Duo Gravis XB
- hyperbolica
- Posts: 3990
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
I just took delivery of a '75/76 Duo Gravis. I make no claims as to it being 6b or 7b. The ebay ad said 7b, but it's not on the horn anywhere.
I had one of these before, but there was a 'situation' involving it and I had to get rid of it quickly. Took me 12 years to try again.
After an hour of playing (with the remnants of a cold) and a list of mouthpieces, it looks like a really wonderful horn. I've determined that the DE XB 114K8 is too big for me to play long term, but in brief tests, it's fun to play. The next best for low notes was Curry 1.5D then Curry 2.0D. The best all around mouthpiece was the Curry 2.0D. It plays in the tenor range, sounds like a trombone, and plays past pedal F after a 10 minute warm up.
Maybe this is the small bass I've been looking for. Yeah, it's dependent, but that only matters on Db and F#. Yeah, it has the double jointed thumb levers, but honestly it's not that bad.
This horn comes with the D 2nd valve extension. Like any '70s horn, it isn't cosmetically very nice, but the slide is good and valves work.
Like a lot of large bore Kings, though, it just about swallows regular large bore mouthpieces. It doesn't have the warm fuzzy of a Conn or the lush velvet of my Kanstul, but this is what I think should be considered an everyday bass. It can be played like a trombone and sounds like one, or it can sound like a bass. It doesn't sound like a slide euphonium.
With the D extension, it's a little back heavy, which is better than front heavy. The tuning slides are a little fussy with braces and bends and dog legs and clearances. It fits non-native cases better than other basses because the levers are more compact. My GetAGrip still fits without adjustment.
I haven't tested the intonation or played it with an ensemble yet, but the range tests I do, Rochut, Snedecor, etc all lay nicely on the horn. I'm sure it will be a great big band horn because the 4th book has very little actual bass bone parts, and has a lot of weird "4th parts that are higher than the 3rd part" sort of thing going on. This bass plays high notes with out sounding like a kazoo.
People who want to represent the bass trombone establishment seem to want to create prejudices that are mostly untrue:
-bigger is better
-foggy tone is the correct tone
-the DG valve levers are unusable
-Dependent valves should be avoided
-D tuning is the only real tuning
-TIS is heavy and bad
-if it doesn't say Shires Q you'll get laughed out of music school
-lacquer is the most important spec for a college horn
All i can say is to approach the common wisdom with a healthy dose of skepticism. The Duo Gravis is a perfectly playable instrument for professional and even academic situations. It offers a sound and feel that is useful and fun to play, but not commonly available on other instruments anymore. People can be irrationally dismissive of things or ideas that are different.
I had one of these before, but there was a 'situation' involving it and I had to get rid of it quickly. Took me 12 years to try again.
After an hour of playing (with the remnants of a cold) and a list of mouthpieces, it looks like a really wonderful horn. I've determined that the DE XB 114K8 is too big for me to play long term, but in brief tests, it's fun to play. The next best for low notes was Curry 1.5D then Curry 2.0D. The best all around mouthpiece was the Curry 2.0D. It plays in the tenor range, sounds like a trombone, and plays past pedal F after a 10 minute warm up.
Maybe this is the small bass I've been looking for. Yeah, it's dependent, but that only matters on Db and F#. Yeah, it has the double jointed thumb levers, but honestly it's not that bad.
This horn comes with the D 2nd valve extension. Like any '70s horn, it isn't cosmetically very nice, but the slide is good and valves work.
Like a lot of large bore Kings, though, it just about swallows regular large bore mouthpieces. It doesn't have the warm fuzzy of a Conn or the lush velvet of my Kanstul, but this is what I think should be considered an everyday bass. It can be played like a trombone and sounds like one, or it can sound like a bass. It doesn't sound like a slide euphonium.
With the D extension, it's a little back heavy, which is better than front heavy. The tuning slides are a little fussy with braces and bends and dog legs and clearances. It fits non-native cases better than other basses because the levers are more compact. My GetAGrip still fits without adjustment.
I haven't tested the intonation or played it with an ensemble yet, but the range tests I do, Rochut, Snedecor, etc all lay nicely on the horn. I'm sure it will be a great big band horn because the 4th book has very little actual bass bone parts, and has a lot of weird "4th parts that are higher than the 3rd part" sort of thing going on. This bass plays high notes with out sounding like a kazoo.
People who want to represent the bass trombone establishment seem to want to create prejudices that are mostly untrue:
-bigger is better
-foggy tone is the correct tone
-the DG valve levers are unusable
-Dependent valves should be avoided
-D tuning is the only real tuning
-TIS is heavy and bad
-if it doesn't say Shires Q you'll get laughed out of music school
-lacquer is the most important spec for a college horn
All i can say is to approach the common wisdom with a healthy dose of skepticism. The Duo Gravis is a perfectly playable instrument for professional and even academic situations. It offers a sound and feel that is useful and fun to play, but not commonly available on other instruments anymore. People can be irrationally dismissive of things or ideas that are different.
- RichC
- Posts: 177
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
Welcome to the DG world! I, regrettably, sold a silver sonic a while back, but have since bought a brass version. Your analysis is spot on...great big band horn. Enjoy!
- nateaff
- Posts: 113
- Joined: Jan 23, 2024
I agree completely with your critiques of a lot of modern bass trombone design/playing, at least in a big band setting.
Take a look at any big band chart - especially anything prior to the 60s/70s when it was assumed the bottom trombone part was still playing on a tenor - and you'll see a lot more notes above the staff than below.
There are all these people working their butts off to play their brick house uber-horns with Shilke 60 mouthpieces in big band, and the end result is that the sound isn't nearly bright enough to keep up with the tenors, so the sound doesn't match AND neither the audience nor microphones can really even pick up bass trombone beyond it being a low gentle "whoomph".
It's a shame there aren't more lighter, brighter bass trombones on the market. As far as I can tell the Yamaha 620G is pretty much the only one there is. Everything else either huge or huger.
Take a look at any big band chart - especially anything prior to the 60s/70s when it was assumed the bottom trombone part was still playing on a tenor - and you'll see a lot more notes above the staff than below.
There are all these people working their butts off to play their brick house uber-horns with Shilke 60 mouthpieces in big band, and the end result is that the sound isn't nearly bright enough to keep up with the tenors, so the sound doesn't match AND neither the audience nor microphones can really even pick up bass trombone beyond it being a low gentle "whoomph".
It's a shame there aren't more lighter, brighter bass trombones on the market. As far as I can tell the Yamaha 620G is pretty much the only one there is. Everything else either huge or huger.
- hyperbolica
- Posts: 3990
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
[quote="RichC"]Welcome to the DG world! I, regrettably, sold a silver sonic a while back, but have since bought a brass version. Your analysis is spot on...great big band horn. Enjoy![/quote]
Thanks! Glad to be part of the club. I think brass is the right one for me. Silver might be too heavy for me. I wish I had done this sooner, DG is probably a better doublers' horn than the other things I've been trying.
Speaking of irrational prejudice, I might have been avoiding Kings (no kings day was a couple of days ago) . Now, it turns out I have 4 Kings (1480, 607, 3b+F, DG). I'm officially no longer a Conn man (8h, 88h, 32h).
Thanks! Glad to be part of the club. I think brass is the right one for me. Silver might be too heavy for me. I wish I had done this sooner, DG is probably a better doublers' horn than the other things I've been trying.
Speaking of irrational prejudice, I might have been avoiding Kings (no kings day was a couple of days ago) . Now, it turns out I have 4 Kings (1480, 607, 3b+F, DG). I'm officially no longer a Conn man (8h, 88h, 32h).
- hyperbolica
- Posts: 3990
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
[quote="nateaff"]...
It's a shame there aren't more lighter, brighter bass trombones on the market. As far as I can tell the Yamaha 620G is pretty much the only one there is. Everything else either huge or huger.[/quote]
Yeah, I agree, there should be other options. You don't have to sell to the whole market to have a success. Developing a loyal fan base is more important. It's an open opportunity to clinch an unserved market segment.
