TromboneChat

On a whim, I got a used Selman (with an 'n') alto trombone. I figured, it is what it is, so I did not have high expectations. Just for fun, play around in Eb, bring to trombone quartet rehearsal for the odd piece. Whatever. I play small tenor, large tenor, bass bone and tuba, mainly small tenor and tuba, electric bass, so an eeffer is foreign territory to me. I haven't played one for at least 2 decades. A friend's very very fine Conn 34H w/trigger. Ancient history. Anyhoo, so keep that as a caveat as I ramble with my first experiences. Kind of an unboxing video without the video, and no packing material. And of course, YMMV. I by no means encourage anyone to buy an alto.

If you're a "real" alto 'bone player, nuthin' to see here.

Selman is yet another typical Jinbao copy of, I guess, the Slokar. I think the specs say .480 bore. With, I did not know, a removable leadpipe, which comes into play sooner than I expected. Arrived intact. As expected, lightly used, so slide was rough and someone had been using slide oil, which stank and was not optimal. A couple of bell dings.

Immediately, this went into the tub for a good soak and cleaning. The horn was a return and/or a floor model, so really, god knows what was in it. And for sure, some kind of gray machining slag came out. A vigorous cleaning kind of made it happy. Dried it in and out. Lacquer is in good shape. Good swab of the slides. But probably need to come back and burnish the inside at some point.
Lubed the tuning slide with Hetman #7. Dig the crazy curve and brace. The start and end of the tuning slide are offset quite a bit, which explains the diagonal upper brace. You'll see other versions like the nearly identical Moz alto with a bent brace like the lower brace to deal with that. And the curve in the bow is not at all symmetrical. Much sharper turn as the diameter increases and transitions toward the bell. I had not seen one of these in person, so that surprised me. Not sure if that is purposeful for some acoustic reason or just what came out of the design.

Slide-o-mix on the hand slide, a little extra. I may have to get some of the Yamaha goo that people like so much.

In terms of construction, things that caught my attention were the really tinny feeling slide lock and at the slide receiver. Just feels like very light pressed metal, whether that is thickness of the stock or just light metal. But otherwise, the horn feels like it has decent soldering and bracing. Water key fine. I think the big question with these horns is how they hold up after 3 or 5 years under real use. Bell thickness a little light maybe; I can bend with my fingers. It's just over 7" around. My small tenor mutes for my King 3B 8" bell are way too big, FWIW.

I play a Corporation Bach 7C on my 1973ish King 3B, and that worked fine, but the horn seemed to like my Conn 12C. The Conn has a different taper, so not a solution (wobbles a bit in the receiver), but as others have said, I think something in the neighborhood of 7 to 11 or 12Cs are generally okay on Alto, whether you play Bach or any of the great brands out there. I know someone who plays a 22, and sparkles. The nameless sizeless stock piece that came with the horn is in that 7C range, but a sharper rim, so it felt too weird that I didn't spend time with it. but I'll give it another shot just to see. I think I have a Stork 7ish somewhere in my stuff that might work. But I'll probably stick with the 7C so I don't change my regular rim set up.

Pretty good intonation, slightly sharp 6th partial and 5th partial. High Eb seemed okay, but I'll have to work in that range a bit to figure it out. The F above (not really a money note for me) seemed better in 3rd. The partial series at least feels familiar. Nothing too wild, other than short positions. 2nd is pretty tight on alto, (and I won't rely on tuning to A anytime soon), and I usually play my King tenor with the tuning slide in a bit to play a little long on the main slide in order to manage, but not really an option on Eb if I ever want to use 7th. I played the tuning slide in with about 1/2" showing at first, but now probably closer to 3/4", but that which change as I get used to the horn. Between the tone of trombone and trumpet, but not, thank god, like a mello-phone.

But the hand slide, ugghh! And got worse as that first coat of slide-O worked in. And it hung up a little extra right where the upper brace on the handslide is, especially in 1st and 7th position when the brace is at/around the stocking. Makes me think it's out of round, from manufacture. And compared to my King and my bass bone, there is not extra thickness or sleeve at the top of the outer slide.

