John Packer Rath Trombones

[Davidus1]

Who has played one? What is your opinion on them? I've read good things from some others (tuba players) but would like to hear your opinions from trombone land.

[Matt K]

I've only played a few but the ones I've played have been really good horns. They 'punch above their weight' so to speak. They aren't a Shires or a Rath, and they aren't customizable as such. But if it's the right set of components for you, they're every bit as good as some of the pro-level stock models in terms of sound & feel, which are really the only criteria I judge by. I didn't notice anything cosmetically wrong with the ones I've played but I don't look for that sort of thing unless it really jumps out at me. They are a newer company and some of the other imported horns haven't held up well over time in the sense that they have corrosion problems so give it a few years and we'll see if they have staying power too. My suspicion is they will be fine

[Neo Bri]

Who has played one? What is your opinion on them? I've read good things from some others (tuba players) but would like to hear your opinions from trombone land.

They seem pretty good. I have an alto that plays really well, and is pretty, too. I played the .547" and it felt pretty good, though the valve had some stickiness to it, which I don't understand. It is owned by a band director, so it might have mysteriously fell from its stand and taken a hit. Who knows?

[FeelMyRath]

I've just sold my JPRath 230 (.500 bore) as it wasn't getting any use since I've stopped doing the odd big band gig and either play my R4F or euphonium in all my other playing.

I'd had it three years and it still looked like a new instrument barring one tiny mute ding although I'm not one who seems to corrode lacquer. Build quality was as good as anything else or there, although it wasn't my daily player.

Sound-wise it was beautiful, very much like a King 2B (I used a Yamaha 45C2-GP mouthpiece) without any stuffiness, pure and clear in the high range. I did play on an R10 once and the JP was probably 90% as good.

The slide was an 8/10, nowhere near as good as my R4F though (although my large bore slide is much heavier). It did require pretty regular lubrication to keep it smooth and quiet (I used Slide-o-mix), again this could be down to the fact it wasn't my regular player.

If I was in need of another small bore in the future, I wouldn't hesitate to buy a new one. Much nicer to play than a Yamaha 354 IMHO.

[Neo Bri]

I should also mention that I played that .525" that everyone was raving about for while. I wasn't impressed. It felt stiff and lifeless. Just very uninteresting, and not very easy to play.

[Davidus1]

Who has played one? What is your opinion on them? I've read good things from some others (tuba players) but would like to hear your opinions from trombone land.

They seem pretty good. I have an alto that plays really well, and is pretty, too. I played the .547" and it felt pretty good, though the valve had some stickiness to it, which I don't understand. It is owned by a band director, so it might have mysteriously fell from its stand and taken a hit. Who knows?

I wonder if the valve was just in need of cleaning perhaps? It could have been dropped as you say. I've not been able to play one. Most of the people that I know that have have had positive things to say. Thanks for the feedback.

[Davidus1]

I've only played a few but the ones I've played have been really good horns. They 'punch above their weight' so to speak. They aren't a Shires or a Rath, and they aren't customizable as such. But if it's the right set of components for you, they're every bit as good as some of the pro-level stock models in terms of sound & feel, which are really the only criteria I judge by. I didn't notice anything cosmetically wrong with the ones I've played but I don't look for that sort of thing unless it really jumps out at me. They are a newer company and some of the other imported horns haven't held up well over time in the sense that they have corrosion problems so give it a few years and we'll see if they have staying power too. My suspicion is they will be fine

Thanks Matt. Did you play tenor or one of the bass bones?

[Davidus1]

I should also mention that I played that .525" that everyone was raving about for while. I wasn't impressed. It felt stiff and lifeless. Just very uninteresting, and not very easy to play.

Thanks. This is the first feedback that I've heard specifically about the .525.

[Cotboneman]

I purchased one this past spring from Steve Ferguson's shop at Hornguys.com. I am sure that they go through each horn carefully before they go out the door. I play bass trombone most of the time but I wanted a good, affordable large bore tenor for the occasional concert band date. I've owned in my time a stock Bach 42B, a Conn 88H and a Getzen 1047 (not all at the same time!). To my mind this one is about on par. I have been living with this horn now for some time now and I cannot find any real flaws in the blow. It slots well, has an open blow and the slide is a gem, smooth, quiet and quick. I use Slide-O-Mix on the slide. To me it is quite enjoyable to play. The fit and finish is superb. Time will tell if the lacquer job holds up, but right now it's fine. I've had top brand name horns with acid bleeds showing up within a few months, but so far no evidence of any finish issues here.

A minor issue has been an occasional sticky F valve, especially if the horn has been sitting on its stand for awhile; a quick squeeze of valve oil down the bore fixes that. A big attribute for the 332O is it's price, which is really reasonable for a horn in this niche. I'm sure that some of the corners were cut with the case the horn ships with, which I do not like. It's a lightweight hard gig case ala a Protech, with shoulder strap and optional backpack straps. I much prefer a wood or carbon fiber case, but that would drive up the price. It's labeled an intermediate trombone, but I would probably prefer the term entry-level professional level.

If you can find one to try out I would encourage you to do so.

[hyperbolica]

I've been curious about the 331, which the brits call "medium large" bore (.525"). Dillon's price is comparable to what you might expect to pay for a used 79h or 36b. How does the 331 compare to the more established players in this size?

[FeelMyRath]

I've been curious about the 331, which the brits call "medium large" bore (.525"). Dillon's price is comparable to what you might expect to pay for a used 79h or 36b. How does the 331 compare to the more established players in this size?

That's because 0.500" is medium bore

[Finetales]

That's because 0.500" is medium bore

That's news to me. I've always heard .500 = small, .508 = medium, .525 = medium-large, .547 = large. I've never heard anyone call a .500 student horn "medium bore".

