Meinlschmidt radial flow valves

[LIBrassCo]

Anyone honk on one of these? I know Noah/Brassark used them on a horn a while back, but other than that I find no references to them. Came across it on my last order and had to get one to see it in person.

[harrisonreed]

I've been extremely interested in trying it. I imagine that with a heavy cap, it would play very similarly to the CL2000.

[tbonesullivan]

I believe they are like the "minick valve". A very good design.

[Jimkinkella]

Not a super fan,
They do play perfectly open, but it's a pretty drastic change with the valve engaged.
Really threw me off.

A lot of it has the same idea as a Minick, but definitely not the same.

[LIBrassCo]

Did a thing. I quite like it, it's surprisingly consistent on both sides. I didnt expect to like it considering the way the air is routed.

[Crazy4Tbone86]

Thanks for sharing this.....nice looking horn! I'd like to try one sometime as well because the design certainly makes one have preconceived notions on how it is going to play.

One thing I didn't notice in the original photos is that the knuckle coming out of the top port (towards the bell stem) looks like it has about a 20-30 degree bend in it. That's a nice design.....makes it easier to assemble without using another knuckle to offset the F-attachment tubing.

[LIBrassCo]

Surprisingly even with the super loopy air routing it plays remarkably consistant on both sides of the horn.

[20posaunen]

Do you all think this could be a good valve candidate to use on a secondary "plug-in" dependent valve, so it doesn't affect the regular path much while disengaged?
I assume it would be simple to install onto a straight leg of an existing tuning crook that already fits, if there's enough clearance from the horn's main tuning slide.

Any notable apparent downsides?
- Is it too heavy? Looks much smaller & lighter than a Trubore or Hagmann...
- Does the angle of the port tubing complicate necessary bracing/tube locations for the plug-in application?
- Does this fully open, straight path offer a noticeably less restrictive, less turbulent, more sonically transparent result than the available "full-flow" rotors from Meinlschmidt, Willson, or Instrument Innovations?

- Daniel

[Burgerbob]

Do you all think this could be a good valve candidate to use on a secondary "plug-in" dependent valve, so it doesn't affect the regular path much while disengaged?
I assume it would be simple to install onto a straight leg of an existing tuning crook that already fits, if there's enough clearance from the horn's main tuning slide.

Any notable apparent downsides?
- Is it too heavy? Looks much smaller & lighter than a Trubore or Hagmann...
- Does the angle of the port tubing complicate necessary bracing/tube locations for the plug-in application?
- Does this fully open, straight path offer a noticeably less restrictive, less turbulent, more sonically transparent result than the available "full-flow" rotors from Meinlschmidt, Willson, or Instrument Innovations?

- Daniel

I'm not a tech, but I'd assume this would be much more difficult in some ways than a normal 90/180 rotor to install in a plug in setup.

[20posaunen]

Yeah, the routing of the added loop wouldn't be so simple as a 90/180 rotor, but I'm wondering how much better the horn might actually play/sound while the extra loop isn't engaged.

I'd even be interested in hearing from people who have experienced both a dependent trubore bass and a single-trubore bass valve section. Same concerning a single, versus dependent Hagmann bass.

For a moment, lets specifically consider the MS radial-flow for application as a third, plug-in valve that gives someone with existing independent Hagmann valves (for example) the option of a low C in 1st position with all valve engaged.
I assume the addition of any dependent valve that adds more resistance/turbulence than the dependent system's primary valve (Hagmann in this example) would be quite noticeable, in both the engaged or disengaged positions.

[Burgerbob]

Yeah, the routing of the added loop wouldn't be so simple as a 90/180 rotor, but I'm wondering how much better the horn might actually play/sound while the extra loop isn't engaged.

I can't imagine it would be that large of a difference, since you're already playing through a valve anyway.

[Matt K]

Yeah, the routing of the added loop wouldn't be so simple as a 90/180 rotor, but I'm wondering how much better the horn might actually play/sound while the extra loop isn't engaged.

I'd even be interested in hearing from people who have experienced both a dependent trubore bass and a single-trubore bass valve section. Same concerning a single, versus dependent Hagmann bass.

Regretably, the number of (bass) single and dependent trubores ever produced is very, very low. (I want to say single digits?) BUT! There's someone here in the forum that does have one of them. I believe they have it attached to a Bach 50 setup of some kind IIRC.

In general, it seems like there are 3 common reasons people use plugin valves:

1. To not chop up a vintage instrument (usually a Conn, sometimes a Bach or Holton)
2. Because they weigh less
3. Because it is (at least perceived, if not actually) more open blowing.

I think Aiden is right about the first two reasons. Rotors are smaller and the plugin valves I've seen work really well with 90 degree ports.

However, if you are mostly going dependent and are okay with the weight and chopping up an instrument... you may well be right. But contemporary values are pretty darn good these days. I suspect you'd have to be playing at a very high level to notice much of a difference.

