Reasons for F-attachment on small bore horns
- johntarr
- Posts: 368
- Joined: May 07, 2018
It seems like (at least from reading this forum) that more people are using small bore horns with F/attachments. The more I think about this, the more it makes sense for me. I am thinking of getting a small bore horn for playing more jazz but wonder if one with an F-attachment would be more useful, as in for jazz but also for small chamber music settings, solo performances and some lighter orchestral repertoire.
I’m curious to hear others’ reasons for, and experiences using such horns, and, which ones you use.
Best to all,
John
I’m curious to hear others’ reasons for, and experiences using such horns, and, which ones you use.
Best to all,
John
- Matt_K
- Posts: 4809
- Joined: Mar 21, 2018
I can’t really reach C and B with any dexterity because my arms are too short so I’ve been playing one for almost a decade at this point. It helps both improvisation and charts that happen to gown down that low. I also regularly use the lower register which is obviously totally inaccessible without one which helps bridge the pedal register to the middle registers. It adds more angular patterns to improvisation because of how wide the registers are down there. I also often drop say, down an octave in the same way a bari sax might when playing with others which is a pretty effective tool if you can play it in tune with others
- harrisonreed
- Posts: 6479
- Joined: Aug 17, 2018
I love the 3BF -- it's a great horn, fun to play, and the valve gives you an awesome low range and a lot more flexibility.
The discussion always comes up between the blow through the straight horn vs one with a valve, but I think that's moot. There's a difference but it's like a gala apple vs a jazz apple. They're both good.
The discussion always comes up between the blow through the straight horn vs one with a valve, but I think that's moot. There's a difference but it's like a gala apple vs a jazz apple. They're both good.
- BGuttman
- Posts: 7368
- Joined: Mar 22, 2018
I had a small bore with F since grade school (Olds Ambassador A-20). I wanted a bass trombone and it was the best my parents could afford (not everybody had $500 to drop on a new trombone in 1960).
Based on the discussions I've seen, for a small bore the ideal situation may be a Bb trombone with a G attachment since you rarely need the very low register and the G valve offers some interesting slide patterns in the bass clef register.
Some applications like theater, small orchestra, etc. can make good use of a small bore with an attachment (F or G). Stravinsky's "L'Histoire du Soldat" seems to have been written for an instrument of this type. I see a lot of King 3B-F instruments in use for this. Of course, if your tonal tastes go to Bach or Conn, the 3B-F may not be your cup of tea.
I have an alto with a Bb attachment. It gives some interesting capabilities letting me play a 1st trombone part. It was a godsend for my and for someone who borrowed my horn once when we had a "brain cramp" and needed to use Bb fingerings because we forgot the Eb fingerings. :)
Based on the discussions I've seen, for a small bore the ideal situation may be a Bb trombone with a G attachment since you rarely need the very low register and the G valve offers some interesting slide patterns in the bass clef register.
Some applications like theater, small orchestra, etc. can make good use of a small bore with an attachment (F or G). Stravinsky's "L'Histoire du Soldat" seems to have been written for an instrument of this type. I see a lot of King 3B-F instruments in use for this. Of course, if your tonal tastes go to Bach or Conn, the 3B-F may not be your cup of tea.
I have an alto with a Bb attachment. It gives some interesting capabilities letting me play a 1st trombone part. It was a godsend for my and for someone who borrowed my horn once when we had a "brain cramp" and needed to use Bb fingerings because we forgot the Eb fingerings. :)
- WGWTR180
- Posts: 2152
- Joined: Sep 04, 2019
[quote="harrisonreed"]I love the 3BF -- it's a great horn, fun to play, and the valve gives you an awesome low range and a lot more flexibility.
The discussion always comes up between the blow through the straight horn vs one with a valve, but I think that's moot. There's a difference but it's like a gala apple vs a jazz apple. They're both good.[/quote]
I'll echo these comments. And for modern show playing a small bore with an F attachment can be a lifesaver.
The discussion always comes up between the blow through the straight horn vs one with a valve, but I think that's moot. There's a difference but it's like a gala apple vs a jazz apple. They're both good.[/quote]
I'll echo these comments. And for modern show playing a small bore with an F attachment can be a lifesaver.
- Sesquitone
- Posts: 291
- Joined: Apr 25, 2022
[quote="johntarr"]It seems like (at least from reading this forum) that more people are using small bore horns with F/attachments. The more I think about this, the more it makes sense for me.
John[/quote]
If you are thinking about more facile slide manipulation in the otherwise awkward low-tenor register, then don't take for granted that the attachment should be tuned a perfect fourth below the base key. The Bb/F combination gives you only four attachment alternates within the normal (attachment-less) tenor compass—having the same sound-path lengths as their slide-alone (SA) counterparts. Plus a few more along the attachment's third harmonic with longer sound-path lengths. The Bb/Gb (major-third) and Bb/G(b/2) ("Bollinger"-like) combinations raise this number to nine, with the attachment alternates more evenly interspersed between the SA harmonics.
But the Bb/G-natural (minor-third) attachment offers sixteen handy attachment alternate positions with the same sound-path lengths as their respective SA positions. Plus a few more with longer sound-path lengths. And the minor-third harmonics are interspersed between SA harmonics in such a way that the combined harmonic distribution throughout the bass clef now "looks" a lot like the facile upper register (above the SA fourth harmonic): the G-attachment's third harmonic mimics (an octave lower) the SA fifth harmonic—with exactly the same (nominal) slide positions; the attachment's third and second harmonics mimic (one and two octaves lower) the SA seventh harmonic—with almost the same (nominal) slide positions. And positions along the minor-third attachment's fifth harmonic are displaced by one position from those of the SA ninth harmonic. This means that the minor-third attachment is very easy to learn. Any lick that can be played easily in the upper register can now be played (with essentially the same positions) an octave lower. The point about having the same sound-path lengths as their SA counterparts means that—with an excellent modern valve and no unnecessary bore discontinuities (especially within the slide receiver)—you have identical intonation, tone-quality, and attack response. In particular, this means that the attachment tubing bore should not be "oversized", but rather match that of the incoming arm of the slide. [This "matched-bore" principle (for any attachment tunings) used to be "a bit controversial", but many manufacturers have now realised its advantages.]
.
John[/quote]
If you are thinking about more facile slide manipulation in the otherwise awkward low-tenor register, then don't take for granted that the attachment should be tuned a perfect fourth below the base key. The Bb/F combination gives you only four attachment alternates within the normal (attachment-less) tenor compass—having the same sound-path lengths as their slide-alone (SA) counterparts. Plus a few more along the attachment's third harmonic with longer sound-path lengths. The Bb/Gb (major-third) and Bb/G(b/2) ("Bollinger"-like) combinations raise this number to nine, with the attachment alternates more evenly interspersed between the SA harmonics.
But the Bb/G-natural (minor-third) attachment offers sixteen handy attachment alternate positions with the same sound-path lengths as their respective SA positions. Plus a few more with longer sound-path lengths. And the minor-third harmonics are interspersed between SA harmonics in such a way that the combined harmonic distribution throughout the bass clef now "looks" a lot like the facile upper register (above the SA fourth harmonic): the G-attachment's third harmonic mimics (an octave lower) the SA fifth harmonic—with exactly the same (nominal) slide positions; the attachment's third and second harmonics mimic (one and two octaves lower) the SA seventh harmonic—with almost the same (nominal) slide positions. And positions along the minor-third attachment's fifth harmonic are displaced by one position from those of the SA ninth harmonic. This means that the minor-third attachment is very easy to learn. Any lick that can be played easily in the upper register can now be played (with essentially the same positions) an octave lower. The point about having the same sound-path lengths as their SA counterparts means that—with an excellent modern valve and no unnecessary bore discontinuities (especially within the slide receiver)—you have identical intonation, tone-quality, and attack response. In particular, this means that the attachment tubing bore should not be "oversized", but rather match that of the incoming arm of the slide. [This "matched-bore" principle (for any attachment tunings) used to be "a bit controversial", but many manufacturers have now realised its advantages.]
