an 18 wheel truck

It's a completely different story if you're going to be the one who tries to change the business and the culture. Good luck![/quote]

Equating elementary school kids' trombone sizes to 18-wheeler driving school. That's a new one... :idk:
</QUOTE>

Oh, they were talking about little kids? I thought they were talking about pushing large bores on college kids, which is where that actually happens.

Give little kids whatever -- their arms aren't long enough and their teeth aren't done growing.

michaelpilley · by **michaelpilley** » 2022-03-22 7:02 a.m.

My main horn is a Yamaha 456G (dual bore .500/.525)

I found it really useful for travelling lots, as you often don't know what you'll be playing and it can play lead in a big band, or lower bone parts in a theatre band. It doesn't hold up to large orchestras, but I don't really play many of them. Brass bands are fine if you're on 1st, 2nd probably needs a bigger sound, although that's only in the top flight. It's a pretty versatile instrument, so I'd recommend it if you're doing a wide range of gigs and don't want to keep switching horns.

BTW no problems getting the full range down to low C's and into the pedals. You don't need a .547 to play nice low notes, and the smaller bore requires less air.

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2022-03-22 8:07 a.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]That's assuming that composers would have stuck with serpents, etc, even if modern tubas and trombones had been available to them. I doubt it. Why?

We don't play them anymore. We're the same people with the same ears. Do people gravitate towards instruments that sound worse? Probably not. I think players (and composers!) gravitate towards instruments where the audience goes "whooooa, that was the hugest brass sound I ever heard".[/quote]

That's beside the point. The point is that composers didn't write their serpent parts for tuba. If they had written for tuba, the parts would have been entirely different, because he would have written for an instrument with different possibilities, and given it a different role in the orchestra. In fact when they did write for tubas, their parts indeed were different! For example, Mendelssohn's serpent parts are the same as the contrabassoon part (literally the same sheet of paper), with the serpent playing 8 foot and contrabassoon 16 foot. They often play when the brass are silent, and conversely sometimes the brass play and they don't. The serpent also frequently goes above the bass trombone. Hell, in the ouverture to Midsummer Night's Dream there is a serpent/English bass horn (and a big solo for it, too), but no trombones at all. It's obvious from even a cursory glance at the scores that the bass of the brass section in that context is the bass trombone, not the serpent. You can see how a big 5/4 tuba on there hardly makes sense musically, and how maybe a euphonium might be a more logical choice. I'd wager in many of those pieces, the composer would rather have had the part not played at all (or completely rewritten) than played on a monster tuba.

Then there is the simple fact that there are pieces in the repertoire where BOTH the tuba and a serpent-family instrument are used. For example, Wagner's Rienzi has tuba and "serpent" (probably one of the various upright versions, not the swirvy church serpent). Berlioz's Faust has both tuba and ophicleide (and they even have a nice exposed duet). I won't even open the whole cimbasso can of worms, except to say that there again, completely different role. Clearly, they wanted to combine two different timbres, for effect or whatever reason.

I also find fault with the argument that early instruments sound "worse" and that modern trombones would have always been preferred had they been available. Certainly the technology for making wide-bore, wide-bell Bb/F trombones was available (the Germans made and used them since the 1830's), yet the French kept playing tiny bores and sub-7" bells until the mid-20th century. Surely it's not because they couldn't make them, but because that's the sound they preferred. That we today don't prefer it is irrelevant to what the composers wrote for and how they made their scoring decisions.

Am I advocating for using serpents and historical trombones in modern orchestras? Of course not. Nor do I care much whether people use alto instead of tenor or vice-versa. I just think it would be nice if we saw more variety (not that I think it's going to happen anytime soon). Not every piece of music requires the power of 2 large tenors and a bass, and sometimes it's a good idea to ask ourselves what our role in the music is and what instrument in our modern arsenal might best allow us to fill that role. Otherwise, "when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail."

BGuttman · by **BGuttman** » 2022-03-22 9:43 a.m.

Maximilien, that was a well-reasoned reply. We need to add another factor in choice of instruments -- the conductor. The conductor is trying to find an interpretation of the music that sounds a particular way and if knowledgeable will ask for the instruments to provide it. He can ask for a larger or smaller trombone or tuba sound and it's our job to provide what is asked for. Sometimes that can require a different instrument. Sometimes we simply can't do what is asked for (after all, many conductors have no idea how we -- or any other players -- achieve the sound we produce).

hyperbolica · by **hyperbolica** » 2022-03-22 10:19 a.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]The student argument doesn't hold water, I think. If the aim is to produce hirable, say, orchestral musicians, then you need to train them on the equipment that people are being hired on. If a student can't hack the required equipment...[/quote]

Yeah, there's a shortage of orchestral trombone players ;oP

Reedman1 · by **Reedman1** » 2022-03-22 5:05 p.m.

Just wondering how much the mouthpiece can affect the timbre of a trombone - can you convincingly fake a large bore on a medium bore horn with a bigger/deeper mouthpiece, or conversely lighten up the tone with a smaller/shallower piece? If so, doesn't that extend the versatility of a medium bore?

MStarke · by **MStarke** » 2022-03-22 5:13 p.m.

I am happy that this provoked quite some interesting views!

And I can totally follow some of the suggestions where to use a medium bore trombone, even if it's not the standard, but maybe the better choice in that situation.

TomRiker · by **TomRiker** » 2022-03-22 5:44 p.m.

[quote="CalgaryTbone"]One other reason that .547's are in use more is that a lot of composers/arrangers are not very clear on the difference between tenor and bass trombone. I see a lot of parts nowadays with lots of trigger notes in the tenors and very low range overall, even in Pops repertoire. Bad scoring - thick muddy writing, but unfriendly to a smaller bore horn in every way. Worst of all worlds, since the low writing and large horns both add to the muddy texture. Add close mikes for everyone and it is the musical equivalent of a slow moving mudslide. Very few people study orchestration anymore - charts are produced by someone that took a semester of theory and owns Finale.

These charts are all technically playable, but aren't in sync with the sound that would be supportive of the music being played. Also, there are a lot of shows, ballets, etc. where someone has done a "reduction" so what was a section of 2 or 3 players is now just one. I played a run of "West Side Story" where there were prominent low "C's" and at least one high "E flat". No horn to use for that but a .547 tenor.

Jim Scott[/quote]

I used to work at a venue that hosted an opera company several times a year. One season they decided to do West Side Story. It was a reduced orchestra. No idea if there is more than one arrangement for reduced orchestra but I noticed that the trombone player was using a different instrument than his normal .547. Turns out he chose a Bach 36b. He sounded very good.

TomRiker · by **TomRiker** » 2022-03-22 5:49 p.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]The student argument doesn't hold water, I think. If the aim is to produce hirable, say, orchestral musicians, then you need to train them on the equipment that people are being hired on. If a student can't hack the required equipment...

This goes for any technical school. You name it. You wanna be a 18 wheel truck driver, you gotta drive an 18 wheel truck

It's a completely different story if you're going to be the one who tries to change the business and the culture. Good luck![/quote]

I think that argument is fine if you are talking about college performance majors. I think taking that approach to elementary through high school students does them a disservice. Give them the tool to learn how to make music and express themselves. Not to land a job. Most of those kids will never need to worry about what instrument will land them an audition. They can just learn to express themselves and have fun. The ones that end up wanting to be pros can learn the pro equipment in college.

harrisonreed · 2022-03-22 7:17 p.m.

[quote="TomRiker"]<QUOTE author="harrisonreed" post_id="174325" time="1647914229" user_id="3642">
The student argument doesn't hold water, I think. If the aim is to produce hirable, say, orchestral musicians, then you need to train them on the equipment that people are being hired on. If a student can't hack the required equipment...

This goes for any technical school. You name it. You wanna be a 18 wheel truck driver, you gotta drive an 18 wheel truck

It's a completely different story if you're going to be the one who tries to change the business and the culture. Good luck![/quote]

I think that argument is fine if you are talking about college performance majors. I think taking that approach to elementary through high school students does them a disservice. Give them the tool to learn how to make music and express themselves. Not to land a job. Most of those kids will never need to worry about what instrument will land them an audition. They can just learn to express themselves and have fun. The ones that end up wanting to be pros can learn the pro equipment in college.
</QUOTE>

I guess I'll say it again. I took the original comment to mean "college student", trying to get a job. This is usually where "kids" are forced to play large bores.

The comment about young kids from the previous page, trying to take a jab at me, is kind of silly given the premise. If this thread was about step up instruments for children, cool, but it's not. What are we really talking about here? Professional or semi-professional applications for medium bores? Good, then let's leave small kids out of it.

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2022-03-22 7:23 p.m.

[quote="hyperbolica"]<QUOTE author="harrisonreed" post_id="174325" time="1647914229" user_id="3642">
The student argument doesn't hold water, I think. If the aim is to produce hirable, say, orchestral musicians, then you need to train them on the equipment that people are being hired on. If a student can't hack the required equipment...[/quote]

Yeah, there's a shortage of orchestral trombone players ;oP
</QUOTE>

No there isn't, haha. That's another story for another day!

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2022-03-22 7:33 p.m.

:idea: [quote="Reedman1"]Just wondering how much the mouthpiece can affect the timbre of a trombone - can you convincingly fake a large bore on a medium bore horn with a bigger/deeper mouthpiece, or conversely lighten up the tone with a smaller/shallower piece? If so, doesn't that extend the versatility of a medium bore?[/quote]

This is another great reason for not needing a medium bore. A 3BF takes to all sorts of mouthpieces. Put a deep cup on it, and it plays huge. If I had to play in a pit, I'd use that.

With Doug's system, a 3BF can be the "do-it-all" horn, if you're into that

Thrawn22 · by **Thrawn22** » 2022-03-22 7:53 p.m.

I like my medium bore for chamber orchestra, upper 1st parts in orchestra and quartets. Works well in wnd ensemble too. I'm currently looking for a SL2525 for my custom 78H bell.

3BFs are silly to me. But hey, use what works.

Matt_K · by **Matt_K** » 2022-03-22 7:54 p.m.

I wish 3bf+s were more common. I hardly ever see them come up for sale but I suspect one would be as close as I could get to an “everything” horn

BGuttman · by **BGuttman** » 2022-03-22 8:13 p.m.

I tested out an Anniversary 2125F in Sterling. And was underwhelmed. First, the "reach" of the slide was pretty narrow and made it uncomfortable. On the plus side, the F-attachment lever worked the same as a 3BF (which would alienate a lot of other players). I also was surprised that I wasn't that impressed with the sterling silver bell. At the time, King seemed to be in a quality "divot".

When King revised the lineup they removed the 2125F calling the straight 2125 "3BPL". I might have liked a better made one, but then again the Benge 175F is a better horn. Wish they made a 175C.

ithinknot · by **ithinknot** » 2022-03-22 8:27 p.m.

'Small big horn' is easy to understand... any Shires/Edwards/Rath/etc is a post-36/42 orchestral horn with a smaller slide, which turns out to be useful exactly where you'd imagine.

But what about 'big small', beyond the 3B+? And what about all those [insert number between 17 and 35] Bachs? Maybe they didn't survive for good reasons, or maybe their timing was just wrong. If they'd remained in the catalog long enough to see everyone go chasing Big Straight JJ Tone, might some purpose-built .515 or .522 have become a NYC big band standard, instead of 'maybe a 36 for lead, but it's not for everyone'...?

(Re the jazz 36... as a solo instrument, I get it - that's a great noise, of a particular sort. 1st or 2nd in a big band, maybe not so much - another step towards dynamics being a thing on a fader, not a question of color.)

A Besson 10-10 showed up here today (I need it like a complimentary trepanning, but it was on eBay locally for zilch) - .523, variously unlike anything made today and sort of unplaceable feel/sizewize - compact, 'big small' and MASSIVE. Intonation is fine, but v Kingly, and the bell is significantly further forward even than those, all of which is a trip coming from Bachs.

There are also plenty of Germans in the 5teens/5thirtysomething dual bore region, but they've got their own thing going on.

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2022-03-23 2:07 a.m.

Because of this thread, I took my 3BF out of the closet today (for the first time in many months) and played it for 2 hours in a big band section. I had forgotten how fine a trombone this is, and how it is a chameleon depending on the mouthpiece - light and jazzy with a smaller piece, full and nearly "orchestral" with a larger piece. :good:

MrHCinDE · by **MrHCinDE** » 2022-03-23 9:53 a.m.

Something I didn't pick up on in the replies so far is whether the audience would enjoy listening to us playing on medium bore. What's more important, how we sound to ourselves, to our section mates, to the conductor, or to the audience?

I would suggest that what’s most important to the majority of the audience is not the last few % of a massive wall of sound that could be achieved with a heavy large bore tenor, but rather the clarity and sweetness of sound that can, for some (maybe many?) trombonists be more easily achieved with slightly smaller setups, i.e. medium bore, particularly on 1st trombone.

It’s not exactly directly related to the medium bore discussion and is a blatant bit of self-congratulation, but I saw a recent write up of a concert I played in where the reporter wrote:

“After the eerily accelerated pizzicato of the strings, the horn theme appears like a sunrise, outshone by the majestic trombone chorale”

To put it in context, it was about Brahms 1 and I chose to play on alto trombone. It's only the local rag and they're generally pretty kind to us so is possibly it bit generous but I got similar feedback from others in the audience as well. I could have chosen played it on tenor, there would have been plenty of good arguments to do so but would I have been able to get the same shimmering, dolce sound on a large bore tenor at a relatively low dynamic to elicit such feedback from the listener? Others possibly could but no way I could have done. Perhaps other trombonists would have preferred to play that piece with two large tenors and a bass and have a broader more uniform sound, I’m not saying there’s a right or wrong, it’s great to have some variety. Anyway, I know that’s not specifically a medium bore topic, but reading the concert report was what triggered my thought that actually the listener may enjoy a bit of clarity and vibrancy in the upper trombone part on occasion, it’s not only about making a huge, dark sound, hence the unapologetically tenuous link to the usefulness of medium bore trombones.

Large bore, medium bore, small bore, alto, the more the merrier I say, each on their own merits but particularly for 1st trombone in symphonic, brass band and wind orchestra medium bore can be a great option for a lot of people, myself included.

Macbone1 · by **Macbone1** » 2022-03-23 1:30 p.m.

When it comes to horn size/bore sizes I find myself thinking less about musical contexts and more about endurance! This comes with age I suppose. A .547 is great for orchestra of course and nobody is gonna get fatigued on a big horn with all the rests typical for that genre. I use my .491 for long, tiring jazz band concerts and dances, for blend but mostly to survive to the end and get paid! A .525 is good for concert band/wind ensemble/brass choir, where I'd find a .547 to be too tiring in most cases.

imsevimse · 2022-03-23 2:09 p.m.

[quote="Reedman1"]Just wondering how much the mouthpiece can affect the timbre of a trombone - can you convincingly fake a large bore on a medium bore horn with a bigger/deeper mouthpiece, or conversely lighten up the tone with a smaller/shallower piece? If so, doesn't that extend the versatility of a medium bore?[/quote]

The mouthpiece can change the sound a lot and also the leadpipe. Other things that matter is model of horn which means measurement, weight and material of different parts of the horn. My small bore horns play different. Some small bores plays huge compared to its size.