What I had not done, though, what take out the removable leadpipe. Turns out, it was really cranked in there, so a few taps with the leather mallet and it agreed to come out. Good thing I removed it, more slag, and I could get into the inner slide to clean it better. And in the end, I went ahead and re-cleaned the inner and outer slide. I also took off the slide lock, which is a couple of inches long, up to the inner slide brace. More slag. That exposed the felt, which was a mess, torn in half, so I tidied that up. Another manufacture detail was the inner slide is not polished all the way up the tube. So could be the source of some of the 1st position friction. I gave it an extra cleaning, but may need to have that buffed out in the future, by someone with the tools and skills. On assembly, much better. New coating of Slide-o-Mix. 7th better but still meh, but with the weight of the slide on that short stocking, I'm not too surprised. But for me, I could get a solid low E and A. On reassembly, I put some Hetman on the slide lock and slide receiver nuts, which helped them feel less like a toy part. I have an old King 2B liberty screw on counterweight (the best little engineering IMHO), I might screw on just to see if it helps balance or tone.

The pedal Eb was surprising good (that does not mean it was great, but better than I expected), and I think I can improve my playing in that range but I lost it around pedal Db. False tones (privileged tones) in the low gap range, nothing to write home about. I might get the G and F to speak someday. I guess on some altos (Yamaha?) these can be plenty usable notes. I do use false tones on my sousa and tuba, but not really on my 'bones.

In the end, the slide is working okay, I give it a 6.5-7 out of ten (up from a 4). Meaning if it were a King 3B, I would not have taken it home from the shop. All my other horns' slides are 9+. And I think the Selman could be 8-8.5 with a pro touch up, especially to check the alignment/parallel of the slides and maybe a little burnish on the inside of the outer slides. Or maybe it just needs to be played. Like the Velveteen Rabbit, if I love it enough, it will become a real Alto!

I warmed up on my small tenor, then I did some long tones and position checks on the alto, playing along with those Cello drones. Jammed on some blues and bossas play alongs, which I'm sure sounded awful, but still fun, my embouchure cried "uncle!" where even mid range notes got all fuzzy, then some more tones with the drones, and cooled down on my tenor, which felt a little foreign. I did not notice any major back pressure despite the smaller bore. Definitely, smaller aperture at the lips. That was an hour and a half, so time flew.

In the end, you get what you pay for, and after my cleaning work, I suppose I did get what I paid for. But I think it is a good little stepping stone horn for me. Which is pretty funny, being late career. I'll guess that a great alto player could make the horn sound good. Still the Conn 34H is my benchmark and dream buy. I hear the Yamaha is quite fine. Rath makes everything good.

I think the cheapo horns, like this and the Moz, which were selling for well under $200 are getting closer to $300, still much less than the JB and the custom versions of the JB out there, around $500, so I think I did okay with a slightly used bargain. Probably, I'll work up a couple of high ballads with my jazz combo and see what I can get the horn to do. I wonder how Donna Lee lies on Eb trombone. I do not think I'll be running out to buy a new lead pipe, like the Brass Ark pipes, which would more than double my investment.

Back in the case, I realized the slide sits opposite of my other horns, with the bottom bow to the left by the bell. Cheap but form fitting case. Good 'nuff. Nothing I'd fly with, to all my alto gigs.
Not!

Nice review.

However I've never understood the attitude of not investing in improvements because "it would more than double my investment." It would be more worth it if you had paid more for the horn?

Doug Elliott wrote: ↑Thu Jan 31, 2019 9:54 pm Nice review.

However I've never understood the attitude of not investing in improvements because "it would more than double my investment." It would be more worth it if you had paid more for the horn?

These Jin Bao altos tend to be really good for the price. They were one of their very few brass instrument that Jin Bao nailed early on. Never going to be as mechanically perfect as a high quality brand, but they play well and aren't too hard to sound good on, especially if you want a brighter alto sound. I do feel like they want to be played with a smaller mouthpiece, I remember one in particular really coming alive when you'd put a 12C or smaller in it, whereas it sounded and felt terrible with a 11c and worse as you tried anything bigger. There might be dogs out there and maybe they don't last being used a lot over extended periods, but I've played concerts on 4 different borrowed Jin Bao altos and they were all between good enough to very good. I know of people who have used one of those in major symphonies.