It's a shame there aren't more lighter, brighter bass trombones on the market. As far as I can tell the Yamaha 620G is pretty much the only one there is. Everything else either huge or huger.[/quote]
Yeah, I agree, there should be other options. You don't have to sell to the whole market to have a success. Developing a loyal fan base is more important. It's an open opportunity to clinch an unserved market segment.
- hyperbolica
- Posts: 3990
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
The intonation is better than any of my other horns. Scary. Really want to put it through the tbone quartet to see if it works there.
The DG weighs 2277 grams (w/D slide) . Kanstul 2307, so not much difference there. The DG slide is ~80g lighter than the Kanstul. DG bell is ~50g heavier, which accounts for the backheaviness.
Interesting ergo notes:
- You can put the D slide next to your ear instead of outboard of the horn, and it helps with the balance a little.
-Pressing against both trigger springs in the same direction simultaneously looks like efficient design, but it's bad engineering. Good way to develop either hand strength or carpal tunnel. Or both. You can play the horn with stock levers, but it gets tricky when things start moving quickly around low D, Db, C and B. .
The DG doesn't seem to have the low volume sensitivity that other axes have. It takes a bit to get it rolling. I'll be curious to see if that holds up over time, or if I can practice that out.
The DG weighs 2277 grams (w/D slide) . Kanstul 2307, so not much difference there. The DG slide is ~80g lighter than the Kanstul. DG bell is ~50g heavier, which accounts for the backheaviness.
Interesting ergo notes:
- You can put the D slide next to your ear instead of outboard of the horn, and it helps with the balance a little.
-Pressing against both trigger springs in the same direction simultaneously looks like efficient design, but it's bad engineering. Good way to develop either hand strength or carpal tunnel. Or both. You can play the horn with stock levers, but it gets tricky when things start moving quickly around low D, Db, C and B. .
The DG doesn't seem to have the low volume sensitivity that other axes have. It takes a bit to get it rolling. I'll be curious to see if that holds up over time, or if I can practice that out.
- Matt_K
- Posts: 4809
- Joined: Mar 21, 2018
Just slap a set of Thayers like the one that shows up for sale every few years! :lol: :lol:
I was about to say that I'm surprised there isn't a single manufacturer using 562 rotors for basses but it dawned on me... I do think there is a contemporary model, but I can't remember what I'm thinking of. I really enjoyed my DG when I had one, and now my bass is an independent, but I use the F/G/Eb tuning on it myself, most of the time. It is quite nice to have that Eb in 1st. I do prefer mine over the DG, but if I lost it somehow I could totally see myself using a DG.
I was about to say that I'm surprised there isn't a single manufacturer using 562 rotors for basses but it dawned on me... I do think there is a contemporary model, but I can't remember what I'm thinking of. I really enjoyed my DG when I had one, and now my bass is an independent, but I use the F/G/Eb tuning on it myself, most of the time. It is quite nice to have that Eb in 1st. I do prefer mine over the DG, but if I lost it somehow I could totally see myself using a DG.
- nateaff
- Posts: 113
- Joined: Jan 23, 2024
[quote="Matt K"]Just slap a set of Thayers like the one that shows up for sale every few years! :lol: :lol:
I was about to say that I'm surprised there isn't a single manufacturer using 562 rotors for basses but it dawned on me... I do think there is a contemporary model, but I can't remember what I'm thinking of. I really enjoyed my DG when I had one, and now my bass is an independent, but I use the F/G/Eb tuning on it myself, most of the time. It is quite nice to have that Eb in 1st. I do prefer mine over the DG, but if I lost it somehow I could totally see myself using a DG.[/quote]
Standard Bach 50s still come with pretty small valves, Getzen Eternas too I think. Those are big, beefy classical horns though, and frankly are probably better with bigger valves.
At least for me, a Bach bass with standard rotors doesn't feel "tight", it feels "choked".
I was about to say that I'm surprised there isn't a single manufacturer using 562 rotors for basses but it dawned on me... I do think there is a contemporary model, but I can't remember what I'm thinking of. I really enjoyed my DG when I had one, and now my bass is an independent, but I use the F/G/Eb tuning on it myself, most of the time. It is quite nice to have that Eb in 1st. I do prefer mine over the DG, but if I lost it somehow I could totally see myself using a DG.[/quote]
Standard Bach 50s still come with pretty small valves, Getzen Eternas too I think. Those are big, beefy classical horns though, and frankly are probably better with bigger valves.
At least for me, a Bach bass with standard rotors doesn't feel "tight", it feels "choked".
- elmsandr
- Posts: 1373
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
[quote="nateaff"]<QUOTE author="Matt K" post_id="287950" time="1761426962" user_id="48">
Just slap a set of Thayers like the one that shows up for sale every few years! :lol: :lol:
I was about to say that I'm surprised there isn't a single manufacturer using 562 rotors for basses but it dawned on me... I do think there is a contemporary model, but I can't remember what I'm thinking of. I really enjoyed my DG when I had one, and now my bass is an independent, but I use the F/G/Eb tuning on it myself, most of the time. It is quite nice to have that Eb in 1st. I do prefer mine over the DG, but if I lost it somehow I could totally see myself using a DG.[/quote]
Standard Bach 50s still come with pretty small valves, Getzen Eternas too I think. Those are big, beefy classical horns though, and frankly are probably better with bigger valves.
At least for me, a Bach bass with standard rotors doesn't feel "tight", it feels "choked".
</QUOTE>
Don’t confuse a bad rotor with bore size. The problem with Bach’s is the rotor. The DG has great rotors, the tubing size is .562 intentionally by design.
Is the DG tuning slide and flare significantly smaller than other basses?
Cheers,
Andy
Just slap a set of Thayers like the one that shows up for sale every few years! :lol: :lol:
I was about to say that I'm surprised there isn't a single manufacturer using 562 rotors for basses but it dawned on me... I do think there is a contemporary model, but I can't remember what I'm thinking of. I really enjoyed my DG when I had one, and now my bass is an independent, but I use the F/G/Eb tuning on it myself, most of the time. It is quite nice to have that Eb in 1st. I do prefer mine over the DG, but if I lost it somehow I could totally see myself using a DG.[/quote]
Standard Bach 50s still come with pretty small valves, Getzen Eternas too I think. Those are big, beefy classical horns though, and frankly are probably better with bigger valves.
At least for me, a Bach bass with standard rotors doesn't feel "tight", it feels "choked".
</QUOTE>
Don’t confuse a bad rotor with bore size. The problem with Bach’s is the rotor. The DG has great rotors, the tubing size is .562 intentionally by design.
Is the DG tuning slide and flare significantly smaller than other basses?
Cheers,
Andy
- Matt_K
- Posts: 4809
- Joined: Mar 21, 2018
Going off memory from when I was going to frankenbone one but I recall tuning slide width and legs being roughly the same size as my Shires. Same for the bell. Purely anecdotal though, I didn’t own calipers at the time
- hyperbolica
- Posts: 3990
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
[quote="elmsandr"]
Is the DG tuning slide and flare significantly smaller than other basses?
Cheers,
Andy[/quote]
The only thing I've got here to compare it to right now is my Kanstul, which is TIS, so it doesn't have a std tuning slide. I tried to take measurements at the point where the J bend straightens out on both ends. I measured at the ferrules for anything with a proper tuning slide.
DG: 0.695, 0.868
Kanstul: 0.747, 0.950
So yeah, there's a significant difference, especially on the big end of the tuning slide. This brings things into perspective.
For reference,
88h: 0.648, 0.807
1480: 0.718, 0.836
The 1480 tuning slide starts larger than the DG even though it comes from a smaller slide bore.
Is the DG tuning slide and flare significantly smaller than other basses?
Cheers,
Andy[/quote]
The only thing I've got here to compare it to right now is my Kanstul, which is TIS, so it doesn't have a std tuning slide. I tried to take measurements at the point where the J bend straightens out on both ends. I measured at the ferrules for anything with a proper tuning slide.
DG: 0.695, 0.868
Kanstul: 0.747, 0.950
So yeah, there's a significant difference, especially on the big end of the tuning slide. This brings things into perspective.
For reference,
88h: 0.648, 0.807
1480: 0.718, 0.836
The 1480 tuning slide starts larger than the DG even though it comes from a smaller slide bore.
- blast
- Posts: 671
- Joined: Mar 22, 2018
I used DG tuning slide legs when I converted 70H from slide to bell tuning. We are more in 70H territory, though the flare has a more open throat on the DG.
- Briande
- Posts: 207
- Joined: Jan 12, 2020
I have found myself playing bass the past few years in a local big band and picked up a well used DG. I’ve tried a few others since (Getzen 1052, Conn 71h, King 1480). None match the punch and sound I get with the DG. On the advice of a colleague I switched to a Shilke 59 a few months back and that made it even better.
- heldenbone
- Posts: 274
- Joined: Aug 21, 2018
[quote="nateaff"]<QUOTE author="Matt K" post_id="287950" time="1761426962" user_id="48">
Just slap a set of Thayers like the one that shows up for sale every few years! :lol: :lol:
I was about to say that I'm surprised there isn't a single manufacturer using 562 rotors for basses but it dawned on me... I do think there is a contemporary model, but I can't remember what I'm thinking of. I really enjoyed my DG when I had one, and now my bass is an independent, but I use the F/G/Eb tuning on it myself, most of the time. It is quite nice to have that Eb in 1st. I do prefer mine over the DG, but if I lost it somehow I could totally see myself using a DG.[/quote]
Standard Bach 50s still come with pretty small valves, Getzen Eternas too I think. Those are big, beefy classical horns though, and frankly are probably better with bigger valves.
At least for me, a Bach bass with standard rotors doesn't feel "tight", it feels "choked".
</QUOTE>
Just say "no" to Thayers on a DG. The rotors on Eternas work well. I play a 1062 with a Schilke Symphony M6.0d and O'Malley's Minick "L"egit pipe (Kanstul's was "L" was good too, O'Malley's is better, for me).
My DG seems to play best with a plain vanilla Bach 1-1/4G, or a Mt V 2G if I'm willing to acclimate to the smaller rim. The trigger split on mine was nicely done.
Just slap a set of Thayers like the one that shows up for sale every few years! :lol: :lol:
I was about to say that I'm surprised there isn't a single manufacturer using 562 rotors for basses but it dawned on me... I do think there is a contemporary model, but I can't remember what I'm thinking of. I really enjoyed my DG when I had one, and now my bass is an independent, but I use the F/G/Eb tuning on it myself, most of the time. It is quite nice to have that Eb in 1st. I do prefer mine over the DG, but if I lost it somehow I could totally see myself using a DG.[/quote]
Standard Bach 50s still come with pretty small valves, Getzen Eternas too I think. Those are big, beefy classical horns though, and frankly are probably better with bigger valves.
At least for me, a Bach bass with standard rotors doesn't feel "tight", it feels "choked".
</QUOTE>
Just say "no" to Thayers on a DG. The rotors on Eternas work well. I play a 1062 with a Schilke Symphony M6.0d and O'Malley's Minick "L"egit pipe (Kanstul's was "L" was good too, O'Malley's is better, for me).
My DG seems to play best with a plain vanilla Bach 1-1/4G, or a Mt V 2G if I'm willing to acclimate to the smaller rim. The trigger split on mine was nicely done.
- sf105
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Mar 24, 2018
Mine has the original triggers, which is made much easier with a NeoTech grip. I should have bought one years ago.
Have you noticed that the odd valve wrap is designed to allow condensation to run down into the slide when the horn is vertical, so you never have to empty them?
I believe the horn was designed for a Bach 1 1/2, so the mouthpiece should be in that range.
Have you noticed that the odd valve wrap is designed to allow condensation to run down into the slide when the horn is vertical, so you never have to empty them?
I believe the horn was designed for a Bach 1 1/2, so the mouthpiece should be in that range.
- Matt_K
- Posts: 4809
- Joined: Mar 21, 2018
Just to be clear, I was 100% joking about the Thayers on a DG. Although I would be lying that if I had a ton of excess cash to burn I would be morbidly curious about what as set of 562 indies on it would do, that would be... not at the top of my list of things to try.
Indeed, the Getzen rotors are excellent. I've yet to try a 1052 and 1062 that I didn't really like. In fact, if I hadn't... basically lucked into my Shires setup, I'd almost certainly still be playing a 1052. They are indeed .593, or so that's what I was told by my tech (I had investigated swapping gout for instrument innovations rotors, not because the Getzens were bad but because gear-acuisition-syndrome and was told that the tubing would be fine from a bore perspective). Actually, now that I think about it, I have several of the bends and tubes from my 1052 on my Shires with Instrument Innovation rotors.
The Bach is also of an appropriate bore size, but there are definitely some... insufficiencies in the design.
Back to the DG, some of the slide receivers seem to be different depths. Doug makes such a shank:
Though the DG I owned was likely a late enough model that a normal, large shank taper worked fine. IIRC mine really liked the "J" cup, which I still own.
Indeed, the Getzen rotors are excellent. I've yet to try a 1052 and 1062 that I didn't really like. In fact, if I hadn't... basically lucked into my Shires setup, I'd almost certainly still be playing a 1052. They are indeed .593, or so that's what I was told by my tech (I had investigated swapping gout for instrument innovations rotors, not because the Getzens were bad but because gear-acuisition-syndrome and was told that the tubing would be fine from a bore perspective). Actually, now that I think about it, I have several of the bends and tubes from my 1052 on my Shires with Instrument Innovation rotors.
The Bach is also of an appropriate bore size, but there are definitely some... insufficiencies in the design.
Back to the DG, some of the slide receivers seem to be different depths. Doug makes such a shank:
King duo gravis, 7B, 8B, and Benge 290 can use standard, but sometimes need a specially tapered K shank for a better fit.
Though the DG I owned was likely a late enough model that a normal, large shank taper worked fine. IIRC mine really liked the "J" cup, which I still own.
- heldenbone
- Posts: 274
- Joined: Aug 21, 2018
Is it time for a "Who in their right mind plays a Duo Gravis?" thread? Paging Chris Stearn...
- blast
- Posts: 671
- Joined: Mar 22, 2018
Don't ask me. Yes, I did own a DGSS years ago. I tried it in the orchestra a couple of times...even did a light show with two 3BSS on top. For me it was underwhelming. Probably not a good one. I know people who get great results on them, I'm not one of them.
- mikerspencer
- Posts: 92
- Joined: Jul 01, 2022
I've a Calder pips tone halo for my DG. It calms the bell resonance for a tamer/controlled sound. It's a lot cheaper than buying a second horn <EMOJI seq="1f602" tseq="1f602">😂</EMOJI>
- hyperbolica
- Posts: 3990
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
[quote="heldenbone"]Is it time for a "Who in their right mind plays a Duo Gravis?" thread? Paging Chris Stearn...[/quote]
I think the guy we need for that thread is @2bobone. He used the DG in a professional orchestra, National Symphony if I remember correctly.
I think the guy we need for that thread is @2bobone. He used the DG in a professional orchestra, National Symphony if I remember correctly.
- bassbone1993
- Posts: 435
- Joined: Feb 10, 2023
It would be lovely if Conn Selmer resurrected it. Will never happen, but one can dream
- hyperbolica
- Posts: 3990
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
[quote="bassbone1993"]It would be lovely if Conn Selmer resurrected it. Will never happen, but one can dream[/quote]
They'd have to redesign it as an indy, and maybe 547/562 dual to increase efficiency. I personally would make it TIS to get the taper efficiency, but I understand "mainstream customers" are afraid of TIS. Maybe a double shepherds crook to make it recognizable. Reasonable levers of course. A nice conical mouthpiece. Put it in a case people want to use, and don't charge custom horn money for it. Maybe rebrand Neo Gravis to stick with the latin theme. Make a new category for compact bass. Drop the "big band" association because that's fading, but call it commercial for sure. They sold a lot of them 50-60 years ago, good ideas never really die.