Generally I would say that a particular player probably gets a bigger sound on a 547 horn compared to a smaller one but if there are two different players then the one with a .525 horn may be the one with the bigger sound.

What is more important than anything is the player and the players technique, what sound he wants. This is because the instrument is also extended with mouth cavity and body volume, tounge, size of lungs, throat and anything you can think of that is personal to the player. The instrument of brass is only half the instrument. Look up Håkan Björkman (has made solo recordings). He is the principal of the Swedish Radio Symphony Orchestra and you will hear an example of a Yamaha 892ZX .509 bore with f-att which is considered to be small for a symphonic player. He has a very nice sound on that setup. It is absolutely a lighter sound than Alessi for example. Alessi also has a very good sound. These are two of the worlds best players. I think Alessi is more of what people strive for. I even think some tenor tromboneplayers go beyond that and want a sound more like a bass trombone sound. Yes, that is impressive. I like bass so nothing wrong with that if that's your sound. As a soloist this could be nice but if you want to blend? In the case of Håkan I know he has his own model of mouthpiece made for him by Yamaha. Does it have to be a huge sound to be a good sound? If you find his rexords and have a listen you know. My answer is no. It is to have an efficient, complex and appealing sound that is important. Dynamic sound is what Håkan talkes about. He has said " It's easier to make a smaller horn sound big than vice versa"

/Tom

Doug_Elliott · by **Doug_Elliott** » 2022-03-23 2:42 p.m.

I played a borrowed 3B/F on a gig a few days ago because I forgot my horn...

I got comfortable on it pretty quickly. The F attachment may have played well but the trigger was so hard to use I gave up on it.

I consider a 36B the ultimate versatile trombone capable of just about anything. If I had to have only one trombone that would be it.

BGuttman · by **BGuttman** » 2022-03-23 2:45 p.m.

That's the nice feature about a 3BF. You can use the F-attachment or not. It plays pretty well either way.

Pmlee1954 · by **Pmlee1954** » 2022-03-23 5:51 p.m.

[quote="MStarke"]I sometimes really like playing my Blessing medium bore (0.525) straight trombone. And there are certainly even better ones in that size.

But I still cannot figure out in which real life situation I would regularly prioritize it over other options in my stable.

Symphony orchestra: Large bore

Wind Orchestra and brass Band: probably large bore

Chamber music (brass ensemble/quintet, trombone Ensemble): Alternating between large and small bore

Big Band: Small bore

(Not playing any small Jazz ensemble stuff)

Etc...

I could imagine very specific situations or individual pieces where a medium bore would make Sense, but no general rule. E.g. Bolero, maybe a movie program or a downscaled section for a choir concert.

I also understand that it's a good compromise for situations where you don't really know what repertoire is coming (and you cannot bring multiple trombones) - but how often does this really happen?

And I see the point for people that want to play or afford only one trombone or don't feel "ready" for a large bore.

But if you are thinking in general terms - where does it fit? Is there any setting where you are expected to bring a medium bore?

(I am also aware that in the jazz scene at least some people play less Standard equipment and there may be more room for individual preferences. But also there the general choice is not a medium bore)[/quote]

I think you are correct in your assessment that using large bore trombones in large classical settings and using a medium bore bore in jazz settings is normal practice.

Bach5G · by **Bach5G** » 2022-03-23 7:05 p.m.

I can’t think of any settings in which you’d be expected to use a medium bore (.525”) horn.

Doug_Elliott · by **Doug_Elliott** » 2022-03-23 8:22 p.m.

Be expected to? By whom?

Who cares?

It's perfect for nearly any gig with only one trombone, or one tenor. Jazz, shows, brass quintet.

I use it on some 3 horn gigs where I need to be a bottom voice sometimes.

Better question than why, is why not?

GabrielRice · by **GabrielRice** » 2022-03-23 9:43 p.m.

[quote="Doug Elliott"]I played a borrowed 3B/F on a gig a few days ago because I forgot my horn...[/quote]

Let's just take a moment to let that sink in. :lol:

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2022-03-23 9:46 p.m.

[quote="Doug Elliott"]I played a borrowed 3B/F on a gig a few days ago because I forgot my horn...

I got comfortable on it pretty quickly. The F attachment may have played well but the trigger was so hard to use I gave up on it.

I consider a 36B the ultimate versatile trombone capable of just about anything. If I had to have only one trombone that would be it.[/quote]

I've heard of others not liking the F attachment on the 3BF. The newer ones have a string linkage and a different paddle. The older ones have a smaller paddle, and a plastic kidney shaped linkage. I have the old style on mine and think it works pretty great. The newer ones are just OK. Not sure if it would be worth trying to reinvent, vs. just getting a .508 shires with f attachment or the 36B route.

I could see it being a deal breaker for sure. But the 3B itself is a design that is hard to beat.

jacobgarchik · by **jacobgarchik** » 2022-03-24 1:24 p.m.

What are orchestra players using these days to play 1st parts in pre-20th c repertoire?

hornbuilder · by **hornbuilder** » 2022-03-24 1:31 p.m.

[quote="jacobgarchik"]What are orchestra players using these days to play 1st parts in pre-20th c repertoire?[/quote]

99% of the time, large bore, valved tenors. At least in the US. (Sweeping statement I know. But I think it is probably pretty accurate)

spencercarran · by **spencercarran** » 2022-03-24 1:42 p.m.

[quote="hornbuilder"]<QUOTE author="jacobgarchik" post_id="174631" time="1648142667" user_id="3890">
What are orchestra players using these days to play 1st parts in pre-20th c repertoire?[/quote]

99% of the time, large bore, valved tenors. At least in the US. (Sweeping statement I know. But I think it is probably pretty accurate)
</QUOTE>

And that's also a bit odd, no? There are a fair number of concerts where you don't use the valve at all. If you have multiple trombones (or a modular trombone) it seems like playing a straight horn for those concerts should be the obvious choice.

ArbanRubank · by **ArbanRubank** » 2022-03-24 1:51 p.m.

[quote="Doug Elliott"]Be expected to? By whom?

Who cares?[/quote]

It depends. If you happen to live and play non or semi-professionally in the shadow of a significant university with a robust musical program, then they may have set a "standard" for the sound of their trombone section. In my area, it was the sound concept of a 42B. So everywhere I played that featured a brass choir, ensemble, etc - that is what the musical directors wanted, because it was - I guess - what they were accustomed to, perhaps having even graduated from that university's musical department.

I know this discussion is about medium-bore horns, but my example was how a certain manufacturer and model can possibly become regimented in a given area.

I wonder if others who contribute to this forum and who teach in a university, have seen evidence of this coat-tailing by groups within their area as well. If not, then maybe it was either just my imagination, or a situation that was unique where I was at the time, for some odd reason.

jacobgarchik · by **jacobgarchik** » 2022-03-24 2:01 p.m.

this seems like a sensible approach.

from https://www.tobyoft.com/equipment

EQUIPMENT GENERAL USES

Edwards T350HB Default Trombone

Thein Kruspe Alto Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms: 1 & 2, Mendelssohn, Schumann

Thein Kruspe Tenor (small bore) Brahms: 3 & 4, Schubert, Dvorak 6 & 7

Bach 36G (straight) Berlioz: Phantastique, Ravel: Bolero & Le Enfant, Jazz or Latin Pops repertoire

jacobgarchik · by **jacobgarchik** » 2022-03-24 2:05 p.m.

also seems sensible

<FACEBOOK id="671257506259368"><LINK_TEXT text="https://www.facebook.com/trombonesrco/p ... 68/?type=1">https://www.facebook.com/trombonesrco/photos/a.586881868030266.1073741827.117668144951643/671257506259368/?type=1</LINK_TEXT></FACEBOOK>

Bach5G · by **Bach5G** » 2022-03-24 2:09 p.m.

[quote="jacobgarchik"]this seems like a sensible approach.

from https://www.tobyoft.com/equipment

EQUIPMENT GENERAL USES

Edwards T350HB Default Trombone

Thein Kruspe Alto Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms: 1 & 2, Mendelssohn, Schumann

Thein Kruspe Tenor (small bore) Brahms: 3 & 4, Schubert, Dvorak 6 & 7

Bach 36G (straight) Berlioz: Phantastique, Ravel: Bolero & Le Enfant, Jazz or Latin Pops repertoire[/quote]

Yeah. If we have all of these choices, why not make them? Why one-size-fits-all .547 trigger horn?

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2022-03-24 4:20 p.m.

~~[color=#8000BF]~~[quote="jacobgarchik"]this seems like a sensible approach.

from https://www.tobyoft.com/equipment

EQUIPMENT GENERAL USES

Edwards T350HB Default Trombone

Thein Kruspe Alto Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms: 1 & 2, Mendelssohn, Schumann

Thein Kruspe Tenor (small bore) Brahms: 3 & 4, Schubert, Dvorak 6 & 7

Bach 36G (straight) Berlioz: Phantastique, Ravel: Bolero & Le Enfant, Jazz or Latin Pops repertoire[/quote]

Toby's approach makes a lot of sense. I love the wonderful sounds that the Boston Symphony Orchestra produces, whether in their amazing concert hall or not.

Note that the rest of of their low brass section also adjusts (goes smaller) when Toby does.

I love playing slightly smaller equipment on the kind of literature Toby notes. And also for smaller ensembles in more intimate venues than a large concert hall.

Isn't about time that the major conservatories recognized this advantage (and, I hope, trend)?

imsevimse · by **imsevimse** » 2022-03-24 7:37 p.m.

Why a medium trombone? Listen to this played on a. 509 Yamaha 892ZX with f-att and you might know the answer.

This is Håkan Björkman

<SPOTIFY id="track/3od1Aw8BwlhrkQUmNbbW26"><LINK_TEXT text="https://open.spotify.com/track/3od1Aw8B ... =copy-link">https://open.spotify.com/track/3od1Aw8BwlhrkQUmNbbW26?si=DcYOdkPpTee8Aawyacgklg&utm_source=copy-link</LINK_TEXT></SPOTIFY>

/Tom

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2022-03-24 7:41 p.m.

[quote="imsevimse"]Why a medium trombone? Listen to this played on a. 509 Yamaha 892ZX with f-att and you might know the answer.

This is Håkan Björkman

<SPOTIFY id="track/3od1Aw8BwlhrkQUmNbbW26"><LINK_TEXT text="https://open.spotify.com/track/3od1Aw8B ... =copy-link">https://open.spotify.com/track/3od1Aw8BwlhrkQUmNbbW26?si=DcYOdkPpTee8Aawyacgklg&utm_source=copy-link</LINK_TEXT></SPOTIFY>

/Tom[/quote]

That's a small bore in my book. I think the .508 (or .509 lol) is the do it all.

He sounds like Lindberg at the start there, you can here it in how he ramps the lip slurs. What a sound! Sweden!

jacobgarchik · by **jacobgarchik** » 2022-03-25 10:53 a.m.

I suspect there's quite a lot of film score sessions with a variety of sizes.

<INSTAGRAM id="BcvQBP6naA_">https://www.instagram.com/p/BcvQBP6naA_/</INSTAGRAM>

<INSTAGRAM id="Bgf-m77Dc7-">https://www.instagram.com/p/Bgf-m77Dc7-/</INSTAGRAM>

great instagram account, BTW.

Mv2541 · by **Mv2541** » 2022-03-25 4:29 p.m.

[quote="Doug Elliott"]Be expected to? By whom?

Who cares?[/quote]

I’ve been enjoying reading this thread, and this is exactly my thought. I bring a 36 to anything that isn’t with a big orchestra. No MD or audience member would know or care, and I get to play the horn I like playing; it’s a win-win.

jorymil · by **jorymil** » 2022-03-26 12:05 a.m.

[quote="imsevimse"]Why a medium trombone? Listen to this played on a. 509 Yamaha 892ZX with f-att and you might know the answer.

This is Håkan Björkman

<SPOTIFY id="track/3od1Aw8BwlhrkQUmNbbW26"><LINK_TEXT text="https://open.spotify.com/track/3od1Aw8B ... =copy-link">https://open.spotify.com/track/3od1Aw8BwlhrkQUmNbbW26?si=DcYOdkPpTee8Aawyacgklg&utm_source=copy-link</LINK_TEXT></SPOTIFY>

/Tom[/quote]

Where can I get one of those? That is one sweet horn.

jorymil · by **jorymil** » 2022-03-26 12:18 a.m.

[quote="Matt K"]I wish 3bf+s were more common. I hardly ever see them come up for sale but I suspect one would be as close as I could get to an “everything” horn[/quote]

There were two for sale on eBay a month or so ago: both sold for under $1k. I got mine in ugly, but playable condition for $500 online (my specific horn comes up a bunch in Google images). $200 in repairs and $200 or so to make it f/g convertible. They're out there to be had.

It won't fool anyone into thinking it's a bass, and it probably won't do the Tommy Dorsey thing as well as a 2B, but it's a really nice horn. It's not a marching horn, either! We egg your house for doing that!

imsevimse · by **imsevimse** » 2022-03-26 3:17 a.m.

[quote="jorymil"]<QUOTE author="imsevimse" post_id="174668" time="1648165029" user_id="3173">
Why a medium trombone? Listen to this played on a. 509 Yamaha 892ZX with f-att and you might know the answer.

This is Håkan Björkman

/Tom[/quote]

Where can I get one of those? That is one sweet horn.
</QUOTE>

You need to get in contact with Yamaha and ask them to make you one. If they hear a lot of people are interested they might understand this horn could sell. I know we are five players in Stockholm who own one. Håkan was the first since it is his own model. A friend that runs one of the two still existing brass instrument shops in Stockholm contacted Yamaha and asked them to build four more. One was sold immediately and the three others remained at the shop. I was there as fast as I heard about them and tried. They were nice horns but I hadn't the money. A year later I was there again and then only one was left in stock. This time I had the money.

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2022-03-26 3:23 a.m.

[quote="Matt K"]I wish 3bf+s were more common. I hardly ever see them come up for sale but I suspect one would be as close as I could get to an “everything” horn[/quote]

Again, King 607F is literally a 3B+F with a straight bell brace.

ithinknot · by **ithinknot** » 2022-03-26 3:57 a.m.

[quote="Burgerbob"]<QUOTE author="Matt K" post_id="174446" time="1647993286" user_id="48">
I wish 3bf+s were more common. I hardly ever see them come up for sale but I suspect one would be as close as I could get to an “everything” horn[/quote]

Again, King 607F is literally a 3B+F with a straight bell brace.
</QUOTE>

and brass outers, FWIW

Trav1s · by **Trav1s** » 2022-03-26 8:40 a.m.

Amateur player (recovering music major) with 35 years of experience with .522"/.525" horns here. I started on trumpet and developed some crazy embouchure problems then moved to trombone. When it was time to upgrade, my teacher (a Bach guy) said go with the 36B - he called it a horn that would last my entire lifetime. If I went the music ed/performance route then an upgrade would be in my future but the 36B (medium bore) was/is versatile and worth having in the arsenal.

