TromboneChat

sirisobhakya wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 8:50 am Are your bell and neckpipe from the same manufacturer of the brace parts? If they are not, why would the parts fit? I don’t understand why they are supposed to “made to match” if they are not even from the same manufacturer. Even parts from the same source but different model would not fit together.

Jgittleson wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 8:29 am

doctortrombone wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 8:12 am You're discussing the bell-side brace and its flange. right? Not all bells have the same taper, so of course there will be variations in the socket angle. Add to that the fact that you're using a shorter neckpipe with no curvature (Getzen curves their single-valve neckpipes), and it's a wonder it's not 10 degrees off. And for all your complaining about the sloppiness of fit at sockets, if you can't get 1 degree of play out of the slop at that particular junction, doesn't that tell us that the fit of these Getzen parts is VERY precise?

I've pointed this out before, and I hope you take it to heart. You're a talented machinist, with good ideas and a strong set of skills. However, instead of referencing your own skills in your sales pitch, you tend to denigrate the work of others. I think it works against you.

Hey my buddy's back! The bell side brace, bar, and socket on the reciever. And no they aren't Getzen, and yes they are all made to match, even with that bell. The brace is placed at the exact same spot on the bell as when used in Bb. Im going to say this again. You know nothing of the intricacies of this horn, please stop pretending you know better. Every time you make an assumption its so far off frankly it's insulting. I'm am used to designing far more complicated things than trombones, and anything you can try to rebut as my ignorance or error, has already been thought of and worked around. If I give a part a big thumbs down, its because it is not even made to work propertly in its native application. If you have a question of how I arrived at a particular conclusion, or how i solved a specific problem, great. That being said, the kid in the classroom trying to tell the teacher they made a mistake on the board act is getting real old.

Aren't you a professor or something? If thats the case it should be beneath you as well.

mrdeacon wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 10:38 am

Jgittleson wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 8:29 am Hey my buddy's back! The bell side brace, bar, and socket on the reciever. And no they aren't Getzen, and yes they are all made to match, even with that bell. The brace is placed at the exact same spot on the bell as when used in Bb. Im going to say this again. You know nothing of the intricacies of this horn, please stop pretending you know better. Every time you make an assumption its so far off frankly it's insulting. I'm am used to designing far more complicated things than trombones, and anything you can try to rebut as my ignorance or error, has already been thought of and worked around. If I give a part a big thumbs down, its because it is not even made to work propertly in its native application. If you have a question of how I arrived at a particular conclusion, or how i solved a specific problem, great. That being said, the kid in the classroom trying to tell the teacher they made a mistake on the board act is getting real old.

Aren't you a professor or something? If thats the case it should be beneath you as well.

Doctor's comment made a lot of sense actually... He just mistakenly identified the parts.

It looks like the three parts are Bach parts, yes? Those parts are designed to work with a Bach tapered bell and neck pipe.

I'm going to make an educated guess (I asked on another thread and you didn't mention where you sourced the bell) that that's a Getzen bell and tuning slide.
Getzen bells and tuning slides have radically different tapers then Bach does. Of course the parts aren't going to fit together.

Nothing wrong with that! I commened you for your craftsmanship but like have others have mentioned it's a little odd to complain that different manufacturers parts don't fit together.

Also do you still have any plans to add TIB or TIS to these horns? I know a whole back you mentioned TIS. Would be awesome to see it in action!

Specialk3700 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:25 am If no one can guess right why don't you just tell us who made the parts?

cozzagiorgi wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 12:35 pm How will you go about finding enough parts when this goes into production?

cozzagiorgi wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 1:50 pm You can buy 100 holton bells? Aren't they discontinued?

Jgittleson wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 12:15 pm The patents are filed i guess i can tell you. I took the liberty of patentimg trombones in Db, and D. Whether its a tenor or bass, i have a patent on it.

Tr160 bell (150 158 and 160 same bell), flange, cross brace
Getzen bass tuning crook not cut btw
Getzen valves on the double bach valve and gooseneck on the single
Bach receiver

LeTromboniste wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 2:18 pm

Jgittleson wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 12:15 pm The patents are filed i guess i can tell you. I took the liberty of patentimg trombones in Db, and D. Whether its a tenor or bass, i have a patent on it.

Tr160 bell (150 158 and 160 same bell), flange, cross brace
Getzen bass tuning crook not cut btw
Getzen valves on the double bach valve and gooseneck on the single
Bach receiver

Do you mean you patented the concept of trombones in D and Db? If that is true, a) that patent will have no value and b) it's incredibly pretentious on your part. There have been trombones in tons of different keys ever since trombones have existed, including trombones in D and Db.