They'd have to redesign it as an indy, and maybe 547/562 dual to increase efficiency. I personally would make it TIS to get the taper efficiency, but I understand "mainstream customers" are afraid of TIS. Maybe a double shepherds crook to make it recognizable. Reasonable levers of course. A nice conical mouthpiece. Put it in a case people want to use, and don't charge custom horn money for it. Maybe rebrand Neo Gravis to stick with the latin theme. Make a new category for compact bass. Drop the "big band" association because that's fading, but call it commercial for sure. They sold a lot of them 50-60 years ago, good ideas never really die.
- hyperbolica
- Posts: 3990
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
Ok, I've got to switch the topic to mutes. If the DG works in a big band, it has to have mutes that work with it. My Wick adjustable cup seems to fit, but my H&B aluminum stone lined straight doesn't. It sticks out way too far. My Yamaha Silent Brass (new style with adapter) works.
So what mutes do you use with your DGs?
So what mutes do you use with your DGs?
- elmsandr
- Posts: 1373
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
Get the salt shaker mute guy’s adjustable corks. Available in a lot of thicknesses.
Been meaning to finish setting mine up, but my initial look was that it would work for both my 50B and 45B, so should be a good solution. And you can swap back and forth.
Cheers,
Andy
Been meaning to finish setting mine up, but my initial look was that it would work for both my 50B and 45B, so should be a good solution. And you can swap back and forth.
Cheers,
Andy
- Matt_K
- Posts: 4809
- Joined: Mar 21, 2018
I used a wick convertible bass for both cup and straight mute. Beleive the stonlined ones worked too. Those are more stylistically appropriate than metal ones for Big Band too fwiw, IMO.
I used a Ira Nepus felt mute for buckets when I had one but I'd probably use a salt shaker now. I have one and though I've never actually used it on a gig, it's very fun to play with and sounds very close.
I used a Ira Nepus felt mute for buckets when I had one but I'd probably use a salt shaker now. I have one and though I've never actually used it on a gig, it's very fun to play with and sounds very close.
- ghmerrill
- Posts: 2193
- Joined: Apr 02, 2018
[quote="Matt K"]I... I'd probably use a salt shaker now. I have one and though I've never actually used it on a gig, it's very fun to play with and sounds very close.[/quote]
I use a Salt Shaker for my bass bucket mute. Everybody else in the section finds it perfectly acceptable.
I use a Salt Shaker for my bass bucket mute. Everybody else in the section finds it perfectly acceptable.
- Briande
- Posts: 207
- Joined: Jan 12, 2020
I also use the wick convertible for both cup and straight. I use a Softone neoprene for my bucket mute. So easy to carry and doubles as a practice mute when you need to warm up.
- ghmerrill
- Posts: 2193
- Joined: Apr 02, 2018
[quote="Briande"]I also use the wick convertible for both cup and straight.[/quote]
Doesn't this make rapid mute changes pretty tricky?
Doesn't this make rapid mute changes pretty tricky?
- Briande
- Posts: 207
- Joined: Jan 12, 2020
[quote="ghmerrill"]<QUOTE author="Briande" post_id="288097" time="1761671791" user_id="8381">
I also use the wick convertible for both cup and straight.[/quote]
Doesn't this make rapid mute changes pretty tricky?
</QUOTE>
I play in a Big Band. I can't remember ever having to switch between a cup and a straight mute in the same song....honestly have only needed a straight mute a handful of times.
I also use the wick convertible for both cup and straight.[/quote]
Doesn't this make rapid mute changes pretty tricky?
</QUOTE>
I play in a Big Band. I can't remember ever having to switch between a cup and a straight mute in the same song....honestly have only needed a straight mute a handful of times.
- Matt_K
- Posts: 4809
- Joined: Mar 21, 2018
I've played a decent amount of big band stuff over the years... probably around 400-500 charts and I think I could probably count the use of straight mutes on perhaps two hands. Maybe one. And of those times, how frequently the section used mutes when straight was called for was definitely south of 80%. Thinking in particular some of the Miller tunes I've played that call for them... derby as well. I don't think I've ever played with a section that used either of those mutes on Miller charts. Cup and plunger for sure though.
- ghmerrill
- Posts: 2193
- Joined: Apr 02, 2018
Our library has 300+ pieces from the '20s through the 2000's. Our upcoming "holiday" show this year has several pieces with straight and several pieces with cup. None of these have both straight and cup in the same piece -- though last year there was at least one that did. I think when that happens it will most likely be in some sort of medley -- but it does happen.
I joined about a year ago, and we haven't had a gig that didn't require using both straight and cup (in different pieces). When a piece calls for straight we almost (but not quite) always use them. Most of our gigs seem to require bucket at one point or another. I will also sometimes use my Salt Shaker fake bucket mute if I have some solo-ish line to be played under a singer whose voice may not be particularly strong even if amplified.
I guess that for the most part I could get away with using the convertible Wick for both cup and straight, but while I think it makes a good cup mute, I think it makes a second-rate straight mute compared to the Wick straight mute, and it's a bit more difficult to handle. And disassembling/reassembling the mute is kind of irritating. But maybe that's just me. For an "In Hat" direction, we just play into our stands. Then there are the plungers, about which ... what to say? I typically just avoid that on the bass and try to fake the effect.
I joined about a year ago, and we haven't had a gig that didn't require using both straight and cup (in different pieces). When a piece calls for straight we almost (but not quite) always use them. Most of our gigs seem to require bucket at one point or another. I will also sometimes use my Salt Shaker fake bucket mute if I have some solo-ish line to be played under a singer whose voice may not be particularly strong even if amplified.
I guess that for the most part I could get away with using the convertible Wick for both cup and straight, but while I think it makes a good cup mute, I think it makes a second-rate straight mute compared to the Wick straight mute, and it's a bit more difficult to handle. And disassembling/reassembling the mute is kind of irritating. But maybe that's just me. For an "In Hat" direction, we just play into our stands. Then there are the plungers, about which ... what to say? I typically just avoid that on the bass and try to fake the effect.
- u_2bobone
- Posts: 474
- Joined: Mar 25, 2018
"I think the guy we need for that thread is @2bobone. He used the DG in a professional orchestra, National Symphony if I remember correctly."
Good memory , Hyperbolica ! I may start a new thread : "Who in their right mind STILL plays a Duo Gravis" ? :shuffle: Bob
Good memory , Hyperbolica ! I may start a new thread : "Who in their right mind STILL plays a Duo Gravis" ? :shuffle: Bob
- Matt_K
- Posts: 4809
- Joined: Mar 21, 2018
If I were in your shoes and had that much straight mute usage, I'd probably get a stonelined or one of the fancy (and expensive!!!) Facet mutes. Both of them would be more accurate to the big band straight mute style sound than the Wick. The Facet mutes are all terrific, I Just can't see myself ever justifying that kind of price tag for a suite of them!
- ghmerrill
- Posts: 2193
- Joined: Apr 02, 2018
[quote="Matt K"]If I were in your shoes and had that much straight mute usage, I'd probably get a stonelined or one of the fancy (and expensive!!!) Facet mutes.[/quote]
Likewise. This is a community "jazz orchestra", and I'm not sure we (or our audiences) can be discerning enough to justify too much expense (which I've already devoted in the direction of the cup and "bucket" mutes). Also, Facet appears to be out of business.