When I changed majors, the 36B did everything I needed in college performance ensembles as a non major. I continued to use it in other groups and settings. I have since then become a Conn-vert but 30 years later, the medium bore continues to do the same - It works for me and it works well.

When people hear me play, they are quite surprised at the sound that I get out of a medium bore horn - this really hit home while playing in a trombone choir at ITF. Only I knew I was cheating and playing a medium bore. Work smarter, not harder is my mantra. ;-)

I've spent the past 30 years working on my sound concept and have made the following observation while playing many different horns in the .520"-.525" range:

- A simple mouthpiece change can make all the difference in sound and response with these horns. The 6.5 range allow them to bark more and the 5 range with a bigger cup fills out the sound. The jackpot mouthpiece on the 79H is a Doug Elliott LT102/LT-D/D4 which makes the horn a great 88H imposter. Thanks Doug!

- I will be experimenting with lead pipes once my second .522" slide is back in my possession. I am curious to see how a large shank pipe/piece will work on the vintage Conn .522" slides.

I'm a pragmatic person and short of those going down the classical performance road, I can't see a need for .547" horn. As Sam Burtis said on the old forum - Try 'em all and play what works for you.

And yes, the my college studio was quick to push me towards the 42B/Bach 6.5AL combo. I played the game and it was not fun. Every Bach 6.5AL I have tied was/is a huge source of frustration for me. Likewise, my college teacher was quick to write off the mouthpiece I had been playing for 3 years prior to joining the studio simply because it did not say Bach 6.5AL on it. I'm grateful for the progress made in the trombone world since the 80's and appreciate the options available to us today.

Now, if I had the $ to head to the New Jersey or even the UK and put together the R3F of my dreams with the 8" nickel bell, Rotax valve, gold brass slide, and red brass tuning slide...

MStarke · by **MStarke** » 2022-03-28 7:02 a.m.

Lots of very interesting posts!

Trying to summarize it:

There is not really any situation where a medium (+/- .525) bore trombone would be expected/"industry" standard.

But there are lots of situations where at least for some people it can work much better than the standard choices.

Maybe I will give mine a little bit more face time. But on the other hand I already have too many other trombones that are being played regularly...

Macbone1 · by **Macbone1** » 2022-03-28 1:55 p.m.

[quote="Reedman1"]Just wondering how much the mouthpiece can affect the timbre of a trombone - can you convincingly fake a large bore on a medium bore horn with a bigger/deeper mouthpiece, or conversely lighten up the tone with a smaller/shallower piece? If so, doesn't that extend the versatility of a medium bore?[/quote]

There is certainly some flexibility, but IMHO more toward a smaller than larger mouthpiece. Going too large will make for dark and tubby sounding mid and high range and a weird stuffy feeling on the lowest notes. But going too far in any direction will distort tone and response.

I once had a teacher who did studio dates in Philly; he only owned a Bach 36B and said he could cover anything including bass trb parts up to a certain point. When I was in the service I stuck a Bach 7 in my .525 bore for 2nd book in big band; it worked fine.

Trav1s · by **Trav1s** » 2022-03-29 9:05 a.m.

[quote="Macbone1"]<QUOTE author="Reedman1" post_id="174425" time="1647983117" user_id="3067">
Just wondering how much the mouthpiece can affect the timbre of a trombone - can you convincingly fake a large bore on a medium bore horn with a bigger/deeper mouthpiece, or conversely lighten up the tone with a smaller/shallower piece? If so, doesn't that extend the versatility of a medium bore?[/quote]

There is certainly some flexibility, but IMHO more toward a smaller than larger mouthpiece. Going too large will make for dark and tubby sounding mid and high range and a weird stuffy feeling on the lowest notes. But going too far in any direction will distort tone and response.

I once had a teacher who did studio dates in Philly; he only owned a Bach 36B and said he could cover anything including bass trb parts up to a certain point. When I was in the service I stuck a Bach 7 in my .525 bore for 2nd book in big band; it worked fine.
</QUOTE>

That's my experience - the 36B I purchased new in 1986 came with a Bach 7C but that was as small as I found workable on that horn. In general, I have found the medium bore horns to no like deep cups. Not sure if that is more about the depth itself or the backbore that is generally paired with them. In the Doug Elliott world, the C+/D/D+ is the sweet spot for me - YMMV

spencercarran · by **spencercarran** » 2022-03-29 9:56 a.m.

[quote="Trav1s"]<QUOTE author="Macbone1" post_id="174960" time="1648490141" user_id="7770">

There is certainly some flexibility, but IMHO more toward a smaller than larger mouthpiece. Going too large will make for dark and tubby sounding mid and high range and a weird stuffy feeling on the lowest notes. But going too far in any direction will distort tone and response.

I once had a teacher who did studio dates in Philly; he only owned a Bach 36B and said he could cover anything including bass trb parts up to a certain point. When I was in the service I stuck a Bach 7 in my .525 bore for 2nd book in big band; it worked fine.[/quote]

That's my experience - the 36B I purchased new in 1986 came with a Bach 7C but that was as small as I found workable on that horn. In general, I have found the medium bore horns to no like deep cups. Not sure if that is more about the depth itself or the backbore that is generally paired with them. In the Doug Elliott world, the C+/D/D+ is the sweet spot for me - YMMV
</QUOTE>
I found 36B + Wick 4BS to be a really nice combination. 51D was too far though; got so many response and intonation quirks.

timothy42b · by **timothy42b** » 2022-03-29 11:24 a.m.

[quote="GabrielRice"]<QUOTE author="Doug Elliott" post_id="174524" time="1648060972" user_id="51">
I played a borrowed 3B/F on a gig a few days ago because I forgot my horn...[/quote]

Let's just take a moment to let that sink in. :lol:
</QUOTE>

That was my thought too. I've showed up with no mouthpiece, or no mute, but have yet to leave the whole horn home! :biggrin:

imsevimse · by **imsevimse** » 2022-03-29 11:49 a.m.

[quote="timothy42b"]<QUOTE author="GabrielRice" post_id="174557" time="1648086216" user_id="102">

Let's just take a moment to let that sink in. :lol:[/quote]

That was my thought too. I've showed up with no mouthpiece, or no mute, but have yet to leave the whole horn home! :biggrin:
</QUOTE>

I've heard of people who came to a gig with an empty case. It sure happens. I've personally forgot the mouthpiece on gigs which hurts a lot. Fortunately I was saved the last minute. The band was ready, I was on first with no mouthpiece but ready with my horn. Dancing audience were ready. The second song was to be "I've got you under my skin" with the solo in my part. <EMOJI seq="1f914" tseq="1f914">🤔</EMOJI>. The start was delayed because the second tromboneplayer was five minutes late. When he arrived he happend to have an extra Bach 6 1/2 Megatone on loan that I could use. He saved my gig. Could have been the last time I subbed with that band <EMOJI seq="1f923" tseq="1f923">🤣</EMOJI>

/Tom

Doug_Elliott · by **Doug_Elliott** » 2022-03-29 12:10 p.m.

I've actually arrived at 4 gigs in the past few years without my horn.

We're usually packing the car with my wife's upright bass, the band music, music stands, lights, etc. I have to remember all the important band stuff first.

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2022-03-29 12:58 p.m.

The worst that I've done:

• Arrived at a rehearsal without music (once) or a stand (once).

• Arrived at a concert without a trombone slide (sitting at home drying by the sink after I'd given it a thorough cleaning!) :horror:

Never again! :oops:

DougHulme · by **DougHulme** » 2022-03-29 1:30 p.m.

I once turned up to a sound check the night before the recording only to find I was missing the slide. I had a single trigger and a double trigger bell set up that shared the same slide, you could see how that could happen couldnt you? Or maybe its something to do with the christian name!... Doug

modelerdc · by **modelerdc** » 2022-03-29 4:54 p.m.

IMHO the medium .525 bore horns, such as the Bach 36B is the best size for brass quintet. also good for 1st in orchestra when the large bore is a bit much. Works fine on 3rd in big band but a bit much for lead. Good for musicals when one trombone plays all over the place. Good for jazz when you are the only trombone in the group. Actually, the most versatile trombone of all, but not better than a large bore for most large orchestra work and not better than a small bore for lead, and traditional jazz.

sungfw · by **sungfw** » 2022-04-06 4:27 p.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]I guess I'll say it again. I took the original comment to mean "college student", trying to get a job. This is usually where "kids" are forced to play large bores.

The comment about young kids from the previous page, trying to take a jab at me, is kind of silly given the premise. If this thread was about step up instruments for children, cool, but it's not. What are we really talking about here? Professional or semi-professional applications for medium bores? Good, then let's leave small kids out of it.[/quote]

The author of the post you took issue with specifically stated:

[quote="asmith"]Also, they can be a great transitional horn for students that are ready for an F-attachment but not a large bore. We have a few teachers around my area that really like the Eastman ETB428MG for that exact reason, plus it's pretty cheap. [emphasis mine][/quote]

Given that premise, it's difficult to fathom how anyone could miss that the author was NOT referring to "college students" in general, much less those pursuing a career in trombone performance or music education.

asmith · by **asmith** » 2022-04-06 5:13 p.m.

The author of the post you took issue with specifically stated:

[quote="asmith"]Also, they can be a great transitional horn for students that are ready for an F-attachment but not a large bore. We have a few teachers around my area that really like the Eastman ETB428MG for that exact reason, plus it's pretty cheap. [emphasis mine][/quote]

Given that premise, it's difficult to fathom how anyone could miss that the author was NOT referring to "college students" in general, much less those pursuing a career in trombone performance or music education.

[/quote]

I think the post that Harrison took issue with was not necessarily mine, but one a little further down.

Either way, it's not my pedagogical approach just that of teachers whose students happen to frequent my store. Personally, I see the approach as an unnecessary burden on the parents' wallets, but in those situations it is not my place to speak up. I would rather see most of these students playing better on their .500" bore student horn that they struggle to play on rather than sell them a horn they will sell before they are out of high school. However, sometimes parents will trust a teacher and go with them no matter what I say or do.

That being said I think it fulfils a niche for professional player in lighter settings or commercial settings where they need a greater flexibility of tonal ability. Generally, I think they have a place in the market but only fit in a certain niche or suit a particular player.

BGuttman · by **BGuttman** » 2022-04-06 5:50 p.m.

I personally think the Medium Bore is being given the short shrift by the teaching community. A student who is not planning a career as a symphony player or in the film studios has no particular need of a large instrument. Size of student really doesn't matter, though. I played with a bass trombonist who was a five foot nothing wisp of a girl who could blow down the house on her Bach 50.

Teachers worried about sound on the football field would do better with a kid on a small bore who can be heard than a kid on a large bore who can't. Then again, I'm a fan of the cheap trombone in marching band where appearance often means more than actual sound.

I've found that a medium bore is a very versatile horn. Maybe you can't win the audition to the Boston Symphony on one, but once you have the job the medium bore horn fits nicely in many playing situations. And outside of Symphony Hall, a medium bore works very well (as I have said before) for a multitude of applications.

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2022-04-06 6:23 p.m.

[quote="asmith"]

I think the post that Harrison took issue with was not necessarily mine, but one a little further down.
[/quote]

Totally agree. It's not worth me explaining any further, other than that the topic as started is not about little kids. I was in no way debating the merits of step up horns for kids, and have no interest in doing that.

At the end of the day, if you sound awesome and love playing a 36b, that's your answer.

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2022-04-06 11:04 p.m.

I wish I "sounded awesome" - but I don't.

However I do love playing my vintage Conn 79H (and also enjoyed the Bach 36B that preceded it). Especially now that I'm no longer playing in a larrge symphony orchestra! Medium bore trombones definitely have their place.

OneTon · by **OneTon** » 2022-04-14 10:18 p.m.

Harrisonreed’s metaphor does not support the argument for only large bore horns. The CDL applicant in many states need only arrive at the practical test with a 2 axle (1 steering (front) axle and 1 driver (rear) axle) tractor, a single axle trailer, and air brakes. To avoid restriction to automatic (or computer shifted manual) transmissions, Road Ranger (10 speed) and/or Splitter (13 to 18 speed) transmissions are not specified. To avoid any restriction on their Class A CDL, the applicant need only arrive to the test with a 5 speed manual transmission, 2 axle tractor, a 1 axle 26 foot trailer, and air brakes, if such a rig could be found. Some operators have run that way, however. More applicants would utilize the smaller rig, but that combination is rarer than a medium bore horn. Operable trailers less than 26 feet might be allowed but are even more rare. With super single wheels and tires, the 18 wheeler just morphed into a 6 wheeler. Long live the French orchestras. Did anyone ever see a French orchestra section playing Bach 6 trombones?

Why, you may ask, use fewer axles and shorter trailers? Road and bridge load restrictions are based on weight per axle and length between axles. Why use a 4 pound sledge if a framing hammer will do?

EOlson9 · by **EOlson9** » 2022-04-15 8:00 p.m.

I play a King 3b+F (2125F) as my main (only) tenor with F attachment. I play in community jazz band, community band, and pit orchestra. It works great for what I do.

teotrombone · by **teotrombone** » 2022-04-19 3:23 p.m.

Hello

I see it a bit like using a knife.

You can cut everything with a very big sharp knife. But you can take also a smaller one and make cutting easier or more precise for different things.

I have many instruments and I love to change them for different repertoire.

But I still do my daily stuff on one and same instrument.

:hi:

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2022-04-19 6:49 p.m.

[quote="teotrombone"]I have many instruments and I love to change them for different repertoire.

But I still do my daily stuff on one and same instrument.[/quote]

You have a nice collection of Benge trombones! What's your "daily?"

teotrombone · by **teotrombone** » 2022-04-20 2:42 a.m.

You have a nice collection of Benge trombones! What's your "daily?"

[/quote]

I use my 190F newer model for a daily horn.

I don’t know why, but I never had the opportunity to try a bad Benge.

dukesboneman · by **dukesboneman** » 2022-04-24 1:45 p.m.

As someone that played Conn 78H`s and Bach 36`s ONLY for about 25 years, I really like that size.

Now currently I do most of my playing on a BachLT12G , If I had to go down to only ONE tenor it would be my Mount Vernon Lt36.

I Play in a sextet (2 trombones, tenor sax, Piano, Bass & Drums) where the 2nd trombonist plays a 36.So I use my 36 and the blend is great and slightly bigger than 2 small bore horns.

Brass quintet I use the 36. I 1st used my 42BO but it sounded to big and heavy.

That size horn is incredibly versatile and is , IMO the best All-around horn size

MStarke · by **MStarke** » 2024-05-30 6:19 a.m.

Coming back to this thread - didn't realize it is more than 2 years old! - as I have just got an Elkhart Conn 78h in good condition that I accidentally found for a very good price.

Some impressions from the first playing session (which I think fit to what others said before):

- Surprisingly heavy (but smooth) slide, larger bell throat than I expected

- Very adaptable. With my regular smallbore mouthpiece it does feel and play kind of like a scaled up 6h, with a larger one it's more like a scaled down 8h

In the last two years I did actually come across more settings than expected that probably work better with a medium bore than my small or large bores. 3rd in a normal bigband setting, maybe also 1st in a wind band etc. Let's see. I got it for cheap, so it's worth a try.