.
- Burgerbob
- Posts: 6327
- Joined: Apr 23, 2018
I personally need one for my work horn, so I'm a bit stuck there.
But I also just enjoy the F-attachment small bore more than a straight one- with a straight horn I always feel like I'm missing something, like part of my playing is being choked off.
The work I've done on small horn outside my job also usually needs the F attachment anyway- shows, brass quartet, etc., it always comes in handy. Why compromise?
But I also just enjoy the F-attachment small bore more than a straight one- with a straight horn I always feel like I'm missing something, like part of my playing is being choked off.
The work I've done on small horn outside my job also usually needs the F attachment anyway- shows, brass quartet, etc., it always comes in handy. Why compromise?
- hyperbolica
- Posts: 3990
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
I like the simplicity and lower weight of straight horns. I've played triggers since I was 11 years old. Lots of people aren't too lazy to reach 6th position. Who needs the crutch? But the allure of the sound of an 8h, 48h, 3508, Olds Recording etc, is just stunning. Why compromise?
- Finetales
- Posts: 1482
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
Practical reasons:
- 3rd trombone in a big band (lots of Cs and Bs in the staff, and plenty of bad writing going quickly from B to Bb or similar)
- wedding bands (rarely does the sax player bring more than one sax to a wedding gig, and when you play Proud Mary someone has to play the bari part)
- musicals (TONS of notes below low E, in parts that are meant for and sound best on a small tenor)
- cramped situations where you don't actually have room for 6th and 7th (been there many times)
- getting a chart from an arranger who doesn't know the range limits of a trombone (also been there many times)
In these situations, using a straight horn is a compromise at best. And in general, 7th position is a physical stretch for most people and many of us prefer to avoid it most of the time.
Musicals actually have so much low stuff that a 2-valve small tenor would be useful. Take Cabaret for example. Playing that part on a large tenor would be the totally wrong sound, but there is a part (without time to switch horns before) with repeated fortissimo staccato low Cs. Even a 3BF can't really do that.
I have a 3B and a 3BF that play identically, so it's nice to have the option of lighter weight when I don't need the valve. But I could easily sell the 3B and not lose anything...not so for the 3BF.
[quote="hyperbolica"]I like the simplicity and lower weight of straight horns. I've played triggers since I was 11 years old. Lots of people aren't too lazy to reach 6th position. Who needs the crutch? But the allure of the sound of an 8h, 48h, 3508, Olds Recording etc, is just stunning. Why compromise?[/quote]
Having an alternative to 6th and 7th position is a lot more than just being "too lazy" or a "crutch".
- 3rd trombone in a big band (lots of Cs and Bs in the staff, and plenty of bad writing going quickly from B to Bb or similar)
- wedding bands (rarely does the sax player bring more than one sax to a wedding gig, and when you play Proud Mary someone has to play the bari part)
- musicals (TONS of notes below low E, in parts that are meant for and sound best on a small tenor)
- cramped situations where you don't actually have room for 6th and 7th (been there many times)
- getting a chart from an arranger who doesn't know the range limits of a trombone (also been there many times)
In these situations, using a straight horn is a compromise at best. And in general, 7th position is a physical stretch for most people and many of us prefer to avoid it most of the time.
Musicals actually have so much low stuff that a 2-valve small tenor would be useful. Take Cabaret for example. Playing that part on a large tenor would be the totally wrong sound, but there is a part (without time to switch horns before) with repeated fortissimo staccato low Cs. Even a 3BF can't really do that.
I have a 3B and a 3BF that play identically, so it's nice to have the option of lighter weight when I don't need the valve. But I could easily sell the 3B and not lose anything...not so for the 3BF.
[quote="hyperbolica"]I like the simplicity and lower weight of straight horns. I've played triggers since I was 11 years old. Lots of people aren't too lazy to reach 6th position. Who needs the crutch? But the allure of the sound of an 8h, 48h, 3508, Olds Recording etc, is just stunning. Why compromise?[/quote]
Having an alternative to 6th and 7th position is a lot more than just being "too lazy" or a "crutch".
- hyperbolica
- Posts: 3990
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
Being tied to just a 3b or Selmer Bolero or some custom job would be the compromise. 3b is a nice enough horn, but anything remotely similar that I've got plays and sounds nicer. I've owned at least 3 3bs including most recently a 3bf, and after the honeymoon period, I could not get rid of it fast enough.
I could put a valve on my 32h, because its modded already, and I'm not 100% on that horn anyway. But I'd probably just go get a Yamaha 356 first. If I'm playing a smaller horn, I'm probably in a range where a trigger is an encumbrance.
I recently sold my 79h because the 88h w/525 slide is probably the smallest horn where I'd need a valve. I could put the 32h slide on the 88h bell, I guess, but I've never tried that.
I could put a valve on my 32h, because its modded already, and I'm not 100% on that horn anyway. But I'd probably just go get a Yamaha 356 first. If I'm playing a smaller horn, I'm probably in a range where a trigger is an encumbrance.
I recently sold my 79h because the 88h w/525 slide is probably the smallest horn where I'd need a valve. I could put the 32h slide on the 88h bell, I guess, but I've never tried that.
- Bach5G
- Posts: 2874
- Joined: Apr 07, 2018
I recall back in the 70s when a 3B/F was the dream horn. Then they fell out of favour and you couldn’t give them away (slight exaggeration). I bought one in the early 90s for about $600 (sold it) and could have bought one a year ago for < $900 (missed opportunity). There seems to be renewed interest these days. A fellow I know got one recently. Sounds great.
- Finetales
- Posts: 1482
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
I got my 3BF for less than $500 in 2018. 3Bs and 3BFs grow on trees, so there is no shortage of supply and used prices stay low (excluding Silver Sonics).
[quote="hyperbolica"]Being tied to just a 3b or Selmer Bolero or some custom job would be the compromise.[/quote]
Guess I've been compromised my whole career then :idk:
[quote="hyperbolica"]Being tied to just a 3b or Selmer Bolero or some custom job would be the compromise.[/quote]
Guess I've been compromised my whole career then :idk:
- johntarr
- Posts: 368
- Joined: May 07, 2018
Thanks for all the interesting and helpful responses!
As Burgerbob said, I miss having the access to the lower patterns and scales that I have on my larger bore.
I too, like harrisonreed mentioned, used to think that a small bore had to be a “pure horn” for playing jazz. Now I realize that that’s just a limiting idea for me.
Sesquitone’s explanations (in this and other posts) about the usefulness of a G-attachment are very intriguing. Perhaps the ultimate solution would be to have a way to have an interchangeable valve with two different tuning slides. Of course, if that would be possible, it would also be expensive, and most likely too much for my limited brain capacity.
The first step would probably be just to get to try a 3BF.
All the best,
John
As Burgerbob said, I miss having the access to the lower patterns and scales that I have on my larger bore.
I too, like harrisonreed mentioned, used to think that a small bore had to be a “pure horn” for playing jazz. Now I realize that that’s just a limiting idea for me.
Sesquitone’s explanations (in this and other posts) about the usefulness of a G-attachment are very intriguing. Perhaps the ultimate solution would be to have a way to have an interchangeable valve with two different tuning slides. Of course, if that would be possible, it would also be expensive, and most likely too much for my limited brain capacity.
The first step would probably be just to get to try a 3BF.
All the best,
John
- Finetales
- Posts: 1482
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
[quote="johntarr"]Perhaps the ultimate solution would be to have a way to have an interchangeable valve with two different tuning slides. Of course, if that would be possible, it would also be expensive, and most likely too much for my limited brain capacity.[/quote]
You wouldn't even need two tuning slides, just a whole step spacer to put in between the tuning slide and the receiver.