However, I do appreciate the mention of the stonlined mutes. In fact I have one, but on my Chinese pseudo-7b horn the intonation in the low register was unacceptable -- and the Wick is great there. However, I just tried the stonelined on the 1052 (now with a #3 pipe), and it seems fine. (Well, I did put three small holes in the bottom when I was trying to get it to work with the 7b clone.) I prefer it to the aluminum Wick in terms of handling and bouncing it off the floor on occasion -- and it does match the other mutes in the section. So I'll switch over to that. :good:
Likewise. This is a community "jazz orchestra", and I'm not sure we (or our audiences) can be discerning enough to justify too much expense (which I've already devoted in the direction of the cup and "bucket" mutes). Also, Facet appears to be out of business.
However, I do appreciate the mention of the stonlined mutes. In fact I have one, but on my Chinese pseudo-7b horn the intonation in the low register was unacceptable -- and the Wick is great there. However, I just tried the stonelined on the 1052 (now with a #3 pipe), and it seems fine. (Well, I did put three small holes in the bottom when I was trying to get it to work with the 7b clone.) I prefer it to the aluminum Wick in terms of handling and bouncing it off the floor on occasion -- and it does match the other mutes in the section. So I'll switch over to that. :good:
- sf105
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Mar 24, 2018
[quote="blast"]Don't ask me. Yes, I did own a DGSS years ago. I tried it in the orchestra a couple of times...even did a light show with two 3BSS on top. For me it was underwhelming. Probably not a good one. I know people who get great results on them, I'm not one of them.[/quote]
I saw a photo of the section from the Chamber Orchestra of Europe some time ago using all Silversonics for Mozart (as I recall).
I saw a photo of the section from the Chamber Orchestra of Europe some time ago using all Silversonics for Mozart (as I recall).
- heldenbone
- Posts: 274
- Joined: Aug 21, 2018
[quote="hyperbolica"]Ok, I've got to switch the topic to mutes. If the DG works in a big band, it has to have mutes that work with it. My Wick adjustable cup seems to fit, but my H&B aluminum stone lined straight doesn't. It sticks out way too far. My Yamaha Silent Brass (new style with adapter) works.
So what mutes do you use with your DGs?[/quote]
Black plastic Bach tenor straight mute with built up corks seems to work OK for me.
For a cup, the large tenor / small bass H & B with corks built up likewise seems to work.
The full-sized bass mutes that work for my Eterna (Protec aluminum straight and Wallace Collection cup mute) are far too large, sounding foggy and unfocused.
So what mutes do you use with your DGs?[/quote]
Black plastic Bach tenor straight mute with built up corks seems to work OK for me.
For a cup, the large tenor / small bass H & B with corks built up likewise seems to work.
The full-sized bass mutes that work for my Eterna (Protec aluminum straight and Wallace Collection cup mute) are far too large, sounding foggy and unfocused.
- blast
- Posts: 671
- Joined: Mar 22, 2018
[quote="sf105"]<QUOTE author="blast" post_id="288030" time="1761576768" user_id="52">
Don't ask me. Yes, I did own a DGSS years ago. I tried it in the orchestra a couple of times...even did a light show with two 3BSS on top. For me it was underwhelming. Probably not a good one. I know people who get great results on them, I'm not one of them.[/quote]
I saw a photo of the section from the Chamber Orchestra of Europe some time ago using all Silversonics for Mozart (as I recall).
</QUOTE>
Yes, COE bass trombone Nick Eastop uses a DG and sounds great on it.
Don't ask me. Yes, I did own a DGSS years ago. I tried it in the orchestra a couple of times...even did a light show with two 3BSS on top. For me it was underwhelming. Probably not a good one. I know people who get great results on them, I'm not one of them.[/quote]
I saw a photo of the section from the Chamber Orchestra of Europe some time ago using all Silversonics for Mozart (as I recall).
</QUOTE>
Yes, COE bass trombone Nick Eastop uses a DG and sounds great on it.
- hyperbolica
- Posts: 3990
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
Leadpipe question :
Is this the stock leadpipe setup, with the finger ring soldered to it and the brace? <ATTACHMENT filename="IMG_20251028_151710946.jpg" index="0">[attachment=0]IMG_20251028_151710946.jpg</ATTACHMENT>
Is this the stock leadpipe setup, with the finger ring soldered to it and the brace? <ATTACHMENT filename="IMG_20251028_151710946.jpg" index="0">
- chromebone
- Posts: 454
- Joined: Apr 08, 2018
[quote="bassbone1993"]It would be lovely if Conn Selmer resurrected it. Will never happen, but one can dream[/quote]
C-S isn’t even making the 4B anymore. They are slowly killing their brands off. They’ll be mostly a student and marching arts horn importer at some point at the rate they’re going.
C-S isn’t even making the 4B anymore. They are slowly killing their brands off. They’ll be mostly a student and marching arts horn importer at some point at the rate they’re going.
- chromebone
- Posts: 454
- Joined: Apr 08, 2018
[quote="bassbone1993"]It would be lovely if Conn Selmer resurrected it. Will never happen, but one can dream[/quote]
C-S isn’t even making the 4B anymore. They are slowly killing their brands off. They’ll be mostly a student and marching arts horn importer at some point at the rate they’re going.
C-S isn’t even making the 4B anymore. They are slowly killing their brands off. They’ll be mostly a student and marching arts horn importer at some point at the rate they’re going.
- hyperbolica
- Posts: 3990
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
Everything is crammed into this one thread.
Anyway, I played the DG in quartet today, mostly reading Christmas music. You know how reading goes, you kiss a lot of frogs. Some were really beautiful like Uber's Lo How a Rose. The DG made a really great sound. I do like the sound better than the Kanstul. BUT, that lever arrangement really only works for slow quarter note kinds of speeds, and really only for Cs and Bs. If I can use a single valve, that's what I'm gonna do.
Anyway, the sound and feel of the DG were really excellent. The intonation is a little different and will take some getting used to. I'm gonna have to modify the 2nd lever, and relearn playing with a single valve again. The slide on this horn is nice.
Gotta say, though, the tuning slides on this horn are a messy tangle. There's a certain order in which you have to do things to avoid pinching fingers or crashing one slide into the others. The mechanical design is imperfect, but I do love the sound. Oh, and I can play to pedal Eb on the smaller horn with the Curry 2.0 D mouthpiece. So it's mostly a big win for me.
Anyway, I played the DG in quartet today, mostly reading Christmas music. You know how reading goes, you kiss a lot of frogs. Some were really beautiful like Uber's Lo How a Rose. The DG made a really great sound. I do like the sound better than the Kanstul. BUT, that lever arrangement really only works for slow quarter note kinds of speeds, and really only for Cs and Bs. If I can use a single valve, that's what I'm gonna do.
Anyway, the sound and feel of the DG were really excellent. The intonation is a little different and will take some getting used to. I'm gonna have to modify the 2nd lever, and relearn playing with a single valve again. The slide on this horn is nice.
Gotta say, though, the tuning slides on this horn are a messy tangle. There's a certain order in which you have to do things to avoid pinching fingers or crashing one slide into the others. The mechanical design is imperfect, but I do love the sound. Oh, and I can play to pedal Eb on the smaller horn with the Curry 2.0 D mouthpiece. So it's mostly a big win for me.
- AtomicClock
- Posts: 1094
- Joined: Oct 19, 2023
[quote="bassbone1993"]It would be lovely if Conn Selmer resurrected it. Will never happen, but one can dream[/quote]
Couldn't anyone make it? Aside from the name itself (whose trademark has expired, by the way), what would C-S bring to the table that another maker couldn't?
Couldn't anyone make it? Aside from the name itself (whose trademark has expired, by the way), what would C-S bring to the table that another maker couldn't?
- hyperbolica
- Posts: 3990
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
[quote="AtomicClock"]what would C-S bring to the table that another maker couldn't?[/quote]
Possibly old drawings, fixtures and tooling. But yeah, anybody could build a similar design. There are several opportunities for improvement, however.
Possibly old drawings, fixtures and tooling. But yeah, anybody could build a similar design. There are several opportunities for improvement, however.