I also find it funny that you present yourself as an "inventor" of a type of trombone, and horn maker when you're reassembling instruments from existing parts. Not that there's anything wrong with Frankenbones, but most people who make them have the humility of not calling themselves instrument builders.

Clearly you are a very skilled machinist, as others have noted, and you have good ideas that can only be commended. But a tiny bit of humility wouldn't be out of place.

mrdeacon wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 2:36 pm Any reason for choosing the TR158/TR160 tenor bell instead of a tweener 9" bell like a King 5B or Bach 45B, or a true 9" bass bell like an Olds or TR183?

I feel like you'd almost get more traction on these if you advertised them as travel tweener horns instead of as a true bass.

I mean I guess they are true basses... Bass tuning slide, single bore bass slide, short bass neck pipe... Just the bell throat is much tighter.

cozzagiorgi wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 2:41 pm I dont understand why flame wars are started on jgittlesons threads.

One can express his opinion without attacking or insulting anybody. That way, real discussions could take place.

cozzagiorgi wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 2:41 pm I dont understand why flame wars are started on jgittlesons threads.

One can express his opinion without attacking or insulting anybody. That way, real discussions could take place.

Jgittleson wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 2:49 pm

LeTromboniste wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 2:18 pm
Do you mean you patented the concept of trombones in D and Db? If that is true, a) that patent will have no value and b) it's incredibly pretentious on your part. There have been trombones in tons of different keys ever since trombones have existed, including trombones in D and Db.

I also find it funny that you present yourself as an "inventor" of a type of trombone, and horn maker when you're reassembling instruments from existing parts. Not that there's anything wrong with Frankenbones, but most people who make them have the humility of not calling themselves instrument builders.

Clearly you are a very skilled machinist, as others have noted, and you have good ideas that can only be commended. But a tiny bit of humility wouldn't be out of place.

Well, to each their own. It might have been done before, but no one took out patents....

Burgerbob wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 3:11 pm

cozzagiorgi wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 2:41 pm I dont understand why flame wars are started on jgittlesons threads.

One can express his opinion without attacking or insulting anybody. That way, real discussions could take place.

IMO, I don't see a lot of flaming, just honest questions.

LeTromboniste wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 3:11 pm

Jgittleson wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 2:49 pm Well, to each their own. It might have been done before, but no one took out patents....

That's absurd. It's like if you said you could patent the trombone itself because nobody else took patents.

Novelty is one of the basic criteria of a patent's validity. Anybody can prove, should you sue them, that trombones in D have existed since at least the 16th century. I literally wrote my previous comment while holding a bass in D in my other hand. There are numerous historical text that describe trombones in D, plus hundreds if not thousands of instruments in circulation. There's at least one Db trombone that is over two centuries old.

Let alone the fact that these have existed for almost as long as trombones have existed, the very idea that tuning a trombone (let alone brass instruments or instruments in general) in different keys represents any kind of novelty is absolutely ludicrous. If anything, just look at the variety of bass trigger tunings discussed on this very forum. Aside from valve tunings, I know of examples of trombones pitched in any one of these keys : Bb, A, G, F, E, Eb, D, Db, C. The only ones I have yet to see is B, Ab and Gb, and I'm sure there are some out there.

LeTromboniste wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 3:13 pm

Burgerbob wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 3:11 pm IMO, I don't see a lot of flaming, just honest questions.

Exactly. There's a difference between question and criticism vs. insult.

LeTromboniste wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 2:18 pm

Jgittleson wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 12:15 pm The patents are filed i guess i can tell you. I took the liberty of patentimg trombones in Db, and D. Whether its a tenor or bass, i have a patent on it.

Tr160 bell (150 158 and 160 same bell), flange, cross brace
Getzen bass tuning crook not cut btw
Getzen valves on the double bach valve and gooseneck on the single
Bach receiver

Do you mean you patented the concept of trombones in D and Db? If that is true, a) that patent will have no value and b) it's incredibly pretentious on your part. There have been trombones in tons of different keys ever since trombones have existed, including trombones in D and Db.

I also find it funny that you present yourself as an "inventor" of a type of trombone, and horn maker when you're reassembling instruments from existing parts. Not that there's anything wrong with Frankenbones, but most people who make them have the humility of not calling themselves instrument builders.

Clearly you are a very skilled machinist, as others have noted, and you have good ideas that can only be commended. But a tiny bit of humility wouldn't be out of place.

LeTromboniste wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 6:52 pm Just to be clear, I never said your design as a whole was not original, or that didn't invent anything, nor did I say that you shouldn't patent what you did invent. Whether your various innovations will prove to be solutions to existing problems or to the contrary, solutions in search of problems, you're absolutely right to patent them, and to patent your design, and if they succeed, good for you and good for all of us who might benefit from them. There are and ever will be improvements that can be made to trombones. Again I'll reiterate that your work looks good and well assembled and I find it interesting, and I'm all for trombones in other keys and would be curious to try your horn.

