Bass trombones with slide handle

[JamesSp]

Hi all,

I've been reading up on some trombone history recently and having some discussions over bass trombone development with friends.

Im interested, but It seems a little tricky to find literature surrounding bass trombone development. I'm particularly interested in learning more about bass trombones with slide extension handles. Is there a good resource somewhere that details things like common bore size for f or g bass trombones? How about which countries (or specific orchestras) had a preference for F, or G bass trombones (and the details surrounding the design of those instruments) and timeframes of them being commonplace?

[BGuttman]

There is a lot of that information here, buried in some older topics.

Slide handles were used on instruments pitched in F or G, where a 7 position slide was too long for a human arm to extend.

The F trombone was used in Europe; mostly in Central and Eastern Europe. Bores were relatively large.

The G trombone was used in Great Britain and the British Empire. Trombones that were contemporary with the G bass were very small bore, so the G bass came with a just sub-0.500" bore or 0.525" bore. Orchestral players used instruments with a rotary valve change to D.

The development of the "Tenor-Bass" trombone; a Bb trombone equipped with an F valve, spelled the end of the line for both of these.

More recently the F trombone was adapted as the Contrabass (and no slide handle; just 2 rotor valves), although I almost bought an Alexander instrument that was in F with a C attachment that used a handle.

In the Renaissance, bass trombones were in F or Eb and used a 7 position slide with a handle. If you want to see what one looked like, find a post by LeTromboniste and look at his avatar.

[JamesSp]

There is a lot of that information here, buried in some older topics.

Slide handles were used on instruments pitched in F or G, where a 7 position slide was too long for a human arm to extend.

The F trombone was used in Europe; mostly in Central and Eastern Europe. Bores were relatively large.

The G trombone was used in Great Britain and the British Empire. Trombones that were contemporary with the G bass were very small bore, so the G bass came with a just sub-0.500" bore or 0.525" bore. Orchestral players used instruments with a rotary valve change to D.

The development of the "Tenor-Bass" trombone; a Bb trombone equipped with an F valve, spelled the end of the line for both of these.

More recently the F trombone was adapted as the Contrabass (and no slide handle; just 2 rotor valves), although I almost bought an Alexander instrument that was in F with a C attachment that used a handle.

In the Renaissance, bass trombones were in F or Eb and used a 7 position slide with a handle. If you want to see what one looked like, find a post by LeTromboniste and look at his avatar.

Thanks! That's very helpful. I didn't realise that the F and G basses had a notably different bore size. I've played an Alexander F contra with a handle for the ring cycle, was quite a learning curve but I had assumed older F basses were not really comparable to something like that. I had assumed the bore size for F and G basses was somewhat similar. When you say bores were relatively large for those old F basses do you mean they were comparable to an F contra like the alexander?

[EdwardSolomon]

Thanks! That's very helpful. I didn't realise that the F and G basses had a notably different bore size. I've played an Alexander F contra with a handle for the ring cycle, was quite a learning curve but I had assumed older F basses were not really comparable to something like that. I had assumed the bore size for F and G basses was somewhat similar. When you say bores were relatively large for those old F basses do you mean they were comparable to an F contra like the alexander?

I own and play two G bass trombones and one F bass trombone. The bore sizes are not that dissimilar, contrary to Bruce's assertion.

The G bass trombone went through an evolution during the 100+ years of its development and existence in bands and orchestras. Although the Terzposaune was in existence during the Renaissance, the G bass trombone came into its own probably in France during the first half of the 19th century. This was then imported to Britain along with the F alto and C tenor. For a time, these were used before being replaced by E flat alto and B flat tenor, though the G bass continued to be used, eventually acquiring a D attachment during the second half of the 19th century, though this was not in widespread use until the mid-20th century.

The G bass trombone bore size increased several times (along with that of the other trombone sizes), though not by very much. The largest size produced of the straight G bass was 0.487", while the G/D bass in the William Betty configuration produced by Boosey & Hawkes was 0.5265". This model was produced until 1978. More details of the history of the G bass trombone are available in Gavin Dixon's Farewell to the Kidshifter published by the Historic Brass Society.