The G wrap just has to be made so the tuning slide is on a separate plane from the main tuning slide (like most F attachments are), so that you can then just insert a spacer to drop it down to F. Or if you want to get fancy with it, put a small loop in the wrap at the tuning slide receivers, with equal distance between all 4 tubes so you can just set the slides one way to go through the loop (F) and another way to bypass it (G). That way you don't have to bother with an additional piece of tubing, it's all on the horn. The Yamaha YMP-201 circular mellophone uses such a loop, and it's a very elegant way of incorporating the two keys.
You wouldn't even need two tuning slides, just a whole step spacer to put in between the tuning slide and the receiver.
The G wrap just has to be made so the tuning slide is on a separate plane from the main tuning slide (like most F attachments are), so that you can then just insert a spacer to drop it down to F. Or if you want to get fancy with it, put a small loop in the wrap at the tuning slide receivers, with equal distance between all 4 tubes so you can just set the slides one way to go through the loop (F) and another way to bypass it (G). That way you don't have to bother with an additional piece of tubing, it's all on the horn. The Yamaha YMP-201 circular mellophone uses such a loop, and it's a very elegant way of incorporating the two keys.
- AtomicClock
- Posts: 1094
- Joined: Oct 19, 2023
They say you can remove a brace from the 3bf, and then simply switch the attachment from F to G by switching around the existing tuning slides. I don't have one to try it out myself.
- Finetales
- Posts: 1482
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
[quote="AtomicClock"]They say you can remove a brace from the 3bf, and then simply switch the attachment from F to G by switching around the existing tuning slides. I don't have one to try it out myself.[/quote]
You can on the later ones, since the tubes are equidistant. It works on my 607s (late wrap) but not my 3BF (early wrap). But to actually use the valve that way you'd have to take the brace off the main tuning slide since it's in the way.
You can on the later ones, since the tubes are equidistant. It works on my 607s (late wrap) but not my 3BF (early wrap). But to actually use the valve that way you'd have to take the brace off the main tuning slide since it's in the way.
- Burgerbob
- Posts: 6327
- Joined: Apr 23, 2018
[quote="hyperbolica"]Why compromise?[/quote]
I haven't played a single tenor gig in the last, maybe, 4 or 5 years where a straight horn wouldn't have been some sort of compromise.
I haven't played a single tenor gig in the last, maybe, 4 or 5 years where a straight horn wouldn't have been some sort of compromise.
- OneTon
- Posts: 757
- Joined: Nov 02, 2021
A 0.508 bore 3BF makes a lot of sense for all of the reasons above. I have seen Bach Mercedes and Ambassadors with f attachments. I am thinking that I may have seen a 2BF. Maybe someone can confirm that or that I was dreaming. A smaller bore f attachment makes a lot of sense. I am also empathetic with people who like straight horns. I covered 1st, 2nd, and 3rd parts with a Bach Lt42G with a 1 piece bell or YSL-653 so much that some people assumed that I could not play an f attachment horn. A few were shocked when I showed up with one or the Duo-Gravis. F attachment small bore horns make sense to me and when I have an f attachment in my hand, I use the heck out of the f attachment. I am like Will Rogers: I never met a trombone I did not like. The reasons to have one are plentiful and for some, even compelling. Go for it. They are the Swiss Army Knife for trombone players.
- imsevimse
- Posts: 1765
- Joined: Apr 29, 2018
[quote="BGuttman"]Based on the discussions I've seen, for a small bore the ideal situation may be a Bb trombone with a G attachment since you rarely need the very low register and the G valve offers some interesting slide patterns in the bass clef register.[/quote]
Yes, a small bore .500 or less is absolutely more useful with G-valve than F-valve. The G-valve on a .500 is not to extend the low register but to have more options within the staff. A minor third doesn't affect the same as a perfect fourth. When I use the G valve in the staff I can not feel much difference in the response compared to the open horn and not much differens on the higher partials either, not the same as the higher partials played on the F-valve. That can feel more like playing a french horn. I use my .500 Bb/G for classical music mostly with a Shires MG signature mouthpiece but I can see a good use for a G-valve on third-trombone parts in a big band. I would use it if I were asked to play third, but I mostly play first, second and bass.
/Tom
Yes, a small bore .500 or less is absolutely more useful with G-valve than F-valve. The G-valve on a .500 is not to extend the low register but to have more options within the staff. A minor third doesn't affect the same as a perfect fourth. When I use the G valve in the staff I can not feel much difference in the response compared to the open horn and not much differens on the higher partials either, not the same as the higher partials played on the F-valve. That can feel more like playing a french horn. I use my .500 Bb/G for classical music mostly with a Shires MG signature mouthpiece but I can see a good use for a G-valve on third-trombone parts in a big band. I would use it if I were asked to play third, but I mostly play first, second and bass.
/Tom
- Finetales
- Posts: 1482
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
[quote="OneTon"]I am thinking that I may have seen a 2BF. Maybe someone can confirm that or that I was dreaming.[/quote]
There is no factory 2BF, someone may have added a valve to a 2B though. King did make a 605F, which is about the same size.
There is no factory 2BF, someone may have added a valve to a 2B though. King did make a 605F, which is about the same size.
- Matt_K
- Posts: 4809
- Joined: Mar 21, 2018
crazy4tbone86 made a 2BF for a client and posted pictures a few months ago. My understanding it was a killer horn, which makes sense given he made a similar 500/525 for me and it is likewise a monster player.
The 605F does appear like a 2B, though many components are slightly different such as the tuning slide.
The 605F does appear like a 2B, though many components are slightly different such as the tuning slide.
- chouston3
- Posts: 167
- Joined: Dec 19, 2023
Theoretically, could I buy an instrument innovations rotor and put it on a small bore horn?
I know that buying a 3bf would be cheaper.
I play an 891z and I know yamaha made a few of them with rotors.
I know that buying a 3bf would be cheaper.
I play an 891z and I know yamaha made a few of them with rotors.
- ithinknot
- Posts: 1339
- Joined: Jul 24, 2020
[quote="chouston3"]Theoretically, could I buy an instrument innovations rotor and put it on a small bore horn?[/quote]
Too big, really. Meinlschmidt and Voigt make more bore-appropriate rotors.
Too big, really. Meinlschmidt and Voigt make more bore-appropriate rotors.
- Matt_K
- Posts: 4809
- Joined: Mar 21, 2018
I think it would be less of a problem than one might think. If not, swapping out the lower tube for a 525 isn't terribly expensive. 508/525 and 500/525 are hugely underrated bore sizes. I've had a 508/525 slide on a Shires with a tru-bore (.562 bore valve) and it worked great. I still kick myself for selling that but I like my 500/525 franken King better.
The issue you'd run into is the neckpipe might have a pretty small bore coming out of the slide so you may have a really quick taper. A tech would also probably have to retaper the straight neckpipe after that. It's not a huge deal for an experienced tech but I'd recommend getting a .530 rotor or Hagmann since there are parts available (either after market or 2nd hand like a used 3BF rotor)
The issue you'd run into is the neckpipe might have a pretty small bore coming out of the slide so you may have a really quick taper. A tech would also probably have to retaper the straight neckpipe after that. It's not a huge deal for an experienced tech but I'd recommend getting a .530 rotor or Hagmann since there are parts available (either after market or 2nd hand like a used 3BF rotor)
- Burgerbob
- Posts: 6327
- Joined: Apr 23, 2018
[quote="chouston3"]Theoretically, could I buy an instrument innovations rotor and put it on a small bore horn?
I know that buying a 3bf would be cheaper.
