Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

WiltshireBone
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2020 3:05 am

Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by WiltshireBone »

I recently purchased a Vintage Elkhart Shires with Dual Bore valve, but after playing a little more at home I realised I really wasn't happy with the overall sound and articulation, so I returned the Trombone.

The Shires VE model really is a decent interpretation of the older Conn, but I'm really seeking out a Shires build that is close to the modern Gen 2 Conn 8/88, not the vintage model. I should add that a friend has a very good Elkhart original 8H and I still prefer the modern Conns to this.

The Gen 2 has a soldered rim, heavier weight (?) bell, and the different leadpipe to the older model. To me, it makes a slightly more open sound.

For reference, I play lead Trombone in brass bands and a number of orchestras.

Unfortunately in the UK, there aren't a lot of choices to try the different combinations, and travelling to the Shires workshop isn't practical right now - so as a starting point I'm trying to understand what the Shires best match to the Conn would be.

Do any fellow members have such a trombone? What thoughts do you have on build? I'm presuming a Vintage Elkhart model Shires but with a Gold brass (85% copper) soldered rim, medium or standard weight bell , perhaps 1G or 1GM would be the closest match, whilst keeping the other components the same.

Any pointers appreciated!

BTW - I have several Conns, and realise the Shires won't be an exact match.
User avatar
Matt K
Verified
Posts: 3944
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2018 10:34 pm
Contact:

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by Matt K »

I'd have probably tried to play with the lead pipes first but that may have pur you outside return window.

The 2RVeT7 is more in line with the Elkhart from what I understand (also what I play). But yeah if they make it, a 1GVE might be closer. Or an actual 88 bell and just get the mounting hardware.

While the X tuning slide is usually recommended for Bach builds, it also is likely to make it more in line with partials ypure used to as well as sound.

You can also get 88 leadpipes which might be a good thing to have on hand at the price they sell them for or a 3 or 2.5 leadpipe.

That all said... if you want a good playing gen 2... you could buy a gen 2 and if it doesn't suit you, have it totally rebuilt. Or do an M&W or Sawaday treatment of one. Possibly makes more sense than trying to make a Shires play like something else.
User avatar
harrisonreed
Posts: 4487
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2018 12:18 pm
Location: Fort Riley, Kansas
Contact:

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by harrisonreed »

There is no Shires equivalent of a Gen II 88H.
norbie2018
Posts: 892
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 6:10 am

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by norbie2018 »

I read your post and am wondering why you don't simply buy a Conn Gen 2. I am probably missing something, but it seems like that would fill your needs.
Last edited by norbie2018 on Sat Apr 04, 2020 8:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
GabrielRice
Posts: 979
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 7:20 am
Location: Boston, MA, USA
Contact:

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by GabrielRice »

I used to do this work for the Shires company.

I would suggest a 7GM or 7GLW bell. The X tuning slide is not a bad idea, but has to be considered as part of the whole package.

I've seen Gen II 88Hs with gold brass and yellow brass slide tubes. Which is your preference? Depending on the answer to that question, I would start with either a T47 or T47G slide.

The other thing I would consider, which might actually be a complete instrument you can find at a Shires dealer, is the Ralph Sauer model. I would hope to be able to try both the .525-.547 dual bore slide that comes with it and the T47 single bore option.
chromebone
Posts: 284
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2018 4:29 pm

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by chromebone »

norbie2018 wrote: Sat Apr 04, 2020 8:14 am I read your post and am wondering why you don't simply buy a Conn Gen 2. I am probably missing something, but it seems like that would fill your needs.
Play what you feel comfortable with. There are still lots of players playing 88H's, even high profile ones. Shires makes components that are "Conn like" that get you close, but they are not the exact same dimensions.
Just play an 88H and call it a day.
I'm sure Joe Alessi won't be mad at you.
castrubone
Posts: 225
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:55 am

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by castrubone »

Nothing I've ever tried by Shires plays even remotely close to an 88HO (or a vintage 88H for that matter). The Vintage Elkhart in particular is 100% nothing like any Conn I've ever played. Shires play like Shires. Buy a Conn and be happy (oh and save yourself a lot of money).
Posaunus
Posts: 3424
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 9:54 pm
Location: California

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by Posaunus »

castrubone wrote: Sat Apr 04, 2020 12:36 pm Nothing I've ever tried by Shires plays even remotely close to an 88HO (or a vintage 88H for that matter). The Vintage Elkhart in particular is 100% nothing like any Conn I've ever played. Shires play like Shires.
Actually, I've had the opportunity to play a very early Shires, owned by a friend in Massachusetts who knew Steve Shires when he was at Osmun Music and was just starting to make his own trombones. Apparently Steve's ideal then was to make an improved Conn 88H. In any case (at least from my brief tryout and fading memory), this early Shires trombone played like the best 88H I've ever encountered (and I thought that my late Ekhart 88H was great!). :good:
User avatar
Matt K
Verified
Posts: 3944
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2018 10:34 pm
Contact:

