Bundy & Other "Bad" Horns

[Neo Bri]

Hey chattle!

What makes a Bundy bad? I remember coming up and Bundy was absolutely considered the bottom of the barrel. Maybe some cheap imports were considered worse. Then the Chinese came along and people said they were bad.

So I'm interested in what makes a horn "bad." I'm especially interested to hear from techs and designers. Yamaha builds the 354, and previously the 154, and I think those are great horns. Also, I heard the Yamaha was modeled after some Holton, but I don't know.

What makes a horn bad?

[Burgerbob]

The lead trombonist in my undergrad jazz band played a Bundy for a while. He sounded fine, didn't have any trouble with the parts.

After a few months, he got an Elkhart 6H, and it was like having an entirely new trombone section. EVERYTHING worked better. Intonation, sound, style... you name it. He also enjoyed playing it a lot more.

Is a Bundy bad? Probably not. Is it good? Also, no.

[FullPedalTrombonist]

My experience with Yamaha’s “student” line has been positive. I have a pretty much brand new Yamaha that I really enjoy playing when I need it. Might be for sale later. Anyway the sample size I’ve had is less than a dozen and they’re all built solidly and I liked playing them. Fantastic slides and easy to play with a lot of mixed trombone sections. It just doesn’t have the same finesse as my daily horn or many others. That’s the point though. A good “student” model should be solid as a rock, consistent and predictable, and easy to play what needs to be played.

The couple Bundys I’ve played when I was helping show HS band mates how to clean their horns or trying to fix them didn’t do much in the way of being an ideal “student” model. Pretty rough to play and not beautifully built. An attentive player could make it work in a professional setting, but countless others are better suited for the task.

[dukesboneman]

When I started teaching in 1979, Bundy`s were considered Crap. on`t even think about a Yamaha.
When I retired in 2016, Those "crappy" Bundy`s were still in rotation. , They were still good horns. we were wrong.
Yamaha`s became wonderful, Jupiter raised their own bar.
But there were Tons of other CRAP out there.
Starting with the "Rebirth" of OLDS

[Mikebmiller]

I played a Bundy for 3 years starting off. It worked fine for me.

[Doubler]

My first trombone was a Bundy. Mine was well-built, well-balanced, durable, decent-looking, slide action was perfect, intonation was pretty good, the sound was also pretty good, response was acceptable, and it played fine in all registers. All in all, I found it a nice, good horn for the money.

[JeffDeault]

The markets targeted by Bundy are music schools and school bands. And for those markets, main criteria are low price and toughness. So to make their trombones "schoolproof", I suspect flare and bell walls are thicker than professional horns and the inner slides have more "play". That would make a tough instrument that can take lots of hits and dents, but could be a challenge to get a good sound out of it.

[Kingfan]

The markets targeted by Bundy are music schools and school bands. And for those markets, main criteria are low price and toughness. So to make their trombones "schoolproof", I suspect flare and bell walls are thicker than professional horns and the inner slides have more "play". That would make a tough instrument that can take lots of hits and dents, but could be a challenge to get a good sound out of it.

Played a King 606 back to back with a King 3B. Yep, the student horn was heavier in both bell and slide. I could tell the difference in sound, so could my tbone buddy hanging with me that day. IMHO the 606 was plenty good for a kid's first trombone, or a backup tenor for an adult. $100 invested in a used American built 606/Bundy/Olds etc. is a good bet, the same into one of the Chinese TSOs is money down the drain.

[Crazy4Tbone86]

We must differentiate between the three different vintages of Bundys. 1. There were the original Bundys of the 1940s? and 1950s. These instruments were made by Selmer, before they had any affiliation with Bach. I have a bell from one of these and it plays very well mounted to the body of a 1970s Conn Director. 2. There were the Bundys that were produced in mass by Selmer from the 1970s-1990s. These are the ones that said “Designed by Vincent Bach” on the bell. 3. There are modern Bundys that are made in China and sold at very low prices. Many of these lose the chrome playing on the inner slides in the first few months of playing.

Since most trombonists think of Bundys as being the ones engraved with “Designed by Vincent Bach,” I will only refer to this particular vintage for the remainder of my post. Bundys were designed to help young students with weak embouchures and very little air support. The resistance is very different, even when compared to .500 bore professional horns. With that in mind, we cannot judge Bundys and like instruments from the perspective of a well-seasoned player.

I worked in a repair shop that did “play condition” repairs on hundreds (well... actually thousands) of student trombones (Bundys, Holton Collegiates, King 606s, Yamaha 354s, Jupiter’s, etc....) every year. All of these models have similar resistance, with Yamahas being the exception....they were slightly more open. Many times I would play test these horns using very little air support and they would somehow hold pitch and an acceptable sound. In other words, the instruments did exactly what they were designed to do.

One thing that struck me about the Bundys was that they were infinitely reparable. Many times, a Bundy would come to my bench completely smashed and nearly destroyed. One hour later, I would be sending it along to be rented for another year. They say that cats have nine lives.....I believe some Bundy trombones had about 20 lives.

Another thing....as Bundys were repaired repeatedly, there seemed to be greater variation in how they played. Yes, some got worse with wear. However, there were quite a few 1970s and 1980s Bundys that played EXTREMELY WELL after a few cycles of repair. I remember one horn on particular that left me mesmerized....I think I play tested it for over an hour.

To conclude, I think we need to be open to the possibility that any model made by any manufacturer has the potential to be a great trombone. I can state with great certainty that there are Bundy trombones out there that play very, very well.

[timbone]

It could be easier if we started with before Asian, or B.A., sort of like LP or HP lol. The Bundys and Olds and Getzens I grew up with were excellent horns and have stood the test of time. Its a lot like the cars of the 60's compared to now. We are talking about metal here. Look at a new car in an accident- sure you see all the glitzy technology but when you see an accident, it looks like aluminum foil. Sure everyone finds a way to make things cheaper, not necessarily better. It is gradual over time, so you don't notice, or have access to older instruments to examine them. "They don't make them like they used to" is what we are talking about.

[Doubler]

I think that years of experience and improvements in technology result in more consistent quality, with less chance for getting a dud and more chance of getting an instrument without playability quirks.

FWIW - A new car is designed to absorb the impact of a collision, rather than stay intact and transfer that destructive energy to the occupants like older cars did. This is not cheaper; it's better.

[bbocaner]

Didn't we figure out on the old forum that some of the pre-Bach Bundys actually had Williams slides?

What makes a cheap instrument bad? Design is one. Wrong leadpipe and gooseneck/tuning slide tapers. Construction is another. Slide not aligned properly and/or not designed to be easily aligned properly. Little or no hand hammering to temper and shape the bell, just squished into shape hydraulically with a minimum of steps. Assembled with tension. Thick finish. There's probably no one thing that makes it bad, it's all the little corners that were cut along the way, they all add up.

[FullPedalTrombonist]

I’ll say that I don’t recall much experience with Jupiter XO instruments other than I think the slide I’m currently using in a FrankenBach is from their XO line. But Jupiter’s student line is absolutely disappointing. When I was in marching band a slide broke apart in my hands. I swapped to a horn that I got for almost nothing and the TS leg broke off when tuning. I didn’t see any solder in there. And just about a week ago when I was practicing soldering I found that there was nothing holding the neckpipe in other than it was stick between the bell/slide tenon and the second bell brace tenon.

With some duct tape wrapped around the bell I had a fine time playing it, but it was going to be finite if the horns would just fall apart while playing.

I would assume they got better with making their student line as they put more effort into their pro line.

[rzeilinger]

Bundy's aren't bad. Are there better, yes. Bundy is not a Pro level instrument. It's a Solid, durable student and even intermediate performer.

Bundys are affordable starter and intermediate level trombones and priced accordingly. Easy to repair.

I own a 1960 all nickle Bundy, plays much like my all nickle Olds Studio.
I also Own a new brass Bundy which is essentially the same horn as a Bach TB300, just a different logo on the counterweight.
Not as free blowing as higher end trombones, however, the slide isn't heavy, the horn isn't heavy.
Slide moves perfectly glassy.

Do I need to work harder to play it in the upper register compared to other trombones, yes.
Does it play well in the middle register, Yes as good as most .500 bore trombones.

Keep in mind, I own and have collected over 70 Trombones. Mostly Olds, then Conn, then Holton, King, Reynolds, Getzen and a few oddities.

Bundy are not Bad....Cheap Asian / Chinese or Indian made horns off E-Bay or Walmart are bad, manufactured bad with screwy designs as much as they attampt to copy better designs and are cheap for a good reason.

Let me say it again...Bundys are not bad, neither are Olds Ambassadors, Holton Collegiates or Reynolds Medalists.
Students horns are fantastic in the mid register.
Conn 18H, 20H, King 602's and other American made student models are on a similar level.

Hope this helps.

[blap73]

I've seen comments about 'free blowing' and 'designed for students with little air support' multiple times. This thread and elsewhere. So, as a designer... what do you change to make something 'free blowing' or the converse? My guess is the leadpipe bore?

[heldenbone]

I had a Bundy (Designed by Vincent Bach) for awhile, acquired from a garage sale for $20. After removing the painted stripes from the inside of the bell and getting the slide some attention, it became a truly wretched thing. It made more-or-less trombonesque sounds, but I think "operating it" was a more apt description than "playing it." There were no obvious dents or leaks, but it "wolf"-ed on multiple pitches, and playing it loudly made the instrument (implement?) vibrate in the hands and the sound evolved to a timbre worthy of The Incredible Honk at high volumes. It was donated to a rural high school as a loaner marching instrument, hopefully to die a mercifully quick and silent death.

[rzeilinger]

ANY trombone can play poorly when abused, filled and coated with crap on the inside of the bell or where most people overlook...the inside of the inner slide. Andy crust or calcified deposits on interior surfaces any where will negatively affect the performance and resonance of a brass instrument.

[BGuttman]

ANY trombone can play poorly when abused, filled and coated with crap on the inside of the bell or where most people overlook...the inside of the inner slide. Andy crust or calcified deposits on interior surfaces any where will negatively affect the performance and resonance of a brass instrument.

This is true, but NeoBri was asking about horns that sometimes are awful even when at their best. For example, the Indian valve trombone that sells cheap on Ebay.

[blap73]

Maybe someone can contribute the Bundy leadpipe dimensions to my new post at https://trombonechat.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=29255

[blap73]

Back to the original question... what technically makes the Bundy 'bad' (or at least not great).
How about bell thickness?
Too thick because they wanted it to be kid resistant?
Anyone able to measure the bell thickness? About 1/2" from the rim would be nice as I could check against some other measurements I've made in my junkyard

[rzeilinger]

"what technically makes the Bundy 'bad' (or at least not great)"

NOTHING "technically makes it bad. Student trombones operate great in the mid register.
I just bought a 1950's Nickle / Silver plated Bundy. I also own a step up/pro model 1970's Olds Studio that is also all silver nickle plated. The bundy has a quicker reponse and a lighter feel than my olds Studio.
While it depends solely on the players abilities and mouthpiece, I found the bundy just great in the upper register.

It's a small bore, not a bottom of the scale trombone. Its great for students, however for the more advanced player it's a great mid range solo trombone or 3rd trombone for a big band or any big band jazz, dixieland jazz, pop, ska, latin ensemble that needs a small bore sound to project & cut, this trombone is 100% capable. It's also capable for small environment & intimate environments for small combo work. It really depends on your mouthpiece and playing style and how you choose to create the various sounds you require.

Bundy's are not "technically" bad or Bad as tall, neither are Olds Ambassadors. Find one in great condition with a great slide and you will have a solid performing trombone. AND you can find them very inexpensively mostly because more of them were made than step up or pro level horns (supply and demand)
If you need something for more advanced playing that is thinner / lighter, you will spend more for an expensive pro level trombone and a size appropriate for the style of music you are performing and justifying the expense because you are earning an income playing. I hope this dispells all the prejudice and uneducated opinions on this thread.
Don't need a maserati for a daily driver or long distance drive, you don't need a lifted 4x4 truck for daily urban errands......as Scotty on Star Trek used to say...."The Right Tool for the Right Job"

[Trombonejoe]

I played on a Bundy around 8th grade. Served its purpose well. Not meant to be life long horn, however they are heavy enough that a beginning student can start to develop a sound, as opposed to the dirt cheap horns we see circulating these days.

[RobL]

I'm interested in where there would be info about the first era of Bundy trombones. Someone I know brought one to show me today (s/n49xxx). It was in very good condition, and I was struck by the nice engraving on the bell.

We must differentiate between the three different vintages of Bundys. 1. There were the original Bundys of the 1940s? and 1950s. These instruments were made by Selmer, before they had any affiliation with Bach. I have a bell from one of these and it plays very well mounted to the body of a 1970s Conn Director. 2. There were the Bundys that were produced in mass by Selmer from the 1970s-1990s. These are the ones that said “Designed by Vincent Bach” on the bell. 3. There are modern Bundys that are made in China and sold at very low prices. Many of these lose the chrome playing on the inner slides in the first few months of playing.

Since most trombonists think of Bundys as being the ones engraved with “Designed by Vincent Bach,” I will only refer to this particular vintage for the remainder of my post. Bundys were designed to help young students with weak embouchures and very little air support. The resistance is very different, even when compared to .500 bore professional horns. With that in mind, we cannot judge Bundys and like instruments from the perspective of a well-seasoned player.

I worked in a repair shop that did “play condition” repairs on hundreds (well... actually thousands) of student trombones (Bundys, Holton Collegiates, King 606s, Yamaha 354s, Jupiter’s, etc....) every year. All of these models have similar resistance, with Yamahas being the exception....they were slightly more open. Many times I would play test these horns using very little air support and they would somehow hold pitch and an acceptable sound. In other words, the instruments did exactly what they were designed to do.

One thing that struck me about the Bundys was that they were infinitely reparable. Many times, a Bundy would come to my bench completely smashed and nearly destroyed. One hour later, I would be sending it along to be rented for another year. They say that cats have nine lives.....I believe some Bundy trombones had about 20 lives.

Another thing....as Bundys were repaired repeatedly, there seemed to be greater variation in how they played. Yes, some got worse with wear. However, there were quite a few 1970s and 1980s Bundys that played EXTREMELY WELL after a few cycles of repair. I remember one horn on particular that left me mesmerized....I think I play tested it for over an hour.

To conclude, I think we need to be open to the possibility that any model made by any manufacturer has the potential to be a great trombone. I can state with great certainty that there are Bundy trombones out there that play very, very well.

[Crazy4Tbone86]

Yep, I have seen a few those and mounted them to the bodies of other horns. Those bells have worked very well!