TromboneChat

Hi all,

Yes, i'm opening this can of worms. What have your experiences been with mixing, matching, testing different materials/material combos or all the same material throughout?

I currently have a tenor that's entirely yellow brass with the exception of the nickel-silver lead-pipe. I really enjoy this combo, but I have not had the money, time, etc to go around trying different materials constantly or even chatting about it for this matter...

From the pros I listen to, I do tend to enjoy the sound tenor trombones that have more yellow brass, bass trombones that have more yellow/nickel-silver/sterling silver combos , and altos that are generally gold (rose gold) brass.

What are your thoughts/experiences? Yes... I'm sorry in advance for opening up this topic!

I like a mix of metals on a horn. It may skew in one direction, but I generally find those horns easier to color and adapt to a style.

My experience is that a lot of the characteristics people attribute to different alloys are really more influenced by mass.

Brass alloys (and other metals) do make a difference, however.

My way of thinking of this is that an excellent trombone can be made all of yellow brass, so using different alloys helps to fine tune the instrument to taste, but won't make a bad design into a good one.

The fixed designs are what the custom builders tried to improve, and their best models are the ones that claim to take the torch from these designs.

The Alessi 396 model is also excellent. I'm glad that Joseph Alessi did all of the play testing so that I didn't have to. I never would have come up with that.

The pure custom trombones that deviate from the incredible amount of research that Conn or Bach did in the past are generally not good. Again, who knows how many versions of the Alessi horn were made before Joe settled on it. That is a tested design that I would put alongside the 88H or 42B in terms of research that went into it, especially when you consider that they were taking a lot of design elements straight off Bach designs.

Sure, materials make a difference. I don't think they change the sound, but they change the feedback to the player, and that changes the way the player approaches their input, which changes the sound. So in that sense they can create feedback loops. But nothing I've played or heard has made me think there is any reason to massively deviate from the tried and true designs (even at Shires or Edwards) unless you've got some deep pockets.

Rather than changing what the horn is made of, changing the shape, weight placement, thickness, and bracing of the horn seems to be the real key. For example, strategic placement of thick duct tape changes more than swapping an entire bell... Screwing a counterlevered bolt further into the counterweight changes more than leadpipes or the bell... Thinning the flare of the bell is the same -- you get an entirely different trombone. Far more than changing what the bell is made out of.

1 question=1 million answers.

I find more variation in the materials gives me a better color to my sound. A yellow brass horn sounds similar but flat compared to my horns.
I play Edwards horns. Easy to make changes and smart with Christians advice.
My favorite horn has a copper leadpipe, Nickel slide, copper pillar and tuning slide, yellow neckpipe and valve tubing and a sterling bell.
My other symphony horn is has a copper leadpipe, Nickel slide, copper tuning slide, straight yellow neckpipe brass bell.
The sterling bell sounds nicer but does not have the edge Directors want to hear the articulations. So lots of hits and power, I take the bass setup and softer and more melodic, I take the sterling bell.

Yes, we will have lots of answers; with lots of different people, we will have many answers that fit many players.
Great question.

Changing things can, you know, change things. On my Shires basses, I have two different bells (1 gold brass, 1 yellow brass). At one point, I had three tuning slides: gold brass C taper, yellow brass C taper, and the Bollinger tuning slide, which has a yellow crook that I seem to remember being very much like their C taper but with a yellow small tuning slide leg instead of nickel. The tuning slides feel different to me and sound different to me and others when I switch them around. I use the gold brass C with my yellow (BII 1Y) bell. I use the Bollinger with the gold brass bell (B1 2G cut bell). The Bollinger TS with the yellow brass bell works pretty well, but I prefer the gold brass tuning slide by a narrow margin. I didn't like the yellow brass C tuning slide with the yellow bell (too snarly), but thought it was decent with the gold brass bell; the Bollinger is better with that bell. The gold brass tuning slide with the gold brass bell is my least favorite combo.

So, for me, with these combos:
gold bell/gold tuning slide = meh
gold bell/yellow tuning slide = good
gold bell/Bollinger tuning slide = very good
yellow bell/gold tuning slide = great
yellow bell/yellow tuning slide = too edgy
yellow bell/Bollinger tuning slide - very good

I sold the yellow tuning slide and kept the gold brass and Bollinger tuning slides. I use brass leadpipes on all of them. Obviously, mileage will vary and people's experiences will likely be different than my own.