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by Matt K »

castrubone wrote: Sat Apr 04, 2020 12:36 pm Nothing I've ever tried by Shires plays even remotely close to an 88HO (or a vintage 88H for that matter). The Vintage Elkhart in particular is 100% nothing like any Conn I've ever played. Shires play like Shires. Buy a Conn and be happy (oh and save yourself a lot of money).
Not to be pedantic, but 100% is sufficiently lacking of any useful context as to be meaningless. Does that mean that a Yamaha 354 is also 100% nothing like a Elkhart Conn 88? Or does it mean that it would be 213.65% nothing like an Elkhart Conn? Or that an Edwards bass is 157% nothing like an Elkhart Conn? Or are all of them 100% nothing like a Conn? Surely the difference between an inline, heavyweight bass with Thayer valves is less different than the various Shires imitations of Conn 88.
norbie2018
Posts: 892
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 6:10 am

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by norbie2018 »

I'll be exact- for what it is worth: if you want an instrument to sound like a Conn just buy a Conn.
User avatar
BGuttman
Posts: 5891
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2018 7:19 am
Location: Cow Hampshire

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by BGuttman »

No reason for Shires (or Rath for that matter) to try to emulate a modern Conn 88H. Why pay more for an emulated Conn 88H? On the other hand, vintage Elkhart horns are no longer available and are popular among players. So Shires tried to emulate the Vintage Elkhart.
Bruce Guttman
Merrimack Valley Philharmonic Orchestra
"Almost Professional"
User avatar
Trav1s
Posts: 390
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2018 9:06 am
Location: Central Ohio

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by Trav1s »

What about a Latzsch SL-240

I played one at ITF and it was all that I liked about an Elkhart 88H and the GenII horns rolled into one.
Last edited by Trav1s on Sat Apr 04, 2020 7:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Travis B.
Trombone player since 1986 and Conn-vert since 2006
1961 24H - LT101/C+/D2
1969 79H - LT102/D/D4
1972 80H - Unicorn
Benge 165F LT102/F+/G8
Posaunus
Posts: 3424
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 9:54 pm
Location: California

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by Posaunus »

BGuttman wrote: Sat Apr 04, 2020 2:10 pm No reason for Shires to try to emulate a modern Conn 88H. Why pay more for an emulated Conn 88H? On the other hand, vintage Elkhart horns are no longer available and are popular among players. So Shires tried to emulate the Vintage Elkhart.
True, at least for early Shires trombones. :good:
User avatar
harrisonreed
Posts: 4487
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2018 12:18 pm
Location: Fort Riley, Kansas
Contact:

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by harrisonreed »

I wonder if Conn can make me an 88H that plays like a T-350-HB...?
User avatar
Matt K
Verified
Posts: 3944
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2018 10:34 pm
Contact:

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by Matt K »

I disagree to a certain degree. I didn't want an Elkhart 88 yet I play a Shires that at least nominally copies some elements of that design. I wanted something that was similar though and to me the Shires setup I have is similar to an older Conn with respect to elements that I liked with other older 88s I'd tried such as timbral flexibility and the diverging levels of brightness at differing dynamic levels. (e.g. with a Bach that I used to play I would have a very stable timbre from soft to loud whereas on my current horn I'm much 'darker' at low volumes and brighter at high volumes). However, there are elements of that Shires that I prefer over any other large bore like the way the overtone series are aligned and a more centered leadpipe which lets me dial in the mouthpiece.

So I can understand why someone who want something that mimics something that is already in existence elsewhere but in a slighty different format. Its possible the OP has an element to the 88s they have that they like but also leaves them to find if a different set of compromises (erm qualities? without compromise? sorry couldn't help but reference the company tagline). So while the best or ultimate answer may be what I indicated in my first post, which is to just get a Gen 2 and possibly put some work into it to make sure its a great horn... it might be an avenue already explored or not the ideal answer if there are elements of Shires horns that really work for the OP.

So while Conn isn't, to my knowledge, making anything like a Getzen... they also aren't about to make anything like a Shires. But Shires is (or at least was) set up to be very flexible enough that such a request might be the best option available.
mrdeacon
Posts: 968
Joined: Tue May 08, 2018 2:05 am
Location: Los Angeles, California

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by mrdeacon »

ugh the comments in this thread.