I play an 891z and I know yamaha made a few of them with rotors.[/quote]
Ask John Sandhagen, I think there may be a batch of .530 Olsen rotors
I know that buying a 3bf would be cheaper.
I play an 891z and I know yamaha made a few of them with rotors.[/quote]
Ask John Sandhagen, I think there may be a batch of .530 Olsen rotors
- Sesquitone
- Posts: 291
- Joined: Apr 25, 2022
The Olds "Recording" model with (F) attachment is a great instrument. The 12.6 mm/13.0 mm dual-bore slide is "matched" to an attachment very close to the same (larger) bore of the slide. In fact, this instrument is what gave René Hagmann and me an epiphany about how to cure the common "problems" with oversized attachment bores: flat and stuffy attachment second harmonic; sharp and uncentered third harmonic; unreliable attack response. The "Recording" model has none of those drawbacks—because it does not have the conventional discontinuity in bore occurring within the slide receiver.
The wrap, lying entirely within the plane of the bell loop, can be easily converted to G-natural.
I ended up chopping mine down to be pitched in C/A—a tremendously powerful "lead" instrument, paralleling the C trumpet often used by principal players in symphony orchestras and Brass Quintets.
.
The wrap, lying entirely within the plane of the bell loop, can be easily converted to G-natural.
I ended up chopping mine down to be pitched in C/A—a tremendously powerful "lead" instrument, paralleling the C trumpet often used by principal players in symphony orchestras and Brass Quintets.
.
- Paladine
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Aug 31, 2024
[quote="hyperbolica"]I like the simplicity and lower weight of straight horns. I've played triggers since I was 11 years old. Lots of people aren't too lazy to reach 6th position. Who needs the crutch? But the allure of the sound of an 8h, 48h, 3508, Olds Recording etc, is just stunning. Why compromise?[/quote]
I came to music (trombone) late in life - when I retired. I've only ever owned straight horns. Now in my 80s, I have 'lost' two tendons in my upper right arm. Getting out to 6th and 7th is becoming more and more painful. I don't want to give up playing, so the most practical option is to get a trombone with a trigger. That's why I would, personally, 'compromise'. And, yes, I suppose it is the equivalent of a crutch, but as a crutch assists walking, a trigger would assist me to carry on playing.
I came to music (trombone) late in life - when I retired. I've only ever owned straight horns. Now in my 80s, I have 'lost' two tendons in my upper right arm. Getting out to 6th and 7th is becoming more and more painful. I don't want to give up playing, so the most practical option is to get a trombone with a trigger. That's why I would, personally, 'compromise'. And, yes, I suppose it is the equivalent of a crutch, but as a crutch assists walking, a trigger would assist me to carry on playing.
- Sesquitone
- Posts: 291
- Joined: Apr 25, 2022
[quote="Paladine"]<QUOTE author="hyperbolica" post_id="251607" time="1724597705" user_id="104">
I like the simplicity and lower weight of straight horns. I've played triggers since I was 11 years old. Lots of people aren't too lazy to reach 6th position. Who needs the crutch? But the allure of the sound of an 8h, 48h, 3508, Olds Recording etc, is just stunning. Why compromise?[/quote]
I came to music (trombone) late in life - when I retired. I've only ever owned straight horns. Now in my 80s, I have 'lost' two tendons in my upper right arm. Getting out to 6th and 7th is becoming more and more painful. I don't want to give up playing, so the most practical option is to get a trombone with a trigger. That's why I would, personally, 'compromise'. And, yes, I suppose it is the equivalent of a crutch, but as a crutch assists walking, a trigger would assist me to carry on playing.
</QUOTE>
Back in the late 1950s Mark McDunn worked with Holton to produce a "Student" tenor trombone for very young beginning students—with SHORT ARMS. The basic instrument was to be lightweight, in Bb (rather than starting off with an alto in Eb, for example). But with a valved attachment tuned so that the young student would not have to reach much beyond slide-alone (SA) 4th position. Mark experimented with various different tunings for the attachment, one of which was the conventional P4: Bb/F. In fact, Courtois had produced just such an instrument with a shorter slide than usual (with the missing length made up by an additional loop in the bell section). With that tuning, you still need to reach to SA 5th position for Dbs and Gbs. That turned out to be quite heavy, and didn't sell well.
However, Mark found that the Bb/G(natural) tuning, meant that, now, all notes in SA 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th positions can be played with the attachment engaged in attachment first, second, third, and fourth positions. The longest of these is just slightly longer than SA 4th.
This would seem to be ideal for someone who cannot reach far beyond that.
The TR-650 turns up for sale from time to time.
I like the simplicity and lower weight of straight horns. I've played triggers since I was 11 years old. Lots of people aren't too lazy to reach 6th position. Who needs the crutch? But the allure of the sound of an 8h, 48h, 3508, Olds Recording etc, is just stunning. Why compromise?[/quote]
I came to music (trombone) late in life - when I retired. I've only ever owned straight horns. Now in my 80s, I have 'lost' two tendons in my upper right arm. Getting out to 6th and 7th is becoming more and more painful. I don't want to give up playing, so the most practical option is to get a trombone with a trigger. That's why I would, personally, 'compromise'. And, yes, I suppose it is the equivalent of a crutch, but as a crutch assists walking, a trigger would assist me to carry on playing.
</QUOTE>
Back in the late 1950s Mark McDunn worked with Holton to produce a "Student" tenor trombone for very young beginning students—with SHORT ARMS. The basic instrument was to be lightweight, in Bb (rather than starting off with an alto in Eb, for example). But with a valved attachment tuned so that the young student would not have to reach much beyond slide-alone (SA) 4th position. Mark experimented with various different tunings for the attachment, one of which was the conventional P4: Bb/F. In fact, Courtois had produced just such an instrument with a shorter slide than usual (with the missing length made up by an additional loop in the bell section). With that tuning, you still need to reach to SA 5th position for Dbs and Gbs. That turned out to be quite heavy, and didn't sell well.
However, Mark found that the Bb/G(natural) tuning, meant that, now, all notes in SA 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th positions can be played with the attachment engaged in attachment first, second, third, and fourth positions. The longest of these is just slightly longer than SA 4th.
This would seem to be ideal for someone who cannot reach far beyond that.
The TR-650 turns up for sale from time to time.
- Crazy4Tbone86
- Posts: 1654
- Joined: Jan 14, 2020
[quote="Matt K"]crazy4tbone86 made a 2BF for a client and posted pictures a few months ago. My understanding it was a killer horn, which makes sense given he made a similar 500/525 for me and it is likewise a monster player.[/quote]
That 2B with a valve was very interesting project. The customer wanted a horn with multiple valve options. With the shortest tuning slide, the valve was in G. I made a short insert to convert the valve to G-flat along with a longer insert to put the valve in F. When both inserts were added together with the original G tuning slide, the valve section was in E, with plenty of places to pull out and make a low B very playable.
I used a Jurgens Voigt 13 mm (.512 inch) bore rotary valve and a gooseneck from an Olds Ambassador that had a valve. The straight tubing in the valve section was .512 and the bends were .515 (from the F section of an Olds Ambassador).
I am convinced that particular project only worked because the original 2B horn was exceptionally open and free blowing. I have never played a 2B or 3B that played quite like it. The horn felt more like a .547 bore instrument!
Will I ever build a bell section like that again? I doubt it. Fitting a lever on there that was ergonomic and had a short, efficient stroke was difficult. I think I built 4 different linkages before the customer and I were happy with it.
I don’t believe a .530 bore valve would work on a 2B valve project because the large end of the gooseneck is about that bore. Thus, the gooseneck would have no taper.
That 2B with a valve was very interesting project. The customer wanted a horn with multiple valve options. With the shortest tuning slide, the valve was in G. I made a short insert to convert the valve to G-flat along with a longer insert to put the valve in F. When both inserts were added together with the original G tuning slide, the valve section was in E, with plenty of places to pull out and make a low B very playable.
