Quote from: svenlarsson on Jan 19, 2017, 10:20AMmake connection to a very small trombone bell that is cut down in size.
That's the difficulty with hackbuts. It's quite difficult to find a bell that tapers down to anywhere near .500. You'd need an extra 6" of conical tubing to bring it down that far if you were using a modern trombone. That's why I started with the extreme smallbore. The small end of that bell was significantly smaller than that of any .500 bore I've ever seen, and could drop to .500 in less than 3" of taper.
Using a modern bell and a consistently tapered extension would require cutting a few inches off of the neckpipe and/or losing the entire tuning slide, and the bell would be at around sixth position. It would look sort of like a grown-up version of those horrible Getzen slide trumpets.
Hackbut Theory: Given the cut bell, which features are most important to you?
-
ttf_Euphanasia
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am
-
ttf_sfboner
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am
Hackbut Theory: Given the cut bell, which features are most important to you?
Euph - beautiful work on that bell garland! See if you can find a die stamp (I think that's probably the wrong word) of a scallop shell. They would go in that strip that you didn't cut out.
-
ttf_Euphanasia
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am
Hackbut Theory: Given the cut bell, which features are most important to you?
Still learning, but I'm getting better at it. This one was a fantastic donor horn. Bore is .426. Tuning slide has zero expansion--you can actually flip it upside-down and it still works. The Kranz is unsoldered and pressed into place, which I understand to be how it was originally done. I had some trouble with the seam in the kranz, as can be seen in the pictures, but I'm very happy with it. I used a vintage York trombone mouthpiece with a flat rim. The cup is a bit too conical, but it works.
I don't know how true vintage sackbut plays, but this one has pretty much every feature that's been mentioned here with the exception of the mouthpiece. Small bore, no water key, thin bell metal, and no leadpipe. One interesting thing about it is that when it had a 7" flare, it played quite poorly. The reduction in bell size made a tremendous improvement.
Images at http://imgur.com/gallery/4j6Zy
I don't know how true vintage sackbut plays, but this one has pretty much every feature that's been mentioned here with the exception of the mouthpiece. Small bore, no water key, thin bell metal, and no leadpipe. One interesting thing about it is that when it had a 7" flare, it played quite poorly. The reduction in bell size made a tremendous improvement.
Images at http://imgur.com/gallery/4j6Zy
-
ttf_Le.Tromboniste
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:59 am
Hackbut Theory: Given the cut bell, which features are most important to you?
Wow that's the nicest looking hackt I've seen!
You might want to consider taking out those
two bell braces off, to have only the one closest to the flare (or at least one of them).
I'd be very curious to try it
You might want to consider taking out those
two bell braces off, to have only the one closest to the flare (or at least one of them).
I'd be very curious to try it
-
ttf_svenlarsson
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:35 pm
Hackbut Theory: Given the cut bell, which features are most important to you?
Quote from: Euphanasia on Jan 19, 2017, 05:52PMThat's the difficulty with hackbuts. It's quite difficult to find a bell that tapers down to anywhere near .500. You'd need an extra 6" of conical tubing to bring it down that far if you were using a modern trombone. That's why I started with the extreme smallbore. The small end of that bell was significantly smaller than that of any .500 bore I've ever seen, and could drop to .500 in less than 3" of taper.
Using a modern bell and a consistently tapered extension would require cutting a few inches off of the neckpipe and/or losing the entire tuning slide, and the bell would be at around sixth position. It would look sort of like a grown-up version of those horrible Getzen slide trumpets.
Of course you need a conical tubing conecting the 500 tube to the bell. U can can use very small bore horn but still have to make a cylindrical conection.
Using a modern bell and a consistently tapered extension would require cutting a few inches off of the neckpipe and/or losing the entire tuning slide, and the bell would be at around sixth position. It would look sort of like a grown-up version of those horrible Getzen slide trumpets.
Of course you need a conical tubing conecting the 500 tube to the bell. U can can use very small bore horn but still have to make a cylindrical conection.
-
ttf_Euphanasia
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am
Hackbut Theory: Given the cut bell, which features are most important to you?
Quote from: svenlarsson on Jun 19, 2017, 04:11AM Of course you need a conical tubing conecting the 500 tube to the bell. U can can use very small bore horn but still have to make a cylindrical conection.
If you start with a modern bell and a .500 slide, the only way to get proper taper from the bell tail down to .500 is to have conical tubing the same length as the existing neckpipe and tuning slide. You have 16" of conical tubing in the neckpipe and tuning slide crook that would still need to be there. If it's not in the crook and the neckpipe, where would you put it?
I don't think you can start with a horn designed to be conical from the tenon joint all the way to the bell and increase the cylindrical tubing without putting it in a different key. While that would be an interesting project, you'd end up with something that bears no resemblance to a historic sackbut.
