Shires Q&A, what would you like to know?

[ttf_tombone21]

How often will someone walk out with the first horn they try, even after trying other setups?

[ttf_Mahlerbone]

Quote from: tombone21 on Nov 21, 2013, 01:44PMHow often will someone walk out with the first horn they try, even after trying other setups?

I've been there quite a few times with different players during horn fittings.  I've never seen that happen.  What I usually see is someone walk out with the opposite of what they expected.  I've commonly seen someone want a Conn 88H copy and wind up with something that closely resembles a Bach 42.  I'm speculating that the reason might be that most players are looking for horns that work well in ensembles and group playing, and a yellow bell provides a clear stable sound throughout all dynamics and ranges, and the yellow bells probably blend so well for that reason.  And with Shires it's possible to get a horn that plays as easy as an 88h but sounds more like a Bach.

[ttf_Matt K]

Quote from: Mahlerbone on Nov 23, 2013, 06:40AMI've been there quite a few times with different players during horn fittings.  I've never seen that happen.  What I usually see is someone walk out with the opposite of what they expected.  I've commonly seen someone want a Conn 88H copy and wind up with something that closely resembles a Bach 42.

I have a mentor who did just that. He played a Minick Conn 88H for a long time, possibly the Best 88 I've ever played.  He went up, got fitted... plays a TB47, Tru-bore, with a 5Y bell.  I went to borrow his slide because I was thinking about buying a T47 used, and he thought he was playing on a "regular" tenor slide (T47).  I was surprised at how open the T47 played until I checked the engraving 

[ttf_Mahlerbone]

I had a question concerning lightweight slides.  Do you feel that gold brass tubes work well with them, especially paired with a yellow bell?  A yellow brass lightweight slide has a tendency to get a little bit edgy at times, and it also seems to me like some depth to the sound is missing.  It seems to me that the gold brass tubes could tone down the edginess and supply some warmth and depth that is otherwise not present.  I really love how the lightweight slides respond with the Trubore valves - for some reason that combination just works in terms of how the horn feels and responds, but there's just a little something missing on the bottom.  I think as smaller bass slide, a lightweight .547-.562 with gold tubes could work really well.  That's actually something that I'm contemplating switching to full time.

[ttf_Bach42T]

This is out of left field, but I am curious.....

Are brass instruments today made with "virgin" brass or more appropriately virgin copper and zinc?  Or is brass all recycled these days?  I don't know if it even matters.  Seems lots of old dusty, ratty, beater horns in closets in America could be renewed, hopefully. 

I guess this could be a "Shires" question, are there varying quality differences in brass sheets between industries or within those that manufacture brass instruments?  For example, is the same sheet of brass, the same used for a lamp stand or door knob??  Does it really matter?  The chinese brass sheets make Eastman horns, and brass sheets made in U.S.A. make Shires. 

[ttf_bbocaner]

Since y'all are now tooled up to make piston valves for the trumpets, is there any chance there would ever be a Shires valve trombone "slide" section one could purchase to use with a "S" bell section?

Speaking of pistons, why does Shires use Monel for the trumpet piston valves? Most of the high-end european manufacturers use stainless steel. I really like the incredibly good stainless steel valves I've had on Besson and Willson euphoniums and baritones.

[ttf_BGuttman]

Quote from: Bach42T on Nov 23, 2013, 02:26PMThis is out of left field, but I am curious.....

Are brass instruments today made with "virgin" brass or more appropriately virgin copper and zinc?  Or is brass all recycled these days?  I don't know if it even matters.  Seems lots of old dusty, ratty, beater horns in closets in America could be renewed, hopefully. 

I guess this could be a "Shires" question, are there varying quality differences in brass sheets between industries or within those that manufacture brass instruments?  For example, is the same sheet of brass, the same used for a lamp stand or door knob??  Does it really matter?  The chinese brass sheets make Eastman horns, and brass sheets made in U.S.A. make Shires. 


I'm going to give you a partial answer since I am not Shires (and I have no idea if they will agree to answer your question).

There are a wide variety of alloys going under the general name of "Brass".  We all know of the various ratios of copper to zinc between Yellow (70/30), Gold (80/20), Rose (85/15) and Red (90/10).

In addition, brass alloys are created in various hardnesses called "Half Hard" and "Hard".

There are some brass alloys that are good for machining because they contain about 1% lead.  Many of the mouthpieces I have been analyzing are this alloy.

There are ways to grade brass sheet, mostly by the number and kinds of defects.  The more defects you will allow the less expensive.

The stuff you will find used for brass electrical fixtures is usually not the same brass as used for musical instruments.  The machining requirements and final properties are very different.

Also, most of the electrical fixture brass I have seen is way too thin for trombones.