Extremely generally speaking, the redder the brass the warmer the sound, thr more nickel silver, the more brilliant, but then you have actual silvers which do different things, plus carbons.....

Harrison's point should not be overlooked. For me, I can notice brass(es) vs silver vs nickel, but a good/bad day influences my own sound far more. Personally the aesthetic differences are more noticeable, and I'm fine admitting such.

bimmerman wrote: ↑Mon Dec 07, 2020 8:30 am Extremely generally speaking, the redder the brass the warmer the sound, thr more nickel silver, the more brilliant, but then you have actual silvers which do different things, plus carbons.....

Let's make sure we complete the story on copper content in bells. Yes, higher copper content tends to warm up the sound when the volume is mezzo-forte or softer. However, higher copper content in bells tends to brighten the sound as the horn goes into the louder spectrum......especially on the thinner red brass and copper bells. Many modern symphonic players who wish to play loud and keep their sound dark play on yellow brass bells because the tone quality stays more consistent from pianissimo to fortissimo.

I inherited a nice collection of 1960s orchestral albums from my parents. Quite a few of these albums are the Boston, Philadelphia and New York orchestras. I love to listen to them because the tonal concept was very different back then. Many of the trombone players played 88Hs (thin, red brass bells)and the tone definitely got brighter when they played fortissimo.

I agree with much of what Harrison wrote. Purely from my own perspective and opinion, FWIW, I would clarify and add the following:

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Mon Dec 07, 2020 12:23 am The Alessi 396 model is also excellent. I'm glad that Joseph Alessi did all of the play testing so that I didn't have to. I never would have come up with that.

Harrison is referring to the Alessi model designed and built by Edwards, the instrument with the harmonic brace and pillars made of different shapes and alloys. (This is different from the current Alessi model made by S.E. Shires.) Edwards states, and many attest, that the pillars and their placement significantly change the response (feel), the player’s sense of sound (behind the bell), and the audience’s perception of sound (in front of the bell). Others who play this particular model state that the harmonic pillars change the response and sound, but they play the horn without the pillars. The fact that numerous professionals adopted the horn shortly after it was introduced and continue to play it speaks volumes.

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Mon Dec 07, 2020 12:23 am The pure custom trombones that deviate from the incredible amount of research that Conn or Bach did in the past are generally not good. Again, who knows how many versions of the Alessi horn were made before Joe settled on it. That is a tested design that I would put alongside the 88H or 42B in terms of research that went into it, especially when you consider that they were taking a lot of design elements straight off Bach designs.

A detail here: I think it worthwhile noting in this discussion that many of Edwards’s early designs originated from Steven Shires, who later went on to found S.E. Shires trombones. Additionally, the 396 retained some elements of the Edwards designs, along with design elements from Bach trombones and Conn trombones. Example: the 396 bell is a two-piece bell with an unsoldered bead, much like a Conn bell, but has a design and manufacturing process that is intended to mimic a one-piece bell with a soldered bead, like a Bach bell. It also has proprietary elements to it. It’s not a hybrid, but its own unique design that tends to respond in a particular way, i.e., a response that Joe Alessi wanted at the time.

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Mon Dec 07, 2020 12:23 am Sure, materials make a difference. I don't think they change the sound, but they change the feedback to the player, and that changes the way the player approaches their input, which changes the sound. So in that sense they can create feedback loops.

Harrison’s point here is spot on: everything about a horn makes a difference. Changes in the instrument affect the overall response and therefore the sound. In a sense, it really makes no difference whether it’s a gold brass or yellow brass bell, for example. What’s more important is how the player responds to that bell. The placebo effect is real.

Another important point made by Harrison I would like to emphasize: Conn, Bach, Edwards, Shires, Yamaha, and all other makers put research and development into their models. They’ve tried many of the different combinations, and produce instruments that will satisfy most players in most conditions. They’ve already done the work. Does that mean that the more exotic or unusual elements and combinations shouldn’t be tried? Absolutely not. They will work for some people who want a particular sound, or whose playing abilities are helped by a particular alloy. Just bear in mind that a blend of nickel, copper and gold brass, while producing a unique and beautiful sound, might not produce a sound that blends well in a section of more standard combinations of alloys.

My apologies for the overlong post...

CLOSE THE CAN OF WORMS.

Stick to non-modular horns if you are like me. Constantly worrying whether it's the BEST POSSIBLE COMBINATION will make you lose so much sleep.

tbonesullivan wrote: ↑Mon Dec 07, 2020 8:39 pm CLOSE THE CAN OF WORMS.