The F bass trombone similarly went through an evolution and was used primarily in the German-speaking lands of Central Europe. The French preferred a bass trombone in E flat, though like the F bass, it was not popular due to its unwieldy size. The F bass trombone was mostly considered a military band instrument, as described in method books of the period. Moreover, after the development of the B flat/F tenorbass trombone, the F bass continued to exist almost entirely as either a wider bore military band instrument, or as a narrower bore church instrument (Kirchenposaune), used in what became the Posaunenchor movement.

The F bass I own was made for this latter purpose and dates from the immediate post-WWII period. It was made in the German Democratic Republic and has a bore size of 0.500" with a 10" bell, so actually smaller in the slide bore than the G/D bass trombone, but with a much larger bell diameter and faster bell expansion.

You can see these instruments on my website: https://www.edwardsolomon.co.uk/.

[LeTromboniste]

Good post by Edward above!

Bass trombones with handles date back to at least the late 16th century. Sources from the time usually describe an instrument in D (although with the higher pitch of the time, that is the length of an instrument in Eb or E at a modern pitch), with a long slide with a handle and what we would call 6 positions. Some instruments even have two handles (!), with the second one attached to the back bow and used to push the back slide, not for tuning but for a quick extension to play the otherwise missing low Eb (because of the lacking 7th position).

A couple precisions to complement things already said:

Although the Terzposaune was in existence during the Renaissance, the G bass trombone came into its own probably in France during the first half of the 19th century.

In the Renaissance and baroque era, a "Terzposaune" would be in F, not in G, as the common tenor was then in A (not in Bb). A tenor trombone in A could be lengthened with a whole-tone crook into an instrument in G, and with further crooks down to F or lower, although of course without a slide handle. Purpose-built bass instruments in G and F with a long slide and handle were also common alongside the Quart/Quintposaune in D. In fact the earliest surviving bass trombone is in G, with a handle, made by Pierre Colbert in Reims in 1593, currently held at the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam. It is quite probable that many instruments in D could be reassembled without the back loop and set up to play in G (and that some or most of the many surviving basses in G from the time used to have a removable crook for D).

I don't think I agree that G basses were developed independently from this in the 19th century. Such instruments were in continuous use in Austria (one of the only places were trombones were used at all), down to Mozart's time, and they also were building new ones (one of the four surviving Viennese classical-era trombones is a bass in G, built in 1813, with a longer slide but no handle, and the same bore but a larger bell as the tenors). They are also described in 1820's sources, although by then more seen as military band instruments. This continued use draws a direct lineage from the Renaissance all the way into the 19th century.

The F bass trombone similarly went through an evolution and was used primarily in the German-speaking lands of Central Europe. The French preferred a bass trombone in E flat, though like the F bass, it was not popular due to its unwieldy size. The F bass trombone was mostly considered a military band instrument, as described in method books of the period. Moreover, after the development of the B flat/F tenorbass trombone, the F bass continued to exist almost entirely as either a wider bore military band instrument, or as a narrower bore church instrument (Kirchenposaune), used in what became the Posaunenchor movement.

Eb basses were used in Germany, as well as F basses and obviously Bb and later Bb/F instruments. If I recall correctly, Berlioz describes the practice in Berlin when he visited as always having an Eb bass on the 3rd trombone, and sometimes an extra (!) Eb bass to play the ophicleide/cimbasso/serpent/tuba parts. In France, neither the F or Eb bass saw much (if any) use at all, and they are described by Berlioz and others as essentially nonexistent.

England G basses.

F basses (with valves, not slide) were not uncommon in Italy and Austria after the switch to valves in the 1830's


Regarding bores and specs, they varied a lot depending on time and place, like for tenors. Keep in mind that long basses generally fell out of use before the advent of the modern very large and very standardized bore sizes. And where they did stay in use longer happens to be where very small tenors remained the standard until very late, so it's not surprising that English G basses are so small. German F basses vary a lot in bore, just as their trombones and other brass instruments did across the board.

[JamesSp]

Exactly the sort of replies I was looking for, thank you everyone.

[EdwardSolomon]

I don't think I agree that G basses were developed independently from this in the 19th century. Such instruments were in continuous use in Austria (one of the only places were trombones were used at all), down to Mozart's time, and they also were building new ones (one of the four surviving Viennese classical-era trombones is a bass in G, built in 1813, with a longer slide but no handle, and the same bore but a larger bell as the tenors). They are also described in 1820's sources, although by then more seen as military band instruments. This continued use draws a direct lineage from the Renaissance all the way into the 19th century.