OP listen to Gabe's advice. He used to work for Shires and helped outfit players!
Rath R1 2000s, Elliott XT
Bach 42 1974, Elliott XT
Holton 169 1965, Elliott LB
Minick Bass Trombone 1980s, Elliott LB
User avatar
harrisonreed
Posts: 4487
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2018 12:18 pm
Location: Fort Riley, Kansas
Contact:

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by harrisonreed »

mrdeacon wrote: Sat Apr 04, 2020 11:59 pm ugh the comments in this thread.

OP listen to Gabe's advice. He used to work for Shires and helped outfit players!
My comments are definitely the ones you're talking about :D . Maybe this question would be easier to answer if we got more info from the OP. In defense of the silliness, I'll point out the thread title asks for an equivalent, and the OP isn't on board with the standard Shires model that tries to be an 88H. The answer is, no, there is no equivalent made by Shires.

OP, what about the 88h are you trying to recreate? If it's sound and feedback, you probably answered your own question by wondering about the soldered gold brass bell. If it's about how the horn feels to play, how the partials line up, and how it breaks up in the upper register, only Conn makes that. Greenhoe and the Sawday refits might keep some of those quirks, too, but then again, those are/were still made on an 88H frame with mostly 88H parts.

Why Shires? Why not Rath or Edwards? Do you already have a Gen II 88H? If so, why not try to get a horn that is just flat out better, instead of trying to improve a design you're trying to replace? Is the UK brass band scene pigeon holed into the 88H design? Why not try the Getzen IB model? What about Yamaha?

If you open up your options from "I wish I had a better 88H" to "I want the best sounding, easiest playing trombone" you'll immediately gravitate away from Shires and 88Hs altogether. :twisted: joking about Shires. Joking.

I used to want a better 88H. I played and still own a Gen II 88H that I still love. I was forced to open my horizons and play on all sorts of trombones, and realized that there are better options out there. Some of them were Shires horns. None of them sounded, looked, felt, or played like an 88H. Don't limit yourself.

There is a great video of Christan Griego talking about designing the Getzen IB model for Ian Bousfield, someone who grew up on 88Hs. He says, just slapping a narrow slide onto our modular design didn't work. Once you start messing with tapers, you have to change everything. In the end it was a one off and not a modular design. And many have said that it's a great horn that doesn't play like an 88H at all. The bracing design and tapers in an 88H are what make it play the way it does. The modular frame of any modular brand rules out the parts of an 88H that gives it its character.
WiltshireBone
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2020 3:05 am

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by WiltshireBone »

Thanks for replies.

To clarify further, I already have a new modern Conn 88 Gen2- (I own 3 of them). I recently spent some time finding a new one I was happy with, after one of mine was badly damaged. I also own a Bach 42 BO with gold brass bell, plus many other bones I don't regularly play or aren't relevant to this discussion.

Why the Shires? I like the build quality, the options for tweaking and (leadpipe choice notwithstanding) the general response, though my impression is that this is helped by No.2. or smaller leadpipe and lightweight bell, though the latter just won't​ work in the group's I play with due to required quality of sound at volume.

I'm looking for a combination that can make the same variety of sweet Conn sounds, and also offers a little more in these aspects -
(1) improve a little on the flat out focus at high volume,
(2) give a little better feel and control at lower volumes (possibly this is something the Gen2- Conn lost over the older models?).
(3) Maintains or improves articulation, especially at low volume.

I very much like an open feel - perhaps that would push me to a different valve choice (axial?), however that's another variable that's probably not wise to throw in, especially as I don't really want to valve against my neck.

BTW - I generally play on a Bach 4G mouthpiece for sound quality reasons, I find it give s a but more openness than the 5G, though I've also extensively used this too.

Thanks for all your thoughts.
WiltshireBone
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2020 3:05 am

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by WiltshireBone »

GabeLangfur wrote: Sat Apr 04, 2020 8:19 am I used to do this work for the Shires company.

I would suggest a 7GM or 7GLW bell. The X tuning slide is not a bad idea, but has to be considered as part of the whole package.

I've seen Gen II 88Hs with gold brass and yellow brass slide tubes. Which is your preference? Depending on the answer to that question, I would start with either a T47 or T47G slide.

The other thing I would consider, which might actually be a complete instrument you can find at a Shires dealer, is the Ralph Sauer model. I would hope to be able to try both the .525-.547 dual bore slide that comes with it and the T47 single bore option.
Thanks! I did get the chance to play a R-S model, albeit briefly, though it had the detachable bell which I don't want. I also swapped between single and dual bore slides and overall quite quite liked the model tbh..just not enough time in the shop, and the model on offer wasn't a combo that would work for me (as it was dual bore, detachable bell).

