Converting to open wrap

[bigbandbone]

Do you think it would be worth it to convert my Conn 50H to an open wrap? Would the response in the trigger range improve? If I take on this projects, are there any pitfalls I should watch out for?

[BGuttman]

I doubt it will make any difference. The most important factor in trigger response is the valve port size. But the tubing on the 50H is sized for that valve and I doubt you will make any impovement.

You would see more improvement by getting a larger bore instrument.

You can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear. The 50H is not a bass trombone.

[LIBrassCo]

Not going to give you the benefit i think you are looking for. Need a larger bore. Even a large bore tenor will be more suited to it. The mouthpiece choice makes a big difference as well.

[bigbandbone]

The 50H Director is a student model bass trombone. The 0.522" bore makes it a #3¾. It was produced from 1965 through at least 1973.

What Conn said in 1966:
Outstanding bass trombone designed especially for students. Acoustically superior. F rotor attachment. Bore size .522". Bell 8½". Length 46¼".

I know, by today's standards the 50H is a tenor with an f-attachment. But it was designed as a bass when Conn was the leader in bass bones. I think it has even more potential. It's holding it's own for me right now. Low C is not a problem. I just want a little more "edge" on the trigger notes.

[Kbiggs]

My opinion: The 50H seems appropriate for a big band that plays primarily swing and other jazz standards (Basie, Ellington, etc.) that don’t require a large bass trombone. But if you’re playing anything beyond that era, and you really want or need that “edge” in the basement, a “true” bass trombone will really help. You won’t get what you need/want from a re-wrap.

A good used Conn 72H (or the equivalent Yamaha) is an excellent bass trombone that’s similar in many ways to a 50H, so the change from a medium-bore horn to a bass shouldn’t be too difficult.

[BGuttman]

The 50H Director is a student model bass trombone. The 0.522" bore makes it a #3¾. It was produced from 1965 through at least 1973.

What Conn said in 1966:
Outstanding bass trombone designed especially for students. Acoustically superior. F rotor attachment. Bore size .522". Bell 8½". Length 46¼".

I know, by today's standards the 50H is a tenor with an f-attachment. But it was designed as a bass when Conn was the leader in bass bones. I think it has even more potential. It's holding it's own for me right now. Low C is not a problem. I just want a little more "edge" on the trigger notes.

Please stop trying to rationalize your decision to get the 50H. It was designed to act as a beginner bass for kids who were playing small bore tenors and needed to hit an occasional trigger note. At the time they were selling the 50H they had some industry leading basses like the 60H, 72H, etc.

I played an Olds Ambassador "bass" for years. i could never find a mouthpiece big enough to really make it sound like a bass; the best I could do was a Bach 4C. I attached a Bach 1 1/2 G with a length of rubber hose, which made the low notes speak a lot better but made the horn too flat to play.

For what it would cost you to convert the pig to an open wrap you could easily find a used large bore tenor with F.

And for 4th trombone in a band playing Swing Era transcriptions the 50H is fine. But when you get a Dave Wolpe arrangement he's expecting you to have a much larger instrument.

[Matt K]

Do you think it would be worth it to convert my Conn 50H to an open wrap?

Definitely not.

Would the response in the trigger range improve?

The chief advantage would be that the spit wouldn't accumulate in the F attachment crook. Another possible advantage is that your tubing may have been damaged over the years and the act of having a tech disassemble and put things together correctly will enhance the underlying response.

If I take on this projects, are there any pitfalls I should watch out for?

Mostly cost. That conversion will cost a few hundred dollars. While you're at it, you'd probably want to switch to a different set of rotors though for the same price, you're quickly approaching the cost of a used bass or even one of the low-cost replicae.

If you really want to make that particular horn into a horn that can play low notes, your best bet is to get a different bell flare and tuning slide. Swap them out for something much larger like a used Edwards tenor flare + ts. That's going to open it up a lot. You'll also probably want to swap out the leadpipe or get a different slide too. A Conn 88 525 fits I think. I think Edwards is selling some demo slides at the moment for ~$400. Tech could swap the tenon out. Get a large shank leadpipe for it. Between the large shank leadpipe, more open slide, larger bell throat, the horn will be way more open than it was before. It still might not be particularly useful as a bass - as I discovered in a similar experiment - but it will be more open.