[ttf_octavposaune]

Quote from: bbocaner on Nov 23, 2013, 03:12PMSince y'all are now tooled up to make piston valves for the trumpets, is there any chance there would ever be a Shires valve trombone "slide" section one could purchase to use with a "S" bell section?

Speaking of pistons, why does Shires use Monel for the trumpet piston valves? Most of the high-end european manufacturers use stainless steel. I really like the incredibly good stainless steel valves I've had on Besson and Willson euphoniums and baritones.

I can't hazard why Shires chooses it's piston materials BUT I know some reasons why not to use stainless steel piston.

1:  Stainless steel is very difficult to machine.  Most stainless piston have to be centerless ground to size.  Monel pistons can be turned and honed to size.

2:  I repair a lot of stainless pistons and action issues tend to creep up as the material actually becomes out of round with time without being damaged externally. Euphoniums and Tubas have looser tolerances than trumpets, and even then many Euphs get action issues after a few years of use.

3:  Stainless piston trumpets are very difficult to repair, tolerances are tighter and the ground finish often acts like a mini file and often digs into the casings.  A major manufacturer who uses stainless pistons has beveled both the top and bottom of the pistons in order to reduce sluggishness and sticking due to side loading.

4:  Monel is a very time proven material made of copper and nickel.  Bach proved they can function and wear well for decades with an air tight seal. 

I think a Shires tenor trombone valve set in monel would be fine.  Stainless is also a LOT CHEAPER than monel.  Monel has a lot of Nickel in it which is one of the more expensive metals.

Benn

[ttf_elmsandr]

Quote from: octavposaune on Nov 23, 2013, 07:47PM...Stainless is also a LOT CHEAPER than monel.  Monel has a lot of Nickel in it which is one of the more expensive metals.

Benn
I'd steer clear of this point, as there are a wide variety of stainless steels, some of which are very expensive.  I'd have to pull a table and check, but a few stainless varieties have a lot of nickel as well, I could think it is nearly as much as Monel.  Of course, nearly all favors of stainless are made in much larger quantities which helps the price point.

Cheers,
Andy

[ttf_cozzagiorgi]

I love my Shires TW47G slide on my tenor trombone. Matched with a Hagmann valve section and a Bach bell this combination sounds and plays very good.

What would be the bass trombone equivalent to the TW47G slide?

[ttf_Mahlerbone]

Quote from: cozzagiorgi on Nov 24, 2013, 05:22AMI love my Shires TW47G slide on my tenor trombone. Matched with a Hagmann valve section and a Bach bell this combination sounds and plays very good.

What would be the bass trombone equivalent to the TW47G slide?

B62G

[ttf_cozzagiorgi]

Is that a popular slide choice?

[ttf_anonymous]

Good day Mr Griffen,

I have been mainly playing a Shires trombone for the last 5-6 years now: I started with a 2RVE bell (that was great for me then) and I'm now playing a 7Y bell that suits my actual needs better.

I do not play the 2RVE anymore: it sounds too light for me. However, I don't want to sell it - I'm more a "buyer" than a "seller" !!

My question: is it possible to change in house (i.e. at the Shires factory) the playing characteristics of a bell such as the 2RVE (through heat treatment or by converting it to screw bell or something else) ?

Thanks for your time.

[ttf_Matt K]

Quote from: cozzagiorgi on Nov 24, 2013, 09:22AMIs that a popular slide choice?

They probably sell more B62 than B62G, but gold brass tubes are not uncommon.  I have gold brass tubes myself. Gold brass slide, nickel crook, gold tuning slide, yellow bell.  "Balanced" in my opinion.

[ttf_Bach42T]

Quote from: BGuttman on Nov 23, 2013, 04:14PMI'm going to give you a partial answer since I am not Shires (and I have no idea if they will agree to answer your question).

There are a wide variety of alloys going under the general name of "Brass".  We all know of the various ratios of copper to zinc between Yellow (70/30), Gold (80/20), Rose (85/15) and Red (90/10).

In addition, brass alloys are created in various hardnesses called "Half Hard" and "Hard".

There are some brass alloys that are good for machining because they contain about 1% lead.  Many of the mouthpieces I have been analyzing are this alloy.

There are ways to grade brass sheet, mostly by the number and kinds of defects.  The more defects you will allow the less expensive.

The stuff you will find used for brass electrical fixtures is usually not the same brass as used for musical instruments.  The machining requirements and final properties are very different.

Also, most of the electrical fixture brass I have seen is way too thin for trombones.


Thanks, always wanted to know.

