Conn 88H vs. 8H

Post Reply
GLT
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2023 8:52 pm

Conn 88H vs. 8H

Post by GLT »

I am a long-time King 3B player but a year or so ago I acquired a 1972 Conn 88H and am enjoying it a lot. However, I hardly ever use the trigger and would be interested in hearing from those of you who have used both the 88H and 8H without the trigger. How do they compare? Thanks for your feedback!
User avatar
Burgerbob
Posts: 5358
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 8:10 pm
Location: LA
Contact:

Re: Conn 88H vs. 8H

Post by Burgerbob »

A good 8H is very, very good. If I were an orchestra principal and I knew a work was not going to need a valve, I might consider owning one... but that valve comes in handy a little too much for me to consider ever getting one.
Aidan Ritchie, LA area player and teacher
hyperbolica
Posts: 3243
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 7:31 am

Re: Conn 88H vs. 8H

Post by hyperbolica »

I've got both. The 8h is obviously a little lighter. I think its also a little harder to hold unless you have big hands. The bell brace is further back than the trigger on the 88h. I use my 8h for first parts in the orchestra.

There's also some variation from horn to horn that will depend on the life each has lived. For example if the bell has been repaired or removed, or there's some tension in the bell section, etc.

I play mine with 525 slides, but they are all great instruments.
User avatar
although
Posts: 67
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2019 4:02 am

Re: Conn 88H vs. 8H

Post by although »

Yeah, that bell brace on the 8H is remarkably far back. I actually pop my neotech grip on it to make it a more comfortable hold. My 8H is my first choice if the music will allow. Mostly I like it because it's light and low maintenance. It's got no bad habits and sounds like (I think) a big tenor ought to.

Cheers!
Thrawn22
Posts: 1360
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2018 10:18 pm

Re: Conn 88H vs. 8H

Post by Thrawn22 »

Older 8Hs (Elkhart era)are awkward to hold because of where the bell braces are located. The newer 8Hs I've played don't have that problem.

Comparing 88Hs and 8Hs is a bit like apples and oranges. With an 88H it's nice to have the option of the valve but not entirely necessary. I've always used an 8H and rarely finding myself wushing i had a valve for something. The valve can also cause some stuffiness in the horn compared to the straight bell. In the end it really matters what you want.
6H (K series)
Elkhart 60s' 6H bell/5H slide
78H (K series)
8H (N series bell w/ modern slide)
88HN
71H (dependant valves)
72H bell section (half moon)
35H alto (K series)
Boneyard custom .509 tenor
timbone
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2018 12:14 pm

Re: Conn 88H vs. 8H

Post by timbone »

Most players miss the opportunity to play a straight .547 and in this case a Conn8H. I own both and frankly an elkhart bell unfettered by a valve is probably the most true trombone sound and feel. Its okay to go without your training wheels lol, the value of a straight trombone will show itself in its tone and playability,and oftentimes, they can be had on the cheap!
User avatar
Matt K
Verified
Posts: 4435
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2018 10:34 pm
Contact:

Re: Conn 88H vs. 8H

Post by Matt K »

Burgerbob wrote: Tue Apr 04, 2023 12:14 pm A good 8H is very, very good. If I were an orchestra principal and I knew a work was not going to need a valve, I might consider owning one... but that valve comes in handy a little too much for me to consider ever getting one.
Totally agree. I think valves get a bad rap because it hasn't always been easy to find a tech to get them setup right... and of course some of the design issues with the most popular F attachment instruments, particularly throughout the 70s-90s. The alignment really has to be spot on, but a well-designed rotor that is aligned, and assembled with minimal stress, I find that the difference is really not that great and provides such enormous utility. Especially as someone with short arms :shuffle: But for orchestral playing, especially principal, the extra weight is not necessary and that is really nice. Although the more I think about it, I wonder if I were doing a lot of principal orchestral playing if I wouldn't default to a G attachment. It's almost as light as a straight horn and provides utility even in the middle registers.
User avatar
spencercarran
Posts: 661
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2020 1:02 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Conn 88H vs. 8H

Post by spencercarran »

Matt K wrote: Wed Apr 05, 2023 9:28 amAlthough the more I think about it, I wonder if I were doing a lot of principal orchestral playing if I wouldn't default to a G attachment. It's almost as light as a straight horn and provides utility even in the middle registers.
The more I play my F/G/Eb indy bass, the more I resent the F tuning on my tenor. G is much, much more useful in the middle register, and it's not like you need C2 in any sensibly-orchestrated tenor trombone parts.
User avatar
Matt K
Verified
Posts: 4435
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2018 10:34 pm
Contact:

Re: Conn 88H vs. 8H

Post by Matt K »

Yeah. I was thinking about having my 500/525 pitched in G but for soloing, I use the low range a lot so I'm conflicted about it. When I win the lottery, I'll have someone make me a set of indy hagmanns for my 607F project :lol:
pjanda1
Posts: 134
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2021 8:43 pm

Re: Conn 88H vs. 8H

Post by pjanda1 »

I've got two Elkhart 8Hs right now. I've had and sold two Elkhart 88Hs. Of them, I thought one was pretty good, but it was not nearly as good as either 8H. They are not the same thing just with or without a valve. For me, absent the rotor, my 8Hs feel much more open, much more focused, and are much better at dynamic extremes than an 88H with a conventional rotor.

I've been pondering an extended rant about how bad conventional rotors are. I grew up with a Thayer (Edwards) and have very limited tolerance for any of them, with the possible exception of my bass, likely because as a tenor player, the change in response and feel is not as apparent. And a 1934 TIS 70H is sort of a different beast, regardless.

At least good Elkhart 88Hs can be tolerable. By contrast, I've never played a Bach with a conventional valve that I could stand. And just today, I was trying to explain in a gentle way how much I hate a colleague's King 3BF as compared to, well, nearly any straight small tenor I've played, student horns included.

I've got a franken-Conn with an instrument Innovations valve. I plan to get it working better for when I need an F attachment. Or, there is also my old Edwards. And, I'm happier forcing the occasional false C/D/Eb on a straight horn than having a valve and having literally every other note play worse.

The hand grip on 8Hs is not ergonomically great because of the bell brace location. My hands aren't small, but I can't use an 8H at length without a Wise grip.

I think everybody owes it to themselves to try a straight large tenor (though maybe not, say, a straight Edwards that doesn't have, IMO, a full seventh position). But if folks keep ignoring these great horns, that just leaves more of them for the rest of us. My newest acquisition, a Holton TR-156 (really a 256, as I understand it), will be here in a few days. So, ignore me and let those prices stay low!

Paul
craign
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2022 10:51 am

Re: Conn 88H vs. 8H

Post by craign »

pjanda1 wrote: Wed Apr 05, 2023 9:00 pm My newest acquisition, a Holton TR-156 (really a 256, as I understand it), will be here in a few days. So, ignore me and let those prices stay low!
The one that was on eBay this week? That was tempting.
craign
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2022 10:51 am

Re: Conn 88H vs. 8H

Post by craign »

And I will add to the chorus that older 8H braces can be an awkward reach. I'm using a neotech on mine at the moment.
Post Reply

Return to “Instruments”