TromboneChat

Sneak preview of my first prototype 3D-printed tenor sackbut. The bell is a copy of one made in 1594 in Nürnberg by Altötting Schnitzer - at least if the measurements in the sources I found are correct.



The bell is black PLA. The slide is carbon fiber with PLA stockings. A=440 with the tuning slide a bit out, a tuning slide to change it to A=415 or 430 is easily made.
As you can see it has some modern design features like a tuning slide, a rather wide bell section, two round stays and a gooseneck.

After I make some fixes I will probably release it open source for non-commercial use (so don't make then sell them without permission from me, but make one for yourself or a friend- go ahead!). Since sackbuts are rather expensive, this could be a decent alternative - you can make one for around €70, with the carbon fiber tubes being the majority of the cost. Or perhaps I could sell an assemble yourself kit version?

It plays easily and sounds good, the  intonation is good enough, and it sounds and plays ok at least from low F to high C - I haven't tested higher or lower yet.

It needs some small fixes. And my next step is a period mouthpiece that replaces the pictured modern mouthpiece and leadpipe. After I made that I'll post a recording/video, or perhaps I can get a historic trombone playing friend to record it.

This still has a few things that are inaccurate, mostly the 12mm bore slide should be smaller - I used a slide I had made earlier for a small modern trombone. Part of the bell section bore before it starts to flare is a bit of a guess. If anyone here with renaissance sackbut reproductions based on a similar instrument wants to share some bore measurements of their slide and of various points of their bell section, that would be helpful!

Really nice.  Maybe it plays OK even with the "oversize" slide.  Certainly makes economic sence for a hacker like me.

Wonder if I could get the bell to fit my 1910 model "The King" trombone slide -- that's much closer.

Quote from: BGuttman on Yesterday at 01:53 PMReally nice.  Maybe it plays OK even with the "oversize" slide.  Certainly makes economic sence for a hacker like me.

Wonder if I could get the bell to fit my 1910 model "The King" trombone slide -- that's much closer.

I can easily make and upload several slide receiver designs. Get callipers and measure the diameter of both ends of the bell connector on your slide, plus the length. Then send me a message with the measurements. Preferably at 0.1mm accuracy.

Is that "The King" trombone stamped medium bore? In that case it should be about the same size slide as I used. With small modern trombone I meant a 7 inch really small bore trombone I would use 10 or 11mm for the next one.

I must say I'm not entirely sure I see the point of playing a historical trombone that is 3-D printed (kind of drastically goes against the idea, no?), but then again, the 3D-printed cornetti are fairly successful, so what do I know!

Couple things about your instrument specifically though. You say

Quote from: Pieter on Jul 19, 2017, 01:48PM The bell is a copy of one made in 1594 in Nürnberg by Altötting Schnitzer - at least if the measurements in the sources I found are correct.
There is no such instrument (or maker, for that matter). Altötting is the name of a Bavarian town where a trombone by Anton Schnitzer was found (or more accurately, rediscovered - as it had been on display for quite some time, unnoticed by scholars for decades). Moreover, the trombone found in Altötting is dated 1576 (the garland engraving reads "MACHT ANTONI SCHNITZER A MDLXXVI")

There is in fact a Schnitzer trombone dated 1594, but that one is in Edinburgh. Neither of those two instruments have a decorative ball on the bell like yours does, however. The only Schnitzer trombone that has one (actually, the only trombone of any maker, AFAIK) is a third instrument, which is date 1579 and is in Verona (Egger makes a copy of that one). Not that it makes a huge difference, as far as I know, all four known Schnitzer trombone bells have the same basic shape and taper (inconsistencies in fabrication methods and ulterior alterations notwithstanding). But I'm just confused about which instrument it is you're copying.

Anyway, all four of them have the bell in 4th position, not 3rd, and all have only one (flat and hinged) bell brace (as is typical on most trombones until at least a couple centuries later). I don't see why you want a wider bell section - the reason modern instruments are wider is because the larger bell flare requires that space. I wouldn't make it wider than the original. I also wouldn't make the bell ferrule into a ball - it's not on the original, probably doesn't change the horn and just looks kind of silly, especially if you leave the other one in. In fact you probably don't need that ferrule at all since I assume the bell itself is printed as one piece?