My goal was not to insult you. I merely pointed out, and I stand by it, that tuning a trombone to a different key is in no way a novelty in itself, and that claiming the contrary is presumptuous, as is presenting oneself as an instrument builder when you are not making any of the main components of the instrument and are using mostly stock parts from established makers (granted, that is a lot of hard work and you seem to do it well, and I do praise you for it). Especially if you then make compromises on your design to accommodate the not ideal parts, like you said you did (which is entirely normal for a mod project of course) or go to great lengths to complain about the problems with the parts you're using, instead of doing what any instrument maker I know would do, which is to make the parts themselves from scratch.

This will be my last post here since I think all that needed to be said had been said. Keep up the good work and I hope your project will meet success. In the meantime I and countless others will continue playing bass and alto trombones in D built by other makers, patent or not.




PS to moderators, despite my best efforts to make it clear it is not meant a personal attack but a reasoned and rational argument on the core issue at hand of trombone design, this is considered as an ad hominem attack, then I fear there is apparently not much space left for discussion and rational debate on this forum.

Jgittleson wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 7:09 pmThe D you are referring to is an octave below mine, and has nothing in common with it.

Jgittleson wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 8:29 am

doctortrombone wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 8:12 am [snip]
I've pointed this out before, and I hope you take it to heart. You're a talented machinist, with good ideas and a strong set of skills. However, instead of referencing your own skills in your sales pitch, you tend to denigrate the work of others. I think it works against you.

Hey my buddy's back!
[snip]
That being said, the kid in the classroom trying to tell the teacher they made a mistake on the board act is getting real old.

Aren't you a professor or something? If thats the case it should be beneath you as well.

BrassedOn wrote: ↑Thu Nov 01, 2018 6:57 am The second thing I would do when I finish my time machine (for which I will have filled a patent as soon as I can make the flux capacitor work right and travel back in time to patent that, thanks to Dr. Brown neglecting to file)

LeTromboniste wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 2:18 pm

Jgittleson wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 12:15 pm The patents are filed i guess i can tell you. I took the liberty of patentimg trombones in Db, and D. Whether its a tenor or bass, i have a patent on it.

Tr160 bell (150 158 and 160 same bell), flange, cross brace
Getzen bass tuning crook not cut btw
Getzen valves on the double bach valve and gooseneck on the single
Bach receiver

Do you mean you patented the concept of trombones in D and Db? If that is true, a) that patent will have no value and b) it's incredibly pretentious on your part. There have been trombones in tons of different keys ever since trombones have existed, including trombones in D and Db.

I also find it funny that you present yourself as an "inventor" of a type of trombone, and horn maker when you're reassembling instruments from existing parts. Not that there's anything wrong with Frankenbones, but most people who make them have the humility of not calling themselves instrument builders.

Clearly you are a very skilled machinist, as others have noted, and you have good ideas that can only be commended. But a tiny bit of humility wouldn't be out of place.

Bonearzt wrote: ↑Thu Nov 01, 2018 10:47 am I think I'm going to lock this thread as I agree it has run way beyond it's logical course.
Too much good info to lose by deleting!

Eric

sirisobhakya wrote: ↑Thu Nov 01, 2018 10:53 am This maybe regarded as an insult, but it is, at least a part of it, my pure and honest curiosity.

I have kept asking myself from the start: WHY must it be in this key? Why do you steadfastly insist that it must be in this key and the player must learn to play it as it is, instead of the other way around? Why players must learn all the new slide positions just to play this horn? And what makes you think they will do that, except those who want it because it is a novelty?

Why is a bass trombone in high D or even high Eb better than a bass trombone in Bb? A shorter slide? It is easily fixed by ascending valve. Double valves can make it playable chromatically to pedal C with only 5 positions. Is it because "it has unique tone"? The tone can be adjusted easily by changing mouthpiece, or at least other components that can be done without changing the key of the instrument. You also said yourself that "The bottom line is a bass trombone is a different instrument than a tenor", but why is the bass supposed to be in a higher key than a tenor? Resistance? Mouthpiece with a larger throat would solve that just fine, or at most dual bore slide or Thayer valves should do it. Weight? Wouldn't a single rotor more comfortable to hold? Also, weight is not as important as balance.

To sum up: why would one go through hassle of learning new positions, while everything they can get from your horn is obtainable without doing that, and most likely at cheaper price?

I am not a horn builder, although I would like to become one if opportunity permits, so I would not comment anything but praise on your craftsmanship. But I am a player, and also an engineer, and all the above are from these two of my point of view.