I just don't seem to be imaginative enough to figure out how this would work as a plug-in valve. As a dependent (but not a plug-in) I could see it being used on the exit path, although it would have to be upside down unless it were a Shires style wrap where the pipe closer to the neckpipe is not the exit path. Maybe they'd make one that is oriented differently for such a use case. Does anyone make a horn with these stock?

[Elow]

Whats the action/throw feel like on these? A picture of the backside of the valve would be nice if anyone has one currently

[Posaunus]

Whats the action/throw feel like on these? A picture of the backside of the valve would be nice if anyone has one currently

Several valve-only photos at the beginning of this thread.

[Tbarh]

Yeah, the routing of the added loop wouldn't be so simple as a 90/180 rotor, but I'm wondering how much better the horn might actually play/sound while the extra loop isn't engaged.

I'd even be interested in hearing from people who have experienced both a dependent trubore bass and a single-trubore bass valve section. Same concerning a single, versus dependent Hagmann bass.

Regretably, the number of (bass) single and dependent trubores ever produced is very, very low. (I want to say single digits?) BUT! There's someone here in the forum that does have one of them. I believe they have it attached to a Bach 50 setup of some kind IIRC.

In general, it seems like there are 3 common reasons people use plugin valves:

1. To not chop up a vintage instrument (usually a Conn, sometimes a Bach or Holton)
2. Because they weigh less
3. Because it is (at least perceived, if not actually) more open blowing.

I think Aiden is right about the first two reasons. Rotors are smaller and the plugin valves I've seen work really well with 90 degree ports.

However, if you are mostly going dependent and are okay with the weight and chopping up an instrument... you may well be right. But contemporary values are pretty darn good these days. I suspect you'd have to be playing at a very high level to notice much of a difference.

I just don't seem to be imaginative enough to figure out how this would work as a plug-in valve. As a dependent (but not a plug-in) I could see it being used on the exit path, although it would have to be upside down unless it were a Shires style wrap where the pipe closer to the neckpipe is not the exit path. Maybe they'd make one that is oriented differently for such a use case. Does anyone make a horn with these stock?

You forget one important reason for choosing plug in valve..Weight distribution!.. A trombone will almodt never be too backheavy, and the plug in are very good ergonomically for that reason.Try it

[Matt K]

Not necessarily, though in aftermarket mods, that tends to be the easiest place to put them. For example, the YBL622 has a plugin valve, but the rotor is very close to the same location that it would be if it were not a plugin, and the wrap doesn't extend beyond the main tuning slide, so all that extra weight doesn't do much to help the balance of the instrument. Although that was the first bass trombone I played on, and didn't have much of an issue holding it at the time.

And in the context of what OP was asking for, you'd have to get a little creative to make these plugin, so I suspect the best way of handling it might be similar to the 622, which would put it closer to the lower bell brace than the main tuning slide. But that's mostly a guess, I've seen some pretty creative solutions before...

[elmsandr]

Yeah, the routing of the added loop wouldn't be so simple as a 90/180 rotor, but I'm wondering how much better the horn might actually play/sound while the extra loop isn't engaged.

I'd even be interested in hearing from people who have experienced both a dependent trubore bass and a single-trubore bass valve section. Same concerning a single, versus dependent Hagmann bass.

Regretably, the number of (bass) single and dependent trubores ever produced is very, very low. (I want to say single digits?) BUT! There's someone here in the forum that does have one of them. I believe they have it attached to a Bach 50 setup of some kind IIRC.

….

Raises hand shyly… one of each here.

It’s a 45, mostly. I have a Holton 281 flare and Bach tuning slide for it, but haven’t adjusted the 50 mounting flange to fit it…. Yet.

I was going to do a drop in valve for the single Trubore with another Trubore, it would make sense, could be done easily (as it could with these meinl valves… but Ben G pointed out ‘why bother, just use a dedicated double section.’ And that REALLY makes everything easier for the double. If the valve section can come off, just do that. Sure, in total I have three valves and not two, but the double is less complicated than a drop in. The lever does not need to be ridiculous, and everything is happily soldered together.

Still going to update the single 50 with a drop in rotor one of these days, but even that involves some surgery that needs to be planned out and performed by somebody with more skill than me.

Cheers,
Andy

[greenbean]

I have a bass trombone made by Romeo Adaci, who was based in Germany until his death 5-10 years ago. It has a Meinlschmidt valve. It is perhaps the best valve I have played on. The Bb and F horns play the same. Period. And the lever throw is *very* short.

https://goo.gl/photos/Cnj9HT7k72c8e7QXA

[afugate]

I have a bass trombone made by Romeo Adaci, who was based in Germany until his death 5-10 years ago. It has a Meinlschmidt valve. It is perhaps the best valve I have played on. The Bb and F horns play the same. Period. And the lever throw is *very* short.

https://goo.gl/photos/Cnj9HT7k72c8e7QXA

Very cool. Looks like it has one of those remote-operated water keys.
--Andy in OKC

[LIBrassCo]

Regretably, the number of (bass) single and dependent trubores ever produced is very, very low. (I want to say single digits?) BUT! There's someone here in the forum that does have one of them. I believe they have it attached to a Bach 50 setup of some kind IIRC.