You can get a replacement leadpipe from HornGuys that is specifically designed for this horn and does significantly improve it.

Be careful with the nut at the slide receiver, the threading is not great and it can easily get stuck.

Doug Elliott wrote: ↑Thu Jan 31, 2019 9:54 pm Nice review.

However I've never understood the attitude of not investing in improvements because "it would more than double my investment." It would be more worth it if you had paid more for the horn?

Yeah, I get that. That’s the right perspective. Maybe, first things first. I need to work on me, primarily, building my skills and approach to the alto, and get a touch up on the slide. That’s the first investment. For now, I don’t know that I would benefit greatly from a leadpipe or even fell the benefit until my alto chops come together’at least a little. And then I might make a better selection on the leadpipe. Quite a price jump, for example, from the yellow brass to the silver, So I’d want to me in shape and sensitive enough to make a good decision, and take the time to test the pipes thoroughly.

LeTromboniste wrote: ↑Fri Feb 01, 2019 4:47 am I do feel like they want to be played with a smaller mouthpiece, I remember one in particular really coming alive when you'd put a 12C or smaller in it, whereas it sounded and felt terrible with a 11c and worse as you tried anything bigger.

You can get a replacement leadpipe from HornGuys that is specifically designed for this horn and does significantly improve it.

Be careful with the nut at the slide receiver, the threading is not great and it can easily get stuck.

Yes, I could definitely tell the difference with the 12 over the 7c. Anything 6 1/2ish was awful; Might as well play on a garden hose and funnel. I have a pal with buckets of mouthpieces, so I’ll give some smaller pieces a try.

Oh I had forgotten about the HornGuys pipes. Thanks.

Good tip on the slide receiver lock. The big parts fit together well, and tight enough to be a friction lock. Secure. So just gotta remember to take my time and take care. I’ll try to remember to use the same technique as with lighter valve caps; holding the horn perpendicular to the floor, you rotate the lock backwards lightly until you feel the click of the first thread and then tighten.

BrassedOn wrote: ↑Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:36 am

Yes, I could definitely tell the difference with the 12 over the 7c. Anything 6 1/2ish was awful; Might as well play on a garden hose and funnel. I have a pal with buckets of mouthpieces, so I’ll give some smaller pieces a try.
[/quote]

BrassedOn wrote: ↑Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:53 pm the horn seemed to like my Conn 12C. The Conn has a different taper, so not a solution (wobbles a bit in the receiver), but as others have said, I think something in the neighborhood of 7 to 11 or 12Cs are generally okay on Alto, whether you play Bach or any of the great brands out there. I know someone who plays a 22, and sparkles. The nameless sizeless stock piece that came with the horn is in that 7C range, but a sharper rim, so it felt too weird that I didn't spend time with it. but I'll give it another shot just to see. I think I have a Stork 7ish somewhere in my stuff that might work. But I'll probably stick with the 7C so I don't change my regular rim set up.

I found my old Conn 12C to be a really good alto piece too. You can always use floss or waxed thread to make the tapers fit better and stop the wobbling. Bach 15c and 22c also seemed to work well. If you're a "different rim size for every horn" kind of player, there's a guy in SoCal named John Cather who makes custom mouthpieces specifically proportioned for alto, it's worth looking into. He prefers and typically makes them with very narrow (21-22mm) rim diameters, but I imagine he will make anything a client wants. And if there's a rim profile you particularly like, you can send him that for him to copy.

Doug Elliott wrote: ↑Thu Jan 31, 2019 9:54 pm However I've never understood the attitude of not investing in improvements because "it would more than double my investment."