[ttf_griffinben]

Quote from: Mahlerbone on Nov 23, 2013, 07:31AMI had a question concerning lightweight slides.  Do you feel that gold brass tubes work well with them, especially paired with a yellow bell?  A yellow brass lightweight slide has a tendency to get a little bit edgy at times, and it also seems to me like some depth to the sound is missing.  It seems to me that the gold brass tubes could tone down the edginess and supply some warmth and depth that is otherwise not present.  I really love how the lightweight slides respond with the Trubore valves - for some reason that combination just works in terms of how the horn feels and responds, but there's just a little something missing on the bottom.  I think as smaller bass slide, a lightweight .547-.562 with gold tubes could work really well.  That's actually something that I'm contemplating switching to full time.

Gold brass does add a lot of color to the sound.  The lightweight versions work very well, particularly when paired with a lightweight bell.  A 2RVE with a TW47GLW is a great horn; it's one of Steve's favorites.  We've also done some TW25GLW slides that are great.

The trade off is articulation, it's not quite as pointed as yellow brass.  It's clear but more of a hard "D" than a hard "T".

The TB47-62LW works excellent as a smaller/lighter sounding bass trombone slide.  I think your idea would yield a responsive, bouncy, colorful horn that would be perfect for light classical work.

[ttf_griffinben]

Quote from: Bach42T on Nov 23, 2013, 02:26PMThis is out of left field, but I am curious.....

Are brass instruments today made with "virgin" brass or more appropriately virgin copper and zinc?  Or is brass all recycled these days?  I don't know if it even matters.  Seems lots of old dusty, ratty, beater horns in closets in America could be renewed, hopefully. 

I guess this could be a "Shires" question, are there varying quality differences in brass sheets between industries or within those that manufacture brass instruments?  For example, is the same sheet of brass, the same used for a lamp stand or door knob??  Does it really matter?  The chinese brass sheets make Eastman horns, and brass sheets made in U.S.A. make Shires. 



I'm not a metallurgist, but this is what I understand...

The brass we get is a formula.  These formulas a pretty tightly controlled and readily available from a variety of sources.  We recycle the scrap brass we do not use.  I am sure that you will see these metals in a variety of other places; it is as easy as ordering it out of a catalogue. 

Picking the right brass/nickle etc. does have a big effect.  But equally, if not more, important is how the instrument is made and the quality of the parts and assembly.

I hope that helps,
Ben

[ttf_griffinben]

Quote from: bbocaner on Nov 23, 2013, 03:12PMSince y'all are now tooled up to make piston valves for the trumpets, is there any chance there would ever be a Shires valve trombone "slide" section one could purchase to use with a "S" bell section?

Speaking of pistons, why does Shires use Monel for the trumpet piston valves? Most of the high-end european manufacturers use stainless steel. I really like the incredibly good stainless steel valves I've had on Besson and Willson euphoniums and baritones.

At this point there are no plans to make a valve trombone.  While we know "how" to do it, actually making trombone piston valves (casings of a new size, pistons of a new size, cluster lengths and bends, etc.) is not something that we are tooled up to do.

I haven't spoken to Steve about stainless steel vs. monel.  Monel is an industry standard amongst most quality trumpet manufacturers.  It is extremely durable and slippery, which makes it perfect for piston valves.  I'll ask sometime about the stainless and get back to you about it.

I hope that helps,
Ben

[ttf_griffinben]

Quote from: cozzagiorgi on Nov 24, 2013, 09:22AMIs that a popular slide choice?

Mahlerbone was correct, a B62G is the equivalent of a a TW47G.

I would not call it a popular choice, but that does not mean it isn't a good choice.  More people simply get what they need from other options.

Ben

[ttf_griffinben]

Quote from: Minick 500 on Nov 24, 2013, 09:59AMGood day Mr Griffen,

I have been mainly playing a Shires trombone for the last 5-6 years now: I started with a 2RVE bell (that was great for me then) and I'm now playing a 7Y bell that suits my actual needs better.

I do not play the 2RVE anymore: it sounds too light for me. However, I don't want to sell it - I'm more a "buyer" than a "seller" !!

My question: is it possible to change in house (i.e. at the Shires factory) the playing characteristics of a bell such as the 2RVE (through heat treatment or by converting it to screw bell or something else) ?

Thanks for your time.

It would be difficult to add weight and heft of sound to a bell that has been completed. 

However, a screw bell conversion will do some of what you are talking about.  It won't change the overall timbre (color), but it will add some weight and deliberation to the sound while projecting much more.  The trade off is that is a bit less flexible in terms of color. 

I hope that helps,
Ben

[ttf_sabutin]

Quote from: griffinben on Nov 26, 2013, 06:17AMGold brass does add a lot of color to the sound.  The lightweight versions work very well, particularly when paired with a lightweight bell.  A 2RVE with a TW47GLW is a great horn; it's one of Steve's favorites.  We've also done some TW25GLW slides that are great.