Didn't realise Conn 88s were available in gold brass slides, so sadly have no experience of that. How would it change the sound of feel?

I'm told that the modern Conn 88 bell is roughly an equivalent to a medium weight Shires. Presumably going lighter or heavier would make a change in perceived lightness/response, versus ability to hold up and not crack at higher volumes?

BTW - how does the Company section tuning slide affect the sound? I don't think I quite understand the difference compared to a standard profile, so any pointers would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance for any further advice you may offer.
Ndwood
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri May 11, 2018 9:33 am

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by Ndwood »

I think a Shires can give you the things you're looking for. Shires LW bells hold up really well with loud playing, especially the type 7 bells Gabe is suggesting. I kind of look at them as giving you the flexibility and color of a LW bell with the dynamic curve of a heavier bell.

I don't know if you've tried a 2RVE bell already but I wouldn't discount it even if it's lighter and unsoldered. I know one thing that'd been done to iron out the quirks in earlier Conns is to replace the slide crook with a wide crook. It usually gives them some headroom to keep them from redlining at higher volumes and blows a little more open. Since you say you like an open feel it might be something to consider.

With anything, of course try it out first, but I would say especially for a Shires slide with goldbrass slide tubes. I used to play on a TW47G slide and the sound was fantastic, but it was challenging to get the articulation clarity I needed and I've heard the same thing from several other people. I think there's a reason the Conn-style Shires horns come with yellow brass tubes by default.
User avatar
Matt K
Verified
Posts: 3944
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2018 10:34 pm
Contact:

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by Matt K »

WiltshireBone wrote: Mon Apr 06, 2020 1:36 am Thanks! I did get the chance to play a R-S model, albeit briefly, though it had the detachable bell which I don't want. I also swapped between single and dual bore slides and overall quite quite liked the model tbh..just not enough time in the shop, and the model on offer wasn't a combo that would work for me (as it was dual bore, detachable bell).
What about the detachable bell didn't you like? If I had the bread and didn't already have a 2RVET7 I'd hop on it in a minute, but I know it works really well with the rest of the large bore I have because I've swapped it out for that one before and it worked great. Incidentally, I have a T47LW and a franken 525/547 and they both worked well so whiel you only tried the dual-bore they do have a single bore option, or at least used to. For that matter, unless things have radically changed recently, you can order whatever slide you like with it.
Didn't realise Conn 88s were available in gold brass slides, so sadly have no experience of that. How would it change the sound of feel?
In my experience, gold brass, in contrast with yellow brass, tends to be dynamically a little more flexible. So at lower volumes it is a little darker and at higher volumes it is a little brighter. Articulations might also be a little more covered rather than clear which isn't a bad thing. My favorite slide I've ever owned was a T0825GLW which is a 508/525 with gold outers and a nickel crook. Unfortunately, it also wasn't particularly great at anything so I ended up selling it... in hindsight I probably should have hung onto it. Problem is that for smaller horns, I do prefer yellow to gold brass because I generally do things that require more pointed articulations. At any rate... I find nickel to be consistently "bright" at most volumes and yellow brass to be consistently between the two of them at most volumes. Nickel is often used on the slide crook now adays (and on the Conn too) to provide a little extra clarity in articulations without making it sound too bright. This combination works really well with gold too on large bore horns.
I'm told that the modern Conn 88 bell is roughly an equivalent to a medium weight Shires. Presumably going lighter or heavier would make a change in perceived lightness/response, versus ability to hold up and not crack at higher volumes?
The Shires weights were created in the 90s when heavy bells were in vogue. A "2G" bell, for example, would be the equivalent of a Bach HW and a 2GHW is even heavier than that. They kept that scale so that from year-to-year the weight would still mean the same thing. So an "M" or "LW" are usually more in line with what you'd get from a regular weight Conn but I don't know specifically which. I wouldn't let the "LW" throw you off thinking it was too thin. They also have an "XLW". And different treatments and flare thicknesses... e.g. the 2RVET7 is a thinner flare than the 2RVE but the stem is the same weight as far as I am aware. And the 7&8 bells have a different weight distribution throughout than the 1&2 bells. So on-paper you might find something similar to a Gen 2 88 bell and it still might not play the same because of the other differences. Likewise you might get something that isn't on-paper the same but plays quite similarly. I'd take Gabe's advice and as I posted in the other thread, Ben's advice about it and give the type 7 bells a serious consideration. Probably not worry too much about if the bell is going to be too light or not.
BTW - how does the Company section tuning slide affect the sound? I don't think I quite understand the difference compared to a standard profile, so any pointers would be appreciated.
The "X" tuning slide differs from the regular Shires tuning slides in that it is more similar to a traditional tuning slide. That's a bit of a mouthful. Basically, Shires slides put the overtone series in a slightly different position that "fixes" the 5th/10th, 6/12th partials. That not only causes them to have a bit of a unique sound but also to handle differently as well. The "X" tuning slide puts them where they normally are, with an exaggerated low D and high F. It gives a more traditional sound. I prefer Shires's taper myself. And I prefer their seamed slides too. But that is definitely different than the Gen 2 88. I find that the way they project is easier to handle but it certainly isnt' for everyone which is why they dont' seem to be as popular. Same with the "X" tuning slide.
Thanks in advance for any further advice you may offer.
[/quote]
To clarify further, I already have a new modern Conn 88 Gen2- (I own 3 of them). I recently spent some time finding a new one I was happy with, after one of mine was badly damaged. I also own a Bach 42 BO with gold brass bell, plus many other bones I don't regularly play or aren't relevant to this discussion.