[brassmedic]

I have my grandfather's axe. My father replaced the handle and I replaced the head.

[Trav1s]

A couple of thoughts as I read this thread...

First, I'd second a different horn if you are really trying to get any serious sound on the trigger range. My '69 79H has been upgraded to a Rotax valve and it made more of a difference than any open wrap horn I have tried. I have a hard time thinking the open wrap would make enough difference to justify the cost. The 79H will speak in that range but there is still a limit to the .530" bore wrap. I suspect the 50H shares similar specs through the valve.

What options to consider? What about a .547" bore horn? A single rotor bass like the Conn 72H or Yamaha 321 would also be reasonably priced .562" horns that I would consider if I was working on that range. I really enjoyed the early 60s 72H that I borrowed a few years ago... fun horn!

The 50H shares the tenon with the 78H/79H and are unique to that size horn. The 88H's SL2525 slide will not fit without modification.

The Edwards .525" slides mentioned above are all gone. But you might consider pulling the lead pipe on the 50H slide and trying an Edwards 3 pipe - a popular choice to open up stuffy Bach 36s.

The Elkhart 50H I purchased will arrive this week and joins my collection of .522" Conns. Benn Hansson says the 50H slides have lighter inners than the 78H/79H. Some 50Hs have lightweight over-sleeves and all should have a brass slide crook. I am going compare the 50H slide with the 79H slide when I get a chance.

[Bach5G]

See the Horn Guys’ comparison of open and close wrapped 88Hs.

[mrdeacon]

Listen to Travis. Buy a 72h or a Yamah 321.

Its not a question of can you improve a 50h but it's whether or not it's the right tool for the job.

If you're trying to play bass a 50h you're never going to get that sizzle and broader sound you're looking for no matter what you do to the horn. You need a bass.

Also think of it this way... It's going to cost $300-$600+ to modify your 50h. A used Yamaha or Conn can be found for around $700-$1000 in good shape if you're thrifty. For pennies more you can get a bass instead.

[Trav1s]

I get attachment to an instrument all too well. I dearly love the way my 79H plays - classic lightweight bell, heavy slide and all vintage Elkhart Conn all the time. I tried newer horns but came back to the 79H every time. Since it is a pro horn, I went down the valve replacement route, knowing that I would have more in the project than I would have in another horn. (At that time, I had nearly $450 to get the Rotax shipped to my door and then I boxed up the valve and horn to send to the tech to do the repairs.) Knowing what I have in the cost of the horn, the valve, and repairs I'd say step away from the project sooner than later. Also, remember vintage horns are like vintage cars, on the surface they appear one way but when you get into the project you find other (expensive) things that need attention. (I sent the .522" slide for my 80H in to have the lead pipe pulled and the tech discovered a multitude of sins and the lead pipe is still firmly lodged in place.)

My ultimate goal was to have one horn I could use in a multitude of settings and the converted 79H works for what I do. (Since then, I have found a new Latzsch .547" tenor that is on my radar (found at ITF) that is everything I love about the 79H and a whole bunch more but that took me 10+ years of searching and playing many different horns.

There are significant design and construction differences between the 50H and the 79H and those differences are also at play in what you are experiencing. I will report back more thoughts when the 50H arrives tomorrow.

Finally, a quick eBay search shows Yamaha YBL-321/322s are available and right where mrdeacon suggests.

[Trav1s]

Observed differences between the 79h and 50h slides:
- 50h has a narrower brass crook
- 50h slide is all brass without oversleves
- 50h slide is much lighter weight

When used on the same bell sections, I find the 50h slide to give a more compact and warmer sound. I cannot imagine trying to get a bass sound on that horn using the 50h slide or the 79h slide.

Back to my previous response...

[BrassedOn]

To alter or not to alter. Tough question.

If in the same situation, I would play similar horns and find what has the characteristics and sound I’m looking for. If what I play and the other horn has some dramatically difference spec (bell diam, material, bore), then altering the present horn would not make much sense.

