thickness of Shires bells

[Tbone00]

Quick question, Does anyone know which is the thickness of the diferent Shires Bells? the Lw the M and the Hv.
I know edwards bells are 21 Gauge (.028" thick) 22 Gauge (.025" thick) and 23 Gauge (.022" thick) but I don't know if it's the same in Shires.

[GabrielRice]

The short answer is, yes, the people in the bell department at Shires certainly know what thickness materials they start with and what they do to them to make various models of bells...but with the formation of the company, Steve Shires did not think that was important information to give out. And much of what he did was deliberately kept somewhat secret - exactly the way you read the main ingredients for an entree on the menu of a fine restaurant, but you don't need to know all the seasonings, proportions, and cooking processes in order to enjoy the meal.

One thing I know is that the flares and stems of 2-piece bells are very often made starting with different thicknesses of sheet brass. I also know that the process of forming a 1-piece bell makes it get gradually thinner from the tuning slide to the bead. How much thinner? That depends on the formation process, and it varies with different models of 1-piece bells. A third thing I know is that the starting thicknesses of different alloys vary a bit for the standard, M, LW and HW weight bells.

So very generally speaking, you can compare the thickest Edwards bells with Shires bells indicated as HW and the thinnest Edwards bells with Shires bells labeled LW. In the Shires system, M is lighter than standard. If you want to compare to Bach bells, M is usually most comparable to a standard modern Bach bell, standard (unmarked) weight is usually most comparable to a Bach H(eavy) bell, and LW is usually most comparable to a lighter, usually vintage, Bach bell.

But there's a lot more to it than those very general comparisons, and by far the best way to understand the differences between the different options is to try them and discover how they feel and sound for you.

[Dennis]

The short answer is, yes, the people in the bell department at Shires certainly know what thickness materials they start with and what they do to them to make various models of bells...but with the formation of the company, Steve Shires did not think that was important information to give out. And much of what he did was deliberately kept somewhat secret - exactly the way you read the main ingredients for an entree on the menu of a fine restaurant, but you don't need to know all the seasonings, proportions, and cooking processes in order to enjoy the meal.

<snip>

But there's a lot more to it than those very general comparisons, and by far the best way to understand the differences between the different options is to try them and discover how they feel and sound for you.

Thanks, Gabe. This was very informative at a useful level.

I've never quite understood why Edwards tells us the starting gauge of the sheet brass they use to form the bells. By the time all the bending, hammering, and spinning is done, the only thing you can be sure of is that it isn't whatever thickness it started at.

[tbonesullivan]

I've never quite understood why Edwards tells us the starting gauge of the sheet brass they use to form the bells. By the time all the bending, hammering, and spinning is done, the only thing you can be sure of is that it isn't whatever thickness it started at.

It is to use as a source of relative comparison, not an absolute measure of how the bell will perform. Basically a way to compare two bells that are otherwise identical except for the gauge brass they started with, and to give some "general" characteristics.

That's why all they give is the starting thickness. Many companies don't even do that. Conn has their "Thinwall" bell for the 88H, but all you really know is that it's thinner than they usually use, but not by how much. It also apparently is still not as thin as the Elkhart Conn 88hs were.