Specifically in the context of French instruments, the bass trombone had dropped out of common use and was largely regarded as obsolete, certainly by the late 1820s. There is, I believe, little to connect Paris or Brussels with Vienna or elsewhere in the German-speaking parts of Europe in terms of instrument manufacture, certainly with respect to bass trombones. The French were already using B flat and C tenor and F alto trombones by the time the G bass trombone began to make its appearance.

The assumption that the British G bass trombone was simply a shortened version of the F bass trombone due to its unwieldy size carries little weight in the face of convincing evidence from French use, so much so that it is highly likely that when the trombone was reintroduced to the British Isles during the 19th century (it had become completely obsolete), it was brought over from France together with the F alto and C tenor, though these latter were later dropped in favour of the E flat alto (which remained in use in military bands and orchestras until the end of the 19th century in Britain) and the B flat tenor. There was a time according to brass band records that the C and B flat tenor trombones were used in approximately equal numbers before the C tenor was gradually dropped.

Again, I really don't think that there is any connection between the British or French G bass trombone and that of Vienna or elsewhere during the Classical era or earlier.

[LeTromboniste]

I don't think I agree that G basses were developed independently from this in the 19th century. Such instruments were in continuous use in Austria (one of the only places were trombones were used at all), down to Mozart's time, and they also were building new ones (one of the four surviving Viennese classical-era trombones is a bass in G, built in 1813, with a longer slide but no handle, and the same bore but a larger bell as the tenors). They are also described in 1820's sources, although by then more seen as military band instruments. This continued use draws a direct lineage from the Renaissance all the way into the 19th century.

Specifically in the context of French instruments, the bass trombone had dropped out of common use and was largely regarded as obsolete, certainly by the late 1820s. There is, I believe, little to connect Paris or Brussels with Vienna or elsewhere in the German-speaking parts of Europe in terms of instrument manufacture, certainly with respect to bass trombones. The French were already using B flat and C tenor and F alto trombones by the time the G bass trombone began to make its appearance.

The assumption that the British G bass trombone was simply a shortened version of the F bass trombone due to its unwieldy size carries little weight in the face of convincing evidence from French use, so much so that it is highly likely that when the trombone was reintroduced to the British Isles during the 19th century (it had become completely obsolete), it was brought over from France together with the F alto and C tenor, though these latter were later dropped in favour of the E flat alto (which remained in use in military bands and orchestras until the end of the 19th century in Britain) and the B flat tenor. There was a time according to brass band records that the C and B flat tenor trombones were used in approximately equal numbers before the C tenor was gradually dropped.

Again, I really don't think that there is any connection between the British or French G bass trombone and that of Vienna or elsewhere during the Classical era or earlier.

Well it's all conjecture and hypothesis on my part at this point. But we know the trombone was reintroduced in France via players of Germanic origins, the main maker in Paris at the turn of the century was Riedlocker (French but of Germanic origins), whose instruments have much more in common in shape and dimensions to the Austrian trombones than to the Saxon ones (which were essentially the two main places where trombones stayed in use through the 18th century), and the reintroduction of the trombone was due at least in part by Viennese music becoming fashionable in Paris and requiring trombones. So there is definitely some connections, although those might indeed be too early to link the Austrian G bass with the British one.

[LeTromboniste]

Well, with almost impeccable timing, there was a great presentation by Arnold Myers at the Romantic Brass Symposium yesterday about precisely the history of the British G bass trombone and many of the things we discussed here. I would look for that paper when the proceedings of the conference are published in a few months!

[DougHulme]

Besides our resident experts here Edward and Maximillian you could also google Nicholas Eastop and get in touch with him. He lives in Sweden but is English and has some role as curator or something in an instrument museum in Sweden but he is very knowedgable about the history of the bass trombone and is a bass trombonist himslef (Chamber Orchestra of Europe). I dont think he is a member here? Well worth talking to though... Doug

[jonathanharker]

I have been gradually updating the bass trombone Wikipedia article, but I need to dig into all the awesome pearls in this thread. Thanks everyone!