I think there's a (somewhat "natural" or "intuitive"?) feeling that investing in improvments on a "cheap" instrument is like the proverbial attempt to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Along with a view that "Well, the reason I got this was because it was so cheap, and I'm sure not going to add a lot of expense to it now." Understandable, but I think that in a lot of cases, not particularly rational. I tend to look at it as the "incremental" cost of getting a certain benefit out of added investment compared to capitulating and buying a "better instrument". But we all have our own risk/cost/benefit considerations.

When I got my Schiller 7B clone I went into that with the full knowledge and intent that I'd be adding some improvements and what the added cost would be. The bullet brace was very likely something I'd have added to any horn I got -- so that wasn't an "incremental" expense compared to getting a better instrument. Similarly for the lead pipe. And I almost certainly would have ended up making similar ergonomic changes. And all that didn't come close to doubling my investment. But a lot of these choices are really about what your expectations were in the first place and what you hope to end up with. I've also bought a couple of used instruments (one old Martin baritone and one cheesy no-name Chinese trombone) that I decided weren't even worth trying to fix. The baritone got donated to a grade school music teacher as a decoration and "show and tell" object, and pieces of the trombone are sitting around waiting to be used in future projects. Ya gotta know when to hold 'em, and know when to fold 'em.

I used to have a Selman alto - mine was the nickel plated one. Had I played alto more I probably would have bought a Stauffer or BrassArk pipe for it, but it worked just fine for me stock. Mine had an awesome pedal Eb and below and reasonably in tune partials all around, except 2nd-partial Eb which I had to play as far out as one plays high G on a tenor. The slide was pretty bad but usable. Kind of wish I didn't sell it, but then I never get called to play alto so it would have just sat at home.

As I already mentioned in some other thread here there is a review of Moz (you might've seen it) on YT by Mike Lake.
He compares it to his Yamaha alto and says 'Go for it' if you don't have to spare $2K.

I have one of the JB or Selman altos a friend was selling. If I had started on that I would have given up... It feels like a lot of work to play, very stuffy and doesn't center very well. A new leadpipe would probably be well worth getting but it hasn't been a priority since I have an actual good alto.

I wonder how come there cold be co radically diverse opinions on the same horn?

LeTromboniste: "...Jin Bao altos and they were all between good enough to very good. I know of people who have used one of those in major symphonies."
Doug Ellioti: "It feels like a lot of work to play, very stuffy and doesn't center very well."

So how those who play major symphonies on JB altos manage to coax a decent sound out of them?

Half Note, the big problem is QC. Apparently there is nearly none among Jin Bao instruments. You can find one that isn't bad or one that is terrible. But nobody is going to let you sort through a pile of them to find the one that "works". This is the problem with most of the Chinese instruments you can find at very low prices.

I don't think the Chinese are intentionally trying to make bad product. They probably can't (or don't want to be bothered) to rework any that aren't very good.

I don't want to turn this thread into a discussion about why Chinese instruments are better/worse than western ones, but here I go anyway... probably nothing new:

The issue of quality control is not unique to instruments of Chinese manufacture. You can find the same issues at all price points with western-made instruments. Maybe not to the same extent, but they're there. There is a Bach A47 that has been sitting on the wall at my local music store that has pretty horrible corrosion right where the main bell brace is soldered/brazed (not sure which one) to the bell-slide receiver. That's a pretty shocking lack of quality control on Conn-Selmer's flagship trombone. That's something you would expect to see on a "junk" Chinese-made instrument.

The issues with Chinese instruments is two-fold: a lack of original designs and a lack of maintainability and repairability. Every good Chinese-made instrument is a copy of a western design. This is less an issue with Chinese band instrument manufacturers specifically, and more an issue with how the Chinese economy operates as a whole. The maintainability and repairability issues, while tied to the poor initial QC, are compounded by the complete lack of availability of replacement parts. Techs in my area refuse to work on certain brands, even higher-price-point brands, from China, because they have had terrible experiences getting replacement parts. While that A47 I mentioned can be economically repaired, a Chinese knock-off would probably get tossed.

You're paying for your instrument one way or another. There are plenty of examples of western band instruments still in use professionally after 50+ years of careful maintenance that can out-play 90% of the "pro level" horns marketed by both western and Chinese manufacturers. The fact that they are still operating is not only a testament to the quality of their manufacture, but equally indicative of the quality of the industry which produced them. Even at the nadir of the band instrument industry in the US, replacement parts were readily available, and instruments came from the factory with some sort of warranty. This is still not true of Chinese instruments, and therefore it's not unreasonable to say that 20 years from now, there will be far fewer of the current crop of Chinese instruments still being used than even the aforementioned "senior citizens" that came out of western factories 70+ years prior.

We're now in a time where quality has been superseded by planned obsolescence, warranties have been shortened, and the most economical solution is often to replace, rather than to repair. The macroscopic trend toward this is the foundation of the Chinese manufacture-for-export economy. It's not a huge leap to see how this has permeated their band instrument manufacture as well. For most people, "good enough" is just that. Some of us though, demand more, and that demand has yet to be met satisfactorily by any Chinese-originated instrument (and by a great number of western-manufactured ones). We'll see how things pan out in the future.

Replacement parts are part of the issue but maybe not even as much as quality of the manufacture in the first place. It's not unusual to have parts break or fall apart when you start working on it... I don't do repairs myself but I hear about that kind of thing. No one wants to be responsible for telling the customer that their POS instrument is trash when "it only needed _______."

In terms of playing quality, with virtually any brand of any instrument from anywhere you can try multiple samples and feel differences, sometime major differences.
If you only play one you have no comparison so you make it work even if it's a bad one... or you try mouthpieces until one plays OK in it.

I concur with Doug, and I’d also caution Paul that every single criticism he levied against Chinese-made horns were made against Yamaha (Japanese-made). Skip forward 20 years and Yamaha makes amazing horns that are consistent enough that now people complain they’re “too bland” and “don’t have enough character.” Same thing with Taiwanese horns from Jupiter (now XO). I’d venture that Yamaha and XO have done more R&D in the last 10 years than all of Conn-Selmer combined. Dismissing them outright is a mistake.

brtnats wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 5:38 pm I concur with Doug, and I’d also caution Paul that every single criticism he levied against Chinese-made horns were made against Yamaha (Japanese-made). Skip forward 20 years and Yamaha makes amazing horns that are consistent enough that now people complain they’re “too bland” and “don’t have enough character.” Same thing with Taiwanese horns from Jupiter (now XO). I’d venture that Yamaha and XO have done more R&D in the last 10 years than all of Conn-Selmer combined. Dismissing them outright is a mistake.

I fully agree! The Japanese economy underwent a transformation in the years following WWII... I'm not sure that China is capable of the same, but that discussion reaches far beyond brass instrument manufacture!

The issues is not whether or not the Chinese instruments 20 years from now will be up to snuff, it's whether or not the current Chinese instruments will be up to snuff 20 years from now.

"more R&D in the last 10 years than all of Conn-Selmer combined"

You may be underestimating Conn in the mid-1900's; they did a tremendous amount of R&D.

Doug Elliott wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 10:55 pm "more R&D in the last 10 years than all of Conn-Selmer combined"

You may be underestimating Conn in the mid-1900's; they did a tremendous amount of R&D.

I think he meant over the same time period (i. e., the last ten years).

brtnats wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 5:38 pm I concur with Doug, and I’d also caution Paul that every single criticism he levied against Chinese-made horns were made against Yamaha (Japanese-made). Skip forward 20 years and Yamaha makes amazing horns that are consistent enough that now people complain they’re “too bland” and “don’t have enough character.” Same thing with Taiwanese horns from Jupiter (now XO). I’d venture that Yamaha and XO have done more R&D in the last 10 years than all of Conn-Selmer combined. Dismissing them outright is a mistake.

To be fair, consistency is not why people complain about the Yamaha sound. It simply is not as interesting a sound as some other makers, and in my opinion that is why Yamaha is still under-represented among symphonic trombone and French horn players. I suspect it is because of the metal they are using. When I work on Yamaha instruments, I notice that the brass is very soft compared to other makers - without temper. You have to be very careful fixing a Yamaha instrument. The metal has no "memory". If you push a dent out too far you can easily create a bulge. I believe that is how they produce very consistent instruments that play very easily. The trade off is that for some people, the sound lacks character.

brassmedic wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 8:57 am ... When I work on Yamaha instruments, I notice that the brass is very soft compared to other makers - without temper. You have to be very careful fixing a Yamaha instrument. ...

That's really interesting!
I remember reading a thread on one of the 2 major trumpet forums where a tech was saying almost word for word the following: "I repair brass instruments and when raising dents the most difficult instruments for me are Yamaha ones since they use very hard brass".

brassmedic wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 8:57 am To be fair, consistency is not why people complain about the Yamaha sound. It simply is not as interesting a sound as some other makers, and in my opinion that is why Yamaha is still under-represented among symphonic trombone and French horn players....I believe that is how they produce very consistent instruments that play very easily. The trade off is that for some people, the sound lacks character.

Yes, I have played Yamahas that I described as "one dimensional". These were tenors 651 and 691. I don't remember the 613R bass having the same problem. I know that the 891z I have has a much more interesting sound. I can totally believe that the metal is softer and/or un- tempered.

Yamahas are bland?

On guitar forums, Martin guys like to say "Taylors lack soul!"

On pickup forums, Chevy guys like to say "Fords are made out of re-cycled beer cans!"

On bike forums, Harley guys like to say "Hondas are foofy riceburners!"

All emotional nonsense. Except for the Fords. They are made out of recycled beer cans. GO CHEVY!!!

TBoneHalfNote wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 10:58 am

brassmedic wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 8:57 am ... When I work on Yamaha instruments, I notice that the brass is very soft compared to other makers - without temper. You have to be very careful fixing a Yamaha instrument. ...

That's really interesting!
I remember reading a thread on one of the 2 major trumpet forums where a tech was saying almost word for word the following: "I repair brass instruments and when raising dents the most difficult instruments for me are Yamaha ones since they use very hard brass".

Was he talking about student horns? Those tend to have very heavy gauge brass and dent work tends to be more difficult.

PaulT wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 12:33 pm Yamahas are bland?

On guitar forums, Martin guys like to say "Taylors lack soul!"

On pickup forums, Chevy guys like to say "Fords are made out of re-cycled beer cans!"

On bike forums, Harley guys like to say "Hondas are foofy riceburners!"

All emotional nonsense. Except for the Fords. They are made out of recycled beer cans. GO CHEVY!!!

People react emotionally when they perceive that not everyone likes their favorite brand? You don't say.

brassmedic wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 1:21 pm

TBoneHalfNote wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 10:58 am That's really interesting!
I remember reading a thread on one of the 2 major trumpet forums where a tech was saying almost word for word the following: "I repair brass instruments and when raising dents the most difficult instruments for me are Yamaha ones since they use very hard brass".

Was he talking about student horns? Those tend to have very heavy gauge brass and dent work tends to be more difficult.

Could be student horns - I don't remember the details of that discussion but I memorized the major idea.
Your comment can be backed up by another fact(?). I remember reading on the sax forum that the difference between two sax models (among other features) - the 'intermediate' 52(32 in Europe) and 'a step-up professional' 62 is that the former uses unannealed brass while the latter is annealed.
That could be quite in line with your comment I guess.

PaulT wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 12:33 pm Yamahas are bland?
...

How about 'rectified'? Or maybe "sterile"?
Non essentially 'characterless' but rather with a 'pure' or maybe 'virgin' character?

I await the day when some factory in China steps out of the stencil shadows and builds a trombone with their own brand on it; proudly made in China and ready to take on the world (I think Eastman is closer to this than anyone else, but not yet there). That's what Yamaha did to get on the map (remember the original 800-series custom models?) and what Jupiter is doing now with XO. Not only does building a product in that class elevate a company's reputation, but they can apply a lot of what they learn building those high-end instruments to the rest of their line (Yamaha does a pretty good job of this; it looks like Jupiter is taking the same tack, but the jury is still out).

But for now, the situation is that the factories in China build trombones for importers and distributors, many of whom have a vested interest in keeping the origins of their wares murky (nothing new - Carl Fischer did the same with Czech-built horns a century ago).

The legend is that Yamaha took a loss on every in the Custom Series. With all due respect to Wessex and John Packer and the like, they're in the business to sell instruments that offer a good value at their price point. They're not going to get involved with something that doesn't have a good chance of turning a profit.

Instrument builders don't make metal. They buy their metal, often from the same few suppliers. The metals used to make trombones- yellow brass, gold brass, and red brass- are standardized industrial materials. If, by argument posited, a softer metal makes for a "blander" tone than a harder metal, then by this argument gold brass must be blander than yellow brass and red brass must be the blandest of all, by dint of material regardless of maker.

Well, to each ear its own definition of tone. It is safe to say there is more variation with ears than with standardized industrial metals.

PaulT wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:24 pm Instrument builders don't make metal. They buy their metal, often from the same few suppliers. The metals used to make trombones- yellow brass, gold brass, and red brass- are standardized industrial materials.

Standardized industrial alloys with each alloy being produced in different tempers. Of course, different mills arrive at a specific temper and thickness range via different rolling and annealing schedules, so that adds more variabilty. And that's just the starting stock. If the instrument maker does any sort of interim or final thermal processing, that's going to alter the properties of the material, too.

If, by argument posited, a softer metal makes for a "blander" tone than a harder metal, then by this argument gold brass must be blander than yellow brass and red brass must be the blandest of all, by dint of material regardless of maker.

Extrapolating a correlation between hardness and tone across different alloys is a bit shaky.

Most of us don't handle enough horns to really know whether Yamaha brass in thicker or thinner, harder or softer, than the same material from another company. I've subjectively noticed a tendency to dent easily on the part of Yamaha brass, but that could be a matter of thickness, hardness, observational bias, or some combination thereof.

PaulT wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:24 pm Instrument builders don't make metal. They buy their metal, often from the same few suppliers. The metals used to make trombones- yellow brass, gold brass, and red brass- are standardized industrial materials. If, by argument posited, a softer metal makes for a "blander" tone than a harder metal, then by this argument gold brass must be blander than yellow brass and red brass must be the blandest of all, by dint of material regardless of maker.

Well, to each ear its own definition of tone. It is safe to say there is more variation with ears than with standardized industrial metals.

I think that's an over-simplification of the "argument posited". First of all, is red brass softer than yellow brass? This chart says red brass is harder:

https://www.azahner.com/resources/metal-hardness

But then hardness or softness maybe isn't really what we're talking about. I just used the word "soft" to describe my observations from working on instruments. As I said, the metal is easily deformed and lacks memory. Is that ductility, malleability, deformability? I don't know; I'm not a metallurgist. I suspect it has to do with how the metal is annealed, not with the material composition of it, but I really don't know. Or could it even contain lead? There certainly are different brass alloys that have varying amounts of lead. I don't believe Yamaha advertises the exact composition of their brass or how they anneal it.

Hey! Just do what I do- Just use an alto Pbone! It will actually play better and then you can save your money for a real alto, I mean how often do you use it? What do I do if the conductor asks me what I am doing? I just tell him I thought it was a pops gig!

Wow, such insights this week!

So, as the OP, I"m a few days further into the alto-net universe of the Selman alto trombone.

As always, YMMV. I'm still new to the horn, and alto playing, really. I mentioned earlier that I'd been using a Conn 12 and Bach 7C, and although the 7C is familiar (what I play on small tenor), the smaller Conn seems better for the horn. I'm certainly not settled, but doing some intonation testing, the Conn 12 seemed to help.