A few purists will disagree, but I don't have an issue with tuning slides. Most of us have one on our instruments; many, many aspects of modern day to day Historically informed performance are not historic at all and require a flexibility on tuning that they didn't necessarily need in their day-to-day playing. Is that thing in the back a counterweight? I would suggest making a version without it. There is no need for a counterweight on a sackbut as it *should* be nose-heavy (especially with the historical longer bell) and be played somewhat towards the ground. Easthetically, it kind of ruins the beauty and purity in the simplicity of the design of the sackbut.

For the bell measurements, it's hard to tell from a picture and without knowing the numbers you used, but at first sight, it looks like it might be too flared (either the end of the flare gets too wide, or the taper is wrong). But it might just as well be correct - as I said, hard to tell, also the absence of a garland can fool the eye.


There is a very detailed article in the Historic Brass Society Journal by Hannes Vereecke on the 1579 Verona trombone, which includes quite a few useful measurements (among other things, it has a graph of the taper of the entire bell, and measurements of wall thickness of every part of the instrument). Initial bore of the slide is 10mm.
http://www.historicbrass.org/Portals/0/Documents/Journal/2011/HBSJ_2011_JL01_002_Vereecke_NN1.pdf


It is also possible to order full-scale technical drawings of the 1594 instrument from Edinburgh.

I am in the run but I will be back, very intersestin as a tryout! The Altötting Schnitzer trombone is a famous one, Altötting is the town Schnitzer is the maker, have to run now.

Maximilian, all of Pieter's trombones have 2 joints in the bell section.  I believe he has to print it in sections.  Trumpets of the period use balls on the joints and he probably thought it would look more appropriate than a pipe joint.

You also won't be able to print a trombone with the thinness of a vintage brass instrument.  At lest not and have it withstand even the handling of normal playing.

I believe the "thing" in the tuning slide crook is simply for strength.  Also, the tuning slide seems to be the same or similar to the one on his regular printed trombone.  He may have used the same one.

I think this is a great idea.  People have been making alphorns and serpents from PVC pipe.  For that matter, people have been making instruments from vegetables (I guess you can play your clarinet and eat it too ).

Quote from: BGuttman on Jul 28, 2017, 07:48AMMaximilian, all of Pieter's trombones have 2 joints in the bell section.  I believe he has to print it in sections.  Trumpets of the period use balls on the joints and he probably thought it would look more appropriate than a pipe joint.


Except that's not true about trumpets, as the balls are most often not covering a joint. They were used for decorative and acoustical purposes and usually put in the middle of a one-piece bell, or very often, in the middle of one of the straight yards. The ball on the Verona Schnitzer trombone, for instance, does not cover a joint.

[s]But I get the point. In this case where they serve to hide the joint, I would recommend keeping the second one (closer to the flare) ball-shaped and just making the other one look like a sleeve (which is what they used). The bell would then look like the Verona bell. Of course that's all purely esthetical. [/s]

EDIT : Never mind, I just saw the pictures of the modern trombone and saw that is just the way you print joints in general - I wrongly assumed it had to do with trying to make it look like a sackbut because one of the Schnitzer instrument has that. Don't listen to me.

Quote from: BGuttman on Jul 28, 2017, 07:48AMYou also won't be able to print a trombone with the thinness of a vintage brass instrument.  At lest not and have it withstand even the handling of normal playing.

Of course. I was just mentioning it as it happens to be one of the data sets the article provide, and it's rather interesting to see the combination of different thicknesses of brass used by Schnitzer, most probably very intentionally (for instance, while the basic wall thickness is 0.3mm, the neck pipe is made of 0.5mm brass, and the bends 0.75mm - the neck pipe data being the really interesting part here)

Anyhow; I'd be very curious to try it!

http://www.historicbrass.org/portals/0/documents/journal/2007/hbsj_2007_jl01_002_martiusraquet_3759.pdf

If you are intersting of the Altötting Schnitzer trombone

The 3D printed sackbut is a start, yea! Looking forward to next try.

Cool Pieter, digging you projects! You ought to try a BBb dual-slide contrabass next 

Cool Pieter, digging you projects! You ought to try a BBb dual-slide contrabass next