EriKon · by **EriKon** » 2024-05-30 9:19 a.m.

Still one of my favorite sizes. I just played my recently acquired Williams 8 for a week of modern bigband concerts and some musical shows. Did both things extraordinary well. I recently lent my 78H SPEC to a colleague who's trying it and I got his early corporation Bach 36B in exchange. Something about this bore size is just special, at least with me.

MrHCinDE · by **MrHCinDE** » 2024-05-30 2:48 p.m.

I‘ve ended up with a few, not really by design but it‘s going to be hard to decide which to keep and which to move on:

King 3B+, as original and with 607 bell section

Conn 78H SPEC, all in red brass

Bach Mercedes

Honorary Member: Edwards .525 slide compatible with my large bore setup

They‘re all so darn easy to play for my main playing interests of the upper trombone parts in small ensembles or a small symphony orchestra.

At the moment the Edwards slide will probably be first to go.

hyperbolica · by **hyperbolica** » 2024-05-30 5:38 p.m.

525 is my go to. Tbone choir? Quartet? Quintet? Church gig? 1 or 2 in an orchestra? Unless it needs serious 547 power, low notes, or need for a lighter sound or harder articulation of a 500/508 bore, it's either the 79h or 88h w/525. The sound is more interesting.

If I don't know what's coming, sometimes I take a 547. Its a harder push, the sound doesn't shimmer up high, but you have some depth down low. I prefer a lighter sound when it makes sense. 547 is overkill 80-90% of the time.

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2024-05-30 5:48 p.m.

For 2nd Trombone in a (medium-sized) orchestra, medium bore (my Conn 79H is 0.522") would seem to be a good choice for much repertoire - especially if the 1st Trombone is on an alto.

I would also consider using my Conn 88H with my dual-bore SL2547 Slide (I need a place to play it!), but the 1st Trombone plays a full 0.547". Where can I use that wonderful slide? :idk:

Bach5G · by **Bach5G** » 2024-05-30 7:07 p.m.

I look forward to the principal playing alto.

Finetales · by **Finetales** » 2024-05-30 10:42 p.m.

All one really needs is a .547 and a 3BF. But in my case it is certainly nice to have a 607 for a little more beef in certain situations. Overall I think the "big small horn" .525s are more useful than "small big horn" .525s, but they both have their little niches.

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2024-05-31 3:26 a.m.

I wish we could reframe the question into why do we even have these categories. Why is there, especially in the classical/orchestral world, a "standard" size that you're expected to play, to begin with? I cannot think of any other instrument where that is the case. Woodwinds come in an infinite variation of sizes and bore profile. Trumpets, horns and tubas all come in a variety of size depending on brand and model and "orchestra players must play on this one specific size" is not a really a thing (at least not anywhere close to the trombone's .547). Even some other attempts at categorization like 4/4 vs 5/4 vs 6/4 tubas are a very relative concept – the bore and bell sizes vary a lot. String players all play instruments with quite a bit of variation in size, shape, string gauge, etc.

Just look at the more traditional German trombones. There's 5 general "widths" and 4 of them were considered orchestral sizes. And look closer and you'll see that one maker's bore sizes for each of those 5 "widths" might be completely different from another's. They are concepts of how the instrument should feel and play, and not precise mandated sizes. Sadly those are disappearing and being replaced by the American standard sizes.

Seems to me that primarily Jazz players use all kinds of sizes of horns, to some extent they strive to have their sound and an instrument that best helps them achieve it.

I simply do not understand why orchestral trombones have to come in one bore and bell size, and why everyone strives to have the same sound concept. I find it boring and sad.

Retrobone · by **Retrobone** » 2024-05-31 4:38 a.m.

[quote="LeTromboniste"]I wish we could reframe the question into why do we even have these categories. Why is there, especially in the classical/orchestral world, a "standard" size that you're expected to play, to begin with? I cannot think of any other instrument where that is the case. Woodwinds come in an infinite variation of sizes and bore profile. Trumpets, horns and tubas all come in a variety of size depending on brand and model and "orchestra players must play on this one specific size" is not a really a thing (at least not anywhere close to the trombone's .547). Even some other attempts at categorization like 4/4 vs 5/4 vs 6/4 tubas are a very relative concept – the bore and bell sizes vary a lot. String players all play instruments with quite a bit of variation in size, shape, string gauge, etc.

Just look at the more traditional German trombones. There's 5 general "widths" and 4 of them were considered orchestral sizes. And look closer and you'll see that one maker's bore sizes for each of those 5 "widths" might be completely different from another's. They are concepts of how the instrument should feel and play, and not precise mandated sizes. Sadly those are disappearing and being replaced by the American standard sizes.

Seems to me that primarily Jazz players use all kinds of sizes of horns, to some extent they strive to have their sound and an instrument that best helps them achieve it.

I simply do not understand why orchestral trombones have to come in one bore and bell size, and why everyone strives to have the same sound concept. I find it boring and sad.[/quote]

I couldn't agree more!!!

MStarke · by **MStarke** » 2024-05-31 5:30 a.m.

You could go one step further and relate it to the question why orchestral playing - in a very simplified way to say it - asks to play things with a very specific pre-defined interpretation and sound and doesn't allow (much) own interpretation typically?

I think if that fact is accepted then it is also logical that there is a relatively standardized selection of equipment.

I know this is a very black and white perspective, but there is not really so much space to deviate in the interpretation.

However to be honest this is NOT the only instrument where it is that way. There are some German orchestras where you can play any french horn as long as it is an Alexander 103 (or maybe a copy).

In British brass bands, instrumentation also seems to be quite standardized across most instruments.

The majority of jazz trombonists play .500 to .509, jazz bass trombonists mostly play fairly standard equipment as well.

I think in the end it is just making it easier to make things work in diverse settings.

You cannot go wrong with bringing your .547 tenor to an orchestral gig, even if another trombone might be the more optimal choice.

Retrobone · by **Retrobone** » 2024-05-31 8:04 a.m.

I am lucky to have some freedom in my instrument choices... since I play in an orchestra which does quite a wide range of repertoire. This week for instance we are accompanying a jazz singer. There is one trombone and its playing in a small venue. I'm playing on my 36, which I used the week before in Beethoven 9 on 2nd trombone. The project before that was Berg Violin Concerto and Bruckner 7. I played that program on a Lätzsch Weite 2 medium bore and the whole section used German trombones together with rotary trumpets. All these decisions are made by the section or myself. Conductors are never consulted. We often scale down from 547 trombones when we feel it's appropriate. In general I find the 547 trombone to be one sided in sound. Not really colourful enough for a,lot of that I want to do sound wise

bbocaner · by **bbocaner** » 2024-05-31 10:35 a.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]That's assuming that composers would have stuck with serpents, etc, even if modern tubas and trombones had been available to them. I doubt it. Why?[/quote]

Actually, a lot of them did stick with the older instruments for quite some time after the newer instruments were available. Because it's a completely different sound.

As far as .525 instruments, my position is that if you're using the right leadpipe/receiver and mouthpiece, there isn't a whole lot of difference between .525 and .547.

I like using the .525 for quintet, for pops programs, bolero, and... I just like practicing on the .525.

Bach5G · by **Bach5G** » 2024-05-31 12:16 p.m.

I’ve had a .525 Shires for nearly 20 years, along with a .547. Nice horn but I think a 3B might be a more useful alternative.

hyperbolica · by **hyperbolica** » 2024-05-31 1:41 p.m.

[quote="Bach5G"]I’ve had a .525 Shires for nearly 20 years, along with a .547. Nice horn but I think a 3B might be a more useful alternative.[/quote]

I bought a Shires 525 a bunch of years ago, and immediately got rid of it. It played so big there was no reason to own it next to an existing 547. Other 525, like the 79h and 36b and even the 88h with 525 slide fill a niche that Shires doesn't seem to be able to touch.

I find the 3b has a more biting sound, and not necessarily in a good way. It blends better with trumpets, but when played by itself, I guess it just sounds like a King, and soime folks like that and some don't. I prefer my Getzen 3508 or even a 48h for a thicker, more solid sound.

JeffBone44 · by **JeffBone44** » 2024-05-31 2:10 p.m.

My 1940 Conn 78H special that I bought from The Brass Ark last year has been a game changer for me. It is absolutely perfect for the pit work that I do. I was struggling mightily trying to use my large bore for it, and a small bore was out of the question because I need a valve for a lot of that repertoire. Most importantly it gives me the sound that I want for that type of work. It can sound brilliant when I need it too, and for softer playing it has a nice warm sound with color. I also prefer the medium bore for 1st parts in my brass band.

Aznguyy · by **Aznguyy** » 2024-05-31 2:44 p.m.

In most of my playing situations, I prefer to use my Getzen medium bore. I do have a 3b size horn, but like many have posted, I prefer the extra "beef" that comes from my medium bore. It just gives me more of the sound I hear in my head and I have no issue making it fit into where I play.

While I say this about the Getzen, I have a harder time using my Yamaha medium bore which has a 8.5inch bell. The Yamaha would just play too big in most situations except for orchestra 1st or chamber groups with single trombone parts. I would occasionally use it in smaller jazz settings but it would take a lot more work steering the horn to play it the way I like to in jazz.

As a question to you all(not trying to turn this into too much of a mouthpiece discussion), do you use the same mouthpiece size in your small/large bore as your medium bore? or do you approach the mouthpiece size differently for your medium bore?

hyperbolica · by **hyperbolica** » 2024-05-31 4:39 p.m.

[quote="Aznguyy"]

As a question to you all(not trying to turn this into too much of a mouthpiece discussion), do you use the same mouthpiece size in your small/large bore as your medium bore? or do you approach the mouthpiece size differently for your medium bore?[/quote]
I use Doug Elliott stuff, the same rim on 500, 508, 525 and 547. Cups from C - G, shanks 2,3,4,8. A horn can change personality or flavor with a different leadpipe and /or mouthpieces. Typically I use a 104 E 4 on 525, but could go up or down a size.

Finetales · by **Finetales** » 2024-05-31 5:18 p.m.

[quote="LeTromboniste"]I wish we could reframe the question into why do we even have these categories. Why is there, especially in the classical/orchestral world, a "standard" size that you're expected to play, to begin with? I cannot think of any other instrument where that is the case. Woodwinds come in an infinite variation of sizes and bore profile. Trumpets, horns and tubas all come in a variety of size depending on brand and model and "orchestra players must play on this one specific size" is not a really a thing (at least not anywhere close to the trombone's .547). Even some other attempts at categorization like 4/4 vs 5/4 vs 6/4 tubas are a very relative concept – the bore and bell sizes vary a lot. String players all play instruments with quite a bit of variation in size, shape, string gauge, etc.[/quote]

I would argue that orchestral trumpets, at least in the United States, are even more standardized than orchestral trombones. Even by the collegiate level you are expected to play a Bach or Yamaha Xeno C (.462" bore, Bach 229 or 239 taper). Nothing else is really acceptable. That's not just ".547", that's "you must play a Bach .547 or an Edwards Bach-style .547."

Horns too are pretty well standardized. There are some differences in bell throats between medium-throat Geyer wraps and large-throat 8Ds, but the 8D is pretty much gone in the orchestra apart from in Cleveland, and small-throat horns like the Conn 6D even moreso. In the UK they still use 8Ds and similar large Kruspes as far as I know. And if bore size is the data point we're interested in, every modern double horn is .468" or an inconsequentially-tiny bit larger. Plus, as already mentioned, in parts of Europe and Asia, you may ONLY play on an Alexander 103. You can play the audition on another horn, but if you win you must go buy a 103.

Tubas are definitely a wild west compared to the rest of the brass. The typical instrument is very different from country to country (6/4 York-style Cs in the US, big compensating Ebs in the UK (though they are bringing out the 6/4 Cs for the biggest works now), rotary Bbs in Germany, etc. But, within each region it's pretty consistent. I think that's a simple result of being the only one on your instrument in the orchestra, and tubas having such a massive range of bores, bell sizes, and wraps.

Just look at the more traditional German trombones. There's 5 general "widths" and 4 of them were considered orchestral sizes. And look closer and you'll see that one maker's bore sizes for each of those 5 "widths" might be completely different from another's. They are concepts of how the instrument should feel and play, and not precise mandated sizes.

Yes, but as you say in the next sentence, they are being replaced by American .547s. The German players aren't being asked to play them, they are doing it on their own accord. Seems to me they recognize that the modern .547 is the best tool for the job. But, they don't sound like American players when they play them. The German sound has as at least as much to do with the player's approach as it does the horn.

I simply do not understand why orchestral trombones have to come in one bore and bell size, and why everyone strives to have the same sound concept. I find it boring and sad.

Same sound concept...well, that's what happens when legions of players want to sound like one thing - first it was the roaring Chicago Symphony brass at its peak, and then it was (and still is) Joe Alessi. It's not just because they're all playing .547s.

My personal orchestral sound concept is a mix of Olaf Ott and Glenn Dodson...there are many more ways to play a .547 than that is commonly done! At the end of the day, although .547 is by far my least favorite size of trombone to play or listen to, if everyone else is bringing a dark .547 to the gig there's not much else you can bring unless you're on principal. I would LOVE to play in a section that doesn't just downsize for alto works, but is downsized by default and only brings out the big guns for Mahler. But unless I make my own orchestra, that will remain a fantasy.

hornbuilder · by **hornbuilder** » 2024-05-31 9:47 p.m.

Big horns aren't actually appropriate for Mahler, either, if you consider what was being played when the music was written..

mjrochatbn74 · by **mjrochatbn74** » 2024-05-31 11:03 p.m.

Disclaimer: I don't play orchestral rep and my background is mainly big band, rock, blues, and a little of everything else including brass ensemble and NOLA brass band. However, I am astounded regarding numerous threads and conversations on horns sizes. I would say that most historical big bands typically got it right for gear with small bore, small-medium bore, medium bore and bass trombone in a section for balance in this rep. However, the classical composers would flip over in their graves if they saw how their music was being played especially by the brass. We have essentially bass trombones blaring playing part one and everyone just agrees that this is how it is. Who says? Everyone needs a 0.547. Please stop. No wonder why trombones get a bad rap for being loud and why composers/conductors cringe around us. Really why are we all so obnoxious as trombonists and then confused when non-tombonists call us out on it. Medium bore is completely appropriate in many places including 2nd or 3rd in big and and likely 1st in most orchestras. Seriously, many of you should get off your high horses. I love my 36B and Mercedes when appropriate. I also use my 2b, constellation and bolero when appropriate as well and no I am not buying a 0.547 horn because people say I should. Thanks.

Finetales · by **Finetales** » 2024-06-01 12:55 p.m.

[quote="mjrochatbn74"]Disclaimer: I don't play orchestral rep and my background is mainly big band, rock, blues, and a little of everything else including brass ensemble and NOLA brass band.[/quote]

The orchestra is where .547s are called for. Very few people are using .547s in all the things you listed.

However, the classical composers would flip over in their graves if they saw how their music was being played especially by the brass.

Every single instrument in the orchestra is different now than it was then. The strings are using steel instead of gut, the woodwinds are using louder, modernized instruments, and of course all the brass are different. The modern trombones we use fit well with the rest of the brass, which fit well with the rest of the orchestra. The .547 trombone wasn't created in a vacuum.

Also, assuming composers would hate how orchestras sound playing their music today is a baseless assumption. Composers wrote for what they did because that's what they had available. I would bet that many famous composers would love the sound and capability of today's instruments.

We have essentially bass trombones blaring playing part one and everyone just agrees that this is how it is. Who says?

Contractors, conductors, professors, band directors, trombonists...

Everyone needs a 0.547. Please stop.

If you want to be hired to play trombone in the orchestra, you need a .547 (or at least, a .525 that sounds AND looks like one...conductors often hear with their eyes). That is a fact, not an opinion. We're not just making it up because we love .547s so much. It's my least favorite size of trombone, I would LOVE to not have to use it. But I don't get to make that choice.

No wonder why trombones get a bad rap for being loud and why composers/conductors cringe around us.

This would not change if we were on smaller equipment. Every trombone is loud. A 2B can decimate an orchestra.

Really why are we all so obnoxious as trombonists and then confused when non-tombonists call us out on it.

Non-trombonists call us out on playing .547s in the orchestra? When?

Seriously, many of you should get off your high horses.

If "doing what is expected of me as a professional trombonist" is a high horse, then I guess I'm ridin' high.

no I am not buying a 0.547 horn because people say I should. Thanks.

You said that you don't play orchestral rep, so needing a .547 horn doesn't apply to you. Why are you so angry about this?

Bach5G · by **Bach5G** » 2024-06-01 1:24 p.m.

Off to play big band 3rd bone with my .525. Tonight orch on my .547.

Right tool for the job.

JohnL · by **JohnL** » 2024-06-01 1:29 p.m.

[quote="Finetales"]If you want to be hired to play trombone in the orchestra, you need a .547 (or at least, a .525 that sounds AND looks like one...conductors often hear with their eyes). That is a fact, not an opinion. We're not just making it up because we love .547s so much. It's my least favorite size of trombone, I would LOVE to not have to use it. But I don't get to make that choice.[/quote]
Hired? For the most part, one needs a .547" just to be taken seriously as a trombone student with orchestral aspirations.

imsevimse · by **imsevimse** » 2024-06-01 1:34 p.m.

You can be too loud on any size. I wonder why we want our music to be so loud today? Maybe we changed as we live in a more noisy world? I'm not thinking not only on classical music now but more of what could be referenced to as commercial music. The mics and the bad soundengineers are the problem not the size of our horns. That's what my experience says and its mostly from big bands. As some has said the .547 is the standard orchestra horn and from there people scale down if music requires. I like all sizes but play least on my .547. I do not have those gigs where I need a .547.

/Tom

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2024-06-01 2:03 p.m.

[quote="mjrochatbn74"]Disclaimer: I don't play orchestral rep and my background is mainly big band, rock, blues, and a little of everything else including brass ensemble and NOLA brass band. However, I am astounded regarding numerous threads and conversations on horns sizes. I would say that most historical big bands typically got it right for gear with small bore, small-medium bore, medium bore and bass trombone in a section for balance in this rep. However, the classical composers would flip over in their graves if they saw how their music was being played especially by the brass. We have essentially bass trombones blaring playing part one and everyone just agrees that this is how it is. Who says? Everyone needs a 0.547. Please stop. No wonder why trombones get a bad rap for being loud and why composers/conductors cringe around us. Really why are we all so obnoxious as trombonists and then confused when non-tombonists call us out on it. Medium bore is completely appropriate in many places including 2nd or 3rd in big and and likely 1st in most orchestras. Seriously, many of you should get off your high horses. I love my 36B and Mercedes when appropriate. I also use my 2b, constellation and bolero when appropriate as well and no I am not buying a 0.547 horn because people say I should. Thanks.[/quote]

Perahps you should take a deep breath! :o

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2024-06-01 4:48 p.m.

[quote="mjrochatbn74"]Disclaimer: I don't play orchestral rep and my background is mainly big band, rock, blues, and a little of everything else including brass ensemble and NOLA brass band. However, I am astounded regarding numerous threads and conversations on horns sizes. I would say that most historical big bands typically got it right for gear with small bore, small-medium bore, medium bore and bass trombone in a section for balance in this rep. However, the classical composers would flip over in their graves if they saw how their music was being played especially by the brass. We have essentially bass trombones blaring playing part one and everyone just agrees that this is how it is. Who says? Everyone needs a 0.547. Please stop. No wonder why trombones get a bad rap for being loud and why composers/conductors cringe around us. Really why are we all so obnoxious as trombonists and then confused when non-tombonists call us out on it. Medium bore is completely appropriate in many places including 2nd or 3rd in big and and likely 1st in most orchestras. Seriously, many of you should get off your high horses. I love my 36B and Mercedes when appropriate. I also use my 2b, constellation and bolero when appropriate as well and no I am not buying a 0.547 horn because people say I should. Thanks.[/quote]

LoL. You do you. It's not like you're trying out for orchestras, so no harm done.

Thrawn22 · by **Thrawn22** » 2024-06-01 4:53 p.m.

[quote="mjrochatbn74"]Disclaimer: I don't play orchestral rep and my background is mainly big band, rock, blues, and a little of everything else including brass ensemble and NOLA brass band. However, I am astounded regarding numerous threads and conversations on horns sizes. I would say that most historical big bands typically got it right for gear with small bore, small-medium bore, medium bore and bass trombone in a section for balance in this rep. However, the classical composers would flip over in their graves if they saw how their music was being played especially by the brass. We have essentially bass trombones blaring playing part one and everyone just agrees that this is how it is. Who says? Everyone needs a 0.547. Please stop. No wonder why trombones get a bad rap for being loud and why composers/conductors cringe around us. Really why are we all so obnoxious as trombonists and then confused when non-tombonists call us out on it. Medium bore is completely appropriate in many places including 2nd or 3rd in big and and likely 1st in most orchestras. Seriously, many of you should get off your high horses. I love my 36B and Mercedes when appropriate. I also use my 2b, constellation and bolero when appropriate as well and no I am not buying a 0.547 horn because people say I should. Thanks.[/quote]

You should buy a big horn. Something around the $5k price range should make you be more appropriate in a conductors eyes.

Bach5G · by **Bach5G** » 2024-06-01 5:52 p.m.

What does $5k buy anymore?

Finetales · by **Finetales** » 2024-06-01 6:21 p.m.

[quote="JohnL"]Hired? For the most part, one needs a .547" just to be taken seriously as a trombone student with orchestral aspirations.[/quote]

Oh definitely. If don't have a .547 by the time you get to college, your professor will be encouraging you to buy one as soon as you can or at least having you rent one from the school.

Bach5G · by **Bach5G** » 2024-06-01 6:33 p.m.

Earlier this year, I attended a brass workshop at the nearest uni. Peter Steiner played so there were a lot of trombon players there. But not a straight horn in sight.

And yet I can’t find an orchestral sub.

Briande · by **Briande** » 2024-06-01 6:47 p.m.

[quote="Bach5G"]Off to play big band 3rd bone with my .525. Tonight orch on my .547.

Right tool for the job.[/quote]

:clever: <EMOJI seq="1f4af" tseq="1f4af">💯</EMOJI>

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2024-06-01 7:01 p.m.

Absolutely agree that the current necessity of using a large bore instrument if you want to become an orchestral player is just a non-debatable fact. I played a 42 (an instrument I did love), and if I was teaching modern trombone I would have to recommend to students that they play large bores too. I'm not disputing that it is a fact, but questioning why it has become – and maybe more importantly, why it should remain – a fact, and whether this dogma and high degree of standardization really is desirable. I think it's healthy for us to reflect on those issues, even if at the end of the day, we must do what we must.

The premise that the .547 is the "right tool for the job" is just silly to me. It is indeed the right tool, but only becsause everybody else plays that, so you can't choose to play something else, combined with certain macho attitudes and often utterly unmusical esthetics without which it would be the "best tool" for almost no repertoire to begin with. I really don't see how it has much at all to do with what best serves the music. If it truly did, we wouldn't be constantly discussing "scaling down" for half the repertoire or switching to German-style instruments for this and that, or using baroque trombones in otherwise modern orchestras when playing Mozart like is becoming increasingly common in central Europe. Those are also not things you commonly see with most of the other orchestral instruments.

I would be very curious to see what the trombone world would look like if everyone just played instruments that best fit their playing and their own sound concept and musical ideas (and if people were actually encouraged to have individuality and musical ideas). Maybe that would mean that not every player is as easily employable everywhere, because you might not fit in in certain places. But a how much more diverse and interesting might the scene be.

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2024-06-01 7:26 p.m.

Maximilien, aren't the vast majority of sacbuts modeled after a very very small number of examples though? There is a field that probably had historic precedent for a ton of variability in design, but everyone plays on only a handful of designs.

I could be totally wrong, but <EMOJI seq="1f937-1f3fd-2642" tseq="1f937-1f3fd-200d-2642-fe0f">🤷🏽‍♂️</EMOJI>

We are in a historic period of time where orchestras use .547s, and HIP people use one of a very small slice of replicas available. No biggie.

Bach5G · by **Bach5G** » 2024-06-01 7:47 p.m.

Why do ordinary folk drive giant pickup trucks?

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2024-06-01 7:50 p.m.

[quote="Bach5G"]Why do ordinary folk drive giant pickup trucks?[/quote]

Why does anybody (probably not "ordinary") drive a Tesla Cybertruck? Saw one yesterday. :???: :amazed: :horror: :o :roll:

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2024-06-01 8:18 p.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]Maximilien, aren't the vast majority of sacbuts modeled after a very very small number of examples though? There is a field that probably had historic precedent for a ton of variability in design, but everyone plays on only a handful of designs.

I could be totally wrong, but <EMOJI seq="1f937-1f3fd-2642" tseq="1f937-1f3fd-200d-2642-fe0f">🤷🏽‍♂️</EMOJI>

We are in a historic period of time where orchestras use .547s, and HIP people use one of a very small slice of replicas available. No biggie.[/quote]

Well, yes, but I don't think anybody in my field is happy about that. We'd all much rather there were more makers, offering more models, based on more originals (and that there were more surviving originals available to be copied to start with).

But there's more variability in key dimensions between these 5 or 6 designs of tenor sackbuts (for one thing, none of them have the same bore or bell size as the others) than between the hundreds of designs of large bore tenors, which is telling. And whether the horn one happens to prefer to play is bigger or smaller has no bearing on who plays first or second or third, or asked at all for that matter. What matters is the playing as a whole.

hyperbolica · by **hyperbolica** » 2024-06-01 8:59 p.m.

The only time I was actually told what size trombone to play was when I went to college. I took an 88h, which in my view is the most colorful and lightest sounding of the 547s. Even as an adult, I once played with a college chamber group playing a high 1st part on a 48h, and endured some good natured ribbing. 48h is dark for a 500 bore, but the high part was clean and clear. On a larger horn it would have been mushier.

I've been showing up to play 1st in local orchestra on 79h. But i have an audition for 2nd at a step-up orchestra, and I'm probably going to take my 88h, just to be safe.

John Swallow was one of my teachers, and he played a lot of 525, although he was more known as chamber music guy than orchestral.

Also, don't forget that a lot of trombonists, even pros, don't necessarily play more than 1 horn most of the time. This forum is a bubble of the obsessed. I play with a couple of guys who only own a 547.

I play also with some guys who insist on playing 547 for big band lead. That makes a lot of mushy volume on top with no real articulation or definition. We don't sound like a section of trombones in a big band.

The overuse of 547 has had 2 sources, as I see it. First Emory Remington standardizing Eastman on the 88h, and as a part of the huge orchestral volume arms race. I do think aside from academics and large orchestras we're starting to get away from the 547 mandate.

In the real world, most audiences couldn't tell the difference between a trombone, a baritone and a French horn. As much as some people tend to play 547 everywhere, I contend that you could equally get away with using a smaller bore bone everywhere, especially if you're careful about controlling the edge and articulation.

chouston3 · by **chouston3** » 2024-06-01 9:34 p.m.

I don't play orchestra anymore. At this point, I use the smallest horn I can get away with playing. .508 has worked for everything for me. However, in my large community band, I would enjoy a little extra beef that a .525 bore horn provides.

For church solos and small ensembles, I like to use my Olds Super which is even smaller.

Hearing horns by themselves, I would gravitate towards the bigger sound. But playing in the ensemble is different. A smaller horn works just fine and it might even be more colorful.

Digidog · by **Digidog** » 2024-06-02 3:19 a.m.

I, for one, do not like the obsession there is about playing 0.547 bores for all parts in orchestras. Too often it doesn't sound good to my ears.

The other week, I listened to "Bolero" being played by one of the major Swedish symphonies, and the trombone solo was all too mellow and polite for my liking, however impeccably played on a Conn.

I would have preferred the lead trombonist to play a smaller horn, and get a light, more edge-y bite to the high part, and a little more focused sound at the end.

I also listened to a performance of David played on a Bach 42, and I'd say that had the player had a smaller horn, the contrasts between the soft and the more dramatic parts would have been better chiseled out and defined.

In my opinion large bore trombones have their use and their place, but they are too often overused and misused, where a medium bore or even a small bore to my ears would have been both more appropriate, as well as sounding better and more expressive.

In my opinion, Håkan Björkman did make a wise descision to play principal on a smaller horn. He gets a wider range of expression, dynamics and motion on his smaller horn, than many do on large bores however great players they are in their own right.

In the end, I think I feel a lack of diversity and sense some kind of conformism in orchestral trombone playing, but all this is my opinions. I am all for a better spread of the horns used; on all occasions and in all ensembles - from brass band, via big band to the major symphonic orchestra. My theoretic ideal section would be small, medium, large, bass in an orchestra and small, medium small, medium, (a not too big) bass in a big band.

Pezza · by **Pezza** » 2024-06-02 4:12 a.m.

I've been playing my King 5B bass in a big band. It works in the section, where my Bach 50 wouldn't!

I have large bore tenors, they haven't been played for years. My Bach 36 always gives enough that I don't feel the need for the large bores.

MrHCinDE · by **MrHCinDE** » 2024-06-02 4:19 a.m.

I played a gig in a small group yesterday (7-piece Bierkeller stuff) and was thinking about this thread and whether to take a medium bore for the 1st trombone part. In the end I took an Olds opera because it‘s new to me and I wanted to try it in a live setting. This has muddied the waters a bit for me. Two observations:

1) Not all large bore horns are created equally. That olds can certainly give more than enough clarity for a 1st part with a medium depth mouthpiece, despite it being larger than .547“. I wouldn’t hesistate to use it again in the same group. It has the added bonus of some fruity pedals, e.g dropping the bass section in a march down an octave. Anything from my other .508“ and .525“ collection would also have been fine. I‘ve tried other large bores in that group before and they didn‘t really work out.

2) The 2nd trombonist in that group is also a conductor of various other groups. She pretty much plays her large bore setup for everything. She doesn‘t seem to have more than a passing interest in equipment and I could not imagine that she would ever ask anyone to bring a particular type of trombone. I think she‘s more reflective of the wider trombone population than the member of this forum are.

OneTon · 2024-06-02 8:44 a.m.

[quote="Pezza"]I've been playing my King 5B bass in a big band. It works in the section, where my Bach 50 wouldn't!

I have large bore tenors, they haven't been played for years. My Bach 36 always gives enough that I don't feel the need for the large bores.[/quote]

Our primary bass in big band plays a Blessing 88H (?) with a 1.5 megatone mouthpiece and covers the part just fine. We sometimes run two basses as per N TX ST. The 2nd bass has a Thomas that is a true bass with two valves. It makes for a good sound.

One of our 88H one and only players got called to cover bass in Michael Andrew’s big band. With the Remington supplied mouthpiece, which he sounds great on for anything else, the big band bass sound was not achieved. The looks he got from Michael Andrew were not endearing.

The time I got to play Brahms 4th in university I was using an 88H as was the 1st. I confess that I loved the sound. The 88H and 2B achieve a respective quintessential essence. If chamber music and brass quartet and quintet music were more more popular, a 0.525 might have found its niche. Perhaps the Bach 36 or King 3B+ did. I don’t know what Brahms heard when he wrote it. It is quite possible that 0.525 bores would cover 1st and 2nd. I would even be interested to hear Brahms 4th played with Bach 6s.

There was an old guy playing 1st in the old Tulsa Philharmonic with a King 3B+. Some college punks made fun of him. I did not get to hear them play Brahms 4th. But I actually thought he sounded okay. At least it did not “stick out.” Actually it was better than okay. I liked it better than some of the orchestras with trombones that sound more like euphoniums.

And Yes: Trombone Chat is probably dominated by players with obsessive compulsive disorder.

Matt_K · by **Matt_K** » 2024-06-02 9:05 a.m.

[quote="Bach5G"]Earlier this year, I attended a brass workshop at the nearest uni. Peter Steiner played so there were a lot of trombon players there. But not a straight horn in sight.

And yet I can’t find an orchestral sub.[/quote]

The F attachment really opens up a lot of things that you don’t get on a straight horn. I’m finishing my arsenal of all F attachment horns now with an O’Malley Bach 6 replica bell with a .484/.491 slide and a .493 bore valve section!

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2024-06-02 10:32 a.m.

Brahms 4 was likely written for Eb alto on 1st.

OneTon · by **OneTon** » 2024-06-02 11:12 a.m.

I kind of doubt if a Bach 6 sounds like an Eb alto, especially if the alto has a “correct” mouthpiece. I would like to hear how Brahms 4th sounds with an Eb alto if anyone knows of a recording of it. On the other hand, in homage Duke

Ellington, if it sounds good it is good. And a couple of 88Hs might just help fill a few more seats. :-)

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2024-06-02 11:50 a.m.

[quote="OneTon"]I kind of doubt if a Bach 6 sounds like an Eb alto, especially if the alto has a “correct” mouthpiece. I would like to hear how Brahms 4th sounds with an Eb alto if anyone knows of a recording of it. On the other hand, in homage Duke

Ellington, if it sounds good it is good. And a couple of 88Hs might just help fill a few more seats. :-)[/quote]

<YOUTUBE id="7QLuYj2jxoc">~~[media]~~https://youtu.be/7QLuYj2jxoc?feature=shared</YOUTUBE>

Looks like Hakan Bjorkman on his 36H

RJMason · by **RJMason** » 2024-06-02 1:37 p.m.

I did most of my work on a Bach 36B for nearly ten years, which covered every style imaginable in the studio, on TV, and live, except playing in a professional orchestra. I didn’t want to bring several horns on the subway to freelance.

When I left NYC for Nashville I felt some mild, but palpable, pressure to use a small bore for commercial work and a large bore for symphonic work in the studios there, as well as getting a proper bass trombone instead of just using a deep small shank mouthpiece on a .525.

It’s been about four years playing mainly on a small bore horn and a bass trombone, and occasionally pulling out the Conn 88H.

After spending years in both schools of thought I think I prefer the multiple horn/“right tool” thing, but I am planning to switch back to .525 this summer with a fresh perspective to see how it goes. I feel like I’m able to pick and choose work right now, and everything I want to do can be done very well with a .525. Lastly, it feels like my “voice” for creative work.

But I now live in LA, and have a feeling I will return to the “right tool” perspective when things slow down and I can’t be picky! Cycles.

I hope more orchestral players break the mold and stop their exclusive use of these modern .547s built to win auditions. They sound really loud, articulations are woofy, every note has a bloom, encourage terrible time feel, and require way more work to play musically in other styles.

I’d rather listen to a section on alto, 36, 88H than 3 players thinking they are chasing the Alessi sound concept by playing slide euphoniums lol

Bach5G · by **Bach5G** » 2024-06-02 3:13 p.m.

RJ Mason referred to: ‘chasing the Alessi sound concept’.

He’s been a singular influence in N America for a while now.

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2024-06-02 4:02 p.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]<QUOTE author="OneTon" post_id="244266" time="1717341160" user_id="13549">
I would like to hear how Brahms 4th sounds with an Eb alto if anyone knows of a recording of it.

<YOUTUBE id="7QLuYj2jxoc">~~[media]~~https://youtu.be/7QLuYj2jxoc?feature=shared</YOUTUBE>

Looks like Hakan Bjorkman on his 36H[/quote]

And is that a King 3B on 2nd Trombone?</QUOTE>

brassmedic · by **brassmedic** » 2024-06-02 4:18 p.m.

[quote="mjrochatbn74"]Disclaimer: I don't play orchestral rep and my background is mainly big band, rock, blues, and a little of everything else including brass ensemble and NOLA brass band. However, I am astounded regarding numerous threads and conversations on horns sizes. I would say that most historical big bands typically got it right for gear with small bore, small-medium bore, medium bore and bass trombone in a section for balance in this rep. However, the classical composers would flip over in their graves if they saw how their music was being played especially by the brass. We have essentially bass trombones blaring playing part one and everyone just agrees that this is how it is. Who says? Everyone needs a 0.547. Please stop. No wonder why trombones get a bad rap for being loud and why composers/conductors cringe around us. Really why are we all so obnoxious as trombonists and then confused when non-tombonists call us out on it. Medium bore is completely appropriate in many places including 2nd or 3rd in big and and likely 1st in most orchestras. Seriously, many of you should get off your high horses. I love my 36B and Mercedes when appropriate. I also use my 2b, constellation and bolero when appropriate as well and no I am not buying a 0.547 horn because people say I should. Thanks.[/quote]
I keep seeing this myth repeated that the old big bands used graduated bore sizes. They did not. It was all small bore. When they had a bass, it was 3 small bores and a bass. Lots of exceptions now, but back then it was not small, small-medium, medium, large. And on casuals, the lead parts often get passed all over the section, so it would make no sense to have bore sizes getting gradually bigger down the line.

Also, I've never had a non-trombonist complain about .547 bore in an orchestra. If I ever do hear a comment, it's a complaint about the trombones using something other than .547. On most of the stuff I do, conductors and especially composers want more trombone sound and ask for it to be louder and "brassier". And nothing brings an audience to their feet like a loud brass section. I don't think I have ever heard an audience member say that the trombones ruined the concert by playing too loud. As for conductors, occasionally you get some clod who has his hand up as soon as he sees light reflecting off the trombone bells, but trombone haters are relatively rare in my experience. I use .547 more often than not, but also alto, .500 bore, .525, bass, German style trombone, sackbut - whatever makes the most sense for the situation.

CalgaryTbone · by **CalgaryTbone** » 2024-06-02 4:27 p.m.

[quote="brassmedic"]<QUOTE author="mjrochatbn74" post_id="244207" time="1717211017" user_id="13595">
Disclaimer: I don't play orchestral rep and my background is mainly big band, rock, blues, and a little of everything else including brass ensemble and NOLA brass band. However, I am astounded regarding numerous threads and conversations on horns sizes. I would say that most historical big bands typically got it right for gear with small bore, small-medium bore, medium bore and bass trombone in a section for balance in this rep. However, the classical composers would flip over in their graves if they saw how their music was being played especially by the brass. We have essentially bass trombones blaring playing part one and everyone just agrees that this is how it is. Who says? Everyone needs a 0.547. Please stop. No wonder why trombones get a bad rap for being loud and why composers/conductors cringe around us. Really why are we all so obnoxious as trombonists and then confused when non-tombonists call us out on it. Medium bore is completely appropriate in many places including 2nd or 3rd in big and and likely 1st in most orchestras. Seriously, many of you should get off your high horses. I love my 36B and Mercedes when appropriate. I also use my 2b, constellation and bolero when appropriate as well and no I am not buying a 0.547 horn because people say I should. Thanks.[/quote]
I keep seeing this myth repeated that the old big bands used graduated bore sizes. They did not. It was all small bore. When they had a bass, it was 3 small bores and a bass. Lots of exceptions now, but back then it was not small, small-medium, medium, large. And on casuals, the lead parts often get passed all over the section, so it would make no sense to have bore sizes getting gradually bigger down the line.

Also, I've never had a non-trombonist complain about .547 bore in an orchestra. If I ever do hear a comment, it's a complaint about the trombones using something other than .547. On most of the stuff I do, conductors and especially composers want more trombone sound and ask for it to be louder and "brassier". And nothing brings an audience to their feet like a loud brass section. I don't think I have ever heard an audience member say that the trombones ruined the concert by playing too loud. As for conductors, occasionally you get some clod who has his hand up as soon as he sees light reflecting off the trombone bells, but trombone haters are relatively rare in my experience. I use .547 more often than not, but also alto, .500 bore, .525, bass, German style trombone, sackbut - whatever makes the most sense for the situation.
</QUOTE>

:good: :good: :good:

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2024-06-02 4:40 p.m.

[quote="brassmedic"]<QUOTE author="mjrochatbn74" post_id="244207" time="1717211017" user_id="13595">
Disclaimer: I don't play orchestral rep[/quote]
I keep seeing this myth repeated that the old big bands used graduated bore sizes. They did not. It was all small bore. When they had a bass, it was 3 small bores and a bass. Lots of exceptions now, but back then it was not small, small-medium, medium, large. And on casuals, the lead parts often get passed all over the section, so it would make no sense to have bore sizes getting gradually bigger down the line.

Also, I've never had a non-trombonist complain about .547 bore in an orchestra. If I ever do hear a comment, it's a complaint about the trombones using something other than .547. On most of the stuff I do, conductors and especially composers want more trombone sound and ask for it to be louder and "brassier". And nothing brings an audience to their feet like a loud brass section. I don't think I have ever heard an audience member say that the trombones ruined the concert by playing too loud. As for conductors, occasionally you get some clod who has his hand up as soon as he sees light reflecting off the trombone bells, but trombone haters are relatively rare in my experience. I use .547 more often than not, but also alto, .500 bore, .525, bass, German style trombone, sackbut - whatever makes the most sense for the situation.
</QUOTE>

+1 <EMOJI seq="2b06" tseq="2b06">⬆️</EMOJI>

RJMason · by **RJMason** » 2024-06-02 5:04 p.m.

[quote="Bach5G"]RJ Mason referred to: ‘chasing the Alessi sound concept’.

He’s been a singular influence in N America for a while now.[/quote]

Yeah and with very good reason!

For me, it’s exciting to see trombonists embracing new sound concepts, like what modern players are doing. There's so much potential beyond the traditional sound, and I believe it opens up more opportunities for musicians. It's interesting how certain sound concepts can become entrenched over time, impacting not just performers but composers and conductors too. It is time for more variety and exploration.

Imagine the possibilities for young trombonists if they dared to forge their own path, exploring different equipment and musical styles.

Back to medium bore: Could a .525 chassis with interchangeable bells offer versatility akin to choosing different amplifiers for a guitar? Perhaps with the right packaging, it could be a game-changer!

Matt_K · by **Matt_K** » 2024-06-02 6:55 p.m.

I’ve always found the criticism of 547s as sounding like euphonium to be puzzling, implying that it’s not unreasonable to show up to a trombone gig with a euph or vice versa. I’ve never found either to be remotely similar beyond being brass instruments. It’s no harder to articulate cleanly on a 547, or larger, than it is on a 500 bore. Articulation by those emulating other American orchestras is purely an artistic choice (perhaps dictated by the MD, but a choice, nonetheless) not an inevitable outcome of using a 547. Robin Eubanks, Slide Hampton, Steve Davis, Steve Turree, and Michael Dease certainly don’t have any of the poor qualities that have been described here.

I know anecdotally I did some jam sessions over the last year with the local jazz professor - a sax player - and he really likes it when I bring my 562/578 bass. He has no idea the bore size, he just really likes the sound and the range it gives, like being able to double the bass on things like the intro to recordame or “So What”, taking the head down an octave, pedal points, etc. You don’t really lose all that much since it’s still in Bb.

Back to medium bore: Could a .525 chassis with interchangeable bells offer versatility akin to choosing different amplifiers for a guitar? Perhaps with the right packaging, it could be a game-changer!

With the exception of the King lineup and a few older out-of-production Conn models, virtually all medium bores are just large bore bell sections. The 8.5” vs 8” does make a difference. Swapping bells out is nice. So is being able to use a large shank leadpipe on the 525 side. It makes the sound much closer to a 547; nearly indistinguishable depending on what 547 slide you’re comparing it too. Small vs. large shank makes a huge difference. Fwiw, 525/547 is my favorite bore size to play on. I doubt few people would be able to tell the difference between it and the same bell with my 547/562 slide, at least from the other side of the bell.

OneTon · by **OneTon** » 2024-06-02 7:07 p.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]

Looks like Hakan Bjorkman on his 36H[/quote]

Thanks Harrison. That is interesting. Just like Will Rogers, I never met a trombone I didn’t like.

hyperbolica · 2024-06-02 9:37 p.m.

[quote="RJMason"]

I hope more orchestral players break the mold and stop their exclusive use of these modern .547s built to win auditions. They sound really loud, articulations are woofy, every note has a bloom, encourage terrible time feel, and require way more work to play musically in other styles.

I’d rather listen to a section on alto, 36, 88H than 3 players thinking they are chasing the Alessi sound concept by playing slide euphoniums lol[/quote]

Yeah, totally agree. Sometimes it's what you want, but usually you want something else.

[quote="RJMason"]...

I hope more orchestral players break the mold and stop their exclusive use of these modern .547s built to win auditions. They sound really loud, articulations are woofy, every note has a bloom, encourage terrible time feel, and require way more work to play musically in other styles.

I’d rather listen to a section on alto, 36, 88H than 3 players thinking they are chasing the Alessi sound concept by playing slide euphoniums lol[/quote]

It's not that they sound exactly like euphoniums, but that's the tendency.

Alessi and the Chicago and Philly and all those sections that have a rep for playing big are playing in kind of an extreme situation. Most of us don't regularly play in a huge space unamplified and competing with a sea of strings in a situation where you don't want to show a lot of edge. If I did that all day, yeah, I'd probably be on a 547 too. But you don't commute in an F1 or a dump truck. "The right tool for the job" usually means you pick something in between, not an extreme.