[HowardW]

Well, with almost impeccable timing, there was a great presentation by Arnold Myers at the Romantic Brass Symposium yesterday about precisely the history of the British G bass trombone and many of the things we discussed here. I would look for that paper when the proceedings of the conference are published in a few months!

In a few months? The proceedings of the Bern symposia generally appear 4-5 years after the event.

Howard

[jonathanharker]

Well, with almost impeccable timing, there was a great presentation by Arnold Myers at the Romantic Brass Symposium yesterday about precisely the history of the British G bass trombone and many of the things we discussed here. I would look for that paper when the proceedings of the conference are published in a few months!

In a few months? The proceedings of the Bern symposia generally appear 4-5 years after the event.

Howard

...I don't suppose this has happened yet? I wonder if its similar content to his recent article for the Historic Brass Society Journal. I've emailed him about it but not had a response yet.

[HowardW]

In a few months? The proceedings of the Bern symposia generally appear 4-5 years after the event.

Howard

...I don't suppose this has happened yet? I wonder if its similar content to his recent article for the Historic Brass Society Journal. I've emailed him about it but not had a response yet.

As it turns out, Arnold's article in HBSJ 35 is pretty much the same as the paper he read in Bern.
Howard

[jonathanharker]

As it turns out, Arnold's article in HBSJ 35 is pretty much the same as the paper he read in Bern.

If anyone's interested, I got a reply in the end, and was able to update the British G trom section of the Wikipedia article. Corrections, comments, withering criticism etc. welcome

[elainechat]

Great info!

[LeTromboniste]

As it turns out, Arnold's article in HBSJ 35 is pretty much the same as the paper he read in Bern.

If anyone's interested, I got a reply in the end, and was able to update the British G trom section of the Wikipedia article. Corrections, comments, withering criticism etc. welcome

Nice!

I also made some corrections to the section on bass sackbuts

[jonathanharker]

I also made some corrections to the section on bass sackbuts

Awesome! Do you have sources, particularly for the information quartposaune lowered to C with a crook - I've been unable to find anything so far. Also, to save confusion I'll mention that a sackbut in A is the same size as a B♭ trombone today, either because pitches were lower at the time (A=415 Hz) or because, as Guion says, the "pitch" of the instrument may have been taken from the note in 2nd position (old texts talked about only having 4 diatonic positions, not 7 chromatic positions; first position may have been where we consider 2nd to be today (in order to play sharpened accidentals etc.)
Update: I'd also like to incorporate Ed's info about use of the F and G basses in Germany on another recent thread, so (when I'm not at work!!) I'll do a search of MGG, AmZ and Revue Musique later on too - there's bound to be mentions in there somewhere.

[jonathanharker]

I also made some corrections to the section on bass sackbuts

Have you also noticed how terrible the sackbut article is? I don't know where to start. I'm almost tempted to fix up the (also pretty awful) main trombone article, and merge it into the "History" section.

[LeTromboniste]

I also made some corrections to the section on bass sackbuts

Awesome! Do you have sources, particularly for the information quartposaune lowered to C with a crook - I've been unable to find anything so far.

Yes: Praetorius. He writes in Theatrum Instrumentorum that there are two kinds of Oktavposaune: one that is truly an octave below the tenor without crook, but is extremely rare (he mentions one specific maker who has "recently succeeded to build one"), and another which "has been commonly found in many chapels for some years" that consists of using a Quartposaune (which is chiefly in D) with "wide tubes" and a whole tone crook. The famous plate from Syntagma Musica with the trombones, cornets and trumpets has two "Quartposaunen" depicted. One clearly has some extra tubing and/or the back slide pushed out. The shorter of the two is explicitly in D (there are slide positions on it with the note names), and so I take it that the other is what he describes as the alternative to a "true" contrabass.

I'll be doing exactly that for a concert of big quadruple-choir music next week.

