TromboneChat

I just bought another Holton tr159. I've really enjoyed most of the Holtons I've owned, with the exception of a tiny Stratodyne and a tr181 that was just too hard to control. The big tenors in particular have been great. 159, 156, 150, 158.

But, one thing I've noticed is that the valve casing outer diameter on this 159 is tiny. (easiest dimension to take without opening up the horns)

Valve shell OD
159 - 1.18"
88h - 1.25
79h - 1.25
36b - 1.25
Instrument Innovations tenor- 1.44
Kanstul bass - 1.54

The bottom slide on the 159 is .562 - same as the Kanstul, and the valve is smaller than valves on typical .525 bore horns.

If you were to close your eyes and play each of these horns, you'd probably pick up that the Kanstul has a big valve, but I don't think you'd get that the Holton is that small.

Given that the 159 is kind of a tweener horn, has anyone swapped out some of these small Holton valves for something larger? I'm in the process of making a plug in valve for the 159, but the F valve will be this 1.18 small valve, and the dependent valve will be the Instrument Innovations 1.44 valve. I can add the plug-in without torching the main horn. Getting another II valve to replace the std Holton looks like it wouldn't be just a drop in - there would be some spacing fiddling to do. On paper, it doesn't look good with the different size valves, but I have a feeling that in practice it won't be a disaster. Does anyone have any before/after stories on swapping out a small Holton valve?

I thought about doing the same to my 158. It was an obvious weak point of the horn.

The low range on the 159 is already pretty solid. The valve does feel /sound a little small, but not as small as it looks. A big valve on the plugin will at least keep the valve range open. I'll try the plug in and see what happens. Maybe I'll swap the main valve later.

The horn feels a bit front heavy too, so the plugin should help that too.

I think it's a reasonable assumption; however, having now been on a dual-bore rotor from Shires for a little over a month now, I'm totally amazed at how small the exterior casing is relative to how "open" feeling the rotor is. Obviously, the Holton design is probably different (certainly, with regards to the exit ports). If the hand slide receiver and tuning slide receiver parts weren't (likely) impossible to come by, I might even suggest making it modular:
Picture stolen and fabulously modified using Paint from Brass Exchange

Matt K wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 6:23 am I might even suggest making it modular:

If you made a 159 into a straight horn, you'd have a 156. I owned one of those 30 some years ago. Incredibly powerful horn. Played in Virginia Beach Symphony, with a lot of military players, and they believed in volume. These days I don't have any place to play something like that. My more delicate 8h covers the kind of playing I run into now. Plus, I'm not in the playing shape now that I was then.

My plan for the 159 is to go the other direction with it and use it as a more trombone-like bass trombone. My Kanstul is really nice in some ways, but it's a velvety bass voice that sounds like a really rich cello. That's a nice place to be able to go, but that horn can't get out of that groove. I need something that offers those 2-valve notes, but still sounds like a trombone. Put a smaller mouthpiece (5g-2g) in the 159, and you can play a tenor part convincingly. With a 1.25G size piece, it's a convincing bass bone. Add a valve and it's a real bass bone.

I was thinking to add a different valve rather than a straight neckpipe. That would let you keep the existing valve setup and let you make a dependent section. But replacing the rotor and adding a plug in is probably going to be the cheaper route. Depends on howbig you want the rotors to be. I've always wanted a double thayer tenor setup on a similar bell but the amount of money that would take relative to how useful it would be is... erm, debatable.