78H vs 36G

[johntarr]

I’m curious as to how a 78H compares with a 36G. What are some of the general differences, how does the valve register compare.

Thanks in advance for any descriptions,

John

[Burgerbob]

So, 79H vs 36BG?

[johntarr]

So, 79H vs 36BG?

I once owned a 36G, writing “G” was an unconscious error. I meant the 36B, but of course if anyone wants to include the “G” as well that would also be interesting.

Thanks for pointing that out.

[DougHulme]

I think Aiden was also pointing out the 78 does not have a valve, the 79 does.

[BGuttman]

I had a 79H and now have a 36CG. The 79H was a nice horn, The 36CG (with LT slide) is a nice horn. The 79H has a somewhat lighter sound than the 36. I would hesitate to call either one "better". In my orchestra with two other Bach trombones the 36 blended better. But it's a very specific instance. I would simply test out both horns and choose the one (actually given the profusion of options on the 36, test several flavors of 36) and choose what seems best to you.

[hyperbolica]

78 has no valve 79 does. Completely different instruments. 78 plays like a big 6h, but can get crazy bright when you push it too hard. 79 is very nimble, flexible - the extra weight of the valve really tames it. It's a great solo, chamber music horn. 78/9h also has a pretty wide slide and is comfortable to play.

36x are also great, but maybe more orchestral type sound. Maybe not as light and nimble. Classic Bach vs Conn comparison. If you need repair or custom work it's easier to get parts for 36 because they are still made.

Other things to compare might be an 8h or 88h w/525 slide. 79h don't show up every day. 8h w/525 actually plays a little lighter than 79h. 88h is very versatile - it can take 562, 547 or 525 slides.

You can't go wrong with any of these options. As long as the horn is in good condition.

I'm a bit of a Conn 525 nut. I've owned 36b, and they are great instruments, but keep coming back to the Conns. I have 79h and 8/88h w525. If you hold a gun to my head and make me choose, I usually take the 79h. But if you want something currently in production, the 8/88 w525 is not a compromise.

After all that, your choice isn't any easier, but at least you know that you can't go wrong.

[Chatname]

I have both as well. The slide positions are quite different, related to the bell. For me, the intonation of the 78H took some time getting used to.
Regarding their capacity for orchestral playing, at least one great American orchestra was using Conn 78Hs still in the seventies (Met opera), so I would not exclude them from being useful in orchestras. I use my 78H at work (symphony orchestra) sometimes, as did my predecessor.
I also use a wonderful Bach 36 regularly.
Both Bach 36 and Conn 78H are fantastic instruments.

[Trav1s]

I've played both - Started on a Bach 36B that I purchased new in the fall of 1986. Played it through college then sold it to a family member. I then purchased it from him and sold it in 2004 when I went to grad school. It was what one would expect from a Bach horn at that time.

After borrowing 72H and playing it like a large tenor, I was on the hunt for a 79H. I finally found my '69 79H in January of 2006 and was fully converted to Conns. I'd say it is a bit lighter in sound than a 36B but is more flexible, easier to color, and not as quirky as the Bachs I have played. I still have it and upgraded to a Rotax valve while making minimal changes to the rest of the horn. I'm thrilled with the end results and would love to do the same with an 88H of the same vintage.

As for the 78H, I have owned several - a 1964 and a 1965- nice horns but did not have the sound presence that the 79H has. They would brighten up and bark really quick and do feel like a large 6h - that's not a bad thing.

I've swapped slides and bells around and the '69 79H slide is where the magic is... but I'm not sure what it is. It does have more mass to it but I have not weighted it.

I'd seriously consider a SL525 slide and the 8HT or 88HT if I were looking for a new horn.

[Thrawn22]

I’m curious as to how a 78H compares with a 36G. What are some of the general differences, how does the valve register compare.

Thanks in advance for any descriptions,

John

While yes, the 78H doesn't have a valve, a comparison can still be made.

I have both, at least bell section wise, both models in question. I had John Sandhagen adapt the 36BG bell section to my dual bore Conn slide. For me, And as described by others, the Bach bell seems to be more focused than the Conn. There is weight difference despite h the valve. The 78H bells (since i have two) are easier to play for me. Having played a few 36s before getting my first 78H, the Bachs had a wider color spectrum than the Conn, but the Conn had a cut that still can be classical. If you work a 78H it'll bark like a small bore, whereas the 36 will take a lot more effort to do the same.

[chromebone]

A 36 is .525, a 78h is a slightly smaller .522 bore.The bell throat is also wider on a 36. Maybe a more apt comparison for a 78 is the 34, which is a .522 bore.
Many principal players played 78/79 h’s and their variants in orchestras back in the day: Gordon Pulis, Simone Mantia, Per Brevig in his earlier years at the Met, Ed Herman…they can hold their own in an orchestral setting.

[CalgaryTbone]

Ed Herman played a 78H on rare occasions and I believe in some of his pre-NY Philharmonic years, but I'm pretty sure from the conversations that we had, his Philharmonic years were almost always on an 8H. Maybe in his very early years, but for sure .547 horns were the norm once they were in Avery Fisher and the acoustics were an issue.