Also, to save confusion I'll mention that a sackbut in A is the same size as a B♭ trombone today,

Careful, though, that's not actually really true. Some historical tenors are roughly the same length as today's Bb trombone, but really not all of them, and "roughly" must be taken very literally. There was no pitch standard so lengths of instruments varied quite a bit. I've played 16th century originals that are almost a full semitone shorter than a modern trombone. There are several problems in calling sackbuts by their modern pitch equivalent. One is that the use of whole tone crooks was ubiquitous, but if we see the tenor as a Bb instrument, it makes no sense at all (playing an instrument in Ab is absolutely useless for this music). Another is that it opens a can of worms with the basses given the variety of pitches. If we're going to say the A (tenor) and D (alto and bass) instruments are actually Bb and Eb because that's what they are today, then we should also not talk about E, F and G basses, and instead F, Gb and Ab basses... It also becomes problematic because it muddies the already ambiguous terminology even more. A bass sackbut in G is not a "Terz-posaune": it's a second lower than the tenor in A, not a third lower. The Terz-posaune is in F.

either because pitches were lower at the time (A=415 Hz)

The pitch trombones played at was not lower, it was higher. In the north of Italy, by sometimes as much as a whole step above 440. For example the three surviving trombones in Verona are at a=480+ (and so is at least one organ in the city). Venice was likely similar. In North Germany where I work a lot, there is a plethora of historical organs still at a≈475.

That is to say, the frequency of A was at a comparable pitch level to a modern Bb (hence the switch in nominal pitch of the trombone when the pitch was lowered) or even higher. By modern convention today, we tend to adopt pitches that are at full equal-tempered semitone increments away from 440, and so you'll see 415 and 392 for low pitch, and for high pitch 466 and 492. A modern-built sackbut in A at 466 is the same length as modern Bb trombone and the switch is just mental. A trombone in A at 492 requires both a mental switch and a shorter instrument.

or because, as Guion says, the "pitch" of the instrument may have been taken from the note in 2nd position (old texts talked about only having 4 diatonic positions, not 7 chromatic positions; first position may have been where we consider 2nd to be today (in order to play sharpened accidentals etc.)

Guion's book has been severely outdated for a few decades now, I would avoid quoting it if you can find other sources. This particular hypothesis has also long be debunked (even in the 80s). Setting aside the pitch of historical organs, every source until the 18th century gives A as the fundamental pitch of the tenor trombone, with a first position basically where we play it now (or as Speer says, two finger-widths out from fully closed). For the potential explanation of leaving room for sharps, there is no need, because those would be A#, E# and C## (!), which are all virtually never used in music of that time. Then, Speer explicitly gives low Bb at the lowest position. If your 1st position is actually in 2nd, that becomes impossible unless you have 8 positions (which is also physically impossible). Then, look at Praetorius. He says the bass is typically a fifth lower than the tenor (and that someone who plays tenor can easily read bass parts by switching the F clef for a C clef and using tenor positions). Then look at his depicted bass trombone: he gives the overtones of D in closed position.

Old texts do talk about 4 diatonic positions, which correspond to modern 1, 3, 5 and 6. On a trombone in A, these very neatly give you all (and only) the natural notes, with only the exception of and that need to be slightly lowered. It would simply not have occured to them to attribute positions to the accidentals, because the tuning of the time has no enharmonic equivalency (enharmonics were nearly a quarter tone apart). You would wind up with 11 or 12 chromatic positions, not 7.

[LeTromboniste]

I also made some corrections to the section on bass sackbuts

Have you also noticed how terrible the sackbut article is? I don't know where to start. I'm almost tempted to fix up the (also pretty awful) main trombone article, and merge it into the "History" section.

Yeah, it's pretty bad. I think it indeed would make more sense for it to be a part of the trombone article, as they are not two distinct instruments, just stages of evolution of the same instrument.

[HowardW]

[
... not two distinct instruments, just stages of evolution of the same instrument.

Not even two stages of evolution. Just different names used in different places at different times, but referring to the same thing.

Howard

[LeTromboniste]

[
... not two distinct instruments, just stages of evolution of the same instrument.

Not even two stages of evolution. Just different names used in different places at different times, but referring to the same thing.

Howard

I meant the sackbut and the modern trombone. But yes indeed!

[HowardW]

Awesome! Do you have sources, particularly for the information quartposaune lowered to C with a crook - I've been unable to find anything so far.

Yes: Praetorius. He writes in Theatrum Instrumentorum that there are two kinds of Oktavposaune: one that is truly an octave below the tenor without crook, but is extremely rare (he mentions one specific maker who has "recently succeeded to build one"), and another which "has been commonly found in many chapels for some years" that consists of using a Quartposaune (which is chiefly in D) with "wide tubes" and a whole tone crook.

