Benge 175 review/comparison

Post Reply
User avatar
spencercarran
Posts: 626
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2020 1:02 pm
Location: Chicago

Benge 175 review/comparison

Post by spencercarran »

I recently picked up a Benge 175 locally. There's a couple old threads on Benge horns, but thought I'd add my impressions, especially in comparison with my Bach 36B.

Musically: the Benge is amazingly nimble and vibrant. Despite the similar specs, it definitely feels like a smaller/lighter instrument than the 36, and it seems to tolerate a broader range of mouthpieces. For me, it's playable on anything from an 11c to a big Wick 4BS. So far it seems to like 6-1/2AL best, but experimentation is ongoing. Compared to the Bach, the sound from the Benge is warmer and more expressive. It can project well, although the sound does develop a bit more edge at dynamic extremes, whereas putting more air into a Bach just cranks the volume dial without changing timbre. Benge has much more of an upper limit on the volume and weight of sound it can reasonably produce, but since I'm not sitting second trombone in a big orchestra that may never be an issue. High range responds easily, with a surprisingly good 7th partial in particular. Low range is as solid as it needs to be on a tenor, I still have a good C and the pedal tones are fine. The lack of an E pull on the valve is a slightly odd design choice. Oh well; there's no reason you would want to play low B on a 0.525 anyways and I still have my bass.

Mechanically: the Benge slide is much narrower than a 36, and accordingly not quite as comfortable in my hands. The Benge rotor is the best I've ever owned (low bar as a Holton bass player, but still). Build quality seems solid; my example by all indications saw a couple years of light use and then sat in a closet. Cleaning/lubing everything and restringing the rotor linkage brought it back to smooth operating right away. Aesthetically I really like Benge trombones; clean sleek lines and that indestructible King lacquer.

Overall, the Benge 175 feels like a great all-round instrument, more versatile and better for my purposes than the 36B. It's about as equally suitable as the 36 for wind band and chamber music, dramatically more appropriate for big band (possibly even usable as a lead horn, for the right player). The only limitation is that it's less able to match the big symphonic sound if you're playing heavier orchestral repertoire. I still think it would be serviceable for orchestral first parts, lighter repertoire, or community orchestras that don't need/expect such a huge sound.
Bach5G
Posts: 2270
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:10 pm

Re: Benge 175 review/comparison

Post by Bach5G »

Nice review.
User avatar
hyperbolica
Posts: 2792
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 7:31 am

Re: Benge 175 review/comparison

Post by hyperbolica »

I liked the 175f I owned. I only sold it because it was very similar to my 79h. The sound was a little brighter than the Conn, and your point about the slide is the biggest difference. 79h has a 36 type slide width. Very nice horns, but hard to find.
User avatar
bassclef
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 8:30 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Benge 175 review/comparison

Post by bassclef »

I had a 175f for a long time, and I agree with your observations. Back when there were these things called "gigs" I used a medium bore for a lot of them. There seems to be two styles of general sound profiles from a .525 horn - a scaled up small more or a scaled down large bore. The 175f is definitely the former. I found it easy to steer in either direction and even more so with a mouthpiece change.
spencercarran wrote: Wed Feb 03, 2021 12:40 pm I still think it would be serviceable for orchestral first parts, lighter repertoire, or community orchestras that don't need/expect such a huge sound.
If you get the chance, put a small shank Schilke 51D in it and see what happens. Will it provide the extremes of breadth/weight of sound and volume capacity as a .547? No, but it gets awfully damn close and takes about 1/2 of the physical effort to get there.
Posaunus
Posts: 3424
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 9:54 pm
Location: California

Re: Benge 175 review/comparison

Post by Posaunus »

bassclef wrote: Fri Feb 05, 2021 2:58 pm If you get the chance, put a small shank Schilke 51D in it and see what happens. Will it provide the extremes of breadth/weight of sound and volume capacity as a .547? No, but it gets awfully damn close and takes about 1/2 of the physical effort to get there.
Small-shank Schilke 51 works surprisingly well in my Conn 79H. [Of course I've been playing a large-shank Schilke 51 for years on my Conn 88H!] I've never gotten along with a Schilke 51B, large or small-shank, nor a Schilke 51D which is, I think, too deep.

I'd be happy to try this on a Benge 175F if anyone wants to sell me one! :idea:
User avatar
spencercarran
Posts: 626
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2020 1:02 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Benge 175 review/comparison

Post by spencercarran »

bassclef wrote: Fri Feb 05, 2021 2:58 pm
spencercarran wrote: Wed Feb 03, 2021 12:40 pm I still think it would be serviceable for orchestral first parts, lighter repertoire, or community orchestras that don't need/expect such a huge sound.
If you get the chance, put a small shank Schilke 51D in it and see what happens. Will it provide the extremes of breadth/weight of sound and volume capacity as a .547? No, but it gets awfully damn close and takes about 1/2 of the physical effort to get there.
I suspect something in the 5-ish range might be the Goldilocks mouthpiece for this horn, just don't have one handy right now. The Wick 4BS, which works great for making a 36 sound like a large bore, feels a bit too far for the Benge. That said, as I continue getting to know the Benge better... it's super flexible with a 6-1/2AL, depending how you play can tilt more towards small horn or big horn feel. It's never going to be easy to get a wall of sound, but with the right air control it can get a decently broad dark sound. The volume limit is still there. Do I have any (musically appropriate) use for going past that limit? Not really, no.
User avatar
RConrad
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2018 10:08 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Benge 175 review/comparison

Post by RConrad »

I've been trying to stick to using my 9BS and just working on my embouchure. I did plug in my old 6 1/2 AL into my Benge 175 after doing a few recordings and noticing my sound was a bit airy. My sound did improve but I'm not convinced the mouthpiece was the issue so more work to do.
Robert C
User avatar
bassclef
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 8:30 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Benge 175 review/comparison

Post by bassclef »

spencercarran wrote: Fri Feb 05, 2021 3:31 pm
bassclef wrote: Fri Feb 05, 2021 2:58 pm If you get the chance, put a small shank Schilke 51D in it and see what happens. Will it provide the extremes of breadth/weight of sound and volume capacity as a .547? No, but it gets awfully damn close and takes about 1/2 of the physical effort to get there.
I suspect something in the 5-ish range might be the Goldilocks mouthpiece for this horn, just don't have one handy right now. The Wick 4BS, which works great for making a 36 sound like a large bore, feels a bit too far for the Benge. That said, as I continue getting to know the Benge better... it's super flexible with a 6-1/2AL, depending how you play can tilt more towards small horn or big horn feel. It's never going to be easy to get a wall of sound, but with the right air control it can get a decently broad dark sound. The volume limit is still there. Do I have any (musically appropriate) use for going past that limit? Not really, no.
I could've been a little more clear.

I think the 6.5al size is the best all around match for a .525 (I happen to like a Stork T1). I only suggested the 51D for doing a symphonic large-bore impression. I actually tried all of the Schilke 51 (5G) size variants and found the 51D to produce the most dramatic difference for this purpose. It seemed like the extra cup depth made a bigger difference than an increase in cup width and/or overall volume.
User avatar
spencercarran
Posts: 626
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2020 1:02 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Benge 175 review/comparison

Post by spencercarran »

Ah, interesting. I might pick up a cheap faxx 51D to test at some point. In general I agree with Posaunus that deep cup euphonium mouthpieces usually aren't quite right for trombone, but maybe an unorthodox combination of gear balances out well in this case.
dsmndng
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2018 5:56 pm

Re: Benge 175 review/comparison

Post by dsmndng »

The 175f is my current main horn and I love it! I play more commercial/jazz gigs so it’s the perfect .525 to me. The previous owner was a principal player who used it in pops concerts. Extremely versatile horn. I don’t think it could handle a big time orchestral gig or maybe not lead in a big band gig (John Mosca might disagree). But pit work, 3 horn wedding/pop gigs, live bar gigs without a mic, brass band, small group jazz, 2nd/3rd big band books are all areas it does well in.

To add to the mouthpiece conversation: I use a Griego 5M and love it. It’s in between a 6.5 and a 5G. Might be a big large to some people’s taste for a 525, but it works for me! A regular 6.5 sounds great with it as well!
imsevimse
Posts: 1408
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2018 10:43 am
Location: Sweden

Re: Benge 175 review/comparison

Post by imsevimse »

If it has a valve it is a 175f if it comes without it is a 175. I have one too and a Bach 36BO. I agree they are very different and my impression is also the Benge plays smaller and I could imagine it could better suit a big band compared to the Bach 36BO.
When I choose a trombone for classical I do choose the Bach every time because it is the better instrument.
The Benge is not bad and I have used it for wind band. It could be the horn I use if I want something different. It is like a cousin of a King 3B+.

/Tom
User avatar
spencercarran
Posts: 626
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2020 1:02 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Benge 175 review/comparison

Post by spencercarran »

Surprise to see this thread jump up again.

As an update to mouthpiece safari, I was able to pick up a Schilke 51D for cheap. Glad it was cheap, because it did not work for me in the Benge at all, just completely inappropriate sound, awful high range intonation. A Bach 5GS seems to thread the needle of getting about as big/orchestral of a sound as you can reasonably expect from this horn without leaping off the edge. For overall playing the 6-1/2AL does seem to get the best overall balance (among pieces I've tried). The 5GS allows a passable impersonation of large bore tenor, at some cost to the super nimble response that makes the 175f so much fun to play.

I'm excited for community groups to start back up so I can put this Benge through its paces in group settings. Definitely will use it for wind band and chamber music.
Posaunus
Posts: 3424
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 9:54 pm
Location: California

Re: Benge 175 review/comparison

Post by Posaunus »

spencercarran wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 9:13 am As an update to mouthpiece safari, I was able to pick up a Schilke 51D for cheap. Glad it was cheap, because it did not work for me in the Benge at all, just completely inappropriate sound, awful high range intonation. A Bach 5GS seems to thread the needle of getting about as big/orchestral of a sound as you can reasonably expect from this horn without leaping off the edge. For overall playing the 6-1/2AL does seem to get the best overall balance (among pieces I've tried). The 5GS allows a passable impersonation of large bore tenor, at some cost to the super nimble response that makes the 175f so much fun to play.

I'm not surprised that the super-deep Schilke 51D does not match well with a Benge 175 or 175F. On my similarly-sized Conn 79H (0.522" bore), I was pleased to have pretty successful results with a Schilke 51 (small-shank). The Schilke 51 has a similar cup diameter to the 51D - but is appreciably shallower. Makes a nice broad sound in this medium-bore trombone. The Schilke 51 is a somewhat similar size to Spencer's Bach 5GS, so I'd say our results are compatible - I just prefer Schilke mouthpieces to Bach. Also similar to Spencer, my preferred pieces on the 79H (when not trying for a "big/orchestral sound") are a little smaller - somewhat similar to his 6½AL for general use, a little smaller for jazzier work. A medium bore trombone can be a delightful chameleon!
[I'd love to try a Benge 175/175F is anyone has one for sale! ;) ]
User avatar
spencercarran
Posts: 626
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2020 1:02 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Benge 175 review/comparison

Post by spencercarran »

No accounting for preference - the Schilke pieces I've tried just haven't agreed with me. If I get bored, might try to pick up some Wick pieces in more moderate size than the 4BS, since that brand and I have gotten along well in the past.

You're right about it being a chameleon - it sizzles very pleasantly with a MV7C. Someone with a more confident high register than mine could almost certainly coax it into being a nice big lead horn. The more time I spend on the Benge, the more convinced I am of its versatility.

I'll be sure to let you know if I run across anyone interested in selling one of these ;)
ngrinder
Posts: 234
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 7:30 pm
Location: New York City
Contact:

Re: Benge 175 review/comparison

Post by ngrinder »

It is a great instrument - I've always loved my Benge 175f and totally agree with your assessment of it. Great review!
Post Reply

Return to “Instruments”