"Convertible" Trombones

[baronfunke]

Hey all - just curious if anyone makes a convertible trombone any more, or if there just wasn't enough demand for them so they stopped being made.

For context: I have a Yamaha YSL-691 for jazz, and a Bach 42G for everything else. I bought the Bach in 1988 used from a local friend, and when I got it most of the lacquer was worn off (he had incredibly acidic sweat); it also went through middle school and high school with me, so it's pretty beat up. I got the Yamaha in 1990, as my first "professional" horn (before going to college for jazz studies), also used (but in better shape); it went through college with me, so is also pretty beat up.

Getting back into playing, and I'd rather not replace both horns (primarily as I'm currently only a hobbyist rather than professional); I find the .547 to be a bit too big and the .508 a bit too small, so I've been hunting for a 36CO to allow me to use one horn for every gig, but am guessing that's a White Whale sort of pursuit (at least one including the open-wrap attachment).

Does anyone have any advice? I found a 36C in good shape online, but it doesn't have the F attachment (let alone the open-wrap version), and I'm not sure how tough it would be to find one of those by itself (almost the same as finding the whole horn, I would think).

[hyperbolica]

Modular is what the old convertible wanted to be. You can get a 525 Shires, and put it together any way you want. Rath makes a great 525. Edwards, and some others.

[OneTon]

Quinn has a b stock 36B at brass winds and Doug Bert has a LT36B and 36BO at Brass Exchange. They’re easier to find and easier to sell. And they’re not nose heavy.

[MichaelMedrick]

Beware of some of the "boutique" .525 convertible trombones. The Edwards .525, in particular, is built on the .547 frame. It is unnecessarily heavy and to me, the most resistant .525 trombone I have played. I punished myself with one for about a year. It was a year too long.

[BGuttman]

There is also a difference between the 36C and 36CO models. The bracework has different spacing so you can't put a 36CO F-attachment on a 36C frame. I have a 36C and like it very much as a universal horn. But I rarely assemble it as a straight.

[tbonesullivan]

There is also a difference between the 36C and 36CO models. The bracework has different spacing so you can't put a 36CO F-attachment on a 36C frame. I have a 36C and like it very much as a universal horn. But I rarely assemble it as a straight.

The same is true for my 42CO when I had it: I usually only made a straight horn out of it to show it off. I have thought many times about picking up a straight Bach 36 for when I have to play first parts. Just a little bit lower bandwidth for when I don't want to destroy quite as much. They really are such nice horns.

[imsevimse]

I have a Benge 190C and a Schilke ST-20 with the extra parts to make them convertible. I don't think Schilke make them anymore, they now make a ST-21 instead and I do not think it is convertable.
Another option to have a convertable horn is to have one slide and two bells. I've ordered a bell with g-att for my Gerdt .500 trombone. I'm curious how that will play.
Next option is to have two complete trombones. I have both a Benge 175 and a 175f. I have a Yanaha 892ZX with valve, otherwise it is the same as a 891Z. I also have both a Bach 42 and a 42B. The trombones play a lot different with a valve, generally, for me they play better without a valve.

/Tom

[Matt K]

Beware of some of the "boutique" .525 convertible trombones. The Edwards .525, in particular, is built on the .547 frame. It is unnecessarily heavy and to me, the most resistant .525 trombone I have played. I punished myself with one for about a year. It was a year too long.

That's not particularly unique to Edwards. Most medium bores share at least a tuning slide with their large bore counterparts (Shires, Edwards/Getzen, Rath, Bach, Yamaha and some Conn models). Almost all of those also use the .562 valve (Bach, Shires, Edwards/Getzen, Rath, Conn 88). Some have a smaller receiver (Bach & Yamaha) for the slide tenon. However, some valves are smaller (King 607/3B+ = .530 valves; Yamaha 356,446, 646 = .547) and some have smaller tuning slides (King 607/3b+, possibly Conn 79?).

