History of the Conn 5H and 100H

[gregwaits]

Does anyone know when the Conn 5H was introduced, how long it was in production etc?

I’ve wondered if the 100H was the official replacement .500 bore, or did manufacturing overlap.

[BGuttman]

100H was based on a Minick horn that was comparable to the 6H. Basically, Conn started making the Minick design and called it 100H. 6H and 5H are VERY old designs, going back at least to the 1920s (see the Conn Loyalist site for details).

[Thrawn22]

Does anyone know when the Conn 5H was introduced, how long it was in production etc?

I’ve wondered if the 100H was the official replacement .500 bore, or did manufacturing overlap.

The modern 5H was nothing like it's predecessor of the same model number. Like BGuttman said, the modern 5H was a 6H.

I've always thought it was weird (yet easier in the end) that Conn would produce a model like the 6H, then make the same model with variations and assign them different model numbers (6H, 5H, 48H as examples). The 100H, while on paper is a 6H, plays nothing like a 6H or the other model types (worse in my opinion unless of course you like super lightweight horns).

[gregwaits]

Thanks. Yes, the vintage 5H was nothing like the modern (mid-70s) 5H.

I owned a 100H briefly, but I’m not a fan of ultra-lightweight horns. I prefer 6Hs from the mid-50s.

[BGuttman]

There was also a difference between the Minick horn and the 100H. The Minick had a good reputation while the 100H was felt to be worse than the 6H (and of course the Minick).

[OneTon]

You can visit cderksen.home.xsfall.nl or oocities.org to see some “published” dates. Conn routinely recycled model numbers. Bill Skillman worked as a trombone player on the road before and after WWII, and in music stores as a salesman in the last half of the 20th Century. He said that 48H was supposed to be the top of the line horn or flagship but it never achieved superiority over the meteoric popularity of the Conn 6H, as we know it. The 5H lacked the nickel plated stocking extending above and below the handgrip. The 5H as we know it used the same bell as the later 6H but as such, sported a lightweight slide. Check out cderksen’s site to see how the popular 4H morphed through various options without changing its 0.485 inch bore configuration.

Recycling model numbers was not the only source of confusion. Bill Skillman said that it appeared that many horns were mis-stamped during late 1950’s through the 1960’s, and that it was often difficult to determine what horn was actually presented.

Even more variation can be accounted for if typical organization structures are considered. A company may be comprised of operations, program management, engineering, research and development, procurement, and sales. The various entities may or may not be working together or even be on the same sheet of music. Sales, artists, and dealers may succeed in negotiating one off unique horns, or multiple horn runs that are poorly documented in option lists or catalogs, and engineering, if at all. More catalogs from King and Olds may have survived or become public than Conn. Or not. Music stores and libraries may have books which list manufacturers and instrument documentation aids.

In the end, chaos reigns supreme. Anyone seeking factual data or valid history on Conn trombones may well have just inadvertently entered the Twilight Zone. Good luck.

[Thrawn22]

There was also a difference between the Minick horn and the 100H. The Minick had a good reputation while the 100H was felt to be worse than the 6H (and of course the Minick).

I have yet to try a Minick 100H or an early Conn production 100H. The guys i know of that have them love them.

I'm currently playing a 5H slide mated to a custom bell section put together by John Sandhagen. I plays wonderfully. I pulled out the 6H i had primarily been using (one of 3 i own) and it felt like home. Nothing beats that 6H sound.

[Macbone1]

I have yet to try a Minick 100H or an early Conn production 100H. The guys i know of that have them love them.

I owned a later silver plated 100H for several years. Those were generally superior to the lacquer ones. It play tested very well at Dillon but when l played it in ensembles the tone seemed anemic. I tried many mouthpiece/leadpipe combinations but could not get the "meat" l wanted in the sound.
Beautiful looking horn though. I guess only the early ones filled the bill.

[Bach5G]

The early 100Hs had some slide issues.

[MStarke]

I cannot really comment on the 5h.
However I am the happy owner of two nice Elkhart 6hs, a regular Conn 100h and more recently a very nice Minick smallbore.

In my view they are ALL very good instruments.
I actually like the 100h a lot at the moment. It is what it is - a very very lightweight instrument. Probably not working to well on heavy loud bigband playing. But a very nice and light, but also warm sound. Soft high register is a dream on that horn!
The 6h is really really nice to play, but maybe almost a bit too warm/not present enough for bigband.
Have not had a chance to do it yet, but I think the Minick might have that extra little brightness that makes it a bit better on lead.