….

Raises hand shyly… one of each here.

It’s a 45, mostly. I have a Holton 281 flare and Bach tuning slide for it, but haven’t adjusted the 50 mounting flange to fit it…. Yet.

I was going to do a drop in valve for the single Trubore with another Trubore, it would make sense, could be done easily (as it could with these meinl valves… but Ben G pointed out ‘why bother, just use a dedicated double section.’ And that REALLY makes everything easier for the double. If the valve section can come off, just do that. Sure, in total I have three valves and not two, but the double is less complicated than a drop in. The lever does not need to be ridiculous, and everything is happily soldered together.

Still going to update the single 50 with a drop in rotor one of these days, but even that involves some surgery that needs to be planned out and performed by somebody with more skill than me.

Cheers,
Andy

I had planned to do a plug in valve with my caidex valves, but came to the same conclusion. Instead I just settled on a unique way to do a dependent setup and haven't looked back.

[LIBrassCo]

Small update on the original horn built in this topic. I loved the horn very much, but unfortunately for me one of my regular customers bought it from me about 2-3 weeks after it was completed. I had intended to keep it, but I would keep every horn I build if it was an option. I'll certainly build myself another one in the future, but I have one personal project that will go ahead of this.

[Elow]

Has anyone seen a two valve version of this?

[LIBrassCo]

Has anyone seen a two valve version of this?

Ya, been done. Haven't played one but im sure its a nice setup.

[boneberg]

One of the German companies uses the Meinlschmidts for their bass trombones. It might be Kühnl & Hoyer.

[Burgerbob]

One of the German companies uses the Meinlschmidts for their bass trombones. It might be Kühnl & Hoyer.

Many of them do, but I don't think any use the Radial Flow specifically.

[boneberg]

Yep Aiden, I just noticed some German makers who use the Meinlschmidt "OpenFlow" (totally different animal) for their 2-valved basses

[LIBrassCo]

Theres been some prior that made a few horns with them. By no means is it standard production anywhere. Imho thats a mistake.

[WGWTR180]

Yep Aiden, I just noticed some German makers who use the Meinlschmidt "OpenFlow" (totally different animal) for their 2-valved basses

Which makers?

[Elow]

Which makers?

Pretty sure the Schmelzer i played on had Meinlschmidt valves.

[LBOne]

karlsbad-brass.de has a nice one for sale, made by Romeo Adaci

[boneberg]

karlsbad-brass.de has a nice one for sale, made by Romeo Adaci

Very nice indeed!

[greenbean]

karlsbad-brass.de has a nice one for sale, made by Romeo Adaci

Nice! I have the single-valve version of it.

[tbonesullivan]

Do the Radial Flow valves have a machined core, or is it brazed together? Never seen the insides.

[WGWTR180]

karlsbad-brass.de has a nice one for sale, made by Romeo Adaci

The valves might be great but the way the tubing extends down from the ports might be problematic for some.

[tbonesullivan]

The valves might be great but the way the tubing extends down from the ports might be problematic for some.

True, but Tru-bore and Axial Flow valves also have tubing extending down as well. Maybe not quite as far, but pretty much all of the "improved valves" take up more room than regular and modified rotary valves.

[TexHipp]

I've been away from the trombone for a few years and am trying to catch up on the equipment landscape. I have a stock Bach 42BO so I'm familiar with the classic rotors and their descendants. And I think I've got a grasp on the Thayer/axial valves and their derivatives. Same with Hagmanns; plenty of pictures and commentary. And I appreciate the pictures trickling in of the Willson CAIDEX.

But I'm pretty confused on the Meinlschmidt frontier. I go to the English-language version of the company's website and I can see six pictures on the trombone rotary valve page. The first two pictures seem to be physically incompatible.

I see that Bach now offers a model LT42BOFG that looks like it corresponds to picture #1. This model seems fairly similar to the classic rotary valves their modern variations.

However, the BrassArk "vintage orchestral" trombone looks to have a valve that more closely corresponds to picture #2 with a straight-through bore. Furthermore, I see that member LIBrassCo made a gorgeous trombone with version #2.

The website seems to be merging two different designs. Does Meinlschmidt actually manufacture two different valves? "OpenFlow" is distinct from "RadialFlow"? Which is which?

[Burgerbob]

Open flow is the normal looking rotor. Radial flow is the valve pictured at the top of this thread.

