Holton 345 info seeking

[JeffT96]

Hello all,

I was wondering if folks who own or have owned a 345 in b flat specifically could share some knowledge to these questions:

1 How hard are the Bb ones to find? And what should one expect to pay for one that plays well but doesn’t have to look pretty?

2 How manageable is intonation (again specifically on the Bbs?
Do they require more slide jockeying than say a good 186?

From the first time I heard one of those years ago I’ve wanted one but never got to try one (hence the intonation questions).

Any info is appreciated even if it’s not replying to these specific question.

[matt g]

The current lack of 345s on the market should tell you how easy they are to find. There are probably still a few serving time in school band rooms, but they never sold as well as Conn and King tubas for band usage. They do show up from time to time, but it is infrequent. And yes, a lot of them were cut decades back when the supply of 6/4 CC tubas wasn’t as available as it is now.

In regards to intonation, very little compares to a good 186 BBb, as they are effectively the gold standard of intonation. “Set it and forget it”, as Ron Popeil would say. I don’t think comparing a 345 to a 186 is a fair comparison. I’d expect to have some slide manipulation needed.

[bloke]

Two reasons that you tend not to see very many of these around are (as I personally believe) as follows:
> They were always quite expensive. Just before they officially discontinued production, the inflation-adjusted-for-2021 price was nearly $30,000.
> They never really seemed eager to build these things, and it always took a long time to get them when ordered. I’m pretty sure they were originally created for Arnold Jacobs (more to have a copy of his York instrument, so that Holton could say *that the principals in the Chicago Symphony all played Holton, than to actually offer to the market...and the same sort of seems to be true with the Yamaha YCB-826S - more publicity value than sales value - yes?)

I have one in pieces that will be very pretty (never-creased bell, and never refinished) and pretty easy to fix up, and another one that will look good, but will be more difficult to fix up.
Currently, there are several instruments ahead of them. You never know how the intonation is going to be, until they are built.
Those that are made of all Holton parts all sound fantastic. Even though they are a lap sousaphone, if someone has the ability to focus their airstream, they can sound like a giant concert tuba, instead of a sousaphone. I do sincerely believe that “being B-flat length“ (which obviously defines a considerably longer cone with a more gradual taper) really helps this genre of tubas to be what they can be, and to NOT sport a tendency to sound “woofy” - as do quite a few of the C’s (to me...) Though wandering off on a tangent, I believe the fact that the expensive Yamaha C instrument is smaller than most of the others built in C helps it to not sound so much like a sousaphone…but again, that’s just my opinion.
Intonation-wise, many encounter a lower F that is flat, and an upper F that is a bit sharp. Some really old 186 Miraphone tubas behave the same way, and many older King 4/4 tubas as well. Being smaller, those other tubas - with the same intonation issues - might tend to be somewhat easier to “lip”. fwiw, most of the Meinl-Weston 6/4 C tubas that feature basically the same bugle as each other: 2165/2265/6450 - feature of the same intonation tendencies.
With these big Holton instruments, a thumb lever - which pulls in the main slide, and then lets it go back out when released - could prove handy.
When I rebuild model 345 tubas, I really strive to super-align their main slides, so a trigger add-on - if done later - is easy.
______________
*

[JeffT96]

The current lack of 345s on the market should tell you how easy they are to find. There are probably still a few serving time in school band rooms, but they never sold as well as Conn and King tubas for band usage. They do show up from time to time, but it is infrequent. And yes, a lot of them were cut decades back when the supply of 6/4 CC tubas wasn’t as available as it is now.

In regards to intonation, very little compares to a good 186 BBb, as they are effectively the gold standard of intonation. “Set it and forget it”, as Ron Popeil would say. I don’t think comparing a 345 to a 186 is a fair comparison. I’d expect to have some slide manipulation needed.

Agreed. I would never expect anything 6/4 size to have 186 level intonation. I only used it as a frame of reference most would be familiar with. I was more curious about if the BBb 345s had better or the same intonation as the CSO copy 6/4 CC tubas. I see world class players on YouTube with those doing a lot more slide moving than I would personally want to deal with.

[jtm]

Wow. Bloke made me look up Wayne Barrington -- didn't realize he was with the Chicago Symphony before he came to Texas.

[lost]

Holton used the same body on all of their large mammoth horns. The 345 just had a new York like valveset attached. The quality on these horns is a hit or miss.

[bloke]

I have always strongly suspected that what you said here is correct...before I ever knew that others suspected it as well.
The Holton instruments are larger - to my eyes - than York (#1 - the one that has been used)...and - had Mr. Jacobs been truly enamored with the Holton knock-off he received, surely (yes...??) he would have moved over to it.

Holton used the same body on all of their large mammoth horns. The 345 just had a new York like valveset attached.

The quality on these horns is a hit or miss.

' funny what (simply) pulling them apart, removing dents, and sticking them back together not-in-a-terrible-rush does for most of them.

The actual issues (which are sometimes revealed), though (just as with a recently-defunct concern out west) seem to be in the bottom bows and large top bows. The bottom bows seem as though they must have been a challenge (for some who made them) to fabricate, and some of the top bows' apexes' smoothness seemed to have relied heavily on belt-sanding and buffing...with the thin upper bows' only remedies being
- fix cracks, smooth them out, copper plate them heavily, and silver plate the instrument (to cover up the copper), ~or~ (I suppose...these days...??)
- beg one of the Chinese importers for a knock-off BB-flat top bow.

[the elephant]

' funny what (simply) pulling them apart, removing dents, and sticking them back together not-in-a-terrible-rush does for most of them.

I can attest to this, personally. My careful work fixed both Holton AND Rusk shaping and assembly mediocrity. Holy cow…

[JeffT96]

Thanks for posting this info. I never realized they were that cost prohibitive when new since they were somewhat before my time. I also never knew about the connection to Arnold Jacobs but the scarcity makes sense now. I have no doubt the ones you put together will be fantastic.

Two reasons that you tend not to see very many of these around are (as I personally believe) as follows:
> They were always quite expensive. Just before they officially discontinued production, the inflation-adjusted-for-2021 price was nearly $30,000.
> They never really seemed eager to build these things, and it always took a long time to get them when ordered. I’m pretty sure they were originally created for Arnold Jacobs (more to have a copy of his York instrument, so that Holton could say *that the principals in the Chicago Symphony all played Holton, than to actually offer to the market...and the same sort of seems to be true with the Yamaha YCB-826S - more publicity value than sales value - yes?)

I have one in pieces that will be very pretty (never-creased bell, and never refinished) and pretty easy to fix up, and another one that will look good, but will be more difficult to fix up.
Currently, there are several instruments ahead of them. You never know how the intonation is going to be, until they are built.
Those that are made of all Holton parts all sound fantastic. Even though they are a lap sousaphone, if someone has the ability to focus their airstream, they can sound like a giant concert tuba, instead of a sousaphone. I do sincerely believe that “being B-flat length“ (which obviously defines a considerably longer cone with a more gradual taper) really helps this genre of tubas to be what they can be, and to NOT sport a tendency to sound “woofy” - as do quite a few of the C’s (to me...) Though wandering off on a tangent, I believe the fact that the expensive Yamaha C instrument is smaller than most of the others built in C helps it to not sound so much like a sousaphone…but again, that’s just my opinion.
Intonation-wise, many encounter a lower F that is flat, and an upper F that is a bit sharp. Some really old 186 Miraphone tubas behave the same way, and many older King 4/4 tubas as well. Being smaller, those other tubas - with the same intonation issues - might tend to be somewhat easier to “lip”. fwiw, most of the Meinl-Weston 6/4 C tubas that feature basically the same bugle as each other: 2165/2265/6450 - feature of the same intonation tendencies.
With these big Holton instruments, a thumb lever - which pulls in the main slide, and then lets it go back out when released - could prove handy.
When I rebuild model 345 tubas, I really strive to super-align their main slides, so a trigger add-on - if done later - is easy.
______________
*

[bloke]

The 3-valve B-flats were less than the (when rarely built) 5-valve C’s, but neither were inexpensive.