Why the Shires? I like the build quality, the options for tweaking and (leadpipe choice notwithstanding) the general response, though my impression is that this is helped by No.2. or smaller leadpipe and lightweight bell, though the latter just won't​ work in the group's I play with due to required quality of sound at volume.

I'm looking for a combination that can make the same variety of sweet Conn sounds, and also offers a little more in these aspects -
(1) improve a little on the flat out focus at high volume,
(2) give a little better feel and control at lower volumes (possibly this is something the Gen2- Conn lost over the older models?).
(3) Maintains or improves articulation, especially at low volume.

I very much like an open feel - perhaps that would push me to a different valve choice (axial?), however that's another variable that's probably not wise to throw in, especially as I don't really want to valve against my neck.

BTW - I generally play on a Bach 4G mouthpiece for sound quality reasons, I find it give s a but more openness than the 5G, though I've also extensively used this too.

Thanks for all your thoughts.

As far as loudness is concerned, there are broadly two approaches and, naturally, some middle ground. The first is to change the impression of loudness and the second would be to actually put out more decibels. For classical in particular, I tend to try to do the first. Like I mentioned earlier, for me, red brass and to a lesser extent gold brass is dark at lower volumes and then tends to get brighter at louder dynamics than yellow brass, so I think you're on the right path with the setup you had and might benefit from doing a little tweaking with it. That may well give you better feel and control at those lower volumes. I'd probably at least do a yellow tuning slide and yellow crook. I also find that out of all the various offerings (bearing in mind I haven't tried the newer twin valve yet) that traditional rotors work best for me. Something to the effect that they provide a little easier articulation at the expense of a slightly less covered sound.

So that's a long winded way of saying "Gabe pretty much hit the nail on the head".
castrubone
Posts: 225
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:55 am

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by castrubone »

WiltshireBone wrote: Mon Apr 06, 2020 1:36 am
GabeLangfur wrote: Sat Apr 04, 2020 8:19 am I used to do this work for the Shires company.

I would suggest a 7GM or 7GLW bell. The X tuning slide is not a bad idea, but has to be considered as part of the whole package.

I've seen Gen II 88Hs with gold brass and yellow brass slide tubes. Which is your preference? Depending on the answer to that question, I would start with either a T47 or T47G slide.

The other thing I would consider, which might actually be a complete instrument you can find at a Shires dealer, is the Ralph Sauer model. I would hope to be able to try both the .525-.547 dual bore slide that comes with it and the T47 single bore option.
Thanks! I did get the chance to play a R-S model, albeit briefly, though it had the detachable bell which I don't want. I also swapped between single and dual bore slides and overall quite quite liked the model tbh..just not enough time in the shop, and the model on offer wasn't a combo that would work for me (as it was dual bore, detachable bell).

Didn't realise Conn 88s were available in gold brass slides, so sadly have no experience of that. How would it change the sound of feel?

I'm told that the modern Conn 88 bell is roughly an equivalent to a medium weight Shires. Presumably going lighter or heavier would make a change in perceived lightness/response, versus ability to hold up and not crack at higher volumes?