You got things a bit mixed up here: Praetorius did not write anything in the Theatrum Instrumentorum, which contains the plates showing the instruments. And in Syntagma Musica II, where he does provide textual descriptions of the instruments, he does not explicitly say that the second type of Octavposaune is a Quartposaune with a whole-tone crook.

The famous plate from Syntagma Musica with the trombones, cornets and trumpets has two "Quartposaunen" depicted. One clearly has some extra tubing and/or the back slide pushed out. The shorter of the two is explicitly in D (there are slide positions on it with the note names), and so I take it that the other is what he describes as the alternative to a "true" contrabass.

So it is actually just your assumption that the other Octavposaune is an alternative to a "true" contrabass trombone. I think you might be reading too much into what Praetorious wrote. He actually wrote that "there are, as I have seen, two kinds" -- he says nothing about the first kind being "true" and the other "alternative." And at the end of the section about the Quartposaune, he says: "However, it should be noted that because the Quartposaunen are different, one larger than the other, the slide positions also do not coincide" -- hence the two differently depicted Quartposaunen.

Howard

[LeTromboniste]

Awesome! Do you have sources, particularly for the information quartposaune lowered to C with a crook - I've been unable to find anything so far.

Yes: Praetorius. He writes in Theatrum Instrumentorum that there are two kinds of Oktavposaune: one that is truly an octave below the tenor without crook, but is extremely rare (he mentions one specific maker who has "recently succeeded to build one"), and another which "has been commonly found in many chapels for some years" that consists of using a Quartposaune (which is chiefly in D) with "wide tubes" and a whole tone crook.

You got things a bit mixed up here: Praetorius did not write anything in the Theatrum Instrumentorum, which contains the plates showing the instruments. And in Syntagma Musica II, where he does provide textual descriptions of the instruments, he does not explicitly say that the second type of Octavposaune is a Quartposaune with a whole-tone crook.

Sorry, yes, Theatrum Instrumentorum is just the depictions, and the text is of course in Syntagma II, De Organographia.


He writes that "The other [sort of contrabass trombone] is not as long, but has wide tubes and through the use of a whole-tone crook can play the low notes".

That's not explicit, but...if it's shorter than a contra in A and can achieve notes lower than a normal bass through the use of a crook (and has "wider tubes"), what else could he refer to except as a wider bass trombone with an added crook?

The famous plate from Syntagma Musica with the trombones, cornets and trumpets has two "Quartposaunen" depicted. One clearly has some extra tubing and/or the back slide pushed out. The shorter of the two is explicitly in D (there are slide positions on it with the note names), and so I take it that the other is what he describes as the alternative to a "true" contrabass.

So it is actually just your assumption that the other Octavposaune is an alternative to a "true" contrabass trombone. I think you might be reading too much into what Praetorious wrote. He actually wrote that "there are, as I have seen, two kinds" -- he says nothing about the first kind being "true" and the other "alternative." And at the end of the section about the Quartposaune, he says: "However, it should be noted that because the Quartposaunen are different, one larger than the other, the slide positions also do not coincide" -- hence the two differently depicted Quartposaunen.

Howard

No, he doesn't say one is "true" and the other alternative, I'm saying that there is what most people would think of when reading the word "oktavposaune" without more context, i.e. an instrument pitched an octave lower, and then the other sort that Praetorius describes which is less than an octave lower. Let's not get lost in semantics.

Maybe I read too much into that picture and text, and yes my identification of the second pictured bass as the other sort of Oktavposaune is just a hypothesis. But whether I'm right or not that this second kind of Oktavposaune is what he was trying to depict, he does show two "Quartposaunen", one of which is excplicitly in D, and the other has clearly additional tubing. I'm not sure what that second Quartposaune is supposed to be if not an instrument lower than D, since he depicts it longer. Now, this begs the question: what exactly would be the difference between a Quartposaune pitched lower than D and an Oktavposaune pitched higher than A? There's only one viable tuning between D and A, and it's C.

[jonathanharker]

I've tried to tack a course and updated the bass trombone article, and managed to cite the "Quartposaune" entry in the Cambridge Encyclopedia by HowardW

[jonathanharker]

The pitch trombones played at was not lower, it was higher.

Yes - my blunder, I meant to say higher, an early Bach A=466 Hz gives B♭