If you start with a modern bell and a .500 slide, the only way to get proper taper from the bell tail down to .500 is to have conical tubing the same length as the existing neckpipe and tuning slide. You have 16" of conical tubing in the neckpipe and tuning slide crook that would still need to be there. If it's not in the crook and the neckpipe, where would you put it?
I don't think you can start with a horn designed to be conical from the tenon joint all the way to the bell and increase the cylindrical tubing without putting it in a different key. While that would be an interesting project, you'd end up with something that bears no resemblance to a historic sackbut.
-
ttf_svenlarsson
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:35 pm
Hackbut Theory: Given the cut bell, which features are most important to you?
What modern bell are you thing about? Why does it have to be modern? If you look around you can find a smaller bell that you can cut down enough,
The bore is the same, cylindrical, from the slid conection, through the bend and maybe 6 inches following the bend. The conical tub conecting to the cut down bell is maybe 6 inch. The bell rim, what is left should land where the fourth position is. The bore is unbroken cylindrical from the mouth piece to the short conical connecting tube.
Dont tell me it is not to be done, I know because my tech did it.
It was done as an experiment since we believe there are bass sackbuts that have been cut down to tenor lenght, som "tenors" have a very large bore like 495. It is very large for a tenor but not for a bass.
I have been using it for some Mozart thing among the Requiem.
The bore is the same, cylindrical, from the slid conection, through the bend and maybe 6 inches following the bend. The conical tub conecting to the cut down bell is maybe 6 inch. The bell rim, what is left should land where the fourth position is. The bore is unbroken cylindrical from the mouth piece to the short conical connecting tube.
Dont tell me it is not to be done, I know because my tech did it.
It was done as an experiment since we believe there are bass sackbuts that have been cut down to tenor lenght, som "tenors" have a very large bore like 495. It is very large for a tenor but not for a bass.
I have been using it for some Mozart thing among the Requiem.
-
ttf_Euphanasia
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:58 am
Hackbut Theory: Given the cut bell, which features are most important to you?
Quote from: svenlarsson on Jun 19, 2017, 09:37AMWhat modern bell are you thing about? Why does it have to be modern? If you look around you can find a smaller bell that you can cut down enough,
The bore is the same, cylindrical, from the slid conection, through the bend and maybe 6 inches following the bend. The conical tub conecting to the cut down bell is maybe 6 inch. The bell rim, what is left should land where the fourth position is. The bore is unbroken cylindrical from the mouth piece to the short conical connecting tube.
Dont tell me it is not to be done, I know because my tech did it.
It was done as an experiment since we believe there are bass sackbuts that have been cut down to tenor lenght, som "tenors" have a very large bore like 495. It is very large for a tenor but not for a bass.
I have been using it for some Mozart thing among the Requiem.
I'd be interested in seeing a picture of it. I know it can be done--I've done it before--but it's difficult to find an appropriate bell. Most bells are in the .800 range at the bell tail. Is the conical connecting tube the same taper as the bell stem?
The bore is the same, cylindrical, from the slid conection, through the bend and maybe 6 inches following the bend. The conical tub conecting to the cut down bell is maybe 6 inch. The bell rim, what is left should land where the fourth position is. The bore is unbroken cylindrical from the mouth piece to the short conical connecting tube.
Dont tell me it is not to be done, I know because my tech did it.
It was done as an experiment since we believe there are bass sackbuts that have been cut down to tenor lenght, som "tenors" have a very large bore like 495. It is very large for a tenor but not for a bass.
I have been using it for some Mozart thing among the Requiem.
I'd be interested in seeing a picture of it. I know it can be done--I've done it before--but it's difficult to find an appropriate bell. Most bells are in the .800 range at the bell tail. Is the conical connecting tube the same taper as the bell stem?
-
ttf_timothy42b
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:57 am
Hackbut Theory: Given the cut bell, which features are most important to you?
Quote from: Euphanasia on Jun 19, 2017, 08:51AMIf you start with a modern bell and a .500 slide, the only way to get proper taper from the bell tail down to .500 is to have conical tubing the same length as the existing neckpipe and tuning slide.
You might be able to approximate a cone with a stepped cylinder.
You might be able to approximate a cone with a stepped cylinder.
-
ttf_timothy42b
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:57 am
Hackbut Theory: Given the cut bell, which features are most important to you?
Quote from: Euphanasia on Jun 19, 2017, 08:51AMIf you start with a modern bell and a .500 slide, the only way to get proper taper from the bell tail down to .500 is to have conical tubing the same length as the existing neckpipe and tuning slide.
You might be able to approximate a cone with a stepped cylinder.
You might be able to approximate a cone with a stepped cylinder.