The trade off is articulation, it's not quite as pointed as yellow brass.  It's clear but more of a hard "D" than a hard "T".

The TB47-62LW works excellent as a smaller/lighter sounding bass trombone slide.  I think your idea would yield a responsive, bouncy, colorful horn that would be perfect for light classical work.
I have an 8" and an 8.5" 2RVE (both red brass) bell that I play (interchangeably) w/T25 and T47LW slides. A great bell. The 8.5 coupled w/the T25 is so good for chamber music!!! And the 8"/T25 axe is my favorite solo instrument as along as the rhythm section isn't overamped. Articulation? Never too much; never too little, always just right..at least for what I am doing.

Just sayin'...

S.

[ttf_trmbtrmb]

Any plans on making an alto with a closed wrap Bb attachment?

[ttf_Gabe Langfur]

There are already altos with Bb attachments, but they're not closed wrap. My friends who have them love what the valve and tubing do for both the blow and the balance in the left hand.

[ttf_trmbtrmb]

Joe has a valved version.  I was just wondering about closed wrap for transporting, like in a tight fitting double case.  Im lazy.

[ttf_trmbtrmb]

for frequent flyers it helps if it fits into the MB double case.   

[ttf_Matt K]

I'm just about 99% I know someone who fit a Shires alto in an MB double, though to be honest I don't know if the case was a tenor double or an alto double.

[ttf_Matt K]

I heard at some point Shires prototyped using bass valves on a tenor bell. The problem with the rotors was they made the whole horn flat.  If you're at liberty to answer, what kind of tuning slide was used?  Was it the same width as a tenor tuning slide? Is there anyway I could get my hands on one of those prototype tuning slides-if they do exist?

Or better yet, will Shires make a tenor tuning slide that will receive a bass valve section?

[ttf_griffinben]

Quote from: Matt K on Dec 08, 2013, 02:46PMI heard at some point Shires prototyped using bass valves on a tenor bell. The problem with the rotors was they made the whole horn flat.  If you're at liberty to answer, what kind of tuning slide was used?  Was it the same width as a tenor tuning slide? Is there anyway I could get my hands on one of those prototype tuning slides-if they do exist?

Or better yet, will Shires make a tenor tuning slide that will receive a bass valve section?

Funny things can start to happen when you start parts that weren't designed to go together.  We've done some of these things and have had to make some major adjustments to get them to play right.  Sometimes it works better than others. 

In this particular combination, we needed to make adjustments to get that combination to play up to pitch (it used a bass tuning slide, which is wider than a tenor tuning slide; we had to shorten the tuning slide and tuning slide receivers on both the bell and valve section, leaving not much room for adjustment).  I would be curious what reason you have for doing this and would want to explore standard options (designed to work together) to accomplish these goals. 

I hope that helps,
Ben

[ttf_Matt K]

Well, I've assembled quite a collection of stray parts. Enough to mount a valve section for basically the cost of labor.  I also have a Duo Gravis that I'd like to make modular with Shires stuff.... but I also would like to make a second F attachment for my tenors. Perhaps Rotax.

So I got to thinking that perhaps the most efficacious solution for both problems involved making the Duo Gravis valve section modular with tenors first and creating two smaller bits with threaded bell screws soldered to them to extend the bell braces to be bass width when necessary.  If I did that, the biggest expenditure would be the tuning slide.   The only problem is it's unknown to me whether or not the tenor side of the horn will be a dud. 

[ttf_griffinben]

Quote from: Matt K on Dec 09, 2013, 10:45AMWell, I've assembled quite a collection of stray parts. Enough to mount a valve section for basically the cost of labor.  I also have a Duo Gravis that I'd like to make modular with Shires stuff.... but I also would like to make a second F attachment for my tenors. Perhaps Rotax.

So I got to thinking that perhaps the most efficacious solution for both problems involved making the Duo Gravis valve section modular with tenors first and creating two smaller bits with threaded bell screws soldered to them to extend the bell braces to be bass width when necessary.  If I did that, the biggest expenditure would be the tuning slide.   The only problem is it's unknown to me whether or not the tenor side of the horn will be a dud. 

Your best bet is to talk with a good tech that does this kind of work.

While we did all kinds of custom work on any instrument in the past, we have grown to a point that we can only do repair and certain customization work on our own instruments.

A good tech will know what parts he needs to order and what parts he can adapt.  He can also work with you to make those kinds of decisions.  The tuning slide you might think of using is entirely dependent on what application you want the bass valves for, tenor or bass.  If it is for tenor I strongly recommend a tenor tuning slide; probably our standard taper in either yellow of gold brass (TY or TG, respectively) and for Bass, a Bass tuning slide.  But the bass and tenor tuning slides are different widths, so it would have to be one or the other.