I used a Jurgens Voigt 13 mm (.512 inch) bore rotary valve and a gooseneck from an Olds Ambassador that had a valve. The straight tubing in the valve section was .512 and the bends were .515 (from the F section of an Olds Ambassador).
I am convinced that particular project only worked because the original 2B horn was exceptionally open and free blowing. I have never played a 2B or 3B that played quite like it. The horn felt more like a .547 bore instrument!
Will I ever build a bell section like that again? I doubt it. Fitting a lever on there that was ergonomic and had a short, efficient stroke was difficult. I think I built 4 different linkages before the customer and I were happy with it.
I don’t believe a .530 bore valve would work on a 2B valve project because the large end of the gooseneck is about that bore. Thus, the gooseneck would have no taper.
- JohnL
- Posts: 2529
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
Perhaps the valve for a YSL-872 (.470"/.490") would be a good match for a 2B?
A King 605/F valve section might also be an option, but they've been out of production for some time, so finding one in good shape could be a challenge.
A King 605/F valve section might also be an option, but they've been out of production for some time, so finding one in good shape could be a challenge.
- chouston3
- Posts: 167
- Joined: Dec 19, 2023
I am interested in an f-attachment on a small bore horn because I currently struggle to play large bore horns. I have some issues with my tmj that are aggravated if I play large bore or bass but are mostly fine with a small bore.
.508 is as large as I am willing to go. So, for someone like me, an f-attachment on a small bore horn would be quite useful.
Adding a valve to my current instrument would be interesting but I think it would be cheaper to buy a King 3b/f.
.508 is as large as I am willing to go. So, for someone like me, an f-attachment on a small bore horn would be quite useful.
Adding a valve to my current instrument would be interesting but I think it would be cheaper to buy a King 3b/f.
- Paladine
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Aug 31, 2024
[quote="Sesquitone"]<QUOTE author="Paladine" post_id="252123" time="1725134914" user_id="18487">
I came to music (trombone) late in life - when I retired. I've only ever owned straight horns. Now in my 80s, I have 'lost' two tendons in my upper right arm. Getting out to 6th and 7th is becoming more and more painful. I don't want to give up playing, so the most practical option is to get a trombone with a trigger. That's why I would, personally, 'compromise'. And, yes, I suppose it is the equivalent of a crutch, but as a crutch assists walking, a trigger would assist me to carry on playing.[/quote]
Back in the late 1950s Mark McDunn worked with Holton to produce a "Student" tenor trombone for very young beginning students—with SHORT ARMS. The basic instrument was to be lightweight, in Bb (rather than starting off with an alto in Eb, for example). But with a valved attachment tuned so that the young student would not have to reach much beyond slide-alone (SA) 4th position. Mark experimented with various different tunings for the attachment, one of which was the conventional P4: Bb/F. In fact, Courtois had produced just such an instrument with a shorter slide than usual (with the missing length made up by an additional loop in the bell section). With that tuning, you still need to reach to SA 5th position for Dbs and Gbs. That turned out to be quite heavy, and didn't sell well.
However, Mark found that the Bb/G(natural) tuning, meant that, now, all notes in SA 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th positions can be played with the attachment engaged in attachment first, second, third, and fourth positions. The longest of these is just slightly longer than SA 4th.
This would seem to be ideal for someone who cannot reach far beyond that.
The TR-650 turns up for sale from time to time.
</QUOTE>
That's interesting to know. Thank you for the information. But they don't seem to appear very often, If anyone has one lying around, I'd be interested. I've found one that came up on a well-known auction site 7 years ago :(
I came to music (trombone) late in life - when I retired. I've only ever owned straight horns. Now in my 80s, I have 'lost' two tendons in my upper right arm. Getting out to 6th and 7th is becoming more and more painful. I don't want to give up playing, so the most practical option is to get a trombone with a trigger. That's why I would, personally, 'compromise'. And, yes, I suppose it is the equivalent of a crutch, but as a crutch assists walking, a trigger would assist me to carry on playing.[/quote]
Back in the late 1950s Mark McDunn worked with Holton to produce a "Student" tenor trombone for very young beginning students—with SHORT ARMS. The basic instrument was to be lightweight, in Bb (rather than starting off with an alto in Eb, for example). But with a valved attachment tuned so that the young student would not have to reach much beyond slide-alone (SA) 4th position. Mark experimented with various different tunings for the attachment, one of which was the conventional P4: Bb/F. In fact, Courtois had produced just such an instrument with a shorter slide than usual (with the missing length made up by an additional loop in the bell section). With that tuning, you still need to reach to SA 5th position for Dbs and Gbs. That turned out to be quite heavy, and didn't sell well.
However, Mark found that the Bb/G(natural) tuning, meant that, now, all notes in SA 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th positions can be played with the attachment engaged in attachment first, second, third, and fourth positions. The longest of these is just slightly longer than SA 4th.
This would seem to be ideal for someone who cannot reach far beyond that.
The TR-650 turns up for sale from time to time.
</QUOTE>
That's interesting to know. Thank you for the information. But they don't seem to appear very often, If anyone has one lying around, I'd be interested. I've found one that came up on a well-known auction site 7 years ago :(
- Sesquitone
- Posts: 291
- Joined: Apr 25, 2022
[quote="Paladine"]That's interesting to know. Thank you for the information. But they don't seem to appear very often, If anyone has one lying around, I'd be interested. I've found one that came up on a well-known auction site 7 years ago :([/quote]
Of course, the main point is the minor-third tuning, Bb/G, which means you don't need to reach beyond attachment fourth position for any literature (or improvisation) within the standard tenor compass. Any competent brass-tech can easily cut down a traditional F attachment to put it in G-natural—at a "reasonable" cost. Some lightweight Bb/F instruments have a wrap geometry that is more amenable to conversion. It clearly doesn't have to be a Holton "Collegiate" model. Although that would be pretty easy to convert.
.
Of course, the main point is the minor-third tuning, Bb/G, which means you don't need to reach beyond attachment fourth position for any literature (or improvisation) within the standard tenor compass. Any competent brass-tech can easily cut down a traditional F attachment to put it in G-natural—at a "reasonable" cost. Some lightweight Bb/F instruments have a wrap geometry that is more amenable to conversion. It clearly doesn't have to be a Holton "Collegiate" model. Although that would be pretty easy to convert.
.
- Paladine
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Aug 31, 2024
Just found this old thread <LINK_TEXT text="viewtopic.php?t=18224">https://trombonechat.com/viewtopic.php?t=18224</LINK_TEXT> about a 'cut-down' Yamaha, for short-armed people (children mainly).
- mazman
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Jul 05, 2023
[quote="Finetales"]<QUOTE author="OneTon" post_id="251664" time="1724679901" user_id="13549">
I am thinking that I may have seen a 2BF. Maybe someone can confirm that or that I was dreaming.[/quote]
There is no factory 2BF, someone may have added a valve to a 2B though. King did make a 605F, which is about the same size.
</QUOTE>
There exist factory 2Bs with F attachments. They are not small bore horns.
I am thinking that I may have seen a 2BF. Maybe someone can confirm that or that I was dreaming.[/quote]
There is no factory 2BF, someone may have added a valve to a 2B though. King did make a 605F, which is about the same size.
</QUOTE>
There exist factory 2Bs with F attachments. They are not small bore horns.
- BGuttman
- Posts: 7368
- Joined: Mar 22, 2018
[quote="mazman"]<QUOTE author="Finetales" post_id="251669" time="1724683574" user_id="136">
There is no factory 2BF, someone may have added a valve to a 2B though. King did make a 605F, which is about the same size.[/quote]
There exist factory 2Bs with F attachments. They are not small bore horns.