Jim Scott

[dukesboneman]

I played a 78H for about 25 years (had 3) hen I switched to a 36.
The 78H`s always felt a little Lighter and maybe a little more nimble
The 36`s played darker and bigger. The projection is broader on the 36
The 78H`s felt more like a Big small horn
where the 36`s felt more like a smaller big horn
I love them both for different reasons
I`m considering getting another 78H

[tbonesullivan]

I wonder if the LT36B with the "Lightweight" nickel silver outer slide would be a bit more "nimble" than a standard 36B. Haven't really got a chance to A/B them much.

Pretty sure I'm going to sell my Yamaha YSL-640, which just plays TOO BIG with the 8 1/2" bell and HUGE tuning slide, which is actually larger in diameter than a Bach 42 tuning slide.

[johntarr]

78 has no valve 79 does. Completely different instruments. 78 plays like a big 6h, but can get crazy bright when you push it too hard. 79 is very nimble, flexible - the extra weight of the valve really tames it. It's a great solo, chamber music horn. 78/9h also has a pretty wide slide and is comfortable to play.

How does the 79h play in the valve register? Are Eb - C below the staff useable notes?

[hyperbolica]

79h is solid down low. Mouthpiece and player dependent of course. Eb under the staff is very usable. C below the staff would be pretty sharp.

[BGuttman]

79h is solid down low. Mouthpiece and player dependent of course. Eb under the staff is very usable. C below the staff would be pretty sharp.

My 79H had a slightly longer slide and it made low C a bit more in tune. Still, T6 on an F-attachment is really far out on the slide; you need really long arms to get there.

[hyperbolica]

The 79h also has a long pull on the f attachment, you could probably get down to a usable C if you make use of that. The horn is capable of sounding good down there.
It's not George Roberts kind of sound, but it sounds good.

Plus, it's a small shank mouthpiece receiver, which is a limitation, but you can get big mouthpieces on a small shank.

[BGuttman]

Let's face it. A 79H is not a 72H, even though they may look pretty similar. It's not a true bass trombone. It's a medium bore tenor with an F-attachment. As such it performs rather well. But if you need a full bass trombone for the part, the 79H (or the 36B for that matter) will not quite fill the bill.

[johntarr]

Other things to compare might be an 8h or 88h w/525 slide. 79h don't show up every day. 8h w/525 actually plays a little lighter than 79h. 88h is very versatile - it can take 562, 547 or 525 slides.

You can't go wrong with any of these options. As long as the horn is in good condition.

I'm a bit of a Conn 525 nut. I've owned 36b, and they are great instruments, but keep coming back to the Conns. I have 79h and 8/88h w525. If you hold a gun to my head and make me choose, I usually take the 79h. But if you want something currently in production, the 8/88 w525 is not a compromise.

After all that, your choice isn't any easier, but at least you know that you can't go wrong.

If you were to get an 88H with a 525 slide, would you look for an Elkhart bell section or a more recent one? Does Conn make the 525 slides now?

Thanks

[hyperbolica]

Personally I'd get Elkhart. The new stuff is good, but you have to get the T(thin) version to have the most Elkhart ish feel. .

I believe you can still get new sl2525 slides. They show up used from time to time too.

[OneTon]

I wonder if the LT36B with the "Lightweight" nickel silver outer slide would be a bit more "nimble" than a standard 36B. Haven't really got a chance to A/B them much.

I have had a 78H, 88H, 42B, and currently own an LT42G, LT42AG, and 79H. I will probably get my hands on a LT36BG at some point. After I had sold off everything including a 42B, I was moving overseas and bought a Bach LT42G without playing it. When I did play it, it was a match for me. The 78H, 79H, and 88H are more nimble than the large bore Bach trombones. The 79H gets a bit bright and
splashy above high Bb. I anticipate that a LT36BG will get more even timbre from top to bottom.

My experience with the large bore Bach trombones is that the slide feels quicker and requires slightly different synchronization with the tongue. The brass slides warm up the sound. I like the quicker action of the lighter weight slide and the sound I get with the Bach gold brass bells. It is an individual preference. The only way for me to know is to play them, preferably at a gig or rehearsal.

If I really want nimble for chamber music, I would play a
79H or 88H, or perhaps even an LT6. A Bach LT36BG would always do the work and perhaps meet with better acceptance from other performers or the conductor.

[tbonesullivan]

If I really want nimble for chamber music, I would play a 79H or 88H, or perhaps even an LT6. A Bach LT36BG would always do the work and perhaps meet with better acceptance from other performers or the conductor.

Well, I did pick up a Bach LT36B, yellow brass bell, and so far I'm really liking it compared to a standard all yellow brass 42BOF and 42T. It plays more compact, but I can get a warm sound on it, probably due to decades playing a King 3b.

I have considered getting a copper tuning slide to warm up the sound a bit, but that's in the future for now, and only if if I like how one of those affects the sound of my 42BOF.