BTW - how does the Company section tuning slide affect the sound? I don't think I quite understand the difference compared to a standard profile, so any pointers would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance for any further advice you may offer.
The 88H does not and has not ever had yellow brass handslides, even on the yellow bell model. Gold brass is the only option, unless you get the SGX (silver plated) version. If you had to compare the modern 88H bell to Shires, then LW is it. But again, Shires makes Shires bells and Conn makes Conn bells so they will play differently even if they are similar weight.
User avatar
harrisonreed
Posts: 4487
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2018 12:18 pm
Location: Fort Riley, Kansas
Contact:

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by harrisonreed »

Even the SGX is a rose brass (they don't call it gold brass) slide.
User avatar
BGuttman
Posts: 5891
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2018 7:19 am
Location: Cow Hampshire

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by BGuttman »

Pedantic note:

Gold Brass and Rose Brass are often confused with each other, but Gold Brass should be 80% Copper 20% Zinc while Rose Brass should be 85% Copper 15% Zinc.
Bruce Guttman
Merrimack Valley Philharmonic Orchestra
"Almost Professional"
castrubone
Posts: 225
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:55 am

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by castrubone »

harrisonreed wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2020 8:34 pm Even the SGX is a rose brass (they don't call it gold brass) slide.
The SGX is silver plated with gold plate trim.
User avatar
harrisonreed
Posts: 4487
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2018 12:18 pm
Location: Fort Riley, Kansas
Contact:

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by harrisonreed »

castrubone wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2020 10:19 pm
harrisonreed wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2020 8:34 pm Even the SGX is a rose brass (they don't call it gold brass) slide.
The SGX is silver plated with gold plate trim.
Plated over rose brass... :shuffle: that's still the only slide material option...
GabrielRice
Posts: 979
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 7:20 am
Location: Boston, MA, USA
Contact:

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by GabrielRice »

I've seen 88Hs with yellow brass slides. Not many, but I've seen them.
User avatar
Matt K
Verified
Posts: 3944
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2018 10:34 pm
Contact:

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by Matt K »

Interestingly enough, the Horn Guys page also indicates that it's actually bronze tubes:
The standard hand slide included with the Conn 88H is made of bronze tubes with nickel trim and end crook. The slide is .547" bore with a standard leadpipe. The mouthpiece receiver is designed to accept any large shank mouthpiece with a Morse taper, which includes Bach and most others. Even Schilke mouthpieces now have the standard Morse taper shank.
But the current marketing material from CS page does indicate its Rose:
. The rose brass material used in the professional bell and handslide material produces a deep, warm resonant sound while the clear lacquer finish adds a subtle warmth overall.
Looks like Gabe beat me to the punch but I was going to add that, whether or not it is offered as an standard option by no means precludes it from existing. Especially for people coming through the Shires factory getting fitted.
ChadA
Posts: 150
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 5:27 pm
Location: Dayton, OH
Contact:

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by ChadA »

My Conn SL2547 slide has yellow outer tubes. As I got it used, I have no idea if that’s standard or not.
Last edited by ChadA on Sat Apr 11, 2020 7:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
harrisonreed
Posts: 4487
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2018 12:18 pm
Location: Fort Riley, Kansas
Contact:

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by harrisonreed »

I think it did used to be an option. Same with rose brass 36Hs, which I've seen only one example of.
Last edited by harrisonreed on Sat Apr 11, 2020 7:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
chromebone
Posts: 284
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2018 4:29 pm

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by chromebone »

The 88H does not and has not ever had yellow brass handslides
All 88h’s had yellow brass handslides starting with the N series, around the time they moved to Abiline.

They continued with yellow brass throughout the ‘70’s until the UMI takeover. When production was moved to Eastlake, they started using rose brass as the standard material, but you could special order yellow brass. I don’t know if that’s still possible.

The rose brass “bronze” material on the modern horns is very different from the bronze material used on the original Elkhart horns. The bronze alloy on the original 88h’s is not available anymore. But I think it’s one is the things that make the Elkhart horns special.
castrubone
Posts: 225
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:55 am

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by castrubone »

chromebone wrote: Sat Apr 11, 2020 7:30 pm
The 88H does not and has not ever had yellow brass handslides
All 88h’s had yellow brass handslides starting with the N series, around the time they moved to Abiline.

They continued with yellow brass throughout the ‘70’s until the UMI takeover. When production was moved to Eastlake, they started using rose brass as the standard material, but you could special order yellow brass. I don’t know if that’s still possible.