</QUOTE>
Those instruments were Symphony models, a precursor to the modern 5B. They were called 2B because they were dual bore: 0.536"/0.547".
There is no factory 2BF, someone may have added a valve to a 2B though. King did make a 605F, which is about the same size.[/quote]
There exist factory 2Bs with F attachments. They are not small bore horns.
</QUOTE>
Those instruments were Symphony models, a precursor to the modern 5B. They were called 2B because they were dual bore: 0.536"/0.547".
- Finetales
- Posts: 1482
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
[quote="mazman"]<QUOTE author="Finetales" post_id="251669" time="1724683574" user_id="136">
There is no factory 2BF, someone may have added a valve to a 2B though. King did make a 605F, which is about the same size.[/quote]
There exist factory 2Bs with F attachments. They are not small bore horns.
</QUOTE>
I didn't say "2B that has an F attachment", I said "2BF", which clearly refers to the 2B Liberty/2102. The 1480 Symphony only had the 2B moniker (not 2BF) briefly, and nobody refers to it as a 2B anyway.
There is no factory 2BF, someone may have added a valve to a 2B though. King did make a 605F, which is about the same size.[/quote]
There exist factory 2Bs with F attachments. They are not small bore horns.
</QUOTE>
I didn't say "2B that has an F attachment", I said "2BF", which clearly refers to the 2B Liberty/2102. The 1480 Symphony only had the 2B moniker (not 2BF) briefly, and nobody refers to it as a 2B anyway.
- HawaiiTromboneGuy
- Posts: 1025
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
Williams 7 is a very versatile horn.
- mazman
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Jul 05, 2023
I’ve just learned 1938 King catalog shows the 2B liberty was available with an F attachment for an extra $15.
- LetItSlide
- Posts: 152
- Joined: Sep 01, 2022
[quote="Matt K"]…C and B…[/quote]
These are the two main reasons.
These are the two main reasons.
- LetItSlide
- Posts: 152
- Joined: Sep 01, 2022
Has anyone here tried a Bach 36 w/ F attachment bell section with an LT16 slide? If so, what are/were your impressions? Just doesn’t make sense? Too orchestral sounding?
- Matt_K
- Posts: 4809
- Joined: Mar 21, 2018
[quote="LetItSlide"]Has anyone here tried a Bach 36 w/ F attachment bell section with an LT16 slide? If so, what are/were your impressions? Just doesn’t make sense? Too orchestral sounding?[/quote]
I haven’t tried that specific combination but I did have a Shires setup very similarly and it worked great. I still kick myself for selling. Had a 508/525 slide. Have a 500/525 slide (mostly) King that is also great. I wouldn’t recommend playing lead on it but great for almost every other commercial application
I haven’t tried that specific combination but I did have a Shires setup very similarly and it worked great. I still kick myself for selling. Had a 508/525 slide. Have a 500/525 slide (mostly) King that is also great. I wouldn’t recommend playing lead on it but great for almost every other commercial application
- Bach5G
- Posts: 2874
- Joined: Apr 07, 2018
Maybe somebody has already answered this question in the preceding posts, but how difficult would it be to add a valve to an existing small bore, maybe something like a Bach 16? Approximate cost, feasibility, etc.
I should add that I’m not a big fan of the trigger arrangement on the King 3B/F.
I should add that I’m not a big fan of the trigger arrangement on the King 3B/F.
- Burgerbob
- Posts: 6327
- Joined: Apr 23, 2018
The problem is sourcing parts, like a good size valve (.530ish) and valve tubing, then not having a lopped off gooseneck if possible.
- Matt_K
- Posts: 4809
- Joined: Mar 21, 2018
Not liking the mechanism of the 607/3BF limits you to the cheapest source of these. You can get a 607 for as cheap as ~$500 give or take these days. The key issue with these is that the valve knuckles might be damaged and these are sometimes fatal to use with another project. Given the 607 side are student horns, you may also have deep corrosion and the like.
There are other used options, but they are pretty rare and also quite old at this point, and often have the same ergonomic considerations that the 3BF/607 have with the thumb over the bracing as was common back when these horn were "popular"... or at least available generally. These include some models of Olds and... maybe Reynolds(?).
FWIW, I've seen a few Bach 16B in the wild, one of which was owned by Bones Malone and my recollection is that they all had a 36 rotor on it (yes, 562 tubing!!). So it's not totally unheard of but I would personally not go that large for a project like this, though, as I mentioned, I have had success with that in the past but in an admittedly narrow scope. Probably more narrow than you are thinking.
As noted above, not liking the 3B/607F is going to be limiting even if you end up using the rotors because linkages are an often underappreciated expense in the totality of a project like this. Going custom is going to cost at least a few hundred dollars for the linkage alone and you might have to do several iterations to get the ergonomics exactly to your liking with something custom like that.
There are contemporary options, which are great but much more expensive. Shires uses their alto rotor, also .530 "dual bore" as I recall. These are great. I don't think they offer them a la carte, though I could be wrong. The cost is going to be comparable to a new valve section either way, so if you buy a whole bell section or a valve you can get a reasonably close cost by looking at the comparable large bore tenor.Their linkages are great and the blow on the dual bore rotors works really well on small bores and altos.
Yamha also offers a few options though again. Off the shelf, I measured the YSL356 at .547 tubing. New, they do offer on a custom basis things like the 891Z w/ F attachment. I've never measured nor do I remember having anyone tel lme, but that should be appropriately sized and I'm sure it plays great, as all Yamaha rotors do. If it uses their mechanical linkages, those are my personal favorite in the industry. Extremely smooth and easy to operate. As with Shires, I'm not sure if they'll sell you one of these rotors without buying the whole horn.
Hagmann and Voight both offer a .530 valve and I know of several in existence. Brian made one (mentioned earlier in this thread) for a 2B (G, Gb, F options). I've seen at least three Rath R2/3 with Hagmann .530" rotors. It is not cheap at all, though depending on the exchange rate, they may be varying degrees of more reasonable. You get what you pay for, though; I seldom hear anything remotely negative about either brand of rotors, other than sometimes the maintenance on the Hagmann, which is akin to Thayer valves (they need more oil than standard rotaries, though oiling them daily is really not a bad idea regardless what rotor you have).
All in, the high end is probably close to $2k, maybe $3k, for a valve section, or potentially as low as $700-800, depending on how cheap you can get an acceptable condition 3BF/607 and, depending on what horn you're putting it on, and depending on how willing you are to use stock linkages. Stock parts for the balance of the bell section (slide receiver, gooseneck, etc.) will help, as getting geometries and tapers can also be a tricky proposition.
There are other used options, but they are pretty rare and also quite old at this point, and often have the same ergonomic considerations that the 3BF/607 have with the thumb over the bracing as was common back when these horn were "popular"... or at least available generally. These include some models of Olds and... maybe Reynolds(?).
FWIW, I've seen a few Bach 16B in the wild, one of which was owned by Bones Malone and my recollection is that they all had a 36 rotor on it (yes, 562 tubing!!). So it's not totally unheard of but I would personally not go that large for a project like this, though, as I mentioned, I have had success with that in the past but in an admittedly narrow scope. Probably more narrow than you are thinking.
As noted above, not liking the 3B/607F is going to be limiting even if you end up using the rotors because linkages are an often underappreciated expense in the totality of a project like this. Going custom is going to cost at least a few hundred dollars for the linkage alone and you might have to do several iterations to get the ergonomics exactly to your liking with something custom like that.
There are contemporary options, which are great but much more expensive. Shires uses their alto rotor, also .530 "dual bore" as I recall. These are great. I don't think they offer them a la carte, though I could be wrong. The cost is going to be comparable to a new valve section either way, so if you buy a whole bell section or a valve you can get a reasonably close cost by looking at the comparable large bore tenor.Their linkages are great and the blow on the dual bore rotors works really well on small bores and altos.
