History of Holton tr150 & 158

[norbie2018]

There were several threads with detailed histories of both these horns on TTF, but I wasn't able to find them in the archived section if TC. Any chance anyone saved this info and could repost it?

[BGuttman]

TR-150 was Frank Crisafulli's horn.

TR-158 (and 159) were Jay Friedman's horns.

[JohnL]

You might be able to to dredge something up in Google's cache or via the Wayback Machine on archive.org.

Here's something from the Google cache:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s ... clnk&gl=us

The Wayback Machine doesn't seem to have everything. I'm afraid that a lot of things will be lost if TTF does not come back some day.

[MoominDave]

Having explored a little, it seems to me that the Wayback Machine only rarely has more than the first page of a TTF thread.

[schiffko]

Maybe someone can repost the article about the 150 and 158

[Burgerbob]

TR-150 was Frank Crisafulli's horn.

TR-158 (and 159) were Jay Friedman's horns.

The F attachment horns are not Friedman models. The 156 (straight version) and 256 (with screwbell) are Friedman models. Jay never knew about or played the versions with valve.

[Crazy4Tbone86]

I believe that Holton had an “intent” with each of their models. There were supposed to be subtle differences between the models, at least that was what the promotional literature said in different ways over the decades. Whether or not the instruments achieved those differences is a different matter. As it has been stated many times on TromboneChat…..“Holton trombones are consistently inconsistent.” I think that is part of the charm of Holtons…….there are some fantastic ones out there.

The TR-150 was Crisafulli’s model and was marketed to be a big playing horn, sort of Holton’s rendition of a Bach 42. The TR-150 was offered in a gold/red brass bell (I don’t recall the percentage of copper content) and a yellow brass bell. I have read accounts that Crisafulli played both types of bells.

The TR-158 was marketed as a slightly brighter, higher-resistance .547 bore horn. I remember the promotional literature in the 1980’s and 1990’s stating that the TR-158 was a great horn for concert bands, chamber groups and solo work.

The TR-160 was marketed as the broadest, darkest sounding .547 bore trombone. I believe the leadpipe is more open than the TR-150 and the slide crook is wider. The promotional literature stated that the TR-160 was a good choice for 2nd trombone and could be used to cover bass trombone parts.

The TR-159 was a “small bass” with a .562 bore, single valve and a 9” bell. These horns have a very unique wrap in the F-attachment.

The TR-156 (screw bell is TR-256) was Friedman’s model. As BurgerBob stated, Friedman only played the straight model, but renditions with an F-attachment were offered. I have seen TR-156 and TR-256 models with F-attachment wraps similar to the 159 wrap. The 156/256 models were also offered in multiple bore sizes….. .541 straight, .547 straight and .547-.559 dual bore. The last one being the model that Friedman supposedly used the most.

There were other .547 models in the mix as well. Some of those were the TR-380 and TR-680 (intermediate models) and the TR-168 (similar to the TR-150). I have a TR-168 bell (9 inch red brass) mounted on a modified Bach 42 body. It plays beautifully.

[hyperbolica]

I've owned the 156 and the 159. I thought the 159 was also a dual bore. I used the 159 as a single valve bass, or on 3rd/4th parts that weren't necessarily real bass parts. It has a deep voice without being slide-euphonium kind of dark.

The 156 is similar to the 159 spec-wise, but without the valve, probably the big difference would be the bell throat. I used the 156 as lead in a strong amateur orchestra in the late 80s.

The Wessex Supertenor is similar to the 159, but with a more standard modern wrap. And doesn't have the nice character, and it seems like a shorter slide you can't do as much with.

[Burgerbob]

The TR-158 was marketed as a slightly brighter, higher-resistance .547 bore horn. I remember the promotional literature in the 1980’s and 1990’s stating that the TR-158 was a great horn for concert bands, chamber groups and solo work.

I didn’t realize the 158 was a completely different design. I quite like mine, it has an incredible principal voice. Definitely not the most open instrument.

[Crazy4Tbone86]

The TR-158 was marketed as a slightly brighter, higher-resistance .547 bore horn. I remember the promotional literature in the 1980’s and 1990’s stating that the TR-158 was a great horn for concert bands, chamber groups and solo work.

I didn’t realize the 158 was a completely different design. I quite like mine, it has an incredible principal voice. Definitely not the most open instrument.

Sounds like your 158 matches the marketing!

[Crazy4Tbone86]

Holton was a very interesting company. Hate to see them fade away in the Conn-Selmer conglomerate.

