Rath R9 Lead pipe issues

[WGWTR180]

Hello All! I have a Rath R9 Bass trombone: Dependent Rotax valves, 745G and 845 R bell flares, red and yellow tuning slides, and both a standard playing slide and a NS playing slide. Both combos work well but with any lead pipe BUT the Rath pipes. I've tried multiple Rath pipes all with the same issues. The worst register with the Rath pipe is the pedal register. Anyone else having any issues with Rath pipes? Do any of you use anything other than a Rath pipe with your Rath??? Many thanks.

[Matt K]

Probably an issue where "any other pipe" you happen to have possibly shares characteristics and similarly your Rath pipes have the same issue. I'm not as familiar with Rath pipes but I've received used Shires slides before that had three similar pipes instead of the standard "1", "2", "3"... instead receiving things like "3G", "2.5L", "3"; if the setup works better for you with a more centered pipe and you happen to have some Bach 42 or similar pipes lying around then all of those pipes are going to be not so good compared to the universe of other pipes you are trying - in this example.

If I were going to hazard a guess, you probably have some variation of this problem, possibly the same actually. Going for super open pipes on a horn that doesn't work well with them for me often makes lower notes feel unfocused. I know a few people who have switched to the brassark copies of Bach 50 pipes and those seem to work quite well, thus this assertion.

What pipes are you working with? That'll probably help narrow down the problem.

[WGWTR180]

Matt I’m sorry but I’m completely confused by your response. “every other pipe” is anything from a shires, Bach, Holton, and everything in between. All different pipes.

[Matt K]

Matt I’m sorry but I’m completely confused by your response. “every other pipe” is anything from a shires, Bach, Holton, and everything in between. All different pipes.

It's just that there's a huge variety of pipes and if you're not at say, the Shires factory, there's a good chance there is a pattern to what you've tried. I haven't played a 169 pipe in awhile, though I have one sitting in a drawer somewhere and it plays relatively similar to Bach 50 pipes. On the Shires scale, they're somewhat between a 1 and a 2, approximately Shires 1.5 actually. Similarly, if the Shires pipes you tried were a 1, 1.5, 2, or some variation of them (short, long, gold brass, etc.) then there might be something in common with "everything" that you can use to figure out what to go with. And that is what I'd suspect is what is happening in your case.

It looks like there are 4 pipes Rath offers: http://www.rathtrombones.com/components/leadpipes/

9 Standard leadpipe for the R8 and R9.

9A More focused than the standard 9 leadpipe.

9B More open than the standard 9 leadpipe.

9L More open than the 9B.

So if you have been trying say, the 9B and 9L then you might want to give the 9A or just the 9 a shot. My suspicion given the other pipes you've tried is that you've been trying things more on the 'open' side and prefer something closer to the centered side or perhaps prefer something more 'centered' than they offer or maybe something inbetween their 'standard' and 'centered'.

[WGWTR180]

I’ve tried them all. Same result.

[Matt K]

Did you get the slide used? Are you sure they're bass pipes? Note that smaller pipes will fit in a 562 horn. So you may have accidentally been given 547 or smaller pipes. Someone had that issue not too long ago... I think it was they were shipped a Shires B62 (bass slide) and it had 547 pipes; the fact was a little difficult to tease out because the 547 pipes have no other marking for Shires but they do for bass so it isn't immediately obvious something is up if you just see a "2" when there is a "2" taper for that size. In your case, the fact that all four tapers provide the same results leads me to believe there's something wrong with the setup. They're usually a rather noticeable difference and the most centered should be at least similar to the Bach 50 pipe. But that said, the 50 does seem to be a relatively common pipe for Rath players and there's certainly nothing wrong with using that pipe so if that's what floats your proverbial boat, you're not alone!

[GabrielRice]

All I know is a Shires B2.5 - which I find too big in my Shires - seemed to work very well in a dependent rotax Rath a BU student used to have. That horn is up for sale at Virtuosity if you want another one...

[FOSSIL]

Did you get the slide used? Are you sure they're bass pipes? Note that smaller pipes will fit in a 562 horn. So you may have accidentally been given 547 or smaller pipes. Someone had that issue not too long ago... I think it was they were shipped a Shires B62 (bass slide) and it had 547 pipes; the fact was a little difficult to tease out because the 547 pipes have no other marking for Shires but they do for bass so it isn't immediately obvious something is up if you just see a "2" when there is a "2" taper for that size. In your case, the fact that all four tapers provide the same results leads me to believe there's something wrong with the setup. They're usually a rather noticeable difference and the most centered should be at least similar to the Bach 50 pipe. But that said, the 50 does seem to be a relatively common pipe for Rath players and there's certainly nothing wrong with using that pipe so if that's what floats your proverbial boat, you're not alone!

Bill knows a tenor pipe from a bass pipe. He has tried all the Rath pipes and does not like any of them.... that's basically where he is. He wants to set his Rath up for the high level professional work that he does. He wants to know if people have any tried and tested ideas. He knows my thoughts... we spent time together a week ago. A lot of people use the standard pipes, but then a lot of people use very big mouthpieces.... they seem to jive.

Chris

[WGWTR180]

Mast K. I appreciate your input but some of your questions and thoughts are completely off base. I wish I hadn’t asked this question. LOL!!

[Matt K]

Mast K. I appreciate your input but some of your questions and thoughts are completely off base. I wish I hadn’t asked this question. LOL!!

Not sure how they're off base or why you regret asking the question but hope you can find something that works for you.

[tbonesullivan]

Have you tried contacting Rath directly with your questions? What mouthpiece are you using in your horn?

I personally always found that the pedal register speaking is dependent on having the right amount of back pressure.

[WGWTR180]

Have you tried contacting Rath directly with your questions? What mouthpiece are you using in your horn?

I personally always found that the pedal register speaking is dependent on having the right amount of back pressure.

Using a Mt Vernon 1 and 1/2G.

[mrdeacon]

Have you tried switching mouthpieces? Maybe not what you want to hear but it could be your piece isn't a good match for your horn.

My Minick at least is really picky with mouthpieces and it 100% doesn't play well with certain pieces.

[islander]

Bill, I warmly recommend you try Brass Ark's MV50 pipe. Brought my Hagmann R9 to life.

Bill

[Burgerbob]

The new stock Bach 50 leadpipes can be quite good. Have someone solder on a ring and they are still only something like $50.

[WGWTR180]

Bill, I warmly recommend you try Brass Ark's MV50 pipe. Brought my Hagmann R9 to life.

Bill

[WGWTR180]

The new stock Bach 50 leadpipes can be quite good. Have someone solder on a ring and they are still only something like $50.

[WGWTR180]

Have you tried switching mouthpieces? Maybe not what you want to hear but it could be your piece isn't a good match for your horn.

My Minick at least is really picky with mouthpieces and it 100% doesn't play well with certain pieces.

wWell at this point in my life I'm not sure I want to change mouthpieces. One of the things I liked about the early Rath bass trombones, especially the non-detachable Hagmann versions, was the fact that early development came from players who played 1 and 1/2G sized pieces. I know that Chris Stearn had some input for sure. So I felt like the earlier versions were a perfect match with 1 and 1/2G pieces. As companies keep developing and bring more players into the fold larger mouthpieces prevail. So I get it. The one thing I found puzzling was that every Rath pipe that Dillon Music sent to me to try had the same characteristics. And mouthpiece insertion depth in each pipe varied dramatically. 2 they sent were absolute garbage as the mouthpiece only went in about 3/4 of an inch.The thickness of the pipes also varied greatly as some screwed in easily whereas others very extremely difficult to even insert into the slide. Quality control seems to be off the rails with their pipes. The slides work beautifully and the Rotax valve section rocks!
BTW Mr. Deacon I sent you an email regarding the Symington piece you have-not sure you received it.

[mrdeacon]

Bill W. I'll send you a email today! I didn't get that first one...

I totally feel you on the mouthpiece making or breaking a setup. Definitely want to keep trying pipes then!

Favorites I've found with 1 1/2 stuff on my Minick (which is 62h/50Bish) have been the MK Drawing stuff, Brass Ark stuff and oddly enough a Shires 2.5.

The MK Drawing GR and 50B pipes are fantastic. I like Brad's MV50B pipe but it can be too tight on some setups, the Schatz/Minick pipe is amazing in some setups. That Shires 2.5 pipe surprised me though. Seems to work very well with rotor setups.

I can send a more depth review of some of these pipes in my email if you'd like!

[bbocaner]

I'd suggest talking to Tim at Rath. Most of Rath's leadpipe options are in the form of different alloys. Beyond that they have one basic design in a few different variations of more or less open than standard. But I do know that they have some experiments with other tapers they've tried and if you discuss your issue with them they may be able to find something special.

[freeman]

I struggled with the low register when I switched from my 50 to the R9D. The solution ended up being the replacement of Greg Black's 1 1/4G with the Rath B1 M.F.

edited: capitalization

[WGWTR180]

I'd suggest talking to Tim at Rath. Most of Rath's leadpipe options are in the form of different alloys. Beyond that they have one basic design in a few different variations of more or less open than standard. But I do know that they have some experiments with other tapers they've tried and if you discuss your issue with them they may be able to find something special.

[tbonesullivan]

Using a Mt Vernon 1 and 1/2G.

An INCREDIBLE mouthpiece, to be sure. I would definitely contact Rath and See what they say. The 1 1/2G "officially" has the same throat as a Bach 4G and 5G, which is I think .276" throat. Most of the "modern" bass mouthpieces have a larger throat, around .300" or larger. Even most modern "tenor" large shank mouthpieces are .281" now.

It could just be that the throat and backbore don't get along with the placement of the venturi on the leadpipe, or maybe the size. Have you looked into maybe getting a Mount Vernon replica leadpipe to go with the MV mouthpiece? Brad Close makes some nice pipes, if Rath doesn't have a good solution, though I bet they will.

[WGWTR180]

Using a Mt Vernon 1 and 1/2G.

An INCREDIBLE mouthpiece, to be sure. I would definitely contact Rath and See what they say. The 1 1/2G "officially" has the same throat as a Bach 4G and 5G, which is I think .276" throat. Most of the "modern" bass mouthpieces have a larger throat, around .300" or larger. Even most modern "tenor" large shank mouthpieces are .281" now.

It could just be that the throat and backbore don't get along with the placement of the venturi on the leadpipe, or maybe the size. Have you looked into maybe getting a Mount Vernon replica leadpipe to go with the MV mouthpiece? Brad Close makes some nice pipes, if Rath doesn't have a good solution, though I bet they will.

You could be right about the bore size having an effect. I am checking into getting a Brad Close pipe amongst other ones. Thanks for the input.

[Schlitz]

.

[WGWTR180]

FINALLY, something nearly as entertaining as Kimball and that whiner.....

I suggest if you're not interested move on.

[eatanick]

I had a similar experience with the R9 I owned. The pedal register on the open horn never felt great (to me) and the partial above that also took some work. Every other register was fantastic.

Out of the non-Rath leadpipes I tried, I only felt compelled to experiment with a Kanstul 169 and Schatz pipe before settling on an M/K Roberts pipe in rose brass. That was a very different feel and it made the pedals easy, but still not particularly secure feeling. After probably six months, I decided I didn't like that sound as much, switched back to a middle-of-the-road Rath pipe and told myself to forget about it and just play the thing. I adjusted and it worked fine, but I sold the horn some time later.

FWIW, I bought that instrument second hand and to date, it's the only R9 I've played. It was configured very differently to yours (independent Hagmann valves, dual bore bronze slide, nickel silver bell, yellow tuning slide). I played a couple of 1 1/2G sized mouthpieces and a Thein BM during that time and all had the same register issues within their respective characteristics. However, I don't remember anyone else who tried the horn making the same observations and their feedback was generally very positive.

To be honest, the issues never got in my way, but I did wish I found those registers a little more comfortable (as is my experience with some other basses). That Rath was an awesome horn - definitely a better instrument than the TR-185 I play now in many ways - but I seriously dig the Holton sound (and the pedals feel great to boot!).

[Schlitz]

.

[Alby56]

Hi
I also never really liked any Rath pipes for my R9D, I had a single bore bronze hand slide, the fix for me was an Edwards SS No2 pipe, also tried MV50 pipe from Brass ark but it was a rather expensive mistake, sold it with the instrument......

[MoominDave]

Memories of an interesting afternoon spent at Chris's a few years ago... Me with my then R9 (a standard kind of set-up - single-bore being the relevant fact, to my mind), dissatisfied with what tone colour I could access (and yes, also dissatisfied with some other playing aspects including the pedal response). We went around Chris's whole box of interesting leadpipes, me playing to him (sheepishly) and him playing to me (gloriously).

The pipe I bought from Chris that day was an M&W GR prototype, one that Chris hadn't got on with. It made the sound much quicker to edge up - but not more colourful. Not sure it made much difference to the pedal response - do you recall, Chris?

After some further experimentation with interchangeable parts, I decided that the Rath design was not for me, and sold that R9 on to someone who suits it much better (a large mouthpiece player, yes), and some while after that, having moved to a Holton 169 (also Chris's fault...), I sold the pipe to someone to use in their big Edwards in a brass band. Else I'd offer it to you now, Bill.

[FOSSIL]

Oh, I remember it Dave..... I somehow ended up with another of those pipes and passed it on to a student with a very dull R9 setup, for whom it did the trick.
Bill already has some interesting pipes, including a Williams that he got from me. I use old 70H pipes in my Raths, but they are very hard to find. Bill is an even bigger Holton fan than you, so it might be that only that big open Holton feel will do. Trouble is that in professional circles, the Holton has fallen out of fashion.... people look at my 169s as some kind of period pieces..... Conn and Rath rule the roost on this side of the pond....luckily I have great examples of both.

Chris

[WGWTR180]

Yes Chris the Williams pipe is getting a go tomorrow. I’m very close with the nickel/silver slide and red tuning slide.