Yamha also offers a few options though again. Off the shelf, I measured the YSL356 at .547 tubing. New, they do offer on a custom basis things like the 891Z w/ F attachment. I've never measured nor do I remember having anyone tel lme, but that should be appropriately sized and I'm sure it plays great, as all Yamaha rotors do. If it uses their mechanical linkages, those are my personal favorite in the industry. Extremely smooth and easy to operate. As with Shires, I'm not sure if they'll sell you one of these rotors without buying the whole horn.
Hagmann and Voight both offer a .530 valve and I know of several in existence. Brian made one (mentioned earlier in this thread) for a 2B (G, Gb, F options). I've seen at least three Rath R2/3 with Hagmann .530" rotors. It is not cheap at all, though depending on the exchange rate, they may be varying degrees of more reasonable. You get what you pay for, though; I seldom hear anything remotely negative about either brand of rotors, other than sometimes the maintenance on the Hagmann, which is akin to Thayer valves (they need more oil than standard rotaries, though oiling them daily is really not a bad idea regardless what rotor you have).
All in, the high end is probably close to $2k, maybe $3k, for a valve section, or potentially as low as $700-800, depending on how cheap you can get an acceptable condition 3BF/607 and, depending on what horn you're putting it on, and depending on how willing you are to use stock linkages. Stock parts for the balance of the bell section (slide receiver, gooseneck, etc.) will help, as getting geometries and tapers can also be a tricky proposition.
- JohnL
- Posts: 2529
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
[quote="mazman"]I’ve just learned 1938 King catalog shows the 2B liberty was available with an F attachment for an extra $15.[/quote]
I wonder how many of were actually made. I've certainly never seen one in the wild.
I wonder how many of were actually made. I've certainly never seen one in the wild.
- timothy42b
- Posts: 1812
- Joined: Mar 27, 2018
[quote="Matt K"]Not liking the mechanism of the 607/3BF limits you to the cheapest source of these. You can get a 607 for as cheap as ~$500 give or take these days. The key issue with these is that the valve knuckles might be damaged and these are sometimes fatal to use with another project. Given the 607 side are student horns, you may also have deep corrosion and the like.
[/quote]
It might be worth trying the 607 though. I recently acquired one and a Yamaha 356. I like the thumb over brace on the King a little better than the no brace of the Yamaha, and I added a DIY brace to my 42B. We all have different size hands.
[/quote]
It might be worth trying the 607 though. I recently acquired one and a Yamaha 356. I like the thumb over brace on the King a little better than the no brace of the Yamaha, and I added a DIY brace to my 42B. We all have different size hands.
- mazman
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Jul 05, 2023
[quote="JohnL"]<QUOTE author="mazman" post_id="253133" time="1726317242" user_id="16779">
I’ve just learned 1938 King catalog shows the 2B liberty was available with an F attachment for an extra $15.[/quote]
I wonder how many of were actually made. I've certainly never seen one in the wild.
</QUOTE>
I’d love to find one.
I’ve just learned 1938 King catalog shows the 2B liberty was available with an F attachment for an extra $15.[/quote]
I wonder how many of were actually made. I've certainly never seen one in the wild.
</QUOTE>
I’d love to find one.
- RJMason
- Posts: 390
- Joined: Jun 05, 2018
Never got to measure the Mercedes II f attachment. If one shows up, maybe worth trying on a Bach 16?
I’d love an F valve on my Yamaha 891ZD, but the cost is steep, since I cant test it I would need to order a brand new bell section to avoid the potential of messing up my current horn. Even if I could source the parts, would take almost a year to get it done properly?
Interested in a small Bach with a G attachment and dream of owning a Mount Vernon 16B, but reading it may have a 36 rotor puts me off.
Have never seen a 2B with a valve. Just the old large bell horns labeled 2B. Would also love to find one.
Once saw a Conn 4H with an F attachment— factory made custom, 40s or 50s, art deco. Thought about buying it just for parts but didn’t want to mess with the original. A 6H with a valve would be wonderful.
Rath R2F was great. Sold it, but maybe should’ve just swapped the bell and leadpipe. I would prob go this route if I wanted a boutique modern small bore with F, the voight valve is wonderful.
Thought about the Thein Maxim with F. Would be kind of like a Bach 8 with valve. Was quoted over $7K. Ouch.
Williams 7 valve range sounds like a bass trombone. Wonderful lead jazz horn with access to that bass sound palette? Have never heard another small bore f come close.
Stephens .525 is on route to me— trying that first! Lol.
I’d love an F valve on my Yamaha 891ZD, but the cost is steep, since I cant test it I would need to order a brand new bell section to avoid the potential of messing up my current horn. Even if I could source the parts, would take almost a year to get it done properly?
Interested in a small Bach with a G attachment and dream of owning a Mount Vernon 16B, but reading it may have a 36 rotor puts me off.
Have never seen a 2B with a valve. Just the old large bell horns labeled 2B. Would also love to find one.
Once saw a Conn 4H with an F attachment— factory made custom, 40s or 50s, art deco. Thought about buying it just for parts but didn’t want to mess with the original. A 6H with a valve would be wonderful.
Rath R2F was great. Sold it, but maybe should’ve just swapped the bell and leadpipe. I would prob go this route if I wanted a boutique modern small bore with F, the voight valve is wonderful.
Thought about the Thein Maxim with F. Would be kind of like a Bach 8 with valve. Was quoted over $7K. Ouch.
Williams 7 valve range sounds like a bass trombone. Wonderful lead jazz horn with access to that bass sound palette? Have never heard another small bore f come close.
Stephens .525 is on route to me— trying that first! Lol.
- Matt_K
- Posts: 4809
- Joined: Mar 21, 2018
Isn't the Mercedes II a medium bore? I'd suspect it also has a .562 rotor, if so, given Bach's predilection to re-use existing parts. I had a great Bach 9 (yes, 9!) that I wanted to do that to but ultimately sold because I didn't want to chop up a Mt. Vernon. Still wonder if I shouldn't have bitten the bullet and gotten an appropriately sized rotor for that. It was a great horn.
Probably more than that, unless the supply chain has radically gotten better in the least year or so. I waited for like ~3 years for YBL830 linkages in like 2018-2021. Commodity stuff like the 3xx,4xx, and 6xx parts seem to be much more readily available and ship almost immediately. Or at least that's been my experience over the last decade of ordering Yamaha parts.
You'd probably get a complete bell section much faster. I bet Yamaha prioritizes its own factory work over what goes out for parts.
Even if I could source the parts, would take almost a year to get it done properly?
Probably more than that, unless the supply chain has radically gotten better in the least year or so. I waited for like ~3 years for YBL830 linkages in like 2018-2021. Commodity stuff like the 3xx,4xx, and 6xx parts seem to be much more readily available and ship almost immediately. Or at least that's been my experience over the last decade of ordering Yamaha parts.
You'd probably get a complete bell section much faster. I bet Yamaha prioritizes its own factory work over what goes out for parts.
- mazman
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Jul 05, 2023
[quote="RJMason"]Never got to measure the Mercedes II f attachment. If one shows up, maybe worth trying on a Bach 16?
I’d love an F valve on my Yamaha 891ZD, but the cost is steep, since I cant test it I would need to order a brand new bell section to avoid the potential of messing up my current horn. Even if I could source the parts, would take almost a year to get it done properly?
Interested in a small Bach with a G attachment and dream of owning a Mount Vernon 16B, but reading it may have a 36 rotor puts me off.
Have never seen a 2B with a valve. Just the old large bell horns labeled 2B. Would also love to find one.