That isn't to say that your Edwards doesn't play heavy. There are definitely heavy setups. And I'm possibly not a fan of the large/medium bore neckpipe too... I have one that I converted to have a Shires tuning slide receiver. The posts are actually in exactly the correct spot weirdly enough. But I've definitely played better Shires neckpipes... at some point I'll probably swap out the taper or put a valve on it or something tbh.

The only exceptions I'm aware of to that are the King and some Conn models, which have the same tuning slide as their smaller counterpart, so the 3B and 3B+ (and the 607F? I'll need to test that... I have both kicking around) have the same tuning slides and it's the smaller size that is shared with the larger horn. I've never actually played a 78H/79 to the best of my knowledge... but my understanding is the instrument is built on a smaller frame. But bigger than the 6H. It might be one of the few medium bore horns that was built from the ground up specifically as a medium bore but I could be wrong about that. I suppose the Bach 36 one could argue is in the same boat since the 42 came later.

At any rate, OP, you have some options... if you want a 36, you could certainly buy it but your chances of picking up an F attachment for it on the open market are pretty slim and, indeed, it probably would be quite expensive to have one made custom for it. You could consider just putting an F attachment on the straight neckpipe. Such conversions can be cheaper than making a totally separate valve section.

However, I would personally recommend buying an F attachment medium bore. Modern valves are really good and many wraps are pretty well balanced. They circumvent the need for a counterweight in many instances. Most of my F attachment horns are better balanced than my straight instruments. The need to use the neckpipe in isolation in my experience has been rather fleeting and I almost always end up using the F attachment on any gig I play. YMMV of course.

I would keep my eyes out for Yamah, Conn, and King medium bores. The King 607F and Yamaha 446 or 646 are all good instruments you can find at a very reasonable price point being "intermediate" horns (with the exception of the 646) but are typically very good players. The 607F is on the smaller side, as noted above. Yamaha tend to play a touch bigger. Another fairly popular instrument of late is the Yamaha 356, which is a 500/525 dual bore, but with the "large" bell section albeit with an 8" bell. I played one for several years. Very good playing instrument, but not in production any more for the US market. The Conn 79H might also be a good horn to keep your eyes out for, but it hasn't been made in awhile so I see a lot fewer of those around than the 607F for example. 36B or BO would also satisfy your requirements.

[tbonesullivan]

That's not particularly unique to Edwards. Most medium bores share at least a tuning slide with their large bore counterparts (Shires, Edwards/Getzen, Rath, Bach, Yamaha and some Conn models). Almost all of those also use the .562 valve (Bach, Shires, Edwards/Getzen, Rath, Conn 88). Some have a smaller receiver (Bach & Yamaha) for the slide tenon. However, some valves are smaller (King 607/3B+ = .530 valves; Yamaha 356,446, 646 = .547) and some have smaller tuning slides (King 607/3b+, possibly Conn 79?).

The Bach is a bit different, as the Model 36 pre dates the Model 42. The 36 was Vincent Bach's "ideal" orchestral trombone, and the 42 was designed later using a lot of 36 parts to make a .547" / 8 1/2" bell trombone. I believe that the bell section is identical, except that the 42 bell is rolled out an additional 8 1/2. The slide of the 42 was taken from the Bach 45.

I do have a medium bore trombone, a Yamaha YSL-640, but sometimes I do wish I had gotten a Bach 36 of some type.

[hornbuilder]

That is correct re the Bach 36-42.

The Conn 78-79 are interesting in comparison. Their tuning slide crook is not the same as the 8H, or the smaller horns. It is actually smaller on the big end, and bigger on the small end.

[andym]

I have a 36 that started as a 36B and was turned into a convertible horn. I like it as an f attachment horn and it is phenomenal as a straight horn. So you could always start with a 36B or BO of your choosing and have a tech customize it for you.

Or just go the Shires or Edwards modular route.

It really depends on the details of the horn. I have a straight neck pipe for my 0.547 Shires and never use it. The valve is just too good.