[bimmerman]

I guess if a 2B / 6 / 8 is small bore...

I just assume <.508ish is small, ~.525 is medium, .547 large.

On topic, anyone tried the double trigger JP/Rath bass? Especially vs the Stearns Wessex?

[BGuttman]

I don't think the Stearns Wessex is a Packer-Rath. Rath had no part in its development and John Packer does not sell it.

Note that 100 years ago, 0.500" bore was "Medium". The Conn #3 bore was called medium and was 0.500". With the shift to larger instruments (especially in Classical) Medium got moved to 0.525"

[FeelMyRath]

That's because 0.500" is medium bore

That's news to me. I've always heard .500 = small, .508 = medium, .525 = medium-large, .547 = large. I've never heard anyone call a .500 student horn "medium bore".

In the UK, sub-.500 is small, .500 medium, .525 medium-large, .547 large. There is more to the world than the USA

[MAliesch]

I owned the .547 Tenor JP 332 closed wrap F attachment for 4 years. It's every bit as good as a modern Bach or Conn, but built more solidly for a student. A bit heavier as such. Sound and playing characteristics seem right in between the two camps. I had no issues with it during that time. A little finish wear on the grip points, but no corrosion. Played well, had a consistent sound throughout the registers and dynamics.

As with any horn, it's best to buy from a trusted dealer and make sure you play the instrument first to see if it fits you.

[bimmerman]

I don't think the Stearns Wessex is a Packer-Rath. Rath had no part in its development and John Packer does not sell it.

Right, I was asking more from competitive point of view, since I believe they're targeted similarly so people may have tried both.

[Finetales]

In the UK, sub-.500 is small, .500 medium, .525 medium-large, .547 large. There is more to the world than the USA

I said that because you responded to hyperbolica saying that the Brits call .525 medium-large by saying that's because .500 is medium. I was just saying that, as an American, I have also always called .525 medium-large and found it odd that that was then your reasoning for .500 being medium, since there's another size in between the two. What do you call .508 then?

[Jimeg]

I received my new JP Rath 333 double valve bass about two weeks ago. I’m very pleased with the horn. It seems well constructed and has a nice sound. I do not normally play bass, but two friends have played the horn. One plays an Edwards dual bore bass and the other a Shires bass. Both were very favorably impressed. However, neither offered to trade me heads up.

[FeelMyRath]

In the UK, sub-.500 is small, .500 medium, .525 medium-large, .547 large. There is more to the world than the USA

I said that because you responded to hyperbolica saying that the Brits call .525 medium-large by saying that's because .500 is medium. I was just saying that, as an American, I have also always called .525 medium-large and found it odd that that was then your reasoning for .500 being medium, since there's another size in between the two. What do you call .508 then?

508 would also be medium to me, with approximately 525 being the threshold for medium-large. Not everything can be categorised into its own size bracket IMHO - there are many other bore sizes out there apart from 500, 508, 525, 547, 562.

[Cotboneman]

As a bit of a follow-up, I've been playing the JP Rath 3320 now for about a year, using it regularly in a community concert band and also a trombone trio which rehearses weekly. I have absolutely no complaints about it, either musically or mechanically. Workmanship is great, no lacquer wear, acid bleeds, slide or brace issues of any kind. I have received praise from section mates on its sound, which can blend when needed or speak strongly without being barky.

I think the key when buying these Chinese instruments is to get them through reputable dealers here in the US, who have a chance to inspect them, do maintenance and adjustments before they go out their doors, or just send back horns with major issues. I bought this horn from Steve Ferguson at Hornguys.com, who is diligent in making sure the products he sells are good.

[Davidus1]

I bought the large bore open wrap tenor. Very nice! I wonder why these horns aren't more popular? They are very solid.

[Mikebmiller]

Chris Bill of YouTube fame seems to have signed on as a paid promoter for JP. He has done quite a few videos lately plugging those horns, including a Star Wars thing where he plays 5 different ones. It sounds great. FWIW, I got an JP 136 alto last summer and it is very well made, at least well enough for me to learn some alto on. Their 274 model euphonium is getting very popular. It is a little more expensive than the various JinBao stencils, but seems to speed a step up in build quality from those horns.

[castrubone]

Someone is paying for the reduced cost of instruments such as this and others like them. Either through cheaper parts or cheaper labor (or both). On the flip side, companies that manufacture instruments in countries with stricter labor laws and higher worker quality of life standards must charge more for their products. It's worth considering the people behind the scenes building these things.

[Dennis]

That's because 0.500" is medium bore

That's news to me. I've always heard .500 = small, .508 = medium, .525 = medium-large, .547 = large. I've never heard anyone call a .500 student horn "medium bore".

Bore size adjectives have always been fluid. Conn referred to the 8(8)H as Symphony bore. (In the original Conn schema the 2, 4, 6, and 8 described bore sizes, and anyone who knew the Conn die sizes could translate from model number to slide bore size.)

In the Bach catalogs from the mid-70s, the 12 and 16M were described as medium bore, the 16 as a dual bore, and the 36 and 42 as large bore.

I suspect the quirk in describing the 36 as a large bore instrument goes back to VB believing that the 36 or 36B was the ideal orchestral tenor trombone.

Given the number of small bore instruments available today (Bach 6 and 8 are now special order items, King 2B, and Shires is making a .485 slide) I think it makes sense to call sub-.500 instruments small bores, .500- .508 medium bores, .515- .530 medium-large bores, .530- .550 large bores, and >.550 extra large bore. (This is for tenors, I'm not at all sure about descriptors for basses or altos.)