If you love the straight horn in terms of quality of sound, response, slide, blow... and all you want is 10% more juice out of the trigger range, then I would suspect switching to a new valve at the same time as a new wrap will get more bang for your buck. I’ve played Bach 42s, and found plenty of 42 traditonal wraps and old style valve playing as good as my open wrap old valve. But every Thayer and larger or more open contemporary valve I’ve tried had a real difference in the blow into the trigger range and felt most similar to the straight horn feel.

[BGuttman]

To alter or not to alter. Tough question.

If in the same situation, I would play similar horns and find what has the characteristics and sound I’m looking for. If what I play and the other horn has some dramatically difference spec (bell diam, material, bore), then altering the present horn would not make much sense.

If you love the straight horn in terms of quality of sound, response, slide, blow... and all you want is 10% more juice out of the trigger range, then I would suspect switching to a new valve at the same time as a new wrap will get more bang for your buck. I’ve played Bach 42s, and found plenty of 42 traditonal wraps and old style valve playing as good as my open wrap old valve. But every Thayer and larger or more open contemporary valve I’ve tried had a real difference in the blow into the trigger range and felt most similar to the straight horn feel.

What you say is true, but bear in mind the OP has a Conn 50H, which is a Medium Bore and is designed as a Middle School "bass". It's way too small to function as a bass in a modern Big Band.

For the cost of converting it to open wrap, and especially for the cost of changing the valve and converting to open wrap, the OP could find a much more suitable instrument to cover the 4th part -- a used single trigger symphonic bore or bass.

[greenbean]

I see negligible benefit to changing the wrap. Other than supporting your local tech...

I better idea would be too pick up a single bass. etbone has a nice TR183 for sale here. You will LOVE playing the trigger and pedal range on a true bass!

[BrassedOn]

To alter or not to alter. Tough question.

If in the same situation, I would play similar horns and find what has the characteristics and sound I’m looking for. If what I play and the other horn has some dramatically difference spec (bell diam, material, bore), then altering the present horn would not make much sense.

If you love the straight horn in terms of quality of sound, response, slide, blow... and all you want is 10% more juice out of the trigger range, then I would suspect switching to a new valve at the same time as a new wrap will get more bang for your buck. I’ve played Bach 42s, and found plenty of 42 traditonal wraps and old style valve playing as good as my open wrap old valve. But every Thayer and larger or more open contemporary valve I’ve tried had a real difference in the blow into the trigger range and felt most similar to the straight horn feel.

What you say is true, but bear in mind the OP has a Conn 50H, which is a Medium Bore and is designed as a Middle School "bass". It's way too small to function as a bass in a modern Big Band.

For the cost of converting it to open wrap, and especially for the cost of changing the valve and converting to open wrap, the OP could find a much more suitable instrument to cover the 4th part -- a used single trigger symphonic bore or bass.

I absolutely concur! Short answers, IMHO not worth the mod. But I also think if the OP played other horns first, they’d find horns much closer to a desired sound and blow. And as you clearly argue, more suited to the job at hand. So by testing alternatives, the OP would discover the right answer themself. Maybe I should also clarify, after testing other gear, if and only if the current 50h horn is “the one”, the OP would not be the first person to spare no expense, to get a horn just “right” for that individual, i.e., to do the slide work, and I’d say just opening the wrap could have too little effect compared to also doing a modern valve.

For me a lot of answers come from actually playing horns, testing different bells and lead pipes, valve configuration, etcetera etcetera, recording oneself, hearing others play the same gear, and when possible, playing and recording i context of an ensemble. In my neck of the woods, there seem to be King 5B 7B and 88h stuff that would be at least as good as a 50h. And single trigger Yamaha bass seem to appear pretty often. Conn basses less often.

I play electric bass also, and similar discussions abound onbass forums. And sometimes when people describe a desired sound for or a mod to their fav bass, the response is “what you’re describing already exists, it’s called a ((whatever))”. Or simply, “Ya can’t make a donkey a thoroughbred.”

[JohnL]

“Ya can’t make a donkey a thoroughbred.”

Nor can you make a donkey out of a thoroughbred. Different choices for different jobs...

or as Sam Burtis always says: