TromboneChat

Out of curiosity, did Bach ever made a 50 sterling silver bell? If not, why not? Does somebody knows something?

No. Only small bores, 36 and 42.

Sterling is very expensive. Bach 50 bells are very thin and it is my understanding that a fair amount of 50 bells fail in the spinning and hammering processes.

I don't think that Bach ever used Sterling. Their silver bells were 99% pure, electroformed by plating onto a mandrel.

"It's Christmas time in the city"

I'm pretty sure that Sterling gets progressively harder to work with as bells get larger. Nobody can afford to have any failure rate with material that expensive.

And it's heavy.

I dont see bach specifically excluding 50's from having sterling plus bells without reason. They made them for almost everything else. And after all, there are a number of king basses, boutique basses, and german basses that have sterling silver bells, all to much success. that being said, Sterling Plus is as mentioned, "pure" silver and not sterling silver, which means it is a magnitude softer than sterling silver, and plays a little differently.

I suppose there may have been a prototype or 2 of the 50 in sterling plus but it probably had either no interest, too thin/soft, didnt play desireably or produce a satisfactory sound to them or probably a combination of reasons. and then the bell prototypes probably got shoved into the back of a warehouse somewhere or melted down to make other bells.

Bach sterling plus bells on various bones as well as on trumpets have been known to be EXTREMELY soft. so much so that if you so much as simply stare at it with too much scrutiny, the bell may dent. and bach 50 bells are already thin as is, so keeping it that thin in sterling plus may very well have just made the bell far too soft and fragile that it wouldnt hold together in all but the most controlled environments

Doug Elliott wrote: ↑Sun Jan 26, 2025 11:59 am I don't think that Bach ever used Sterling. Their silver bells were 99% pure, electroformed by plating onto a mandrel.

Bach did actually make sterling bells from sheets of sterling silver and those bells are just marked as Sterling Silver as opposed to Sterling Silver Plus. My understanding is that those were earlier and rarer. There is a sold 36 on the Brass Ark website with just the Sterling Silver bell not the Plus: https://brassark.com/sale_horns/vincent ... ng-silver/

To create an electroformed bell you have to create a mandrel. This would be a [normally steel] form on which the bell is to be plated up. I don't think a bass mandrel was ever made. Conn made mandrels for the small bores, up to an 8" (200 mm) bell (which they used for copper electroforming -- Coprion).

King never did electroformed bells; all the SilverSonic bells were made from sheet sterling silver. At one time Conn offered sterling silver bells on the 88H as a special order.

The first sterling bells Bach made in the early 90s were sheet. They quickly moved to electro formed plus bells so there was maybe 4-5 years of a couple examples. Also possible that a few special orders were done in the 80s before they did a big campaign promoting them. I’ve seen 12,16,36,42, which makes sense as these horns were originally set up for iconic LA studio musicians. Never have seen or heard of a sterling 50 bell.

Pretty much impossible to get a sterling silver bell trombone from Bach now. They made a trumpet for Rashawn Ross of Dave Matthew’s band recently, that’s the only example I know of.

I don’t know of anyone using one professionally anymore, though they remain in collections due to their rarity and unique profile. I would imagine the sheet horns project a bit better. The players I know who own or have owned them moved on to brass bells, 3Bs, or Yamahas.

Couple of minor points.

The thickness of a brass bell is unrelated the thickness of an electroformed bell. Brass bells start out as sheet of a certain thickness. Where as electroformed bells can be formed to whatever the desired thickness may be.

Bells don't get "melted down to be made into other bells". Conn-Selmer doesn't have smelting capability. They buy sheet metal from vendors. Any bells/parts that may be scrap for whatever reason are sold as scrap, for cents on the dollar, to be recycled by the scrap metal companies.

hornbuilder wrote: ↑Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:09 pm Bells don't get "melted down to be made into other bells". Conn-Selmer doesn't have smelting capability. They buy sheet metal from vendors. Any bells/parts that may be scrap for whatever reason are sold as scrap, for cents on the dollar, to be recycled by the scrap metal companies.

If a bell for some reason gets unusable or defect from its production into being a bell, is it impossible then to re-work the metal into a new bell or another instrument part? If so: What makes it so, does the metal loose certain traits or is it just irrevocably (de)formed? I'd assume it also depends on in what stage of the process the defect is shown.

Just being curious.

Like, what? Under very few circumstances, maybe. For the most part, you either repair it to what it was intended to be or scrap it. I guess if you barely damage the outside edge of the material while trying to make a 42 rim, you may be able to make a 36 instead, but for the most part you break it and it is scrap metal.

I’ve turned a number of scrap flares into brass funnels, does that count?
Andy

The cost/time factor is a big consideration. How much time does it take to "fix" something, that will never, actually, be defect free. VS just make a new one. And no, parts made for one application can't be magically repurposed to be something else.