TubaForum.net

Here is a ripe piece of meat for the ravenous masses who may be in the know:

What is the King 2341/Miraphone 186/188 of the tenor trombone world?

i.e., fairly consistent, good intonation, lasting quality

Nothing new or fancy-pants, looking at old American makes. I'm branching more out into trombone lately and looking for something decent that won't break the bank.

8/88H for a 0.547” bore tenor
2B/3B(F) for a smaller bore

88h, but for a really nicely made budget option, look at the Benge 165f

What do you mean by good intonation? Bones are just giant tuning slides.

More people play Bach than Conn, these days...and for quite some time.

...and others are buying pricey Shires knock-offs (because they unbolt, therefore "custom" and "made just for me"...etc.) of whatever the real thing might be.


The BEST EVER Conn 88H was the Courtois knockoff (and pre-B&S, when still made in France)...yes: better than Elkhart.
My fairly new friend, Jaime Morales (and he's friends of tons-and-tons of other people, but I hadn't played with him in a section until recently) plays a (French-made) Courtois as does a semi-local friend (who stumbled across one in France, was knocked out by it, and bought it on the spot).
Here's a picture of Jaime with his Courtois-made 88H knockoff: https://i.imgur.com/2nQqiBI.jpeg
same pic: Mike Hosford plays a Bach.


More Symphonic principal players are beginning to get just a little bit smaller and are moving into .525" bore trombones (largest bore which is standard shank).

The last (brand-new) Conn 88H's and King 2B's that I worked on were too crappy to be taken seriously (at least, by me).

I've been told that all of the Conn-Selmer playing slide tubes are now drawn in the Elkhart Bach factory.


A few jazzers play Yamaha...I don't see very many Yamaha players...and - mostly - I see Yamaha trombones in schools (as with Yamaha tubas).

Of all bass trombones, Elkhart Conn's (both the 6X bells and the 7X bells - which are different in throat width) always sound the best to me.

gocsick wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 5:57 pm What do you mean by good intonation? Bones are just giant tuning slides.

I was gonna say that... Or at least make the same point.

I suppose it is still a worthwhile exercise on my end to figure out how i woulda put it.

Am i allowed to blame intonation on my trombone?

humBell wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 10:05 pm
Am i allowed to blame intonation on my trombone?

Only while you're playing tuba.

But to answer the general inquiry, tongue in cheek or no, basically looking for models that are decently enough in-tune with themselves throughout their harmonic series without needing a lot of adjustment.

arpthark wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 10:21 pm

humBell wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 10:05 pm
Am i allowed to blame intonation on my trombone?

Only while you're playing tuba.

But to answer the general inquiry, tongue in cheek or no, basically looking for models that are decently enough in-tune with themselves throughout their harmonic series without needing a lot of adjustment.

Yup, i figured there are still intonation quirks, that a poor trombone might mean the positions wobble a little depending what partial you are in. I suppose i haven't yet held my own trombone playing up to a high enough standard to note such idiosyncrasies...

Being good at something is its own punishment.

All that said... no, i have no trombone wisdom to share.

I just like bait.

Yeah, 88h is the 186 of the 547 trombone world. I've played Courtois, and they have some tuning and ergonomic quirks that I couldn't deal with, although the Eastman (as in Rochester NY Eastman School of Music) had sort of informally standardized on Courtois for a while. As the home of the original 88h, I guess that says something. For all that, my 1968 88h is still the best and most versatile 547 I've ever played. In the 1980s everybody played a 42b, but they were a bit harsh for me. The 88h can just do everything in a way that nothing else really can. It's light enough to be played sensitively, and big enough to play with real controlled power. Lots of color to the sound.

Yamahas to me are pretty bland, colorless and flavorless. Kind of the tofu of brass. Actually, I put Shires into this category as well. Just without much discernible personality. Some of the new smaller bore Yammies aren't bad, like the 891z, and some artist model Shires like the Michael Davis Plus, Marshall Gilkes models. But these are very far from 186 ubiquity, they just don't suck as hard as the rest.