[Matt K]

The Bach is a bit different, as the Model 36 pre dates the Model 42. The 36 was Vincent Bach's "ideal" orchestral trombone, and the 42 was designed later using a lot of 36 parts to make a .547" / 8 1/2" bell trombone. I believe that the bell section is identical, except that the 42 bell is rolled out an additional 8 1/2. The slide of the 42 was taken from the Bach 45.

I do have a medium bore trombone, a Yamaha YSL-640, but sometimes I do wish I had gotten a Bach 36 of some type.

That's all true, but that would seem to reinforce the point that the 36 is akin to other manufacturers who share the larger chassis, in my opinion. The OP was being warned not to choose something that leans too far in one direction. Whether the medium bore came first or the other way around, I don't necessarily think that it's as big a deal. Since it's so common for medium bores to share such attributes, it isn't the basis that I would or would not choose an instrument. That would leave a very small subset of models, although good playing models in my opinion.

Incidentally, the Yamaha tuning slides are huge. The ones I've had have a larger lower and upper leg than my Shires. I want to say it's also bigger than Edwards tenors as well... but I can't remember how large the Edwards tuning slides are relative to the Shires ones. And the bell is 8.5" so the 640 is more of an outlier of medium bores. I've never quite understood why Yamaha put 8.5 bells on their 600 series medium bores. A lighterweight, 8" bell (lightweight like their 645 bell for example) and 8" like their 4xx series medium bores would be a home-run, in my opinion.

[whitbey]

I have two Edwards symphony tenors and one valve. The horn that is most often played in band or orchestra I usually play as a straight horn. It is so much sweeter sounding and plays like a flywheel.

I do like to tighten the screws 1/8th turn past finger tight with pliers as that seems to lock the horn down like it was soldered together. Having a tech line up the fittings so they are the exact same will help the playing too. Any tech that removes tension from horns will know how to do that.

The only thing I do not like is for practicality I have the counter weight on the straight pipe brace. Too feel balanced like a valve would feel would be 3 or 4 counter weights. I tried two and it dampened the sound too much. To horn is just slide heavy. If I have extended background notes I will hold the horn with a grip that is closer to the bell on the hand grip. Hard to show that.

My Edwards sterling bell seems to not matter as much if I have the valve on as the brass bell. The brass bell is a totally different horn with the valve on.

I have a small bore Edwards custom horn with a valve cut to Ab or a first valve. It gives me superbone valve speed. It's a one valve with alternate positions thing. That mass of the valve on the small bore did not make enough change to matter.

My horns are in my profile.

[MichaelMedrick]

I'm going to comment on a few points of view from this thread.
I have decades of experience with three Bach models, a 50b2, a 36 and a 42b. I no longer have the 42b because it did not work as well for me as a 36. The 42 feels too close to the 50, to me. I realize other folks handle both models just fine.

Firstly, finding an f attachment for a straight 36 and getting a convertible bell made is only hard if you have no one handy to do the work. The pick I included is a 36 bell assemble from assorted Corporation era parts with an open wrap F attachment cut to a G tuning. It blows very openly and does not bang into everything in the general area. The attachment also started life as part of a 42. There is no difference between 36 and 42 f attachments, other than the connector receiver.

Secondly, after trying Edwards .547 and .525 trombones, several Yamaha .525 models and about 45 years of Bach 36, for me again, the 36 works well. It is nothing like a 42 over than with with the right lead pipe and mouthpiece, a 36 has no problem doing what a 42 can. The proper ingrained sound concept helps too.

In having modifications done to 36s, I have gone a couple of steps too far, as in the attempts made little difference. 36 and 42 bells, as stated elsewhere are a matter of the trim. I have a .525-.547 slide that was a experiment that did me no real good.

If you are looking for a middle of the road, versatile, adaptable .525 trombone, a Bach 36 could be a great choice. Honestly, there's no reason other than funding, gumption and having a smart trombone technician, not try mods on any .525 trombone with commonly available parts.