M/K Handslide Crooks

[WGWTR180]

M/K Drawing offers the following hand slide crooks for a Bach 42:

M/K Bach Replacements: Bore .588 OD .625

Bach OEM Replacements: Bore .600 OD .635

Has anyone used these crooks? Any reason there's a different bore size/OD size when they're both marked "Bach"?

[bassbone1993]

I could be totally wrong, but I think the OEM is more or less an exact copy and the M/K replacements are M/K's take on a better crook?

I'm probably wrong though.

[Crazy4Tbone86]

Yep, the OEM at .600 is the same size crook that Bach puts on the model 50 bass trombone. The .600 is actually oversized for the Bach 42 and undersized for the Bach 50.

Some people play better on Bach 42s with the .588 bore crook, which is a closer match to the bore of the outer slide tubes. Likewise, some people play better on a Bach 50 bass trombone with the MK .608 crooks that are a closer match to the bore of the Bach 50 outer tubes.

Different bites for different likes.

[jjenkins]

I've use the OEM on several horns and they've all worked great. My favorites are the nickel crooks for gold brass bells and bronze for yellow bells

[Rrova]

I've use the OEM on several horns and they've all worked great. My favorites are the nickel crooks for gold brass bells and bronze for yellow bells

Can you describe how the Yellow/Bronze combo differs from Bach's standard Yellow/Yellow?

[Crazy4Tbone86]

I have a Bach 42 standard slide that I customized with an OEM (.600 bore) gold brass M/K crook. The sound is pretty dense and I must work harder to create clear articulations. I thought I would use it more than I do.

The last time I used it was about two years ago. That concert was a couple of computer generated + band music. The composer was the conductor and he wanted “sound with no abrupt entrances,” so I chose to use that slide and not worry about producing any clear articulations. Those kinds of gigs don’t happen very often.

[jjenkins]

I agree with that the bronze crook with yellow bell sounds a hair more dense, but also a subtly more interesting color when pushed from mezzo forte and greater.

[Kbiggs]

You can get a similar (perhaps subtler?) effect by replacing the stock yellow tuning slide crook with a gold, bronze, or red brass crook. I currently have a 47 tuning slide crook (gold brass) on my 42. (I also asked my tech to reverse the tubing on the 1st leg of the t-slide.) It has helped to soften the initial attack on notes, and reduces some of the coarseness or “shouty” quality my horn can develop at fortissimo and above.

[CheeseTray]

My main 42 slide is an early Mt Vernon one with a crook that is the same size as the outer slide (I'm assume its similar to the smaller M/K one listed above.) I also own and play a number of modern 42 slides with standard 50 crooks. For me, there is certainly a different feel, but I wouldn't characterize either as better or worse; simply different. That being said, I think the lead pipe has a larger impact. Enough so, that changing pipes can negate the different feel of the tighter crook. User experience may vary.

[Crazy4Tbone86]

CheesTray,

I agree that leadpipes play a significant role in determining how a trombone plays. If you saw my collection of leadpipes (at least 40 in the .547 bore size alone), you would understand my passion for finding the perfect leadpipe for every situation.

However, I believe that slide crooks play a critical role in how a trombone works for a person. I have never been successful with a Conn 8H/88H style slide (I really don’t like those narrow crooks) and most have an inside diameter somewhere in the low .580s. For some reason, I still want to make the Conn brand work for me. Thus, I am in the process of creating four Conn .547 slides (all wide, Bach 42 width) with four different bores of crooks. So far, I have completed a slide with a nickel .600 crook and a slide with a nickel .583 crook. The .600 crook is too open for me, so I attempt to focus it with a tighter leadpipe…..still trying to find the right leadpipe for that slide. The .583 crook is definitely too tight for me. I chip notes easily and my sound brightens up quickly at louder volumes, even when I use a very open leadpipe.

I have the parts for two more slides and hope to make them this year. One of those will have a .587 nickel crook (MK crook) and the other will have a .593 nickel (from a Hunter large-bore tenor). I am hoping that one of those two slides will be my perfect match for my Conn large bore tenor horns.

The point of my OCD fascination with instrument components is that I really do think that these subtle differences in crook bore sizes do make a difference for the discerning musician. Yes, the player can fine-tune things even more with leadpipe choice, but don’t ignore the importance of having a crook that enhances the natural abilities of the player.

Every time that I chat about trombone design with Steve Shires at a trombone conference, he always says …..”every little thing on the instrument makes a difference.”

[Blabberbucket]

CheesTray,

I agree that leadpipes play a significant role in determining how a trombone plays. If you saw my collection of leadpipes (at least 40 in the .547 bore size alone), you would understand my passion for finding the perfect leadpipe for every situation.

However, I believe that slide crooks play a critical role in how a trombone works for a person. I have never been successful with a Conn 8H/88H style slide (I really don’t like those narrow crooks) and most have an inside diameter somewhere in the low .580s. For some reason, I still want to make the Conn brand work for me. Thus, I am in the process of creating four Conn .547 slides (all wide, Bach 42 width) with four different bores of crooks. So far, I have completed a slide with a nickel .600 crook and a slide with a nickel .583 crook. The .600 crook is too open for me, so I attempt to focus it with a tighter leadpipe…..still trying to find the right leadpipe for that slide. The .583 crook is definitely too tight for me. I chip notes easily and my sound brightens up quickly at louder volumes, even when I use a very open leadpipe.

I have the parts for two more slides and hope to make them this year. One of those will have a .587 nickel crook (MK crook) and the other will have a .593 nickel (from a Hunter large-bore tenor). I am hoping that one of those two slides will be my perfect match for my Conn large bore tenor horns.

The point of my OCD fascination with instrument components is that I really do think that these subtle differences in crook bore sizes do make a difference for the discerning musician. Yes, the player can fine-tune things even more with leadpipe choice, but don’t ignore the importance of having a crook that enhances the natural abilities of the player.

Every time that I chat about trombone design with Steve Shires at a trombone conference, he always says …..”every little thing on the instrument makes a difference.”

Seems like you are, by feel, looking for a crook that matches the ID of the outers. .583" is too small, .600" is too big, .590 is juuuuust right.

[Crazy4Tbone86]

My prediction is that the .587 crook will work well with the 8H and the .593 will work well on the 88H models…..assuming that the valve adds a little bit of resistance on the 88H models.

[Tbarh]

To muddy the waters on this thread a bit ; I have an aftermarket Conn '562 slide ,SL 6262 which I use on my 88H tenor bell section. I am not a fan of nickel silver crooks and would like to change it.. I have an ancient ( from 1920) red brass crook from a 8H . This crook will probably be too small if the slide is used as a bass slide, but as a tenor; could it work ?.. After all I suppose that the crook bore are larger than '562, right?

Trond