I hope this helps.
Ben 

[ttf_Mahlerbone]

I am very curious about the different tuning slide options for the small bore horns.  I have a .500 bore Shires setup, but I've always felt that it plays and feels very big, kind of like a bright .547 bore horn.  I want an instrument that has a more compact feel and sound, like a King 2B or 3B.  I saw that Shires now offers #1 and #1.5 tuning slides.  Could you describe those in more detail?  My guess is that the #1 would make the instrument feel like a 2B, and the #1.5 more like a 3B.  Correct me if I'm wrong.

[ttf_wgwbassbone]

Hey Jeff,
I'm sure you want an answer from Ben but I can share a great experience I had with Ben and a Shires small bore versus vintage small bore comparison. Ben and I worked together last year on a show where he played lead on his custom Shires small bore and I played on a nice old Bach 16M.  Ben sounded great and we had a great time working together. One thing that I noticed and we spoke about at length was the fact that his Shires had a much larger sound than the Bach. In the end I made it balance and work out but I know I was definitely working harder than I should because of what I was playing. I'm not sure that a smaller pipe will make the horn sound like a 2B, etc.. I think the horns just have a bigger sound no matter what pipe or mouthpiece one uses. Good or bad??? You make the call. I love the sound I get on the 16M and it's perfect for my needs. If I played in a section on tenor where everyone was using a Shires or similar instrument I might have to consider getting one. But I don't so I won't.

[ttf_Mahlerbone]

Even with the smallest leadpipe the horn plays big. I'm talking about changing the tuning slide.

I tried someone's 3B on Monday and I really liked the compact feel.  It didn't play quite as smoothly as my Shires, but I loved the sound and I'm sure I could make it work in virtually any commercial/big band situation.

I'm actually considering getting a 3b or maybe even a 2b.

[ttf_griffinben]

Quote from: Mahlerbone on Dec 12, 2013, 07:08AMEven with the smallest leadpipe the horn plays big. I'm talking about changing the tuning slide.

I tried someone's 3B on Monday and I really liked the compact feel.  It didn't play quite as smoothly as my Shires, but I loved the sound and I'm sure I could make it work in virtually any commercial/big band situation.

I'm actually considering getting a 3b or maybe even a 2b.

Our horns do play and feel bigger than King instruments.  I think our small bore tenor trombones are feel much more like a  Williams or Conn 6H/48H (which feel bigger than King 3B's as well.

The tuning slide focuses the feel on the back side of the horn.  For me, this works amazingly well and most of our small bore horns are now sold with an SY1.0 or SY1.5 tuning slide.

There is also our other model: the Michael Davis.  This trombone has a lot more in common with the King feel.  I would try one of these if you ever have a chance.  I think you'd be very surprised (pleasantly).

Quote from: wgwbassbone on Dec 12, 2013, 05:35AMHey Jeff,
I'm sure you want an answer from Ben but I can share a great experience I had with Ben and a Shires small bore versus vintage small bore comparison. Ben and I worked together last year on a show where he played lead on his custom Shires small bore and I played on a nice old Bach 16M.  Ben sounded great and we had a great time working together. One thing that I noticed and we spoke about at length was the fact that his Shires had a much larger sound than the Bach. In the end I made it balance and work out but I know I was definitely working harder than I should because of what I was playing. I'm not sure that a smaller pipe will make the horn sound like a 2B, etc.. I think the horns just have a bigger sound no matter what pipe or mouthpiece one uses. Good or bad??? You make the call. I love the sound I get on the 16M and it's perfect for my needs. If I played in a section on tenor where everyone was using a Shires or similar instrument I might have to consider getting one. But I don't so I won't.

That was a lot of fun, Bill!  Yous sounded great (and made me sound a lot better than I deserved to)!!!

The other thing about "size of sound" and large feel that I have learned since then has to do with bell weight, especially on the small bores.  Our medium weight horns sound and feel a lot more focused than our lightweight horns with everything else being equal.  (The horn I was playing on the show, while only .485, had a very lightweight bell with our T7 treatment).  This won't necessarily make the sound smaller int he hall, but it can focus things a good deal.  The trade off is that heavier bells have less of a tonal palette and do not respond quite as quickly as a lightweight bell. 

Bell size also has a radical effect on the size of sound.  The sound and feel difference between 7.5", 7.75" and 8" bells is quite honestly astounding.  I never would have believed it until I played them all back to back.