[Macbone1]

The 6h is really really nice to play, but maybe almost a bit too warm/not present enough for bigband.

Interesting observation. I'm not sure that Stan Kenton's or Woody Herman's trombone sections of the 1950s or 60s would agree though!
I just tried one for the first time and found it played much richer than a 100H, pretty versatile actually.

[MStarke]

The 6h is really really nice to play, but maybe almost a bit too warm/not present enough for bigband.

Interesting observation. I'm not sure that Stan Kenton's or Woody Herman's trombone sections of the 1950s or 60s would agree though!
I just tried one for the first time and found it played much richer than a 100H, pretty versatile actually.

I think I wasn't very clear in what I mean. The 6h is wonderful! It's working very well in a bigband on every part and is a great allround horn. However specifically for lead playing I think just a little more direct sound can be helpful. certainly depends on the player!

[Macbone1]

I think I wasn't very clear in what I mean. The 6h is wonderful! It's working very well in a bigband on every part and is a great allround horn. However specifically for lead playing I think just a little more direct sound can be helpful. certainly depends on the player!

Ah, l get that. In fact l replaced my 100H with a King 2BL for that "cut" l need to have on lead parts.
The Conn was light and had a fantastic slide, but l don't do "intimate" or close miked gigs so that was that. I had to punch the crap out of every note in big band, lots of work.

[MStarke]

I think I wasn't very clear in what I mean. The 6h is wonderful! It's working very well in a bigband on every part and is a great allround horn. However specifically for lead playing I think just a little more direct sound can be helpful. certainly depends on the player!

Ah, l get that. In fact l replaced my 100H with a King 2BL for that "cut" l need to have on lead parts.
The Conn was light and had a fantastic slide, but l don't do "intimate" or close miked gigs so that was that. I had to punch the crap out of every note in big band, lots of work.

For me the 100h seems to also be not "substantial" enough for typical lead playing, although it's so smooth in that range. I am pretty sure the Minick can close that gap, but didn't have a chance yet to try it in reality.

[RJMason]

Have tried and used a number of these horns. My opinions:

Owned a Minick sounded amazing in the studio and at home (seriously incredible), soft gigs. Played a couple live band things on it and just couldn’t get the core I was after, ended up overblowing the horn. Felt like a Ferrari with no brakes, could never get comfy on it. Tried an older 100H, similar vibe, but less interesting sound than the Minick. Tried a red bell Minick which I LOVED (more 8H vibe) in the practice room but felt like I would have the same issues with these minick featherweight trombone designs, plus blending with a red brass bell, so passed on it. I did try one minick that I think he made later in the mid 90s, bell was heavier, more Conn/bach hybrid. That one would’ve been the ticket.

That being said players like Ira Nepus, Jason Jackson, have done well on these designs so it’s possible but with the unique characteristics of each Minick horn as well as the inconsistency of the Conn manufactured 100Hs it can be a mixed bag.

The 5H is better to me, bell and slide generally a tad heavier than a 100h, but I think the lightweight slide makes it lose some of that core. Really good for most settings though.

For me the 6H is the best out of these options. The heavier slide can handle the energy, but you still get the edge and sizzle. Like it’s almost about to overload but the oversleeves absorb enough energy to keep it stable?

Also feel that the 6H is the perfect jazz horn for someone who comes from a classical background. And you can do a lot with it in the studio: make it sound like a French horn with a big mouthpiece, make it scream, make it crunch, make it sound like a classical horn, play like rosolino (easier as a 5H!)

Big band wise it’s an appropriate sound. Though there is something about playing lead with a slightly smaller bell that really clicks: 2B, Bach 12, Conn 4H, 24H, etc. This also really depends on the pieces, ensemble sound, time period, etc.

Extra credit: 48H…these horns really can take what you give but to me generally have a slightly less versatile sound palette. Doesn’t mean you can’t make it work in all settings. These offer the most core and volume without breaking up, but sometimes less of the sizzle. Think 3B vs 3BSS

P.P.S: If budget and time is not an Issue and you want a modern 6H with a little 2B flavor on it go try a Greenhoe GC2. Those horns are really good.

