TromboneChat

Hi,

I've been thinking of buying a Hagmann valve section for my Shires tenor. Has anyone else tried this?

I prefer the "narrow" width on my slide, so I worry that there won't be enough clearance between the valve and my neck.

I see on the Hagmann website that they have done a conversion job on an Elkhart 88H (http://www.trombone.ch/EN/customshop.html#conn), so maybe it's not a problem.

Thanks.

I've played a 88H with a Hagmann on several occasions and there is no problem with the clearance, at least for me.

OK, thanks Nordic.

I tried a Hagman when I was getting my Rath and it rubbed my neck. Ended up going with rotax. As they say, YMMV. But the Rotax was cheaper and has been an excellent valve. Very fast and short throw.

Any thoughts on the possibility of a Hagmann on a Bach 36? I'm envisioning something like this http://www.trombone.ch/images/wrapdesig ... ok_big.jpg because I like the compactness of a traditional wrap with regard to weight balance but I obviously want fewer bends that an open wrap would offer. The image attached here seems to accomplish that.

I don't really care for the Thayer's simply because the valve digs into my neck, so neck clearance is a legit concern for a Hagmann as billyball mentioned.

I know Bach produces a 42 with a Hagmann and most if not all of the parts of the traditional rotor section of the 42's and 36's are basically the same. So why not a Hagmann on a 36?

The 36 slide is a little narrower, I think. That would be the only issue.

Maybe try horns with Hagmann valves first, as it depends very much on your physionomy and posture. It does however protrude less from the horn than a Thayer, and the linkage and axis rod protrude in the only direction where they can't possibly be in the way (as opposed to Thayers and traditional valves).

trompanner wrote: ↑Sat Feb 09, 2019 6:17 pm Any thoughts on the possibility of a Hagmann on a Bach 36? I'm envisioning something like this

I wouldn't see why not, they do make medium bore valves. Bear in mind that a Hagmann conversion on an existing horn is going to be upwards of $1500.

That's a cool wrap but it has the downside of not having an E pull (which the open wrap made by Hagmann has - the Bach open wrap on stock horns with this valve is slightly different and doesn't!). The German style wrap with two tuning slides is interesting because it gives you both the compactness of a closed wrap yet still gives you an E pull.

LeTromboniste wrote: ↑Sun Feb 10, 2019 3:10 am Bear in mind that a Hagmann conversion on an existing horn is going to be upwards of $1500.

I wonder if there is much of cost difference between a conversion on a convertible versus non-convertible horns.

LeTromboniste wrote: ↑Sun Feb 10, 2019 3:10 am That's a cool wrap but it has the downside of not having an E pull (which the open wrap made by Hagmann has - the Bach open wrap on stock horns with this valve is slightly different and doesn't!). The German style wrap with two tuning slides is interesting because it gives you both the compactness of a closed wrap yet still gives you an E pull.

For the record, the low E pull is not a need for me and basically a non-issue. For me, the biggest points are balance and the compromise between compactness and openness.

trompanner wrote: ↑Sun Feb 10, 2019 1:44 pm I wonder if there is much of cost difference between a conversion on a convertible versus non-convertible horns.

Might be a little bit cheaper from not having to take the bell section apart but it'll still involve putting it together with the braces, receiver, neckpipe and carefully aligning all that, plus the valve and tubing alone are the bulk of the cost anyway. When I bought mine the conversion kit was just shy of 1000 CHF (which is roughly on par with the dollar), and that was in 2010 I think, so it might have gone up quite a bit since then. The conversion itself was around $300 by my local tech, that will vary with who you work with of course.

Another option would be to get a 42A, swap bells and either 1. change the slide receiver to the 36 size or 2. change the tenon on your 36 slide to a 42 tenon.

It's actually cheaper to make it fixed than modular in my experience. Though the difference is not a tremendous amount. Open wraps are cheaper than some of the closed/semi-closed wraps too (the 3BF rotor on a King has a lot of solder points for example). But you also then have to buy all the parts (flanges, nuts, etc.) and those add up both parts wise and installation wise. THat said, if it's modular and you don't want the old stuff to be compatible, it would technically be a smidge cheaper to do it modular if the parts are compatible which is often not the case, even with valves of the same type (such as the variety of rotors, all of which are slightly different enough to need some custom fitting to make work right usually).

I played a 36 with a Hagmann. Played really well. Was not too narrow.

IF you’re an absolute giant of a player, you’ll have trouble. But you’d probably have trouble with with a 36B or an 88H anyway.

brtnats wrote: ↑Mon Feb 11, 2019 4:24 pm I played a 36 with a Hagmann. Played really well. Was not too narrow.

Nice! I knew I couldn't have been the first to have thought of a 36 with a Hagmann. Do you remember if it was a customization? (Side note: Bach didn't make a 36A did they?)

brtnats wrote: ↑Mon Feb 11, 2019 4:24 pm IF you’re an absolute giant of a player, you’ll have trouble. But you’d probably have trouble with with a 36B or an 88H anyway.

I'm no giant...a big reason by I'm looking into a medium bore pro level instrument is because while I still play often, I no longer play 4-5 hours a day. I feel like a medium bore would make better use of my "new normal" lung capacity and what not.

trompanner wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 6:38 pm
Nice! I knew I couldn't have been the first to have thought of a 36 with a Hagmann. Do you remember if it was a customization? (Side note: Bach didn't make a 36A did they?)

Considering that the model numbers for their valves are "TTB42" for the large bores and "TTB36" for the medium (TTB for tenor trombone, I would guess), I would think the creator of the valve must have had that idea before anyone else...

trompanner wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 6:38 pm

brtnats wrote: ↑Mon Feb 11, 2019 4:24 pm I played a 36 with a Hagmann. Played really well. Was not too narrow.

Nice! I knew I couldn't have been the first to have thought of a 36 with a Hagmann. Do you remember if it was a customization? (Side note: Bach didn't make a 36A did they?)

It was a custom job with standard parts. Eric Edwards did the work. Played great and was my main horn for about a decade.

brtnats wrote: ↑Mon Feb 11, 2019 4:24 pm I played a 36 with a Hagmann. Played really well. Was not too narrow.

IF you’re an absolute giant of a player, you’ll have trouble. But you’d probably have trouble with with a 36B or an 88H anyway.

That perception is probably coming from the horn itself or the valve for which you put on it. Hagmanns are actually the most flexible valve out there that I am aware of that all come in a single package. In other words, I'm not aware of another valve taht offers .530, .547(or similar I believe), .562, and .593 options. The 36 actually has a 562 rotor, as is convention for a lot of medium bores actually. It's the same size as the large bores usually as well fwiw. But a .530 rotor feels a lot different than a 562 one in my opinion though I have never actually A/B compared the two.

@Matt: I was referring to the neck clearance of the player using a tenor slide crook instead of a bass crook.

brtnats wrote: ↑Wed Feb 13, 2019 11:33 am @Matt: I was referring to the neck clearance of the player using a tenor slide crook instead of a bass crook.

::whoosh:: on me, yay for 5AM reading comprehension