I don't think our horns have ever felt as small as a tight 2B, but between the myriad of options we can get a much more compact feeling trombone than the one you may have now, Mahlerbone.

-Ben

[ttf_Matt K]

Are there generalizations about the differences between 7, 7.5, and the 8" bells-all else being equal?

[ttf_Mahlerbone]

My current setup is a T00NLW slide and an 8" 1YM bell with whatever standard tuning slide they sold with it a decade ago.

[ttf_sabutin]

Quote from: Matt K on Dec 12, 2013, 10:33AMAre there generalizations about the differences between 7, 7.5, and the 8" bells-all else being equal?



Well first of all...it's 7.5", 7.75" and 8" bells. That being said...

I have messed around w/the various sizes on a number of horns, and the only differences/commonalities I can hear and feel that are common among all of those sizes on sub-.525 bore horns are these:

The 7.5" bells get bright very early in the dynamic range...a little too early for my tastes...and the attacks and articulations are quite pointed. I didn't think that they were projecting very well, either. However, some of that can be ameliorated by alloy and weight choices.

The 7.75" bells are very well balanced for the kind of playing that I most do...acoustic playing at volume w/projection and good, solid attack characteristics. Really middle of the road, but it's a good road.

The 8" bells are...lush. Gorgeous sounding, I think. Maybe not quite so forceful as an equivalent 7.75" nor quite as projecting, but for anything that doesn't require gorillaing the horn they are more than adequate. For solo work, refined lead playing or blending on inside parts with big-sound sections...very, very nice.

I have settled on an 8" bell with my .485 slide and a 7.75" bell with my .500 bore. The different bore sizes kind of pull the bells back to a magic middle ground, only the .485 is so easy to play with some refinement in the upper register...refined but not weak...that I find myself more and more going with that horn. Of course...the two bells are different models as well, and each has its place.

My 2 cents, adjusted for re-inflation...

S.

[ttf_griffinben]

Quote from: sabutin on Dec 12, 2013, 03:40PMWell first of all...it's 7.5", 7.75" and 8" bells. That being said...

I have messed around w/the various sizes on a number of horns, and the only differences/commonalities I can hear and feel that are common among all of those sizes on sub-.525 bore horns are these:

The 7.5" bells get bright very early in the dynamic range...a little too early for my tastes...and the attacks and articulations are quite pointed. I didn't think that they were projecting very well, either. However, some of that can be ameliorated by alloy and weight choices.

The 7.75" bells are very well balanced for the kind of playing that I most do...acoustic playing at volume w/projection and good, solid attack characteristics. Really middle of the road, but it's a good road.

The 8" bells are...lush. Gorgeous sounding, I think. Maybe not quite so forceful as an equivalent 7.75" nor quite as projecting, but for anything that doesn't require gorillaing the horn they are more than adequate. For solo work, refined lead playing or blending on inside parts with big-sound sections...very, very nice.

I have settled on an 8" bell with my .485 slide and a 7.75" bell with my .500 bore. The different bore sizes kind of pull the bells back to a magic middle ground, only the .485 is so easy to play with some refinement in the upper register...refined but not weak...that I find myself more and more going with that horn. Of course...the two bells are different models as well, and each has its place.

My 2 cents, adjusted for re-inflation...

S.
Quote from: Matt K on Dec 12, 2013, 10:33AMAre there generalizations about the differences between 7, 7.5, and the 8" bells-all else being equal?



Its all personal!

In general, the 7.5" bells are the most focused, 7.75" are the middle of the road (the Goldielocks bell, it seems), and the 8" have the broadest sound.  Which works best for you depends entirely on your own musical voice.

Sam has a very strong musical voice (and is a very strong player!), and his findings do not surprise me at all.

Most people tend to gravitate toward the 7.75" bell; it really can do a bit of everything.  It does what most people would expect of a King 3B or Conn 6H bell.  I never would have believed it if I hadn't played them all back to back in several different combinations myself.

The 7.5" definitely can project.  I used this bell size on my small bore for many, many years and nobody ever complained about the projection.  Different strokes for different folks.

The 8" bell is definitely bigger in size and scope.  It can be lush if you are the right player for it.  It sounds bigger to my ears than a King 3B or 6H (not as focused).  It seems to have more in common with a great 78H bell.  So you can have that sound in a smaller bore, easier to accelerate package.

I hope that helps.

Ben

[ttf_sabutin]

Quote from: griffinben on Dec 13, 2013, 08:26AM---snip---

The 7.5" definitely can project.  I used this bell size on my small bore for many, many years and nobody ever complained about the projection.  Different strokes for different folks.
Yup. I never actually took a 7.5" bell home to try on gigs, so I am only going on what I heard and felt at the factory.