- ghmerrill
- Posts: 2193
- Joined: Apr 02, 2018
[quote="hyperbolica"]Is this the stock leadpipe setup, with the finger ring soldered to it and the brace?[/quote]
Does anyone use those finger rings? I guess they're "iconic", and maybe it's just my hand size, but I find them to be awkward and useless. I took it off my 7B clone (actually replaced it with a hook on the other side of that brace -- which worked well for me).
Does anyone use those finger rings? I guess they're "iconic", and maybe it's just my hand size, but I find them to be awkward and useless. I took it off my 7B clone (actually replaced it with a hook on the other side of that brace -- which worked well for me).
- chromebone
- Posts: 454
- Joined: Apr 08, 2018
[quote="ghmerrill"]<QUOTE author="hyperbolica" post_id="288129" time="1761691994" user_id="104">
Is this the stock leadpipe setup, with the finger ring soldered to it and the brace?[/quote]
Does anyone use those finger rings? I guess they're "iconic", and maybe it's just my hand size, but I find them to be awkward and useless. I took it off my 7B clone (actually replaced it with a hook on the other side of that brace -- which worked well for me).
</QUOTE>
The finger ring worked for smaller hands with the cross brace through the thumb setup and the original paddle design. Same for the 4B, 5B and 7B and 8 B. When they moved the cross brace back, the ring really didn’t work as intended anymore and at some point they deleted it.
Is this the stock leadpipe setup, with the finger ring soldered to it and the brace?[/quote]
Does anyone use those finger rings? I guess they're "iconic", and maybe it's just my hand size, but I find them to be awkward and useless. I took it off my 7B clone (actually replaced it with a hook on the other side of that brace -- which worked well for me).
</QUOTE>
The finger ring worked for smaller hands with the cross brace through the thumb setup and the original paddle design. Same for the 4B, 5B and 7B and 8 B. When they moved the cross brace back, the ring really didn’t work as intended anymore and at some point they deleted it.
- heldenbone
- Posts: 274
- Joined: Aug 21, 2018
[quote="hyperbolica"]...that lever arrangement really only works for slow quarter note kinds of speeds, and really only for Cs and Bs. If I can use a single valve, that's what I'm gonna do.
I'm gonna have to modify the 2nd lever, and relearn playing with a single valve again. The slide on this horn is nice.
[/quote]
Raising the F trigger a little higher above the D trigger, either by adjusting the stringing or putting a layer of cork on the F trigger, helps to isolate one from the other if you don't intend to split them.
I'm gonna have to modify the 2nd lever, and relearn playing with a single valve again. The slide on this horn is nice.
[/quote]
Raising the F trigger a little higher above the D trigger, either by adjusting the stringing or putting a layer of cork on the F trigger, helps to isolate one from the other if you don't intend to split them.
- heldenbone
- Posts: 274
- Joined: Aug 21, 2018
[quote="hyperbolica"]<QUOTE author="bassbone1993" post_id="288054" time="1761603383" user_id="16272">
It would be lovely if Conn Selmer resurrected it. Will never happen, but one can dream[/quote]
They'd have to redesign it as an indy, and maybe 547/562 dual to increase efficiency. I personally would make it TIS to get the taper efficiency, but I understand "mainstream customers" are afraid of TIS. Maybe a double shepherds crook to make it recognizable. Reasonable levers of course. A nice conical mouthpiece. Put it in a case people want to use, and don't charge custom horn money for it. Maybe rebrand <I>Neo Gravis</I> to stick with the latin theme. Make a new category for compact bass. Drop the "big band" association because that's fading, but call it commercial for sure. They sold a lot of them 50-60 years ago, good ideas never really die.
</QUOTE>
Huh?! I love "Neo Gravis" for a follow-on. This might be it. Olds S-20 with a scavenged 50B3O valve section grafted in. Slide tuning, .554" - .565" dual slide bore. The valve section appears to have had some attention from Roy Lawler in the past. The attached photo is post-assembly, but pre-adjustment for tuning. The J-bend needs a trim to bring it up to pitch and locate the bell rim near 3rd position. Now I gotta build a compact case with the famous leopard print interior.
It would be lovely if Conn Selmer resurrected it. Will never happen, but one can dream[/quote]
They'd have to redesign it as an indy, and maybe 547/562 dual to increase efficiency. I personally would make it TIS to get the taper efficiency, but I understand "mainstream customers" are afraid of TIS. Maybe a double shepherds crook to make it recognizable. Reasonable levers of course. A nice conical mouthpiece. Put it in a case people want to use, and don't charge custom horn money for it. Maybe rebrand <I>Neo Gravis</I> to stick with the latin theme. Make a new category for compact bass. Drop the "big band" association because that's fading, but call it commercial for sure. They sold a lot of them 50-60 years ago, good ideas never really die.
</QUOTE>
Huh?! I love "Neo Gravis" for a follow-on. This might be it. Olds S-20 with a scavenged 50B3O valve section grafted in. Slide tuning, .554" - .565" dual slide bore. The valve section appears to have had some attention from Roy Lawler in the past. The attached photo is post-assembly, but pre-adjustment for tuning. The J-bend needs a trim to bring it up to pitch and locate the bell rim near 3rd position. Now I gotta build a compact case with the famous leopard print interior.
- harrisonreed
- Posts: 6479
- Joined: Aug 17, 2018
[quote="Matt K"]If I were in your shoes and had that much straight mute usage, I'd probably get a stonelined or one of the fancy (and expensive!!!) Facet mutes. Both of them would be more accurate to the big band straight mute style sound than the Wick. The Facet mutes are all terrific, I Just can't see myself ever justifying that kind of price tag for a suite of them![/quote]
Do they still make the facet mutes? I think they are long gone.
For what is worth, I think that the Ullven mutes are the best:
<LINK_TEXT text="https://trumpetmouthpiece.com/products/ ... 1331242078">https://trumpetmouthpiece.com/products/ullven-mutes-trombone-popy-cup-mute-bass-trombone?srsltid=AfmBOopzwzwtTJ3BzCsqDxLjYOOrZBv4VKoU2mpD5s-iDA4d58THN7hj&variant=40151331242078</LINK_TEXT>
I know bucket mutes didn't come up but the Peter Gane one for bass is decent.
Do they still make the facet mutes? I think they are long gone.
For what is worth, I think that the Ullven mutes are the best:
<LINK_TEXT text="https://trumpetmouthpiece.com/products/ ... 1331242078">https://trumpetmouthpiece.com/products/ullven-mutes-trombone-popy-cup-mute-bass-trombone?srsltid=AfmBOopzwzwtTJ3BzCsqDxLjYOOrZBv4VKoU2mpD5s-iDA4d58THN7hj&variant=40151331242078</LINK_TEXT>
I know bucket mutes didn't come up but the Peter Gane one for bass is decent.
- Matt_K
- Posts: 4809
- Joined: Mar 21, 2018
FWIW, I believe Jeff at Long Island Brass has made several basses that use .562 rotors. I've yet to play anything out of his shop that is anything less than magnificent. So there is some of this flavor out there in the wild, aside from the other minimally produced stock options mentioned in this thread, particularly if ad-hoc bones like that one are considered.
Totally incidentally, I built a similar horn a long time ago, but with one key difference: It had a 562 valve bore but only had a tenor tuning slide and bell section. It makes a huge, huge difference. Even with a 562 slide, the Duo Gravis was significantly more of a bass than the more-or-less identical setup up to the valves.
:? Hmmmm well, it appears not so much. So much for that recommendation. I've never tried Ullven, but it looks like it might fit the bill. The thing about the aluminum mutes is the produce a very... harsh (for lack of a better term) sound quality. The stonelined cardboard and mutes of other materials seem to be significantly less harsh. For a pit or orchestra, the harsher sound of aluminum is typically what it seems like composers were going for, but for big band, I almost always think it's more stylistically more appropriate for them to be a bit softer. Although, I can't really think of a time where I've used a straight mute in such a setting and was blown away by the sonic texture being produced. Whereas I have had that experience, particularly with Tchaikovsky who IMO makes the best use of the straight mute out of any composer I've played or listened to.