During that time, they also built a 19 inch bell, 32 inch tall three-valve top-action that featured in the same bore size (.665”, and probably a bunch of the same other stuff) as the decades later “Phillips model“ which was one of the last things they offered just before they were shuttered.

In the mid-1960s, I am thinking that the three-valve top-action “Collegiate” was offered for around $500. With inflation and higher tax rates affecting prices, that instrument would probably be priced nearly half ten times that much in dollars, today. That model is the one that some people have been watching me convert to a front-action five-valve in the repair forum. I see - and have seen - quite a few instruments over the last four decades of sales/repairs/etc. I don’t know how many of those 19-inch bell “Collegiate“ B-flat’s were made, but this is the first one that I’ve personally seen. Even with the three-valve top-action valveset (and all beat up), it was a good player, and that is what encouraged me to take it to the next level.

[pjv]

a bit off topic, but

I used to own a Frank Holton 130 sousaphone. It had a real nice concert tuba sound and really nice intonation.

I sold it to buy a 40K

stupid

[donn]

Yeah, there's a big Holton sousaphone around here that I understand came here from the famous Oregon tuba barn, with some terrible scars - patched bell collar? but a beautiful sound.

For me, they were doing it already, well before the 340/345. The older big Holton tubas are worth a look, particularly if a detachable forward bell is acceptable and you can manage with three valves, as they did back in the day.

[Mithosphere]

I had one, it was good. Required a bit of slide pulling, but pretty even across the board. Wouldn't get another one though.

[bort2.0]

Hrmm... I never thought of the Holton 345 as a particularly rare tuba, or hard to get. As in, if I ever decided I wanted one, I wouldn't expect a lot of trouble to find one.

Ive played a few. They are fun. Not what I wanted (then or now), but a lot of fun!

[KingTuba1241X]

Hrmm... I never thought of the Holton 345 as a particularly rare tuba, or hard to get. As in, if I ever decided I wanted one, I wouldn't expect a lot of trouble to find one.

Ive played a few. They are fun. Not what I wanted (then or now), but a lot of fun!

Really? I think they are super rare especially in top original condition.

[bort2.0]

Ok, you're adding a lot of qualifiers there...

But if you posted here WTB Holton 345... How long would you expect to wait on it? Maybe I'm wrong though!

[bloke]

...if you posted here WTB Holton 345... How long would you expect to wait on it?

37 days, 16 hours, 6 minutes, 14 seconds
——
I don’t quite know what I would do were shorter - or longer - than I would expect.

[KingTuba1241X]

Ok, you're adding a lot of qualifiers there...

But if you posted here WTB Holton 345... How long would you expect to wait on it? Maybe I'm wrong though!

I know of one about 10 miles away that I used to own in near pristine shape, original BBb and the owner might sell it for the right price.

[matt g]

@JeffT96, there’s a thread over here...

http://forums.chisham.com/viewtopic.php?t=62213

That has some decent information albeit with a few holes due to posts being removed.

Regardless, looks like not a tremendous number were made (especially compared to Kings and Conns) and only for a couple of decades. Likely a few hundred at most were made?

The one thing to be learned is that if you find a 345, if a competent tech hasn’t pulled it apart and put it back together with care, that should probably be the first order of business. Moreover, because they are also all at least 40 years old now.

[Dan Tuba]

If you are interested in trying/purchasing a Holton 345, I would consider giving the Big Mouth Brass J764, or the 5 valve version, J765 a try. I have tried those tubas, along with two different 345s, one of which was pristine, the other not so much. From my experience, the Big Mouth Brass tubas played/sounded at least as good, and were easier to play.

I owned a Big Mouth Brass J765 tuba for a couple of years. It was a fine tuba. I probably shouldn't have sold it, but I could always buy another one