I recently bought a 183 in addition to my 169. From what I had read, the main difference was the smaller 9" unsoldered bell. When I received this trombone I noticed a lot of small changes that I didn't know about.

-The valve is a different design with a much smaller external case and different port spacing.

-The wrap is moved around. I'm guessing this was for George Roberts for the E pull. My 169 will not easily pull out far enough for a proper E. The wrap also doesn't seem set up to fit a "Bird's nest" valve, as the tubing is much closer to the main tuning slide.

-Possibly the most valuable change is that the instrument is much shorter in the bell section. The slide is nearly identical length. With my 169, I am in tune only when pushed all the way in. The 183 has the “Ideal” length for base tuning.

-The bell is also lighter towards the flare. The stem of the bell feels almost the same between them, but the 183 thins out similar to the Shires “T7” treatment.

Interestingly, the parts are almost interchangeable. The hand slide for the 183 will fit the 169, but not the other way around (?). Also the tuning slides can be swapped from the 183 to 169, but not the other way around because of larger outer diameter. The 183 slide also fits the tenon taper of my Edwards and M&W somehow :idk:

The way they play seemed very different until I swapped slides. I had to force the smaller taper of the 169 slide onto the 183, but once I did the character that I really like from the 169 started to show through. The difference felt like it was mainly down to a different leadpipe Venturi.

If I missed anything please chime in. I am really starting to enjoy these older Holtons, and I’d love to learn more about them.

Here’s a comparison from when I had a 169. This is against a Williams 10. Interesting how much shorter the Williams bell section is.

Drew

Did you ever compare tubing size of the 169 f branch to the 185 f branch?

Bob

[quote="Fairlane57"]Drew

Did you ever compare tubing size of the 169 f branch to the 185 f branch?

Bob[/quote]

Hi Bob,

No, never did compare the tubing size between the 169 and 185 F branch. I no longer own the horns so unfortunately can’t do so.

Holton is consistently inconsistent... I have tried/owned a 183 and a 169... Small differences but maybe the biggest is the leadpipe.. GR pope in n the 183 and a slightly more open pipe in the 169.. Maybe heavier slide action n the 169..

[quote="Tbarh"]Holton is consistently inconsistent... I have tried/owned a 183 and a 169... Small differences but maybe the biggest is the leadpipe.. GR pipe in the 183 and a slightly more open pipe in the 169.. Maybe heavier slide action n the 169..[/quote]

Here’s a picture of the 169, 183, and a modern 50b tuning slide comparison. The 50’s span is 2mm wider than the Holton. The legs are roughly the same diameter, but the 50 is not interchangeable without modification to the Holton braces.

Bob,

Measuring the tubing between these two shows that they are the same inner diameter. The outer diameter of the 169 shows about 0.005" thicker. Pretty much the same, but different enough to not quite fit right without some massaging/thinning.

Tbarh,

I have a GR (MK) pipe to compare, and it actually is "smaller" at the taper, but has a fast expansion and is much shorter compared to a 50 leadpipe. I'm guessing this would speed up the air more dramatically for an open feeling?

[quote="paysonmcc"]Bob,

Measuring the tubing between these two shows that they are the same inner diameter. The outer diameter of the 169 shows about 0.005" thicker. Pretty much the same, but different enough to not quite fit right without some massaging/thinning.

Tbarh,

I have a GR (MK) pipe to compare, and it actually is "smaller" at the taper, but has a fast expansion and is much shorter compared to a 50 leadpipe. I'm guessing this would speed up the air more dramatically for an open feeling?[/quote]
I had a tr183 for some years , now I have an E185 and have tried a 169 a couple of times.. My clear favorite is my own E185... Darker,more open, warmer Sound.. I found the tr 183 more pointed in the articulation and a bit brighter more "tenory"sound..My E185 has the darkest most "bassy" sound i have ever tried.. If there is a difference in leadpipe between my E185 and a 169 is impossible to know having the Holton inconsistency in mind.

I had a tr183 for some years , now I have an E185 and have tried a 169 a couple of times.. My clear favorite is my own E185... Darker,more open, warmer Sound.. I found the tr 183 more pointed in the articulation and a bit brighter more "tenory"sound..My E185 has the darkest most "bassy" sound i have ever tried.. If there is a difference in leadpipe between my E185 and a 169 is impossible to know having the Holton inconsistency in mind.

That checks out that the 183 is bright and punchy, it WAS the George Roberts horn after all. I've been passively looking for one for a long time now, thinking it would be the perfect horn for big band days when 4th trombone is sometimes bass, sometimes 4th tenor. Personally I love a bright, tenor-y bass trombone sound, especially in a big band.

Does anyone know how long GR played the 183? It seems like he went to Holton after Olds went out of business, but he didn’t really stay with them that long before going back to playing Conn.

[quote="chromebone"]Does anyone know how long GR played the 183? It seems like he went to Holton after Olds went out of business, but he didn’t really stay with them that long before going back to playing Conn.[/quote]
I'm pretty sure that he left Olds for Holton around 1973 , then returned to Olds soon thereafter.

Notice that this [url=http://itsabear.com/Olds_Docs/Olds1973.pdf]1973 Olds catalog doesn't mention George. I don't know for sure when he returned to Olds, but the 1978 Olds price list lists the P-22 as the "Custom George Roberts Bass Trombone".