[hyperbolica]

Extra credit: 48H…these horns really can take what you give but to me generally have a slightly less versatile sound palette. Doesn’t mean you can’t make it work in all settings. These offer the most core and volume without breaking up, but sometimes less of the sizzle. Think 3B vs 3BSS

Yeah, I've played my 48h in a clssical setting with a bigger mouthpiece in a way that didn't light everything on fire. It has a very dark tone, but hard articulations.

Also in the vein of light trombones you might consider the Getzen 3508. Great clear sound (very different from the 6h) and a lot of variations due to the 3 leadpipes.

[Jimkinkella]

Had a Minick 100h, super comfy to play but just didn’t fit my gigs. I’m guessing that it would be pretty awesome for studio players, but it just didn’t cut a rock n roll show (for me).
Tried a couple of the Conn 100hs, way too light, I’ve heard that the silver versions have a bit more heft (physically and sonically) but haven’t gotten a chance to try one.
I’ve never found a 6h that I felt comfortable on, but I get the concept.
I’ve had some pretty good success with a 48h on the louder shows that I usually play, but only with non-stock leadpipes.
The stock one feels kinda squirrelly, and I’ve tried a number of them.

[Macbone1]

Had a Minick 100h, super comfy to play but just didn’t fit my gigs. I’m guessing that it would be pretty awesome for studio players, but it just didn’t cut a rock n roll show (for me).
Tried a couple of the Conn 100hs, way too light, I’ve heard that the silver versions have a bit more heft (physically and sonically) but haven’t gotten a chance to try one.
I’ve never found a 6h that I felt comfortable on, but I get the concept.
I’ve had some pretty good success with a 48h on the louder shows that I usually play, but only with non-stock leadpipes.
The stock one feels kinda squirrelly, and I’ve tried a number of them.

Trust me, I had a silver 100H and it was very light as well, not much in the way of "heft". The bell seemed to "swallow" the sound instead of projecting it.
I used a provided 48H in Air Force bands for a while. We considered them suitable mainly just for marching band - poor slotting and projection. Maybe the band got stuck with factory seconds....

[Jimkinkella]

I used a provided 48H in Air Force bands for a while. We considered them suitable mainly just for marching band - poor slotting and projection. Maybe the band got stuck with factory seconds....

A friend of mine had one in the Navy, he retired his issued 48h by sending the handslide overboard during a performance!

I've played a number of 48hs over the years and at least for me the stock leadpipe pretty much stinks.
A 100h #2 leadpipe works really well, and pretty much anything that I've tried (through a couple of different horns) is better than stock. Not quite sure what they were thinking.

[Macbone1]

"A friend of mine had one in the Navy, he retired his issued 48h by sending the handslide overboard during a performance!
I've played a number of 48hs over the years and at least for me the stock leadpipe pretty much stinks.
A 100h #2 leadpipe works really well, and pretty much anything that I've tried (through a couple of different horns) is better than stock. Not quite sure what they were thinking."

Thanks, I got quite a chuckle out of that! I suppose the leadpipes were the issue on those 48Hs. And l'm sure for other instruments as well. Nice looking horns, but nothing l would step up to the microphone with on the concert stage.

[Posaunus]

Is the 1960s-early1970s 48H "stock" (soldered-in) leadpipe different from the 6H leadpipes of the same era?

[JWHartley]

Back to the original question: If you refer to the Conn Loyalist pages: https://cderksen.home.xs4all.nl
The 5H was originally a (now) small bore (0.485") 4H variation. The 100H descends from the 6H, a 0.5" bore.
The 5H disappeared in the 30s.

The 100H was the result of Minick's consulting with Conn in the late 70s/early 80s. As discussed, its lineage is from the 6H.

Also remember the Conn company history. In the 20s, Conn was still controlled by Carl Greenleaf (1915-1949). During those years, there was a lot of innovation and development. Then Conn fell on hard times was traded a few times and merged with King, in Eastlake, in the early 80s.

So, the 4H/5H is a line that descended to the later small bore Conns, such as the 24H, 28H, 44H and other 0.485" bore horns.

The 0.5" bore horns are a different lineage. (Conn reused the 5H model name.) The second 5H of the late 70s is more a descendant of the 6H. and it appeared just before the merger with King. Derksen's website says that the 5H was lightweight slide 0.5" bore and only produced in 1979. My guess is that this would be a variant of the 6H, but before the emergence of the Minick consulting horns such as the 100H.

-Jess