Stick to non-modular horns if you are like me. Constantly worrying whether it's the BEST POSSIBLE COMBINATION will make you lose so much sleep.

Here is an interesting point....

I don't necessarily agree, but I do agree. Go to an expert to get fitted if you go the modular route. They have seen enough different people to know what works generally for different types of players. For example, when I was doing this, it was pretty obvious to me within a few minutes if a player was going to work with red/gold/whatever bells. Their sound either meshed with the material or didn't. Sure, we could dance around and offset things, but that was a pretty clear feedback to a listener who listened to these horns daily in consistent circumstances. For example, I know that I pretty much always sound better on yellow brass with very little gold or red mixed in. I still love the sound of the gold brass horns, but I cannot maintain or control them really. I wish I could. Same for nickel for me. The more I put on a horn the less I can get it to resonate. This is 100% just me, not anything inherent with the metal.

Back to the OP... I don't know that I have an opinion on this for different types of horns Alto/Tenor/Bass... All of my observations and experiences have been just as valid for one size horn as for another. I wouldn't inherently chose one material on one horn and a different on another if I were just imagining them on paper. However, I do chose the horns in front of me and the best horn wins. For this, aside from my aversion to nickel, I am willing to negotiate away my preferences based on actual experiences. Build quality, wind column shape, and my playing are way bigger inputs to the sound than the tuning slide material, so I will trade a minor theoretical improvement to a physical feedback that I get with an actual horn.

Cheers,
Andy

Yeah I agree with Andy, other than I find a touch of nickel almost always helps my tone quality be more flexible but I also gravitate towards redder bells and so that makes sense. But I've played some unbelievable horns that don't fit what I'd build on paper. Neobri has a spectacular Bach 50 with Rath/Hagmann valves. I generally don't gravitate towards Bach anymore but holy moly. I also usually don't like all yellow brass horns. I also don't usually like Hagmanns. Yet, that is undeniably one of the best basses I've ever laid my hands on. There's a recording of me out there somewhere playing... I think it was a Christmas album(?).

I do contend with the idea that buying a fixed instrument prevents you from tweaking or that it is cheaper. After all, how do you know when to stop? You find a great stock Bach 42B. But... what about the thayer valve? Do you buy an entire bell section (or an entire 42T!)? Chop up the horn and put a Thayer on the existing one?

What stops you from worrying that you have the best combination is to stop worrying about whether or not you have the best combination! And there is nothing inherently inferior about a modular horn that would make you feel less content than a stock horn. In fact, I don't have the research in front of me, but I recall some research that indicated that the amount of money or sacrifice put into a purchase actually led to higher levels of satisfaction, independent of the quality of whatever product they were looking into. So if you want to stop tweaking, it may actually be better to go the modular route, notwithstanding the fact that if you work with someone as Andy suggested, you might end up feeling more confident about having the best combination because it was hand selected by someone who does that professionally, for you.

Which isn't to disparage fixed horns at all. I have more fixed horns than modular horns at the moment... But the amount of tweaking I've done to my fixed horns actually outweighs the amount of change I've made to my modular horns, personally. Front and center, the Yamaha franken horn I'm about to get back from the shop that has a 356G slide with a nickel 354 crook, a King 2b+ leadpipe, a 646 valve, a 645G tuning slide, and a 645Y bell.

elmsandr wrote: ↑Tue Dec 08, 2020 7:30 am

Here is an interesting point....

I don't necessarily agree, but I do agree. Go to an expert to get fitted if you go the modular route. They have seen enough different people to know what works generally for different types of players. For example, when I was doing this, it was pretty obvious to me within a few minutes if a player was going to work with red/gold/whatever bells. Their sound either meshed with the material or didn't. Sure, we could dance around and offset things, but that was a pretty clear feedback to a listener who listened to these horns daily in consistent circumstances. For example, I know that I pretty much always sound better on yellow brass with very little gold or red mixed in. I still love the sound of the gold brass horns, but I cannot maintain or control them really. I wish I could. Same for nickel for me. The more I put on a horn the less I can get it to resonate. This is 100% just me, not anything inherent with the metal.[/quote] Well, yes, that is the one caveat: getting fitted, which is the way the modular systems were designed to really work. It was to make custom horns less "risky" and easier to accomplish. It wasn't so that you could keep an arsenal of bells around, or so that you could constantly change stuff.

I have considered making the trip to get fitted for a Custom horn, but right now is not the time unfortunately.