At one point, they offered three or four .459 bore trumpets that had subtle differences. My brother (a trumpet player) went to several shows and liked one of the models every time he tried it. The particular model was marketed as having a “Mount Vernon style leadpipe.” When he finally decided that he wanted to buy one, they no longer offered it. Whenever he finds one, the owner does not want to sell it.

[schiffko]

I have had several 150`s and 158`s in the past.
What I noticed whas the the leadpipe on the 150 has always been a lot tighter (also the mouthpiece receiver).
The mouthpiece goes in much further into the receiver of the 158`s as well.
The valve wrap is also different. It is not easy to see at the first glance.
The 150 and 158 had also different part numbers for the leadpipes but the 160 and 150 shared the same part number for the pipe.

At the old tromboneforum there was an interesting thread about the origin of the 158.
It was designed as kind of a competitor to the 88H....

[Burgerbob]

At the old tromboneforum there was an interesting thread about the origin of the 158.
It was designed as kind of a competitor to the 88H....

Mine seems very 88H like in dimensions.

[Crazy4Tbone86]

Hi Schiffko,

Have you had the opportunity to pull the leadpipes out of the 150 and 158 horns and measure them? I know the venturi measurement of a pipe is not the only determining factor for how a pipe plays, but I would like to know those dimensions. I’m wondering if Noah Gladstone and Brad Close have pulled and measured these pipes. They have done research on a lot of pipes and Brad offers a TR-156 pipe on his brassmedic.com website.

I would be surprised if the leadpipe venturi of the 158 were larger than the 150. Then again…..Holton did some unique things on their horns. There are many other places that a trombone can create “resistance” or be more “open.” For example, the slide crook, the gooseneck (the older Holtons actually had two goosenecks because the valve was set back so far), the main tuning slide and in the bell stem/flare.

It makes sense that the 158 was designed as a competitor for the Conn 88H. It has been a couple of years since I have held one, but I believe the 158 slide crook is very similar to the Conn 88H……narrow width, bore size matches the outside tubes of the slide.

I am surprised nobody has mentioned the Holton TR-160. I really like how they play…..big and dark, and capable of playing very loud without any edge. In my opinion, an excellent horn for an orchestral second trombonist. I had a couple if students be very successful on 160 horns.

[Posaunus]

I am surprised nobody has mentioned the Holton TR-160. I really like how they play…..big and dark, and capable of playing very loud without any edge. In my opinion, an excellent horn for an orchestral second trombonist.

To each his own. I had a Holton TR-160 for a while as a backup to my (1972 - late Elkhart?) Conn 88H. It wasn't the best for me; I sold it to a small-tenor-playing friend who is happy to have a decent large-bore tenor. I replaced the TR-160 with a Benge 165F which I really enjoy playing.

[chromebone]

The TR 150 was known as the TR-168 before the LeBlanc acquisition. I think Crisafulli’s horn might have technically been a 168. I had a 168 for a short minute. It played very well, better than any 150 I ever tried. The 168’s bell looks somewhat more gold brass and not as red as the later
150, but it’s pretty well identical in every other respect.
The 168 is very rare; it was a special order in the 1950’s the way Mount Vernon 42’s were.
Like all Holtons back then, the 168 and the early 150’s are all a little different from each example; Holton was “consistently inconsistent” in those days.
There was also a straight version, the TR-166.
Looking at pictures of older Holton Symphony bore instruments from the 20’s and 30’s, it’s pretty clear the basic design philosophy of the 168/150 is based on those earlier designs.

[adryalm]

There is so much misinformation in these posts

TR-150 was Frank Crisafulli's horn.

TR-158 (and 159) were Jay Friedman's horns.

Mr. Crisafulli played a 168 which the TR 150’s later were designed on. I associate the Vienna Philharmonic more with the TR 150 than I do the Mr C. The very limited 166's and 168's I've tried do not play similarly to any other Holton's I've played. They might be based off each other, but IMO play very differently.

TR 158 was most associated with Van Haney I believe.

The TR 150 was known as the TR-168 before the LeBlanc acquisition. I think Crisafulli’s horn might have technically been a 168. I had a 168 for a short minute. It played very well, better than any 150 I ever tried. The 168’s bell looks somewhat more gold brass and not as red as the later
150, but it’s pretty well identical in every other respect.
The 168 is very rare; it was a special order in the 1950’s the way Mount Vernon 42’s were.
Like all Holtons back then, the 168 and the early 150’s are all a little different from each example; Holton was “consistently inconsistent” in those days.
There was also a straight version, the TR-166.
Looking at pictures of older Holton Symphony bore instruments from the 20’s and 30’s, it’s pretty clear the basic design philosophy of the 168/150 is based on those earlier designs.