QuoteThe 8" bell is definitely bigger in size and scope.  It can be lush if you are the right player for it.  It sounds bigger to my ears than a King 3B or 6H (not as focused).  It seems to have more in common with a great 78H bell.  So you can have that sound in a smaller bore, easier to accelerate package.
A 78H bell...that's kind of what you were hearing when I played it at that rehearsal w/the .508 slide and Clarke L m'pce and you said I could use it in a symphony, right? I can see that...probably why I like that combo so much...back to my high school roots w/ a red brass '30s 78H Special and a 6.5 AL m'pce. But that same 8" 7LW bell w/ a great Mt. Vernon 12C and the .485 slide acts and sounds more like whatever Urbie Green was playing on those amazing Command big band records...rumored to be a 3B bell on a 2B slide w/some sort of 12C-size m'pce. Big but centered. He would have loved it. I do.

Later...

S.

[ttf_GetzenBassPlayer]

I sat next to a player who bought a large bore f attachment tenor horn from you, Ben, about 8 months ago. She Says she loves the upper register but is struggling with the in staff register and lower. She does have some difficulty projecting in the staff, although I thought her sound was nice. I suggested she call you, as you seem to be very knowledgeable in leadpipe mouthpiece selections and their effect. I hope she did. Is there some other leadpipes you would suggest for a person to try who is looking to gain more presence in the staff without sacrificing a lot in the upper register?

[ttf_griffinben]

Quote from: GetzenBassPlayer on Dec 13, 2013, 06:10PMI sat next to a player who bought a large bore f attachment tenor horn from you, Ben, about 8 months ago. She Says she loves the upper register but is struggling with the in staff register and lower. She does have some difficulty projecting in the staff, although I thought her sound was nice. I suggested she call you, as you seem to be very knowledgeable in leadpipe mouthpiece selections and their effect. I hope she did. Is there some other leadpipes you would suggest for a person to try who is looking to gain more presence in the staff without sacrificing a lot in the upper register?

I certainly hope she does call or email!  I haven't heard anything yet but please relay that we are happy to help.

Regarding what leadpipes (or anything, for that matter) will work better is impossible to diagnose without more information.  It could also be any number of other things (tuning slide and/or mouthpiece) spring readily to mind.  It is also highly individual; what works for one person will not work for the next. 

The important thing is to find an instrument that balances with the way you play.

Ben

[ttf_TromboneMonkey]

Heya Ben,

Per a question I had in another thread-- I was wondering if there were many players who opt for the unlacquered bell on their horns, specifically on large bore axes. It seems like a rarity, and I'm not sure if that's because of the maintenance involved or if it's because players generally prefer the sound of lacquered horns?

[ttf_sabutin]

Quote from: TromboneMonkey on Dec 16, 2013, 08:29PMHeya Ben,

Per a question I had in another thread-- I was wondering if there were many players who opt for the unlacquered bell on their horns, specifically on large bore axes. It seems like a rarity, and I'm not sure if that's because of the maintenance involved or if it's because players generally prefer the sound of lacquered horns?


I don't know about "how many," but I personally have never had a horn that didn't get better when I took the lacquer off of the bell or bell section. I recently did it again w/a small bore Shires 7LW bell that I liked a great deal except for its projection characteristics. The very first gig I did w/it...Mike Longo's Funk Band at the Baha'i Center in NYC, a venue that I must have played over well 100 times and a very hard room to hear the trombone onstage (no mike or monitors to speak of but a fairly small room...say 100 seats)...I clearly heard it coming off of the back wall at mf and above. That's my test. In a room I know, if I can hear it of the back wall I know it's getting out there. The horn seemed a tiny bit quicker to respond as well, and attacks seemed just a little more pronounced with the same effort and input. I no longer own a horn that has lacquer on it although I have gold-plated or gold/silver-plated several horns with great success. (I only do that if a horn is too aggressive-sounding after the lacquer is off.)

Just sayin'...

My sound tends toward relative darkness no matter how small or large the equipment I am playing may be, so maybe I need help in that department. You are asking about large bore horns which might mean you are working primarily in Western European-style orchestral settings. I can't say much about that scene simply because about 99.9% of what I do is in other idioms, but when I bring my unlacquered basses, .547s or .525s into those kinds of situations they always seem to sound fairly appropriate. Maintenance? A cinch. I use something called "Simichrome." Easy to use, lasts for a long while. It can be easily found online. I only polish them when I'm doing a fancy gig, though. Mostly, audiences are supposed to listen to me, not stare and make fashion statements. Good thing, too, 'cuz I'm not very shiny myself. 

Later...