[TexHipp]

Tunnel vision got me: I've been staring at the ports for too long without blinking. The model name is stamped right there on the valve covers.

And I linked to a picture that was directly in this thread. I'd blame an empty coffee cup and too many browser tabs, but really it's just my fading brain.

[WGWTR180]

The valves might be great but the way the tubing extends down from the ports might be problematic for some.

True, but Tru-bore and Axial Flow valves also have tubing extending down as well. Maybe not quite as far, but pretty much all of the "improved valves" take up more room than regular and modified rotary valves.

The Radial Flow valves linked above in the comments seem to extend further down than Tru-bores and definitely Axial Flow valves. When I played "thayers" it didn't bother me at all. And to be fair only a few of the improved valves have ports and thus tubing that extends down quite that far. My new M&W set extend a "normal" distance and other valves like Rotax the same. Anyway in the end it's up to the individual player.

[Matt K]

When you say "down" you mean "closer to the neck" like how the CL valves also have that sort-of "C" shaped thing protruding because the entrance to the F attachment tubing is on the "neck" side rather than in between the neckpipe and bell like it is on rotors? (Erm, sorry, that was a very long worded question).

Reason I say that is because I think of "down" being towards the lower bell brace and Tru-bores and Thayers both go below the lower bell brace and this one seems to be "above" the lower bell brace. But I'm probably misunderstanding what you're saying.

[Burgerbob]

Towards the neck and therefore causing discomfort when playing.

[Matt K]

Gotcha, that makes sense. I wonder if there isn't a combination of 1) angling the slide receiver slightly different than on rotors and 2) making a "bridge" or something similar out of nickel that is soldered to the "lowest" points that would make this feel even like a straight neckpipe. Might cause more clearance issues though.

[tbonesullivan]

When you say "down" you mean "closer to the neck" like how the CL valves also have that sort-of "C" shaped thing protruding because the entrance to the F attachment tubing is on the "neck" side rather than in between the neckpipe and bell like it is on rotors? (Erm, sorry, that was a very long worded question).

Reason I say that is because I think of "down" being towards the lower bell brace and Tru-bores and Thayers both go below the lower bell brace and this one seems to be "above" the lower bell brace. But I'm probably misunderstanding what you're saying.

towards the neck. The CL2000 is similar in a way. The Tru-bore valves themselves have a fairly large casing, and the valve itself protrudes down below the neckpipe. It all depends on how it's aligned I guess.

[boneberg]

RadialFlowDouble.jpg

Looks like it could be somewhat fat on the neck. But has anyone actually played this set-up?

[WGWTR180]

RadialFlowDouble.jpg


Looks like it could be somewhat fat on the neck. But has anyone actually played this set-up?

Right! That’s what I meant earlier.

[WGWTR180]

Towards the neck and therefore causing discomfort when playing.

Correct! Thx.

[LIBrassCo]

So I tried to order the radials like in the photo, but they politely refused to make them (no idea why). I tried to ask for a couple of other port configurations and was met with the same response. Basically, buy them as they offer or don't, no customization is offered on them like it is on open flow valves.

I did, however, find a workaround. Since I play dependent, I figured out a nice configuration to use one radial flow and one open flow side by side. Manfred agreed to match the exterior design of the valves (exterior material and matching valve caps) making the two different designs jive stylistically. To say I'm excited to build this would be an understatement.

[tbonesullivan]

So I tried to order the radials like in the photo, but they politely refused to make them (no idea why). I tried to ask for a couple of other port configurations and was met with the same response. Basically, buy them as they offer or don't, no customization is offered on them like it is on open flow valves.

I haven't seen with brass knuckles and smooth valve caps like in the picture, so maybe those are earlier models from when they offered options?

You'd think they would, seeing the issues that are particular to a dual inline bass. Though honestly I don't think I've ever seen a RADIAL FLOW in the wild. Just the OPEN FLOW.

[LIBrassCo]

So I tried to order the radials like in the photo, but they politely refused to make them (no idea why). I tried to ask for a couple of other port configurations and was met with the same response. Basically, buy them as they offer or don't, no customization is offered on them like it is on open flow valves.

I haven't seen with brass knuckles and smooth valve caps like in the picture, so maybe those are earlier models from when they offered options?

You'd think they would, seeing the issues that are particular to a dual inline bass. Though honestly I don't think I've ever seen a RADIAL FLOW in the wild. Just the OPEN FLOW.

I get the impression there's some kind of reason they don't like making them, although I cannot confirm. The thing is they play fantastic, so it's got me perplexed as well.

[LIBrassCo]

Well, my order got here, albeit not quite for what was placed. While that gets resolved in some capacity, I tossed a couple of parts together on the Radial flow. If anyone is going to ATW and wants to see one of these in person, I'll have it with me.