The number of artist level players who are selecting a horn with a 525 in the specs is I think indicates that 525 isn't just the "step up" for high school kids that it sometimes gets the rep for. Elliot Mason, Ralph Sauer, Nils Landgren...

AtomicClock · by **AtomicClock** » 2024-06-02 10:01 p.m.

[quote="hyperbolica"]Alessi and the Chicago and Philly and all those sections that have a rep for playing big are playing in kind of an extreme situation. Most of us don't regularly play in a huge space unamplified and competing with a seal of strings in a situation where you don't want to show a lot of edge. If I did that all day, yeah, I'd probably be on a 547 too.[/quote]

Or contrast Chicago and Philly with every community orchestra. String section severely underpopulated, trombone section with weekend-warrior chops, but still with the .547 tenors.

JohnL · by **JohnL** » 2024-06-02 11:56 p.m.

[quote="AtomicClock"]Or contrast Chicago and Philly with every community orchestra. String section severely underpopulated, trombone section with weekend-warrior chops, but still with the .547 tenors.[/quote]
You neglected to mention performing in a hall that seats maybe a few hundred rather that a couple thousand...

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2024-06-03 1:32 a.m.

[quote="hyperbolica"]

Alessi and the Chicago and Philly and all those sections that have a rep for playing big are playing in kind of an extreme situation. Most of us don't regularly play in a huge space unamplified and competing with a sea of strings in a situation where you don't want to show a lot of edge.
[/quote]

Also, these sections routinely obliterate even their sea of strings.

RJMason · by **RJMason** » 2024-06-03 2:19 a.m.

[quote="LeTromboniste"]

Also, these sections routinely obliterate even their sea of strings.[/quote]

Totally agree.

[quote="Matt K"]

The F attachment really opens up a lot of things that you don’t get on a straight horn. I’m finishing my arsenal of all F attachment horns now with an O’Malley Bach 6 replica bell with a .484/.491 slide and a .493 bore valve section![/quote]

.493 valve section?! I’ve been dreaming of putting an f attachment on my Bach 8/12!

johntarr · by **johntarr** » 2024-06-03 2:41 a.m.

After giving up the idea of making a living playing in an orchestra (many years ago), I played .525 bore horns, which worked for most of what I was doing. Recently, I switched back to a .547 bore horn (M&W) because I enjoy the expanded register. The valve works really well so I have access to a few more notes below the staff and can still play with a certain ease in the upper register. With the .525 bore horns I played, I couldn’t quite get the lower register to speak the way I wanted.

It’s a pleasure to play my old Conn 72H and Bach 34, but the M&W allows me to be able to almost cover the ranges of those two horns. Additionally, I regularly get compliments from my string player colleagues for my sound, more so than when I was playing a 36B. And for what it’s worth, I never want to bury the orchestra. For me, the .547 bore horns seem to be a good size for a wide register and I can produce different kinds of sounds. Plus, we have mutes! That being said, I agree that we could use more diversity of sound concepts and welcome the idea of using different instruments, and even more importantly, mindsets.

Slidennis · 2024-06-03 4:16 a.m.

[quote="spencercarran"]<QUOTE author="Trav1s" post_id="175030" time="1648559157" user_id="3564">

That's my experience - the 36B I purchased new in 1986 came with a Bach 7C but that was as small as I found workable on that horn. In general, I have found the medium bore horns to no like deep cups. Not sure if that is more about the depth itself or the backbore that is generally paired with them. In the Doug Elliott world, the C+/D/D+ is the sweet spot for me - YMMV[/quote]
I found 36B + Wick 4BS to be a really nice combination. 51D was too far though; got so many response and intonation quirks.
</QUOTE>
My 88H w/ .525" slide is at his best with a Bach 5 GS, but this is more a small big tenor than the reverse... and forget about the 7C... Very versatile combo, BTW...

Slidennis · by **Slidennis** » 2024-06-03 4:43 a.m.

[quote="hyperbolica"]525 is my go to. Tbone choir? Quartet? Quintet? Church gig? 1 or 2 in an orchestra? Unless it needs serious 547 power, low notes, or need for a lighter sound or harder articulation of a 500/508 bore, it's either the 79h or 88h w/525. The sound is more interesting.

If I don't know what's coming, sometimes I take a 547. Its a harder push, the sound doesn't shimmer up high, but you have some depth down low. I prefer a lighter sound when it makes sense. 547 is overkill 80-90% of the time.[/quote]
Am I alone to find this, that some large bore horns can be more nimble up high than some medium bore's??? As is my 8H "Artist Symphony" w/ dual 547-562 slide compared to my 88HO (UMI) w/ 525 slide... (and if I swap slides, they do not respond as fine as the settings here mentioned...)

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2024-06-03 8:47 a.m.

[quote="hyperbolica"]

It's not that they sound exactly like euphoniums, but that's the tendency.
[/quote]

For all the different comments from everyone about the differences and nuances between a .525 and .547 trombone and being able to appreciate that tiny difference, I think claiming that .547 trombones sound like euphoniums might detract from the argument. In no universe does a .547 trombone sound like a Euph.

I would be of the opinion that the real problem with .547 trombones is the mouthpiece, not the trombone itself. If you are using a 4G or even 5G piece on a .547, you're missing a trick. A .547 with a piece that is shallower than a 5G is often a better sound, and easier to play.

I also don't necessarily buy the volume argument either. A .547 will help you play louder while keeping a sonorous tone, but in terms of overall volume, a King 3B will blow a .547 out of the water every day of the week. So it's possible to bury the strings on any trombone (barring sacbuts), but you'll likely sound "smoother" doing that on a .547.

I'm all for using the right tool for the job. If something works better on a Bach 36 or on an alto, that's a conscious decision to make. But I think the .547 haters might be in a situation where they are trying to play their. 547 with a very deep mouthpiece, say a G cup, and then when they switch to their .525 they might be on a DE E cup (or 6.5AL, or similar mp). Suddenly it sounds clear and is easier to play. Well, why do you use a G or even H :amazed: cup on the large trombone, and an E cup on the medium one? Because that's the way it is? It doesn't have to be.

Finetales · by **Finetales** » 2024-06-03 10:19 a.m.

[quote="Digidog"]The other week, I listened to "Bolero" being played by one of the major Swedish symphonies, and the trombone solo was all too mellow and polite for my liking, however impeccably played on a Conn.

I would have preferred the lead trombonist to play a smaller horn, and get a light, more edge-y bite to the high part, and a little more focused sound at the end.[/quote]

Bolero is arguably one of the only places in the rep where it would be seen as "acceptable" to bring a small horn. After all, Ravel wanted it to sound like Tommy Dorsey!

Not all large bore horns are created equally.

This is an important point. Not every .547 is like a 42. The 88H is smaller and more colorful, the 4B smaller still, the Selmer Largo sounds and plays like no other trombone (and does not blend with ANYTHING else, small or large!), etc.

(The Largo would probably work a jazz combo probably more effectively than it does in a large ensemble, it is that different. You could bring a Largo for Bolero so that you're still technically playing by the rules...)

Also, not every small horn is a "jazzer" either. There was a Romeo Adaci .500" bore trombone I tried at DJ's once that was 100% a classical/orchestral horn. The sound was dark and dense and I would imagine it would sound AMAZING on principal. I think it would be interesting if principal players experimented with building dark, orchestral small bores (not just .525s that are trying to sound like .547s). You can do it at Shires and I'm sure all the other modular/boutique makers as well. Lots of red brass, nickel kranz on the bell...

[quote="Matt K"]I’m finishing my arsenal of all F attachment horns now with an O’Malley Bach 6 replica bell with a .484/.491 slide and a .493 bore valve section![/quote]

O'Malley has a 6 mandrel? This is...dangerous.

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2024-06-03 10:30 a.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]I also don't necessarily buy the volume argument either. A .547 will help you play louder while keeping a sonorous tone, but in terms of overall volume, a King 3B will blow a .547 out of the water every day of the week. So it's possible to bury the strings on any trombone (barring sacbuts), but you'll likely sound "smoother" doing that on a .547.[/quote]

In my experience a .547 definitely has more volume potential than a smaller horn, i.e. you'll reach a higher dB level before the sound colour sounds "loud", and you'll be able to keep that "big", "round", "dark", sound at a higher dynamic before brightness starts cutting through. With a smaller and lighter horn, you are perceived as "loud" earlier, and your sound shines or cuts through the texture without burying everyone. You more quickly reach a point where it's not worth playing any louder because it'll just get ugly. Sure you could still play louder and bury the strings, but you likely won't, is the point. But then you don't get the "wall of sound" thrill we've gotten used to.

Conversely, I find that large bores and big bass trombones tend to be fairly dull at soft dynamics. They lack colour and focus to properly blend and get chords to lock at piano or softer. There's a reason orchestral sections virtually never venture into really soft playing. I cannot count the number of times I've heard the phrase "an orchestral piano or pianissimo is mezzo-piano", from colleagues, teachers, coaches, top orchestra players... When has anyone last heard the soft trombone chorales at the end of Tchaik 6 or Mahler 6 actually played really soft (down to ppppp for Tchaik!)? I'm not sure I ever have, and the few versions I can remember that try to go for it all have intonation and blend problems.

hyperbolica · by **hyperbolica** » 2024-06-03 10:32 a.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]For all the different comments from everyone about the differences and nuances between a .525 and .547 trombone and being able to appreciate that tiny difference, I think claiming that .547 trombones sound like euphoniums might detract from the argument. In no universe does a .547 trombone sound like a Euph.[/quote]

It's not a tiny difference. 0.022" is bigger than the difference between 525 and 508 (0.017"). It divides the sizes into even-ish steps. I play that size in part because the air requirement is lower. After you've had some sort of injury or god forbid you live to see 50 or more, you'll probably have a different perspective.

And to be honest, my bass feels like a euph or at least like a baritone to me. I've spent years fighting that. But everybody seems to love that mushy, velvety sound on bass. I'm a trombone player, and want even a bass trombone to sound and play like a trombone, as unpopular as that seems to be. This is why I'm always looking for odd bass-y things to get a little bit of that woof out of the sound. The King 1480 (0.536 top slide) holds a lot of promise if you can work out the ergo and range problems.

[quote="harrisonreed"]I would be of the opinion that the real problem with .547 trombones is the mouthpiece, not the trombone itself. If you are using a 4G or even 5G piece on a .547, you're missing a trick. A .547 with a piece that is shallower than a 5G is often a better sound, and easier to play...

But I think the .547 haters might be in a situation where they are trying to play their. 547 with a very deep mouthpiece, say a G cup, and then when they switch to their .525 they might be on a DE E cup (or 6.5AL, or similar mp). Suddenly it sounds clear and is easier to play. Well, why do you use a G or even H :amazed: cup on the large trombone, and an E cup on the medium one? Because that's the way it is? It doesn't have to be.[/quote]

Part of the reason for going to a 525 slide is to get the smaller shank mouthpiece. I'm not going to use one of those adapters that comes with student 547s. Why would you play a small cup on a large shank? I have G and F cups for large bore, but to be honest, I only put my 547 slide and G cup on the 88h when I'm playing 3rd parts that aren't bass parts. I also have F and G 4 shanks, so I can cross those over into 525. But that's rare when I want to do that. Just to say there are options on both sides.

[quote="harrisonreed"]I also don't necessarily buy the volume argument either. A .547 will help you play louder while keeping a sonorous tone, but in terms of overall volume, a King 3B will blow a .547 out of the water every day of the week. So it's possible to bury the strings on any trombone (barring sacbuts), but you'll likely sound "smoother" doing that on a .547.[/quote]

I just boxed up a 3bf and happily shipped it out today. I kept it for a while, but I just don't get the hype. I've bought and sold at least 3 3b's. I want to like it, but it's hard. The sound is kinda harsh. Yes, it blended better with trumpets, but is that a good thing? I played it with quintet for a few months, and at first I liked it, but the 88h w525 was just a big sound quality improvement. You can't get the volume without edge on the 3b.

[quote="harrisonreed"]I'm all for using the right tool for the job. If something works better on a Bach 36 or on an alto, that's a conscious decision to make.[/quote]

I played 547 exclusively from the time I was 10 until I was probably 40. I was one of "those guys". But it turns out that there are other options available for a lot of different situations.

harrisonreed · 2024-06-03 10:45 a.m.

That's what I'm saying though, you *can* and should use a shallower mouthpiece then a 5G on large bore. Forget the shank size aspect for a sec. Large bores used to and sometimes still do ship with a 6.5 mouthpiece. Have people have heard Alessi live recently -- his mouthpiece is shallower than a 5G (but not as shallow as a 6.5 though!) and he sounds *bright*. I think people are remembering the early 90s Alessi sound, here.

It's worth a try to use a more reasonable mouthpiece on .547 before swearing off it forever, at least.

The 3B is 100% for ska, big band, NOLA brass band, etc. I wouldn't use that in orchestra if I had access to a big horn.

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2024-06-03 10:48 a.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]That's what I'm saying though, you *can* and should use a shallower mouthpiece then a 5G on large bore.

...

It's worth a try to use a more reasonable mouthpiece on .547 before swearing off it forever, at least.[/quote]

With this I agree very much!

hornbuilder · by **hornbuilder** » 2024-06-03 11:27 a.m.

I have to ask, (Hyperbolica specifically) have you ever heard the Chicago section live? They are nothing like euphoniums in sound, regardless of volume. Their sound is clear and crisp, bright and energetic, full and rich, buoyant and lively.

And to Maximilien, I also ask you, have you heard Chicago live? What you say is just not true

hyperbolica · by **hyperbolica** » 2024-06-03 12:03 p.m.

[quote="hornbuilder"]I have to ask, (Hyperbolica specifically) have you ever heard the Chicago section live? They are nothing like euphoniums in sound, regardless of volume. Their sound is clear and crisp, bright and energetic, full and rich, buoyant and lively.[/quote]

I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I said those orchestras known for big playing use big equipment to avoid edge when they play loud. Most of the rest of us don't have any call to try to use the same equipment because we're not in the same situation. For the same reason we don't commute in an F1 car.

I wouldn't go as far as calling their sound "bright". It's not inappropriate for what they are doing. If they were here playing my gigs, I imagine they might do something different.

sf105 · by **sf105** » 2024-06-03 12:32 p.m.

[quote="Finetales"]Bolero is arguably one of the only places in the rep where it would be seen as "acceptable" to bring a small horn. After all, Ravel wanted it to sound like Tommy Dorsey![/quote]

Very much this.

I'd also make a case for other French music, especially Berlioz. Those pedal notes only make sense when they're a kind of rattle down the bottom of the orchestra, rather than a devastating sound canon.

I was struck once when watching the LSO doing Peleas that tromones in that repertoire should really be about adding colour, rather than body. (The trombones put on a masterly show of not being too bored while being stuck on stage.)

Bach5G · by **Bach5G** » 2024-06-03 2:00 p.m.

We once rehearsed Symphonie Fantastique with alto, Bach 16 (actually a DeBruycker bell) and bass (downsizing on bass is a tough sell).

It really sounded quite marvellous.

harrisonreed · by **harrisonreed** » 2024-06-03 2:42 p.m.