S

[ttf_TromboneMonkey]

Quote from: sabutin on Dec 17, 2013, 07:23AM


 You are asking about large bore horns which might mean you are working primarily in Western European-style orchestral settings. I can't say much about that scenen simply because about 99.9% of what I do is in other idioms, but when I bring my unlacquered basses, .547s or .525s into those kinds of situations they always seem to sound fairly appropriate. Maintenance?

Good stuff, I appreciate the input Sam!  Actually like you I almost never play in orchestral settings... I recently grabbed a Williams 4 that happens to be unlacquered and (having never preferred unlacquered horns before) absolutely fell in love with its playing characteristics.  I played Doug's lacquered one for a minute and liked it, but not as much. 

I'm in the market for a large bore, and I'm interested to know if the unlacquered option is worthy of consideration since I like my smaller horn without!   

[ttf_Matt K]

I'm the opposite of Sam, I naturally have a relatively bright tone, yet I still find unlacquered bells to be better. I've found it's much better to darken your sound with a different component, and I've had great success doing so with the material of the slide tubes. I have a TW47G and a T0825GLW now that do a fantastic job of darkening my sound to the point where I have a passable classical tone, which I can say that about very few horns. I also like the way those play better with seamed tuning slides. They seem to project better. 

[ttf_griffinben]

Quote from: TromboneMonkey on Dec 16, 2013, 08:29PMHeya Ben,

Per a question I had in another thread-- I was wondering if there were many players who opt for the unlacquered bell on their horns, specifically on large bore axes. It seems like a rarity, and I'm not sure if that's because of the maintenance involved or if it's because players generally prefer the sound of lacquered horns?

Few people specifically ask for their horns/bells to be un-lacquered.

I personally haven't done a bunch of A-B testing of un-lacquered vs. lacquered horns; my feeling in my limited experience is that some of it is subjective but that there's some truth to it on specific horns/bells.  I think you need to be a very sensitive player to perceive some of the differences.  But I am ready to have my mind changed any time!

A lot of times when people do things to a horn they notice big differences because they haven't done maintenance in a while and all of a sudden a horn gets cleaned up (inside and out).  Sometimes other things get sorted out too, like dents or alignment issues.  Suddenly it's: "Hey, this plays great!  Must be that I removed the lacquer!"

But, if the players feels there is a difference and is happy, then that's all that matters.  Because you'll be happy with the instrument and the sound/response/whatever-else and stop thinking about the horn and concentrate on the art of making music, which is why we're all here (I hope!).

That's my experience, at least.
Ben

[ttf_Bassbonebuster]

When it comes to valves, especially bass trombone, what do players most often use as their deciding factor? Hype, cosmetics, sound, blow, throw, etc... all seem to be factors with friends of mine. With Alessi's new model, Markey's independent prototype, and Pagano's dependent prototype all having rotax rotors from Edwards, I wonder if we'll see a resurgence in tradition rotors. Have you noticed any resurgence in the traditional rotor at Shires?

[ttf_griffinben]

Quote from: Bassbonebuster on Dec 17, 2013, 10:46AMWhen it comes to valves, especially bass trombone, what do players most often use as their deciding factor? Hype, cosmetics, sound, blow, throw, etc... all seem to be factors with friends of mine. With Alessi's new model, Markey's independent prototype, and Pagano's dependent prototype all having rotax rotors from Edwards, I wonder if we'll see a resurgence in tradition rotors. Have you noticed any resurgence in the traditional rotor at Shires?

For most people, sound is the number one priority.  Though a lot of people move away from axial valves because of the long throw, so I would say performance is second on the list.

We've seen more interest in rotary valves on tenor trombone, not as much on basses.  (That said, we are very interested in developing a Dual-Bore Valve set for bass trombone.  When I know more, you will too.)  Its still has a long way to go to catch up to axial valves, but there is more interest than a few years ago.  But I think that's because of sound, not because others are doing it. 

Thanks,
Ben

[ttf_ChadA]

Regarding bass valves, I moved from Shires independent axials to Shires independent rotors some time ago and have been very happy.  With the combination of other things I have (dual bore slide, big mouthpiece, C tuning crook), it was actually too open with the axials, which some people may believe is impossible.    The horn is easier to play with no loss of size of sound according to my colleagues.  It's a more efficient instrument now and I my chop endurance has gone up since I switched.  I should mention I do a lot of orchestral playing and some chamber music as well (among other things).  Overall I have a very versatile horn now, and it's easy to play.

And, yeah, maintenance is much easier (less oiling, more consistent performance day-to-day), the valves are lighter, and the throw is shorter on both. 

[ttf_Bassbonebuster]

A number of years ago, a gentleman at the Arkansas All-State had some Shires trombones with two tone bells. I have not seen them since. Did that catch on or fizzle out?