Once saw a Conn 4H with an F attachment— factory made custom, 40s or 50s, art deco. Thought about buying it just for parts but didn’t want to mess with the original. A 6H with a valve would be wonderful.
Rath R2F was great. Sold it, but maybe should’ve just swapped the bell and leadpipe. I would prob go this route if I wanted a boutique modern small bore with F, the voight valve is wonderful.
Thought about the Thein Maxim with F. Would be kind of like a Bach 8 with valve. Was quoted over $7K. Ouch.
Williams 7 valve range sounds like a bass trombone. Wonderful lead jazz horn with access to that bass sound palette? Have never heard another small bore f come close.
Stephens .525 is on route to me— trying that first! Lol.[/quote]
A 6H with an F attachment is an excellent idea.
I’d love an F valve on my Yamaha 891ZD, but the cost is steep, since I cant test it I would need to order a brand new bell section to avoid the potential of messing up my current horn. Even if I could source the parts, would take almost a year to get it done properly?
Interested in a small Bach with a G attachment and dream of owning a Mount Vernon 16B, but reading it may have a 36 rotor puts me off.
Have never seen a 2B with a valve. Just the old large bell horns labeled 2B. Would also love to find one.
Once saw a Conn 4H with an F attachment— factory made custom, 40s or 50s, art deco. Thought about buying it just for parts but didn’t want to mess with the original. A 6H with a valve would be wonderful.
Rath R2F was great. Sold it, but maybe should’ve just swapped the bell and leadpipe. I would prob go this route if I wanted a boutique modern small bore with F, the voight valve is wonderful.
Thought about the Thein Maxim with F. Would be kind of like a Bach 8 with valve. Was quoted over $7K. Ouch.
Williams 7 valve range sounds like a bass trombone. Wonderful lead jazz horn with access to that bass sound palette? Have never heard another small bore f come close.
Stephens .525 is on route to me— trying that first! Lol.[/quote]
A 6H with an F attachment is an excellent idea.
- MrHCinDE
- Posts: 1039
- Joined: Jul 01, 2018
I believe a forum member had a plug-in tuning slide valve made which fits a 6h and 48h. Non-destructive and I don‘t believe it would cost that much different to getting a permanent/modular valve fitted.
- Aznguyy
- Posts: 664
- Joined: May 01, 2018
[quote="mazman"]<QUOTE author="RJMason" post_id="253355" time="1726588698" user_id="3369">
Never got to measure the Mercedes II f attachment. If one shows up, maybe worth trying on a Bach 16?
I’d love an F valve on my Yamaha 891ZD, but the cost is steep, since I cant test it I would need to order a brand new bell section to avoid the potential of messing up my current horn. Even if I could source the parts, would take almost a year to get it done properly?
Interested in a small Bach with a G attachment and dream of owning a Mount Vernon 16B, but reading it may have a 36 rotor puts me off.
Have never seen a 2B with a valve. Just the old large bell horns labeled 2B. Would also love to find one.
Once saw a Conn 4H with an F attachment— factory made custom, 40s or 50s, art deco. Thought about buying it just for parts but didn’t want to mess with the original. A 6H with a valve would be wonderful.
Rath R2F was great. Sold it, but maybe should’ve just swapped the bell and leadpipe. I would prob go this route if I wanted a boutique modern small bore with F, the voight valve is wonderful.
Thought about the Thein Maxim with F. Would be kind of like a Bach 8 with valve. Was quoted over $7K. Ouch.
Williams 7 valve range sounds like a bass trombone. Wonderful lead jazz horn with access to that bass sound palette? Have never heard another small bore f come close.
Stephens .525 is on route to me— trying that first! Lol.[/quote]
A 6H with an F attachment is an excellent idea.
</QUOTE>
Wouldn't the Shires Marshall Gilkes Model with F attachment fit the bill? The specs would all be the same.
Never got to measure the Mercedes II f attachment. If one shows up, maybe worth trying on a Bach 16?
I’d love an F valve on my Yamaha 891ZD, but the cost is steep, since I cant test it I would need to order a brand new bell section to avoid the potential of messing up my current horn. Even if I could source the parts, would take almost a year to get it done properly?
Interested in a small Bach with a G attachment and dream of owning a Mount Vernon 16B, but reading it may have a 36 rotor puts me off.
Have never seen a 2B with a valve. Just the old large bell horns labeled 2B. Would also love to find one.
Once saw a Conn 4H with an F attachment— factory made custom, 40s or 50s, art deco. Thought about buying it just for parts but didn’t want to mess with the original. A 6H with a valve would be wonderful.
Rath R2F was great. Sold it, but maybe should’ve just swapped the bell and leadpipe. I would prob go this route if I wanted a boutique modern small bore with F, the voight valve is wonderful.
Thought about the Thein Maxim with F. Would be kind of like a Bach 8 with valve. Was quoted over $7K. Ouch.
Williams 7 valve range sounds like a bass trombone. Wonderful lead jazz horn with access to that bass sound palette? Have never heard another small bore f come close.
Stephens .525 is on route to me— trying that first! Lol.[/quote]
A 6H with an F attachment is an excellent idea.
</QUOTE>
Wouldn't the Shires Marshall Gilkes Model with F attachment fit the bill? The specs would all be the same.
- johntarr
- Posts: 368
- Joined: May 07, 2018
[quote="Aznguyy"]<QUOTE author="mazman" post_id="253364" time="1726591821" user_id="16779">
A 6H with an F attachment is an excellent idea.[/quote]
Wouldn't the Shires Marshall Gilkes Model with F attachment fit the bill? The specs would all be the same.
</QUOTE>
Kühnl & Hoyer makes a “Bart van Lier” model, .512 bore with an F-attachment. The braces look very comfortable and you can adjust the trigger paddle. I would love to try one. In the past, I had several young students playing on rented Kühnl & Hoyer altos and they were solid horns and easy to play. Has anyone tried one of the van Lier models?
A 6H with an F attachment is an excellent idea.[/quote]
Wouldn't the Shires Marshall Gilkes Model with F attachment fit the bill? The specs would all be the same.
</QUOTE>
Kühnl & Hoyer makes a “Bart van Lier” model, .512 bore with an F-attachment. The braces look very comfortable and you can adjust the trigger paddle. I would love to try one. In the past, I had several young students playing on rented Kühnl & Hoyer altos and they were solid horns and easy to play. Has anyone tried one of the van Lier models?
- octavposaune
- Posts: 160
- Joined: Jul 04, 2018
I have seen a MV 16B,
The F attachment was absolutely NOT. A 36b part. All wrap.parts were one off hand bent pieces and the wrap did not have an E pull, the U bend part was super long to fit in the narrow chassis of a 16. I dont remember the custom lever but it was very non ergonomic and the narrow slide sucked.
I suspect people have made 16Bs with 36 valve sections but this factory job was not that.
I bought some .547" rotor stuff from Kanstul in 2011-2012 to build a 16COM for myself and got side tracked for the last 12 years since working with Instrument Innovations. Maybe I will build that someday.... Anyways, many trombones have valve tubing bores about 30 thousandths bigger than slide bore, so with a .509" bore I thought .547 would be OK.
Benn
The F attachment was absolutely NOT. A 36b part. All wrap.parts were one off hand bent pieces and the wrap did not have an E pull, the U bend part was super long to fit in the narrow chassis of a 16. I dont remember the custom lever but it was very non ergonomic and the narrow slide sucked.
I suspect people have made 16Bs with 36 valve sections but this factory job was not that.
I bought some .547" rotor stuff from Kanstul in 2011-2012 to build a 16COM for myself and got side tracked for the last 12 years since working with Instrument Innovations. Maybe I will build that someday.... Anyways, many trombones have valve tubing bores about 30 thousandths bigger than slide bore, so with a .509" bore I thought .547 would be OK.
Benn