This is the most accurate TR 150 post. However, the 166 and 168 shouldn’t have the “TR” attached. Technicality…
Crisafulli’s 168 was built with a wide slide similar to a bach slide in dimensions.

The TR-150 was Crisafulli’s model and was marketed to be a big playing horn, sort of Holton’s rendition of a Bach 42. The TR-150 was offered in a gold/red brass bell (I don’t recall the percentage of copper content) and a yellow brass bell. I have read accounts that Crisafulli played both types of bells.

To say he played both bells is a bit of a stretch. He primarily used his 168 (red brass). I think he did have another holton, but I don't believe it was his primary instrument. He also had a schilke built horn with an axial and a Bach 42 that sat in his office. I think I heard that he said the Bach 42 in his office played most similarly to his main 168...

The TR 150 I’ve seen with a lighter gold brass color and yellow brass variants. I have only seen 166’s 168’s with red brass and one silver plated 168

The F attachment horns are not Friedman models. The 156 (straight version) and 256 (with screwbell) are Friedman models. Jay never knew about or played the versions with valve.

Jay probably knew about the versions because he had sat next to someone who played one for 20ish years at that point, but you are right that he never played on with a valve

[Burgerbob]

The F attachment horns are not Friedman models. The 156 (straight version) and 256 (with screwbell) are Friedman models. Jay never knew about or played the versions with valve.

Jay probably knew about the versions because he had sat next to someone who played one for 20ish years at that point, but you are right that he never played on with a valve

The F attachment versions of his models in particular. He learned they existed only on the last year or so.

[Greg]

I believe the TR158 was designed with the input of Lewis Van Haney (New York Phil. and Indiana University). The story I heard from Mr Haney in the mid-80’s was he was working with Holton in the early 70’s on the TR-180 Bass Trombone then started on the 158. (Help me out IU grads). He had his Conn 88-H to use has a model for the new Holton. Unfortunately, he had loaned it to a student who was keeping it in a locker in the old theater where IU did opera performances. This was a wooden theater was left over from WWII. It burned to the ground taking Mr Haney’s 88-H with it. So they started from scratch to design the 158.

[modelerdc]

I remember the Tr158 as being the Van Haney model as well. One thing missed in all these posts was that all these models were based on the same basic set of parts. Most, except for some of the Freidman models had 9-inch bells. The Holton that Crisafulli played was a prototype with a yellow bell that the TR150s were modeled after, Some of the variations had duo bore or larger bore slides, same bell sections, some had different wrap or screw bells or different lead pipes but same family of parts. None were small bass trombones no matter how used, Holton also made the Tr183 for that. All were Holton's attempts to sale in the large bore tenor market.

[Crazy4Tbone86]

The 159 is the most mysterious horn for me. When I was younger, I thought it was a dual bore, similar to the .547-.559 dual-bore 156 and 256 models. Yet, all of the used 159s that I have seen advertised in the last few years have been .562 straight bores. If the 159 with a .562 bore is not a small bass, what is it? Was Holton trying to sell it as a large bore tenor with an oversized slide? If yes, was it intended to compete with the Bach 42 (with Bach LT50 slide) that Friedman used in the late 80s (at least that’s when I remember the TR-159 being advertised)?

Luckily, my wife does not need to hear all this talk about this bore and that bore. She tells me these discussions are “so boring.”

[OneTon]

Luckily, my wife does not need to hear all this talk about this bore and that bore. She tells me these discussions are “so boring.”

Pun alert.

[schiffko]

Hi Schiffko,

Have you had the opportunity to pull the leadpipes out of the 150 and 158 horns and measure them? I know the venturi measurement of a pipe is not the only determining factor for how a pipe plays, but I would like to know those dimensions. I’m wondering if Noah Gladstone and Brad Close have pulled and measured these pipes. They have done research on a lot of pipes and Brad offers a TR-156 pipe on his brassmedic.com website.

I would be surprised if the leadpipe venturi of the 158 were larger than the 150. Then again…..Holton did some unique things on their horns. There are many other places that a trombone can create “resistance” or be more “open.” For example, the slide crook, the gooseneck (the older Holtons actually had two goosenecks because the valve was set back so far), the main tuning slide and in the bell stem/flare.