Basically, I had another person watching a strob-o style tuner and digital tuner to help me test the pitch, and kind of averaged the results over a couple of days. These are just rough numbers, but as I think others have mentioned, the 3rd and 5th partial on my horn, my setup, and me (alto novice) playing. The cents differences are greater than I thought, but small variation in the slide position make a great difference. Middle 4th partial Eb at 0 (tuning slide 3/4' in my home 70 degrees, hand slide slightly out from the bumper as usual, maybe more in than on my tenor) 2nd partial Eb +7 cents (and easy blow down to pitch). Still room with 2 1/2"-3" of stocking to play the low A. 3rd partial Bb -14 (low). Hmmmm. 5th partial G +14. That was noticeable and made the figure Ab (3rd position) C (4th) Eb (5th) feel odd. 6th partial Bb +12. On middle Eb G Bb in first where G is noticeably more "out" than Bb. 8th partial Eb -5 (easy to lip up). I'll guess 50% of this variation is me, not the horn. And FWIW my impression is that it has big "slots", easy to lip.

As matters of practicality,
1) I'll probably tune the horn to Bb as that's the flat partial. That brings the tuning slide in closer to 1/2' which still gives me room if needed.
2) If I do try other mouthpieces or lead pipes, ideally they should ameliorate rather than exacerbate these pitch tendencies.
3) It is what it is, as a used Alto-Trombone-Shaped-Object (made on the cheap). Based on the other discussion on the thread, the fact that this is made in China is not the problem. Any maker in any country producing horns at really low price points are bound to have some minuses. I had one the early generation of Jupiter (Korea) tubas that really broke the mould with its innovative wrap and improved craftmanship (and very heavy). Just as Japan makers have done, and Chinese makers will likely do someday. So I appreciate the discussion for that bit of perspective.

Also this week, dug up a couple of old CDs (Actual disks with digitized music on them). Interesting to hear the sounds by differnt alto 'bone artists. I hear the alto trombone timbre range from horn, fluegelhorn, trumpet...to something that is sadly just terrible.

Here are a couple from the 'net that give a sense.
Ricardo Mollá plays Leopold Mozart Concerto for Alto Trombone
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_fGs6hR7Vc

Christian Lindberg Leopold Mozart Concerto for Alto Trombone (rehearsal, also conducting)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onKYdnVa9qU

FYI I have had a bad experience with the Jinbao Eb alto trombone with the Bb trigger. IMHO -Get the straight Eb bone unless you want the larger bore that this one has.
The rotor mechanism seized in the first weeks and I have removed it. There is a split tube compression nut and screw to hold the straight pipe bell receiver replacement that digs into my left palm. It comes with a second leadpipe / full-length lining to decrease the diameter of the right inner tube (for a dual-bore set-up) all the way down to the stocking, but it does not insert easily- it would need to be installed by a professional, so I have not tried it.
As for mouthpieces, IMHO this larger bore version plays best with a Bach 15C, 15E, or Schilke 46 or 46B.

Thet are great inexpensive horns. I modified one once, played really well!

LIBrassCo wrote: ↑Wed May 01, 2019 6:46 am Thet are great inexpensive horns. I modified one once, played really well!

Can you tell us what modifications you did to the horn?

cozzagiorgi wrote: ↑Wed May 01, 2019 7:09 am

LIBrassCo wrote: ↑Wed May 01, 2019 6:46 am Thet are great inexpensive horns. I modified one once, played really well!

Can you tell us what modifications you did to the horn?

I tossed everything in the bell section other than the reciever and the bell. Used a yamaha tuning slide, and made parts for the rest. It really improved how it played, and aesthetically it was nice to lose the odd shaped tuning slide.

The slide was ok ?

cozzagiorgi wrote: ↑Wed May 01, 2019 11:50 am The slide was ok ?

Yeah, i polished the inside of the outers, I'd say it was a 9/10.

the brace looks like it was attached the wrong way

i have an Elliott Brass alto it seems to be a Jin Bao type in looks and case, but with nice stocks and slightly refined. it is housed in an unimpressive stock chinese factory like case, it came with a 9E mouthpiece. i have found that a UMI/King 7c works well with it or a shallow 12c (weird coz the 9E is deep bit like a cornet type piece) I'm not a good enough player to get the sound i reckon it can get. i also couldn't be assed learning the alto clef.. but since i also now play cornet it could be worth a try to experiment with sounds.