Totally incidentally, I built a similar horn a long time ago, but with one key difference: It had a 562 valve bore but only had a tenor tuning slide and bell section. It makes a huge, huge difference. Even with a 562 slide, the Duo Gravis was significantly more of a bass than the more-or-less identical setup up to the valves.
Do they still make the facet mutes? I think they are long gone.
:? Hmmmm well, it appears not so much. So much for that recommendation. I've never tried Ullven, but it looks like it might fit the bill. The thing about the aluminum mutes is the produce a very... harsh (for lack of a better term) sound quality. The stonelined cardboard and mutes of other materials seem to be significantly less harsh. For a pit or orchestra, the harsher sound of aluminum is typically what it seems like composers were going for, but for big band, I almost always think it's more stylistically more appropriate for them to be a bit softer. Although, I can't really think of a time where I've used a straight mute in such a setting and was blown away by the sonic texture being produced. Whereas I have had that experience, particularly with Tchaikovsky who IMO makes the best use of the straight mute out of any composer I've played or listened to.
- ghmerrill
- Posts: 2193
- Joined: Apr 02, 2018
[quote="Matt K"]The thing about the aluminum mutes is the produce a very... harsh (for lack of a better term) sound quality. The stonelined cardboard and mutes of other materials seem to be significantly less harsh. For a pit or orchestra, the harsher sound of aluminum is typically what it seems like composers were going for, but for big band, I almost always think it's more stylistically more appropriate for them to be a bit softer.[/quote]
"Harsh" seems a bit perjorative :lol: , but something like "zingy" is definitely applicable. And I do prefer the sound of a fiber bottom in general (both in straight and cup mutes), but there are cases -- even in big band -- where aluminum seems the better choice. One that we seem to play every Christmas is the Warrington arrangement of "Silver Bells" where the opening notation is "Cup Mute (sting!)", and the aluminum Wick cup mute does a really good job of that while the fiber mutes put out a bit more subdued "buzz".
Still, it would be preferable to have a (light weight) fiber mute in general. I suppose I might temper the zingyness of the aluminum mute by stuffing some sort of (light weight!) material in it -- maybe something like thin "cushion foam" or "foam wrap" used for packing. That might be worth an experiment. Or maybe just sticking a piece of duct tape on the aluminum bottom. I've also thought of cutting out the bottom of the Wick mute and just gluing on a thin fiber or wood bottom. :roll: The foam stuffing or duct tape approaches seem more attractive at the moment because they're reversible. But I'm kind of tempted by the idea of a fiber- or wood-bottomed Wick cup mute -- except I know the response from my wife is going to be "So you took a perfectly good mute and did WHAT to it??? And now you need to buy ANOTHER Wick mute because you destroyed your first one???"
"Harsh" seems a bit perjorative :lol: , but something like "zingy" is definitely applicable. And I do prefer the sound of a fiber bottom in general (both in straight and cup mutes), but there are cases -- even in big band -- where aluminum seems the better choice. One that we seem to play every Christmas is the Warrington arrangement of "Silver Bells" where the opening notation is "Cup Mute (sting!)", and the aluminum Wick cup mute does a really good job of that while the fiber mutes put out a bit more subdued "buzz".
Still, it would be preferable to have a (light weight) fiber mute in general. I suppose I might temper the zingyness of the aluminum mute by stuffing some sort of (light weight!) material in it -- maybe something like thin "cushion foam" or "foam wrap" used for packing. That might be worth an experiment. Or maybe just sticking a piece of duct tape on the aluminum bottom. I've also thought of cutting out the bottom of the Wick mute and just gluing on a thin fiber or wood bottom. :roll: The foam stuffing or duct tape approaches seem more attractive at the moment because they're reversible. But I'm kind of tempted by the idea of a fiber- or wood-bottomed Wick cup mute -- except I know the response from my wife is going to be "So you took a perfectly good mute and did WHAT to it??? And now you need to buy ANOTHER Wick mute because you destroyed your first one???"
- hyperbolica
- Posts: 3990
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
[quote="heldenbone"]
Huh?! I love "Neo Gravis" for a follow-on. This might be it. Olds S-20 with a scavenged 50B3O valve section grafted in. Slide tuning, .554" - .565" dual slide bore. The valve section appears to have had some attention from Roy Lawler in the past. The attached photo is post-assembly, but pre-adjustment for tuning. The J-bend needs a trim to bring it up to pitch and locate the bell ring near 3rd position. Now I gotta build a compact case with the famous leopard print interior.[/quote]
A number of years ago I found an S20 and put a DG valveset on it. That was a rockin setup. I played bass with an orchestra doing Holsts Perfect Fool Overture, which I had never heard of before. The bass bone and tuba had a lot of off-kilter counterpoint to the rest of the orchestra. Of course at a pretty obnoxious noise level. That S20/DG would bark. I'm not sure it was what I'm looking for now, but it was a piece of work then.
Huh?! I love "Neo Gravis" for a follow-on. This might be it. Olds S-20 with a scavenged 50B3O valve section grafted in. Slide tuning, .554" - .565" dual slide bore. The valve section appears to have had some attention from Roy Lawler in the past. The attached photo is post-assembly, but pre-adjustment for tuning. The J-bend needs a trim to bring it up to pitch and locate the bell ring near 3rd position. Now I gotta build a compact case with the famous leopard print interior.[/quote]
A number of years ago I found an S20 and put a DG valveset on it. That was a rockin setup. I played bass with an orchestra doing Holsts Perfect Fool Overture, which I had never heard of before. The bass bone and tuba had a lot of off-kilter counterpoint to the rest of the orchestra. Of course at a pretty obnoxious noise level. That S20/DG would bark. I'm not sure it was what I'm looking for now, but it was a piece of work then.
- sf105
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Mar 24, 2018
[quote="hyperbolica"]A number of years ago I found an S20 and put a DG valveset on it. That was a rockin setup. I played bass with an orchestra doing Holsts Perfect Fool Overture, which I had never heard of before. The bass bone and tuba had a lot of off-kilter counterpoint to the rest of the orchestra. Of course at a pretty obnoxious noise level. That S20/DG would bark. I'm not sure it was what I'm looking for now, but it was a piece of work then.[/quote]
That's a great part. And it was written for a British G bass so a bit of edge would be appropriate.
That's a great part. And it was written for a British G bass so a bit of edge would be appropriate.
- hyperbolica
- Posts: 3990
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
Just another note about this instrument. I have a long shank Schilke 59, and it bottoms out on something in the mouthpiece receiver, making it unusable. So there's a hard stop down in there a bit over an inch in.
And in answer to my previous question about the leadpipe and finger ring arrangement, yes, that does appear to be the stock design. I found a photo from the Brass Exchange which shows the same configuration at the receiver end of the slide.
And in answer to my previous question about the leadpipe and finger ring arrangement, yes, that does appear to be the stock design. I found a photo from the Brass Exchange which shows the same configuration at the receiver end of the slide.
- blast
- Posts: 671
- Joined: Mar 22, 2018
They have a two piece leadpipe. Many mouthpieces don't work. Ideally, you need a small gap between the mouthpiece end and the ridge in the pipe.
- Kbiggs
- Posts: 1768
- Joined: Mar 24, 2018
[quote="blast"]They have a two piece leadpipe. Many mouthpieces don't work. Ideally, you need a small gap between the mouthpiece end and the ridge in the pipe.[/quote]
You can use a King mouthpiece, which will fit. They can be difficult to find, as they’re often separated from the horn.
You can use Bob Reeve’s system of Reeve’s Sleeves. Send them your mouthpiece, and they’ll machine down the shank and give you a set of sleeves that fit on the end of the shank. Some of the sleeves are longer, some are shorter so you can dial in the gap.
You might also ask Doug Elliott if he is able to provide a shank that works in a King bass leadpipe.
You can use a King mouthpiece, which will fit. They can be difficult to find, as they’re often separated from the horn.