The rose brass “bronze” material on the modern horns is very different from the bronze material used on the original Elkhart horns. The bronze alloy on the original 88h’s is not available anymore. But I think it’s one is the things that make the Elkhart horns special.
What are you basing that on? At no point in history of the 88H was a yellow handslide "standard," or even a marketed option.
chromebone
Posts: 284
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2018 4:29 pm

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by chromebone »

I'm basing it on the fact that Abiline production Conns had yellow brass handslides. Sorry, but that's the way it is. Look on eBay, there's some Abiline 88h's on there right now, and they all have yellow brass outer slides. Noah Gladstone has an early Texas production 88H on his website for sale. Yellow Brass Handslide.
Last edited by chromebone on Sun Apr 12, 2020 9:39 am, edited 3 times in total.
castrubone
Posts: 225
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:55 am

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by castrubone »

chromebone wrote: Sun Apr 12, 2020 9:09 am I'm basing it on the fact that Abiline production Conns had yellow brass handslides. Sorry, but that's the way it is.
Wow, thanks for clarifying. Goodbye TromboneChat. I won't miss this.
mrdeacon
Posts: 968
Joined: Tue May 08, 2018 2:05 am
Location: Los Angeles, California

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by mrdeacon »

castrubone wrote: Sun Apr 12, 2020 9:14 am
chromebone wrote: Sun Apr 12, 2020 9:09 am I'm basing it on the fact that Abiline production Conns had yellow brass handslides. Sorry, but that's the way it is.
Wow, thanks for clarifying. Goodbye TromboneChat. I won't miss this.
I hope you end up sticking around. But for what it's worth chrombone is correct. He also provided some pretty concrete evidence.

If you dig around in my post history you can see a Texas 88h I sold and it clearly has yellow outers. Like chrombone said you can even find early Ohio 88h horns with yellow outers. I have a friend with one and his slide again very clearly a yellow slide. I've held at least another half dozen examples over the years with yellow outers. The rose brass didn't become standard again until the Gen II horns really hit full swing.

Does anyone out there remember what the outers were on the Lindberg horns? Were they yellow?
Rath R1 2000s, Elliott XT
Bach 42 1974, Elliott XT
Holton 169 1965, Elliott LB
Minick Bass Trombone 1980s, Elliott LB
Posaunus
Posts: 3424
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 9:54 pm
Location: California

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by Posaunus »

mrdeacon wrote: Sun Apr 12, 2020 5:32 pm Does anyone out there remember what the outers were on the Lindberg horns? Were they yellow?
Please stick around, castrubone.

My Conn 88H (S/N R21***), purchased new in 1972, was apparently made during the transition from Elkhart to Abilene. It does not have Elkhart engraved on the bell, but plays like late 60s/early 70s Elkharts I've tried :D, so I'd always assumed that at least the parts came from Elkhart, even if the final assembly could have been Abilene. The outer slide material is yellow brass.

Conn 88H CL ("Lindberg") made in Eastlake in ~2003 (I think) has a yellow brass slide.

Both trombones completely stock and unaltered. Terrific trombones (to this old-timer)!

I also have a spare 88H slide, of uncertain vintage, purchased when I thought I'd damaged my 88H slide. Its outer slide is much darker brass, but looks nothing like the rose brass of my 1972 88H. More like a bronze color. :idk:
User avatar
harrisonreed
Posts: 4487
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2018 12:18 pm
Location: Fort Riley, Kansas
Contact:

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by harrisonreed »

castrubone wrote: Sun Apr 12, 2020 9:14 am
chromebone wrote: Sun Apr 12, 2020 9:09 am I'm basing it on the fact that Abiline production Conns had yellow brass handslides. Sorry, but that's the way it is.
Wow, thanks for clarifying. Goodbye TromboneChat. I won't miss this.
:???: :eek: :idk:


Interesting about the 2003 CL model having a yellow slide.
My 2005 88HTCL has rose brass outers.
User avatar
FeelMyRath
Posts: 81
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:55 am

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by FeelMyRath »

Wiltshirebone, have a conversation with Mick Rath. He'll be able to make you exactly what you want. The build quality of my R4F is second to none.
Making the world better, one note at a time

Yorkshire, United Kingdom
Tromboned
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:36 am
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by Tromboned »

Sorry to see this escalate like this. I believe the original question was in regard to the Gen 2 Conn 88H's which I believe started in the late 90's. I have a 2014 Conn 88HYO from the Eastlake plant before they moved manufacturing to Indiana. For what it's worth, the outer slide is darker in color than the yellow bell. I would assume that it is rose/ gold brass even with the yellow bell. I don't know if that has anything to do with the action but it is the best slide I have every played and I love my sound on that horn.
Posaunus
Posts: 3424
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 9:54 pm
Location: California

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by Posaunus »

harrisonreed wrote: Sun Apr 12, 2020 9:04 pm Interesting about the 2003 CL model having a yellow slide.
My 2005 88HTCL has rose brass outers.
By the light of day …
I made a grievous error yesterday when I reported that my 88H CL slide was yellow brass. I had looked at it in the dimness of the afternoon, with bad lighting. Today, with daylight, I can see that the 88H CL slide is actually rose brass, the identical color of the bells of the 88H and 88H CL. My 1972 88H slide still appears yellower than the rose brass. So I guess it may be "yellow brass." (It's the same color as the slide and bell of my 1958 King 2B.)