[quote="Bach5G"]We once rehearsed Symphonie Fantastique with alto, Bach 16 (actually a DeBruycker bell) and bass (downsizing on bass is a tough sell).

It really sounded quite marvellous.[/quote]

Seems appropriate for that work! :)

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2024-06-03 7:00 p.m.

[quote="hornbuilder"]And to Maximilien, I also ask you, have you heard Chicago live?[/quote]

No, I haven't heard Chicago in person, but I don't think I've said anything about Chicago? If anything they are an example of what I would like to see more of, as they like to use various equipment and explore different sound colours, and not always stick to the big guns for everything, and they're not afraid to sound bright.

[quote="hornbuilder"]What you say is just not true[/quote]

What part of what I say is just not true? A lot of it was opinion, and my perception and personal experience, not statements of fact.

CalgaryTbone · by **CalgaryTbone** » 2024-06-03 7:41 p.m.

[quote="LeTromboniste"]<QUOTE author="harrisonreed" post_id="244352" time="1717418847" user_id="3642">
I also don't necessarily buy the volume argument either. A .547 will help you play louder while keeping a sonorous tone, but in terms of overall volume, a King 3B will blow a .547 out of the water every day of the week. So it's possible to bury the strings on any trombone (barring sacbuts), but you'll likely sound "smoother" doing that on a .547.[/quote]

In my experience a .547 definitely has more volume potential than a smaller horn, i.e. you'll reach a higher dB level before the sound colour sounds "loud", and you'll be able to keep that "big", "round", "dark", sound at a higher dynamic before brightness starts cutting through. With a smaller and lighter horn, you are perceived as "loud" earlier, and your sound shines or cuts through the texture without burying everyone. You more quickly reach a point where it's not worth playing any louder because it'll just get ugly. Sure you could still play louder and bury the strings, but you likely won't, is the point. But then you don't get the "wall of sound" thrill we've gotten used to.

Conversely, I find that large bores and big bass trombones tend to be fairly dull at soft dynamics. They lack colour and focus to properly blend and get chords to lock at piano or softer. There's a reason orchestral sections virtually never venture into really soft playing. I cannot count the number of times I've heard the phrase "an orchestral piano or pianissimo is mezzo-piano", from colleagues, teachers, coaches, top orchestra players... When has anyone last heard the soft trombone chorales at the end of Tchaik 6 or Mahler 6 actually played really soft (down to ppppp for Tchaik!)? I'm not sure I ever have, and the few versions I can remember that try to go for it all have intonation and blend problems.
</QUOTE>

I know that every time I've ever played the chorale from Tchaikovsky 6th, the low brass "busted their a..es" to get to the softest possible dynamic for the end of it. One memorable time playing that chorale was at an Alessi Seminar, where Joe insisted on an absolute whisper at the end. The other passage where he preferred less was on the loud unison tune in the 1st mvt. Blend was the key here, and not letting adrenalin take over when playing in front of a hall full of trombonists while he provided coaching was the key takeaway.

I think it's not realistic to imagine that there are trombonists that are playing louder than what the conductor wants on a regular basis. There can be individuals that push the limits, and certainly an occasional moment when a section could be louder OR softer than what a conductor was looking for, but a section that makes a habit of this is going to hear about it. If you like getting the pay check, you can't be openly disrespectful like that. Conductors and audiences like that "wall of sound" quite often too. When our brass section gets a bow after a concert with a lot of exciting moments, we get a loud reaction and extra applause from the audience.

Obviously, not all orchestral concerts have those moments, and different equipment can be a tool to bring more color to the sound at lower volumes. I love playing alto on Mozart and Beethoven, etc. My .508 horn is great on Pops. I have an 8" bell that can be used on either a .525 or a .547 slide and that was just the ticket for the Schubert 9th recently. It kept most of the warmth that I associate with a .547, and added some clarity and compactness to the higher passages.

By the way, I'm not a Sacbut player, but I have heard quite a few loud sacbuts on YouTube in recently released clips. I guess it's possible to push the limits on whatever horn you choose to play on. Trombonists should play on whatever horn they feel is appropriate with a great sound, and in a way that is in keeping with the wishes of the conductor and the enjoyment of the audience.

Jim Scott

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2024-06-03 9:06 p.m.

[quote="CalgaryTbone"]...

I think it's not realistic to imagine that there are trombonists that are playing louder than what the conductor wants on a regular basis. There can be individuals that push the limits, and certainly an occasional moment when a section could be louder OR softer than what a conductor was looking for, but a section that makes a habit of this is going to hear about it. If you like getting the pay check, you can't be openly disrespectful like that. Conductors and audiences like that "wall of sound" quite often too. ...

Obviously, not all orchestral concerts have those moments, and different equipment can be a tool to bring more color to the sound at lower volumes. ...

I guess it's possible to push the limits on whatever horn you choose to play on. Trombonists should play on whatever horn they feel is appropriate with a great sound, and in a way that is in keeping with the wishes of the conductor and the enjoyment of the audience.

Jim Scott[/quote]

Thanks Jim, for your wise observations. :good:

Matt_K · by **Matt_K** » 2024-06-04 7:45 a.m.

[quote="RJMason"]

.493 valve section?! I’ve been dreaming of putting an f attachment on my Bach 8/12![/quote]

Yep! King donor valve section I forgot I had. My 2B slide is in the shop atm, but will probably have a 2B slide, just need to make sure the length isn't too wacky.

Am I alone to find this, that some large bore horns can be more nimble up high than some medium bore's??? As is my 8H "Artist Symphony" w/ dual 547-562 slide compared to my 88HO (UMI) w/ 525 slide... (and if I swap slides, they do not respond as fine as the settings here mentioned...)

100%. I have a Holton bass bell that's more nimble with a 562/578 slide than some of my small bores. That thing is unbelievably lively. Gives a big sound, not totally appropriate for everything mentioned (probably), though certainly passable. I wouldn't play lead on it :lol: But there are medium bores I own that I could, though I probably won't. Although, there's a great recording:

<YOUTUBE id="X75lU9bB7mk">https://youtu.be/X75lU9bB7mk</YOUTUBE>

Of a bunch of large bore players in a section that sounds... pretty good!! I don't anticipate being able to do something so experimental in that setup given where I currently live.

O'Malley has a 6 mandrel? This is...dangerous.

A 6iii, which is supposedly one of the more lively and less popular 6 options. It's definitely a surprising choice that I didn't ask why. Very interested to see how the project works out!

---

Also agree with Harrison. You don't have to have a small rim to have a shallower cup, and that really brings out the color in a lot of large bores I've tried. Believe Megumi Kanda plays the shallowest setup I've heard of, as of a few months ago playing on an Elliott D+/D8 - and she sounds fantastic! I seldom play anything deeper than an E cup except for bass, myself.

hornbuilder · by **hornbuilder** » 2024-06-04 8:35 a.m.

Maximilien.

This quote. This, at least for Chicago, is simply not true.

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2024-06-04 10:00 a.m.

[quote="hornbuilder"]Maximilien.

This quote. This, at least for Chicago, is simply not true.[/quote]

I didn't name Chicago there. The comment I was responding to included Chicago, but among others (two more named and the general "and all those sections that play big"). I was responding in general, not about Chicago.

My point was that I don't buy the "big horns are needed in those extreme situations to be able to be heard over the sea of strings" thing, because clearly we're doing more than just being heard, and many sections frequently bury the rest of the orchestra. We don't use .547s because of balance reasons with big orchestras, we use them because we need to align to a certain aesthetic and a sound concept.

Does the Chicago section struggle to be heard when they play their German trombones? I doubt it, or they just wouldn't do it. (yes I know German trombones can have an even larger bore, but they play and sound nothing like a modern heavy .547)

hornbuilder · by **hornbuilder** » 2024-06-04 11:08 a.m.

German trombones do not "have an even larger bore". They are, infact, smaller in slide bore than American instruments, and make an entirely different type of sound.

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2024-06-04 3:00 p.m.

[quote="hornbuilder"]German trombones do not "have an even larger bore". They are, infact, smaller in slide bore than American instruments, and make an entirely different type of sound.[/quote]

...I said <B>can</B> have...

Not sure if I'm just not writing in a way that allows me to be understood, I apologize if that's the case.

[quote="CalgaryTbone"]By the way, I'm not a Sacbut player, but I have heard quite a few loud sacbuts on YouTube in recently released clips. I guess it's possible to push the limits on whatever horn you choose to play on.[/quote]

Absolutely.

[quote="CalgaryTbone"]Trombonists should play on whatever horn they feel is appropriate with a great sound,[/quote]

Also, absolutely. That's precisely my point.

Again, the entire time I played modern trombone except the first couple years, I played large bore instruments. I absolutely LOVED my 42. I will never stop being sad of having had to sell it. I can also say that everytime I play in an orchestra with any other type of tenor than a modern large bore, it feels like a revelation (whether it was sizing down to a 6H on principal or playing German or French trombones). Those two statements are not mutually exclusive.

I'm not saying nobody should play on large bore tenors. I'm questioning why everyone has to play on large bore tenors as a default, and whether the trombone world would benefit from more diversity in instruments and playing approaches.

Blenky · by **Blenky** » 2024-06-17 5:53 p.m.

This has been one of my favourite threads to follow!

I’m just an aspiring amateur, but with my level of practice and embouchure I find my Yamaha YSL640 the perfect instrument for the first part in quartets/quintets. If I use my 88HCL the sound is just too big and my stamina is nowhere close to using the Yamaha.

I also found that the YSL640 was the perfect instrument to play the 2nd part for the Tuba Miram in Mozart requiem. On my face the 88H was way too big a sound.

Tried using the Yamaha in a brass band or wind band where my section is largely ion 547’s, and it was a pretty soul destroying experience.

I think certainly for decent amateurs the 547/525 choice will very much depend on how much you practice, what the other amateur players around you are using and what their level of skill is!

MrHCinDE · by **MrHCinDE** » 2024-06-19 1:35 a.m.

[quote="harrisonreed"]As a 3BF player, I have no idea what the point of a medium bore is. If I wanted to be lazy or cheap, and play everything on one horn, that would be the horn I'd use. But I can have both a 3BF and a 396-A, and they fit together in one case .... So the medium bore is trying to get hired for a job that doesn't exist.[/quote]

Having played my 3BF exclusively for a couple of weeks, I’m starting to come around to the same point of view. As commented by my teacher, I was sounding very good on the 3BF that I took to the last couple of lessons, especially considering I had a couple of weeks off and didn’t have any time to practice (apart from lessons/rehearsals) since my return.

It was quite interesting to be playing through some of the Brad Edwards book, Rochut, Grondahl and Bourgeois. I would have never thought to play a Concerto on a 3BF with a smallish mouthpiece (DE LT C+/D3) but was pleasantly surprised.

Might have to thin the medium bores out after all.

Finetales · by **Finetales** » 2024-06-19 1:59 a.m.

The .525 3BF (3B+F or early 607) might be even slightly better as a do-everything horn than the 3BF. It does everything the 3BF does, but it records even better and has a much beefier low end, all at the expense of only a very slight reduction in high register ease. It can still peel high Fs off the wall, you just need a tiny bit more effort. So in that sense the .525 has use, but that "big small horn" type of .525 is much less common than the "small big horn" type, which I find much more difficult to justify.

JohnL · by **JohnL** » 2024-06-19 2:22 a.m.

[quote="Finetales"]The .525 3BF (3B+F or early 607) might be even slightly better as a do-everything horn than the 3BF. It does everything the 3BF does, but it records even better and has a much beefier low end, all at the expense of only a very slight reduction in high register ease. It can still peel high Fs off the wall, you just need a tiny bit more effort. So in that sense the .525 has use, but that "big small horn" type of .525 is much less common than the "small big horn" type, which I find much more difficult to justify.[/quote]
Gotta wonder how well a 3B+ with a .508"/.525" dual bore slide would play...

OneTon · by **OneTon** » 2024-06-19 5:50 a.m.

It seems 0.525 bore trombones retain a niche in the market inspite of Emory Remington and Conn setting a benchmark with the 88H. The 0.525 may enjoy more versatility than a 0.547 and may offer a more appropriate result for some applications. In terms of numbers, the 0.525 is 0.017 inches bigger than a 0.508. The 0.547 is 0.022 inches bigger than. 0.525. So why 0.525: 0.525 bore trombones split the difference between small bore and large bore horns. The closest thing to a “rule” might be brass quintets, brass quartets, and some chamber sized music. The rule is by no means hard and fast. Is the model number for the 0.525 bore Blessing known? Did the Canadian Brass use 0.525 bore trombones, at least for some period of time?

Matt_K · by **Matt_K** » 2024-06-19 8:30 a.m.

[quote="JohnL"]<QUOTE author="Finetales" post_id="245627" time="1718776778" user_id="136">
The .525 3BF (3B+F or early 607) might be even slightly better as a do-everything horn than the 3BF. It does everything the 3BF does, but it records even better and has a much beefier low end, all at the expense of only a very slight reduction in high register ease. It can still peel high Fs off the wall, you just need a tiny bit more effort. So in that sense the .525 has use, but that "big small horn" type of .525 is much less common than the "small big horn" type, which I find much more difficult to justify.[/quote]
Gotta wonder how well a 3B+ with a .508"/.525" dual bore slide would play...
</QUOTE>

My 500/525 King with a Getzen 3508Y bell is hands down my favorite horn to play and I’d have no problems taking to brass quintet gigs. It played great with the 607F bell before I had it swapped too. I also have a Getzen 725 (525/547) that’s a fantastic horn that I’d probably take to that same gig instead though. It’s super easy to play but has all the oomph you’d want out of a 547 horn with just a touch of extra character/brilliance.

cb56 · by **cb56** » 2024-06-19 11:05 a.m.

[quote="OneTon"]Is the model number for the 0.525 bore Blessing known?[/quote]
I think it was B78 for the F attachment. And B7 for the straight horn.

dukesboneman · by **dukesboneman** » 2024-06-19 1:26 p.m.

I think over the years with the Music Stores and Teachers (Public and College) pushing the 547 Trombone that the market has pushed the 525 off to the side. Younger and younger kids are being pushed into Too big horns.

I`m a retired Public school Band director and I saw it. I taught in 2 inner city districts , so my kids got what we had.

Mostly the King and Yamaha medium bore student model horns.

Over the years I`ve had 42B`s, 42, 88H, 8H. all nice horns but not really practical outside of an Orchestral or Concert Band setting, in my opinion.

The Medium bore horns, Bach 36 (B) 79H, 78H and I`ve played a Shires Medium bore that I liked, are the best all around horn .

Yes Alessi, Friedman, etc... sound Fantastic on the 547 horns. But in the modern American Symphonic setting , That`s what they have to play. What if Alessi reached a certain age and said , This horn is too much work and showed up for an entire season with a Bach 36? Ralph Sauer downsized

Finetales · by **Finetales** » 2024-06-19 11:51 p.m.

[quote="JohnL"]Gotta wonder how well a 3B+ with a .508"/.525" dual bore slide would play...[/quote]

I wonder that often. Maybe one day if I have enough surplus 3B/607 slides. Actually, I only need one more 607 slide to be able to do it...

Quick Links

Instruments

Marketplace

Medium bore trombones - why?