It makes sense that the 158 was designed as a competitor for the Conn 88H. It has been a couple of years since I have held one, but I believe the 158 slide crook is very similar to the Conn 88H……narrow width, bore size matches the outside tubes of the slide.

I am surprised nobody has mentioned the Holton TR-160. I really like how they play…..big and dark, and capable of playing very loud without any edge. In my opinion, an excellent horn for an orchestral second trombonist. I had a couple if students be very successful on 160 horns.

From what I measured is that the slide crook dimensions (width and tube diameter) on the 150, 160 and 158 are exactly the same.
The 156 and 159 had wide bass bone slide crooks similar to a Bach 42.

The leadpipe of the 158 is basically the same on the 156, 158 and 159. ...shorter and more 88-ish
The mouthpiece also goes in much further too compared to the 150 and 160.
The 170 and 107 (straight version of the 170) are 150`s with 8,5" bells designed for the japanese market.

Tuning slides are interchangeable on both the 160,150,170,107 and 158.

Valve wraps are a little different on the 150 and 158....it has to do with the main bell brace and the necessary space needed.

[Crazy4Tbone86]

Hi Schiffko,

Have you had the opportunity to pull the leadpipes out of the 150 and 158 horns and measure them? I know the venturi measurement of a pipe is not the only determining factor for how a pipe plays, but I would like to know those dimensions. I’m wondering if Noah Gladstone and Brad Close have pulled and measured these pipes. They have done research on a lot of pipes and Brad offers a TR-156 pipe on his brassmedic.com website.

I would be surprised if the leadpipe venturi of the 158 were larger than the 150. Then again…..Holton did some unique things on their horns. There are many other places that a trombone can create “resistance” or be more “open.” For example, the slide crook, the gooseneck (the older Holtons actually had two goosenecks because the valve was set back so far), the main tuning slide and in the bell stem/flare.

It makes sense that the 158 was designed as a competitor for the Conn 88H. It has been a couple of years since I have held one, but I believe the 158 slide crook is very similar to the Conn 88H……narrow width, bore size matches the outside tubes of the slide.

I am surprised nobody has mentioned the Holton TR-160. I really like how they play…..big and dark, and capable of playing very loud without any edge. In my opinion, an excellent horn for an orchestral second trombonist. I had a couple if students be very successful on 160 horns.

From what I measured is that the slide crook dimensions (width and tube diameter) on the 150, 160 and 158 are exactxy the same.
The 156 and 159 had wide bass bone slide crooks similar to a Bach 42.

The leadpipe of the 158 is basically the same on the 156, 158 and 159. ...shorter and more 88-ish
The mouthpiece also goes in much further too compared to the 150 and 160.
The 170 and 107 (straight 107) are 150`s with 8,5" bells designed for the japanese market.

Tuning slides are interchangeable on both the 160,150 and 158.

Valve wraps are a little different on the 150 and 158....it has to do with the main bell brace and the necessary space needed.

Thank you Schiffko! I appreciate the information.

This has me thinking about the 160s that my students had about 7 or 8 years ago. Those horns definitely had wide, Bach-style slide crooks. Both of those students bought their horns "used" and possibly from the same person. Now I am wondering if the horns were modified prior to being purchased by my students.

I plan to go to ITF this summer and will need to look at the Holton 160s on display.....assuming they will have Holton 160s. Of course, there are so many other things that I have on my checklist as well!

[jschwartz]

I believe the TR158 was designed with the input of Lewis Van Haney (New York Phil. and Indiana University). The story I heard from Mr Haney in the mid-80’s was he was working with Holton in the early 70’s on the TR-180 Bass Trombone then started on the 158. (Help me out IU grads). He had his Conn 88-H to use has a model for the new Holton. Unfortunately, he had loaned it to a student who was keeping it in a locker in the old theater where IU did opera performances. This was a wooden theater was left over from WWII. It burned to the ground taking Mr Haney’s 88-H with it. So they started from scratch to design the 158.

In my first lesson with Van Haney at IU (Fall 1982) he pointed to my TR-158 and informed me that he had designed my trombone. He asked to see it, complained about the white plastic knuckles on the valve linkage and, for reasons I don't recall, promptly broke the linkage arm. While muttering to himself he reached for his Holton bass (180? 181?), popped off the linkage are and installed it on my horn. I played that horn with Pinnacle Winds in Kansas City last weekend, and the Van Haney linkage still works great!