As for 525 bore, yeah, that's my preference for general playing (either a 79h or an 88h w/525 slide). I reserve 547 for small bass or situations where I need bass and tenor but can only have one horn. The Bach 36b probably deserves the 186 label here. It's probably not the best 525, but it is definitely a wonderful pro level horn and the most widely used and copied. And it's still made.

For small bores (to me this means anything 508 and lower), the 186 is I think the 6h, as the most versatile and middle-of-the-road do-anything sort of professional horn. Although for longevity purposes, you could make a case for the 3b and 3bf. 3Bs are a little to quirky to get a 186 level generalist label in my book. Yamaha 356 student horns are everywhere, but they don't rise to the 186 play-worthiness standard.

Bass bones are too fragmented for a 186 equivalent. The "holy grail" bass bone is supposedly the 62h. This is what people tell you, but they don't like the Bb/F/E tuning, the dependent valve, the small valves, the funky wrap, the rose brass bell, the tuning-in-slide or the saxophone roller levers. So there's not really much left that people supposedly like about that classic. I wish all those posers would stop chopping up these 60 year old horns and let those of us who really do like all that quirkiness actually buy one at a reasonable price. The Bach 50b3 is probably the prototypical bass bone that everyone actually wants, but Bach has become kind of a style points faux pas these days.

Trombones vary a whole lot less than tubas. Therefore, it's much easier for players to overcome their characteristic sounds than with tubas. I just attempted post some stuff - which discussed a lot of mix-and-match of parts that has particularly happened since the UMI thing up through the Conn-Selmer thing, along with the b.s. trombone line that was created out of thin air called Benge (King, with different colored bells and such... this marketing strategy temporarily popularized typically unpopular larger bore King models by rebranding them) - to go along with the purchase of Benge trumpet tooling, way back when - which has also been shelved. I might come back later and try to post some of that stuff that was just lost (due to a internet fluke), but maybe it's stuff that everybody knows anyway.

There's also one particular American boutique line which I would stay away from. I'm not going to mention who they are, but I view them as mostly hype and have even discovered nickel plated playing slide components - that absolutely should be solid nickel silver - on them.

Something that sort of breaks my heart - even though I don't consider the model to be a particularly successful model - there's a 60-year-old H. N. White solid silver bell King 5B trombone here. The bell section is nearly perfect mint. The slide has been subjected to an early life accident and a recent accident. (This is a one owner instrument. ) The inside slide tubes feature a .547" bore and an unusually long stocking area that's over four and a half inches long. It looks like the recent attempt at a repair - at a small town shop - defines that I've got to toss at least one of the inside slide tubes in the trash, and - for them to match an appearance - probably the other one as well.

Fortunately, it appears that a Bach 42 fixed style venturi/mouthpipe is virtually identical to the original (as the extended-beyond venturi represents a bit more than one half inch of the overall length of the upper inside tube).

Since this particular post has become a hodgepodge of anything related to trombone, I'm thinking back to a very early model of Yamaha bass trombone - back when one of the attractive things about Yamaha was that their instruments were cheaper than it others, rather than more expensive:
The old model 322 bass trombone - which was a knockoff of the Conn 72H - was a darn good instrument. It was underrated then, and is underrated now. Someone sold me a very very distressed 322 bell section for less than the cost of filling up my Toyota with gas. I managed to get it all back basically perfect and beautiful, and - due to the way the playing slide receiver is attached on Yamaha - I had to go to some trouble, but I managed to adapt it to receive an early 1960s tuning-in-the-slide California Olds duo-bore bass trombone slide, which features a .554" bore on top and a .564" bore on the bottom. This combination makes for a very nice bass trombone, and I've been enjoying playing on it from time to time. I also enjoy the fact that it cost me about nothing. (The reason that I never played the complete Olds bass trombone is that it's bell section - similar to the King 5B bell section in size - is absolutely wretched, design-wise. I couldn't imagine a more horrible bass trombone, both in regards to sonority and tuning.)
Does the option of tuning it at two different places offer tuning characteristics options? yes...a little bit.

...so here's my Yamaha/F. E. Olds bass trombone:
...and yeah - (as seen) when I manage to find the time to complete it - it will have a 4+2 valves cimbasso option...
mouthpiece...?? The BEST-PLAYING (for me) bass trombone mouthpiece that I have is an obsolete MiraFone mouthpiece (simply) labeled "562". I got the last dusty-box new/old-old-old stock one that was on Christian Niedermayer's shelf in Waldkraiburg.

Some characteristics of the "186" as the basis for comparison: Pros don't use them in symphony gigs, and don't often use them even for smaller groups. No pro tuba player in an orchestra would earn style points with a 186, but that doesn't invalidate them as the standard by which other tubas can be measured.

They are ubiquitous as being generally consistent and competent mostly for use by students and amateurs, being more instrument than either usually needs to play at their very best. And they are generally available (used, particularly) and so can be a reasonably recommendation even if no longer being made.

And that's why I suggest the "186" of trombones is the Conn 88H.

Rick "who owns a Conn 48H but can't play it well enough for public consumption" Denney

bloke wrote: ↑Thu Feb 15, 2024 9:09 am T
...so here's my Yamaha/F. E. Olds bass trombone:
...and yeah - (as seen) when I manage to find the time to complete it - it will have a 4+2 valves cimbasso option...
mouthpiece...?? The BEST-PLAYING (for me) bass trombone mouthpiece that I have is an obsolete MiraFone mouthpiece (simply) labeled "562". I got the last dusty-box new/old-old-old stock one that was on Christian Niedermayer's shelf in Waldkraiburg.

You are using tuning in bell PLUS tuning in slide? Most boners hate TIS because of the perceived weight. And the reason people get TIS is to get rid of the taper interruption in the main bell tuning slide. You almost have to get rid of one.

@Rick Denney does absolutely have a point.

I absolutely do see more (well: OLDER) adult amateurs with Conn 88H trombones than Bach 42 trombones (neither of which are boutique models).

That having been said, I see a whole bunch more students and YOUNGER (not-playing-for-remuneration) adult trombone players with Bach instruments.

The Conn 88H model's reputation took a serious hit when the tooling was moved to Abilene, YET the craftsmen were NOT moved to Abilene...
Later, the Conn received a "bump" when manufacturing was moved to Eastlake (King factory...UMI era), and a whole bunch of whoop-ti-doo was made of it. (The Conn 8D horn's bad/Abilene reputation received a bump for the same reason at the same time.) ...

...but it didn't take very long for really sensitlve/experienced/accomplished players to realize that "these are just King-sounding/playing instruments that only look like Conn instruments."

Once Bach moved from a suburb of NYC to Elkhart (with Vincent Bach himself moving WITH the factory for a few years), that was the last move made, and (at least, for a while) the Bach quality (ex: 1970's) remained as good as the NY quality.

I believe those are significant differences which have affected model popularity.

@bone-a-phone

As known, I'm not particularly concerned with perceptions (other than concert dress/etiquette, etc.), and I didn't put this instrument together to sell - but to use. Further (being a slide-slob) I'll likely use the 6-valve rig far more often than the slide. I have a (probably repairable) Elkhart 72H slide, but it's just enough distressed (along with serious chrome wear) that I just didn't want to toss a bunch of dough into it (new-and-funky Conn-Selmer inside slide tubes/venturi/etc.). The duo-bore Olds slide (which - though I took it all apart and completely dialed it in) had - over the years - only suffered minor damage required $O.O0 of new parts. LOL...I have had trombone peeps try it, and tell me "this is a great slide, but [visually seeing the tuning-in-the-slide] it 'feels heavy' ". I weighed the beat-up 72H slide and this slide. Percentage-wise, the Olds slide only ways very slightly more...and the extra hardware is all up at the hand - with none of it down at the far end. (I suspect that the lighter-weight .554" bore upper tube compensates - somewhat, weight-wise - for the extra hardware as well.) Finally, I'm not putting this stuff together to sell to some preformed-opinions trombonist (who is probably looking to buy a Shires, as that's the trend-du-jour). Rather, I put it together for my own use. I've been using the F (considered "contrabass" by trombonists, but considered "bass" by tuba players) cimbasso for pieces such as *Schubert 9, Dvorak 7, and Mozart's Requiem (along with all of the pops concert and big-band uses), but - once I've got the valve assembly built - I'd like to check it out (though no complaints from anyone regarding the classical stuff) on (well..) "the classical stuff".
___________________________________________
*Sometimes (from online ePeeps) I get this stuff about the F cimbasso being too large to play those classical works (etc., etc.)...but - in reality [1] when many-if-not-most all of those works were first played, they were played on some sorts of alto, tenor, and (true, usually not B-flat) bass trombones, and [2] if modern-day trombonists can drag in huge .547" bore trombones to play the 1st trombone parts on Dvorak (etc.), I don't see any reason why I can't bring in a .689" bore (true) bass trombone to play Dvorak. Finally, I believe most of the ePeeps who criticize me are (simply) upset that I kept some straw-man B-flat slide bass trombonist from being hired for these gigs.
Schubert 9 finale (with E-flat alto, B-flat tenor, and F bass) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZK-dg-2Y4mo (reduced strings/plannedemic)
yes...some of the loudest sections are loud and brassy, but ONLY because that's what was requested by the (continental European conservatory-taught) music director.

============================================
opinions:
- An exceptionally-good ELKHART Conn 88H trombone is better than most any Bach 42 trombone.
- The only Courtois 88H knockoffs that compared favorably to early Conn 88H trombones were those that were ACTUALLY made in France. Those made by B&S still had "Courtois/France" (or something of that nature) engraved on them.

LeMark wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 4:59 pm 88h, but for a really nicely made budget option, look at the Benge 165f

Those are really nice, I bought a pristine example for $500 like 12 years ago. Very zippy, could be delightfully annoying in the low range and a lot of fun to play. I was primarily a bass trombonist so it was a great contrast to my Getzen bass and my Kanstul contra. They do have a narrow slide though; I saw the writing on the wall for my slide playing days and traded it to get my mini cimbasso thing built. If I'd kept playing I probably would have picked up a 42B, they're great small basses with a 1.5G and it could have opened up some lower chair tenor gigs. The few Blessing tenors I played were fine, might find a chance to get one for cheap compared to a Conn.

The most common brands I saw in NW Indiana were Bach 42's for tenor and Getzen 1062's for bass. Most of the older folks had straight horns, lots of them owned their horns for decades. Not a trombone but I knew a gentleman who bought his Olds baritone new in the '60s or '70s.

.

yellow brass bell - not Conn-88H like
detachable bell threaded rings - front heavy (I sort of doubt that the massive gimmick valve - particularly being so close to the fulcrum - is enough to counterbalance those threaded rings.)
gimmick valve - different resistance from that of an Elkhart-made (pre-1970's) Conn

Most .547" bore trombones are way more similar to each other (from any brand/model to any other) than most 5/4-size 19mm bore (mostly, built in C) tubas, but - with much smaller instrument (ie. trombone) - little differences seem to be more noticeable, yes?

It may well be a VERY GOOD trombone, but so little of it (perhaps the cork barrels?) resembles a Conn 88H.

re: the actually-made-in-France Courtois 88H knock-offs...
I've been able to use Conn parts to replace damaged parts on those instruments.

Something that a couple of Courtois owners have had me address:
The main tuning slides (which they referred to as "loose") were actually not loose, but - simply - remarkably well-aligned.
The problem with perfect tuning slides is that - to "repair" them is to make them slightly imperfect...which is to intentionally - then - become a "hack".


Something else:
So many of today's American players really don't understand Elkhart-vintage Conn 88H trombones.
Again, so many of them dream of owning a Shires (made "just for me" / "all of that cool engraving", etc.)

related, but does NOT really reinforce my point:
The finest American BASS trombone player I know (Scott Cochran - Richmond Symphony - who chose to not stay with a much higher profile job - for his own reasons) has been playing a pre-1960's Conn single rotor model 70H. These are extremely difficult to locate - in original/excellent condition, but many of those in the know consider them to be the holy grail.
A good friend of mine (a highly-valued mentor/student of Emory Remington, who - their miscalculation - seems to admire my playing, though they are a far better player than am I) stumbled across a 70H (back in the 1980's), had me do a bit of work on it (slide work, and modernization of the valve mechanism) set aside their other instruments, and played that 70H from then on.