You can use Bob Reeve’s system of Reeve’s Sleeves. Send them your mouthpiece, and they’ll machine down the shank and give you a set of sleeves that fit on the end of the shank. Some of the sleeves are longer, some are shorter so you can dial in the gap.
You might also ask Doug Elliott if he is able to provide a shank that works in a King bass leadpipe.
- sf105
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Mar 24, 2018
Yeah, the old Shilke's don't fit. I usually find that Bach's fit and I also have a Rath 1 1/2 that works well.
- bassclef
- Posts: 337
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
[quote="Kbiggs"]You can use a King mouthpiece, which will fit. They can be difficult to find, as they’re often separated from the horn.[/quote]
This is true. Most of the BENGE mouthpieces have the right shank as well. Also pretty hard to find. Their 1 1/2G is a pretty great piece in that size range, if you can find one.
[quote="Kbiggs"]You can use Bob Reeve’s system of Reeve’s Sleeves. Send them your mouthpiece, and they’ll machine down the shank and give you a set of sleeves that fit on the end of the shank. Some of the sleeves are longer, some are shorter so you can dial in the gap.[/quote]
Also true. Years ago, when I was putting a lot of money into getting a Duo Gravis set up to work for me, I actually mailed a DG slide and two Stork mouthpieces out to Bob Reeves for them to measure the receiver and re-shank those two mouthpieces accordingly. They did immaculate work.
This is true. Most of the BENGE mouthpieces have the right shank as well. Also pretty hard to find. Their 1 1/2G is a pretty great piece in that size range, if you can find one.
[quote="Kbiggs"]You can use Bob Reeve’s system of Reeve’s Sleeves. Send them your mouthpiece, and they’ll machine down the shank and give you a set of sleeves that fit on the end of the shank. Some of the sleeves are longer, some are shorter so you can dial in the gap.[/quote]
Also true. Years ago, when I was putting a lot of money into getting a Duo Gravis set up to work for me, I actually mailed a DG slide and two Stork mouthpieces out to Bob Reeves for them to measure the receiver and re-shank those two mouthpieces accordingly. They did immaculate work.
- Matt_K
- Posts: 4809
- Joined: Mar 21, 2018
You might also ask Doug Elliott if he is able to provide a shank that works in a King bass leadpipe.
He does! Has a “K” designstion (not to be confused with the cup depth so a king shank for a k cup would be K8K for example)
- ScottZigler
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Jul 19, 2023
Can confirm! I have an L8K shank:
https://photos.app.goo.gl/kedZw3Re7NuJzxm19
It sits the perfect 1" into the DG leadpipe while a normal L8 goes in farther (but still works).
If anyone would want to buy it or trade for a K8 shank, PM me!
https://photos.app.goo.gl/kedZw3Re7NuJzxm19
It sits the perfect 1" into the DG leadpipe while a normal L8 goes in farther (but still works).
If anyone would want to buy it or trade for a K8 shank, PM me!
- hyperbolica
- Posts: 3990
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
I just want to update this thread after playing the DG in a big band for the first time. The 4th parts in this band are as much above the staff as below, so you've got to have some upper range. The DG with the smaller Curry is perfect. Why did no one mention to me after 10+ years that the Kanstul is probably not the best big band horn out there? It seems obvious now, but I had to "kiss a lot of frogs" to figure it out.
Now the question is do I need the Kanstul?
Now the question is do I need the Kanstul?
- Kbiggs
- Posts: 1768
- Joined: Mar 24, 2018
In some bands, the 4th book lies mostly in and below the staff. For you, the Kanstul might be better suited to that kind of situation.
- hyperbolica
- Posts: 3990
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
[quote="blast"]Mike Suter sounded great on his Kanstul. Just sayin'.[/quote]
Yeah, but he was Mike Suter. I'm not Mike Suter. I'm not even a real bass bone player. I just need something different.
I do sound pretty good on my Kanstul, but it's not always the kind of sound I want to make. And it's just a lot of work for a tenor player. The DG is somewhat less work, and it can sound tenorish when you need it to. Other people have pointed to this as a downside, but I think it's an upside.
I really wanted that 62h of Bills, but I got the Kanstul in the hopes that it had something 62hish in it, and it didn't work out exactly to plan. The DG is far enough to the tenor side of the spectrum that it can put a foot in both puddles, which is what I need a bass to do for me. I still have the Kanstul in case someone really wants me to play it.
It's not that the Kanstul isn't a great horn, I just don't think I'm the right player playing the in the right situations to get the best out of it.
Yeah, but he was Mike Suter. I'm not Mike Suter. I'm not even a real bass bone player. I just need something different.
I do sound pretty good on my Kanstul, but it's not always the kind of sound I want to make. And it's just a lot of work for a tenor player. The DG is somewhat less work, and it can sound tenorish when you need it to. Other people have pointed to this as a downside, but I think it's an upside.
I really wanted that 62h of Bills, but I got the Kanstul in the hopes that it had something 62hish in it, and it didn't work out exactly to plan. The DG is far enough to the tenor side of the spectrum that it can put a foot in both puddles, which is what I need a bass to do for me. I still have the Kanstul in case someone really wants me to play it.
It's not that the Kanstul isn't a great horn, I just don't think I'm the right player playing the in the right situations to get the best out of it.
- heldenbone
- Posts: 274
- Joined: Aug 21, 2018
[quote="harrisonreed"]<QUOTE author="Matt K" post_id="288115" time="1761679416" user_id="48">
If I were in your shoes and had that much straight mute usage, I'd probably get a stonelined or one of the fancy (and expensive!!!) Facet mutes. Both of them would be more accurate to the big band straight mute style sound than the Wick. The Facet mutes are all terrific, I Just can't see myself ever justifying that kind of price tag for a suite of them![/quote]
Do they still make the facet mutes? I think they are long gone.
For what is worth, I think that the Ullven mutes are the best:
<LINK_TEXT text="https://trumpetmouthpiece.com/products/ ... 1331242078">https://trumpetmouthpiece.com/products/ullven-mutes-trombone-popy-cup-mute-bass-trombone?srsltid=AfmBOopzwzwtTJ3BzCsqDxLjYOOrZBv4VKoU2mpD5s-iDA4d58THN7hj&variant=40151331242078</LINK_TEXT>
I know bucket mutes didn't come up but the Peter Gane one for bass is decent.
</QUOTE>
For trumpet, the best fiber mute I found was the Voigt Brass blue conical one.
<ATTACHMENT filename="VoigtBrassStraightMute.jpg" index="0">[attachment=0]VoigtBrassStraightMute.jpg</ATTACHMENT>
I don't know if it's available for trombone. Pitch and register-to-register balance for the trumpet mute is wonderful, and the sound is muted without the aluminum sizzle.
If I were in your shoes and had that much straight mute usage, I'd probably get a stonelined or one of the fancy (and expensive!!!) Facet mutes. Both of them would be more accurate to the big band straight mute style sound than the Wick. The Facet mutes are all terrific, I Just can't see myself ever justifying that kind of price tag for a suite of them![/quote]
Do they still make the facet mutes? I think they are long gone.
For what is worth, I think that the Ullven mutes are the best:
<LINK_TEXT text="https://trumpetmouthpiece.com/products/ ... 1331242078">https://trumpetmouthpiece.com/products/ullven-mutes-trombone-popy-cup-mute-bass-trombone?srsltid=AfmBOopzwzwtTJ3BzCsqDxLjYOOrZBv4VKoU2mpD5s-iDA4d58THN7hj&variant=40151331242078</LINK_TEXT>
I know bucket mutes didn't come up but the Peter Gane one for bass is decent.
</QUOTE>
For trumpet, the best fiber mute I found was the Voigt Brass blue conical one.
<ATTACHMENT filename="VoigtBrassStraightMute.jpg" index="0">
I don't know if it's available for trombone. Pitch and register-to-register balance for the trumpet mute is wonderful, and the sound is muted without the aluminum sizzle.