Sorry, Harrison, about my color insensitivity. Now I know what I've got!
User avatar
Matt K
Verified
Posts: 3944
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2018 10:34 pm
Contact:

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by Matt K »

That might be a bit dramatic estimation of the consequences of being wrong about the color of your slide ;)

The problem with the Conns and the Kings as far as visually is that there was a period of time where they used a tint of lacquer that was a little golder in appearance than we do now. I'm honestly not a huge fan although I have seen a few horns that it works well on aesthetically. At any rate, I'm not sure if you'd really 100% for sure be able to tell if its yellow brass with gold lacquer or rose brass unless you know what that tint looks like.
WGWTR180
Posts: 1211
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2019 2:32 pm

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by WGWTR180 »

I have an L series Elkhart 88H I've had since the 7th grade with yellow outer slide tubes. Someone else told me once that all 88Hs from N series on had yellow tubes. I'm not saying what is right or wrong just saying'
I also know 3 trombonists who were among the first trombonists to work with Steve on his early .547 tenor trombones. All 3 told me they were "modern day Conn 88Hs". They were all wonderful players but they didn't sound like they were playing on an 88H.
I agree with those who've said to the OP try a second generation 88H. If you like, buy. If not move on.
User avatar
FeelMyRath
Posts: 81
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:55 am

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by FeelMyRath »

He already has 3 Gen 2 88Hs!
Making the world better, one note at a time

Yorkshire, United Kingdom
User avatar
harrisonreed
Posts: 4487
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2018 12:18 pm
Location: Fort Riley, Kansas
Contact:

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by harrisonreed »

FeelMyRath wrote: Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:23 pm He already has 3 Gen 2 88Hs!
Shhhhh


Hahaha
Vegasbound
Posts: 1058
Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2019 6:11 am

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by Vegasbound »

FeelMyRath wrote: Mon Apr 13, 2020 1:43 am Wiltshirebone, have a conversation with Mick Rath. He'll be able to make you exactly what you want. The build quality of my R4F is second to none.

I got to play the most conn like horn Mick built about 10 years ago, a proto type built from mainly conn parts with a hagman type valve, built for a well known player and being trialed by another. It was fantastic


Matt K edit: fixed formatting
WGWTR180
Posts: 1211
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2019 2:32 pm

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by WGWTR180 »

harrisonreed wrote: Mon Apr 13, 2020 5:53 pm
FeelMyRath wrote: Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:23 pm He already has 3 Gen 2 88Hs!
Shhhhh


Hahaha
Always a few comedians.
User avatar
harrisonreed
Posts: 4487
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2018 12:18 pm
Location: Fort Riley, Kansas
Contact:

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by harrisonreed »

WGWTR180 wrote: Tue Apr 14, 2020 5:23 am
harrisonreed wrote: Mon Apr 13, 2020 5:53 pm

Shhhhh


Hahaha
Always a few comedians.
The comment was supposed to be funny, but as much to comment on the fact that you can have 3 88Hs, apparently, not be satisfied, and still want an 88H.

Karl Pilkington says, "If you're gonna have a change, have a change."
Last edited by harrisonreed on Tue Apr 14, 2020 6:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
WGWTR180
Posts: 1211
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2019 2:32 pm

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by WGWTR180 »

harrisonreed wrote: Tue Apr 14, 2020 5:29 am
WGWTR180 wrote: Tue Apr 14, 2020 5:23 am

Always a few comedians.
The comment was supposed to be funny, but as much to comment on the fact that you can have 3 88Hs, apparently, not be satisfied, and still want an 88H.

Karl Pilkingtom says, "If you're gonna have a change, have a change."
:good:
FOSSIL
Posts: 685
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2019 8:41 am

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by FOSSIL »

The Getzen Bousfield model has been described by Ian as the 88H that Conn would be making if they had continued to develop the 88H. That should make it worth a try by the OP. Ian sounds amazing on it...best I've ever heard him sound.... and it has that kind of Conn style sound.

Chris
ChadA
Posts: 150
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 5:27 pm
Location: Dayton, OH
Contact:

Re: Shires equivalent to Gen 2 Conn 88 HO

Post by ChadA »

The Getzen Bousfield is a really good horn. I had one before I got my Greenhoe 88ht. I really enjoyed the Bousfield horn. A student of mine bought it and sounds really good on it.
Last edited by ChadA on Tue Apr 14, 2020 9:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply

Return to “Instruments”