Db bass trombone!

[Jgittleson]

Are your bell and neckpipe from the same manufacturer of the brace parts? If they are not, why would the parts fit? I don’t understand why they are supposed to “made to match” if they are not even from the same manufacturer. Even parts from the same source but different model would not fit together.

The parts i am talking about are same manufactuer, same model. Literally made to match. The crook and neckpipe have nothing to do with what i am talking about.

[Jgittleson]

I think some of you are under the impression horn parts go together like legos, tight fit, no adjustment avaiable. This is very far from true, and actually part of what i have a problem with.

[mrdeacon]

You're discussing the bell-side brace and its flange. right? Not all bells have the same taper, so of course there will be variations in the socket angle. Add to that the fact that you're using a shorter neckpipe with no curvature (Getzen curves their single-valve neckpipes), and it's a wonder it's not 10 degrees off. And for all your complaining about the sloppiness of fit at sockets, if you can't get 1 degree of play out of the slop at that particular junction, doesn't that tell us that the fit of these Getzen parts is VERY precise?

I've pointed this out before, and I hope you take it to heart. You're a talented machinist, with good ideas and a strong set of skills. However, instead of referencing your own skills in your sales pitch, you tend to denigrate the work of others. I think it works against you.

Hey my buddy's back! The bell side brace, bar, and socket on the reciever. And no they aren't Getzen, and yes they are all made to match, even with that bell. The brace is placed at the exact same spot on the bell as when used in Bb. Im going to say this again. You know nothing of the intricacies of this horn, please stop pretending you know better. Every time you make an assumption its so far off frankly it's insulting. I'm am used to designing far more complicated things than trombones, and anything you can try to rebut as my ignorance or error, has already been thought of and worked around. If I give a part a big thumbs down, its because it is not even made to work propertly in its native application. If you have a question of how I arrived at a particular conclusion, or how i solved a specific problem, great. That being said, the kid in the classroom trying to tell the teacher they made a mistake on the board act is getting real old.

Aren't you a professor or something? If thats the case it should be beneath you as well.

Doctor's comment made a lot of sense actually... He just mistakenly identified the parts.

It looks like the three parts are Bach parts, yes? Those parts are designed to work with a Bach tapered bell and neck pipe.

I'm going to make an educated guess (I asked on another thread and you didn't mention where you sourced the bell) that that's a Getzen bell and tuning slide.
Getzen bells and tuning slides have radically different tapers then Bach does. Of course the parts aren't going to fit together.

Nothing wrong with that! I commened you for your craftsmanship but like have others have mentioned it's a little odd to complain that different manufacturers parts don't fit together.

Also do you still have any plans to add TIB or TIS to these horns? I know a whole back you mentioned TIS. Would be awesome to see it in action!

[Jgittleson]

Hey my buddy's back! The bell side brace, bar, and socket on the reciever. And no they aren't Getzen, and yes they are all made to match, even with that bell. The brace is placed at the exact same spot on the bell as when used in Bb. Im going to say this again. You know nothing of the intricacies of this horn, please stop pretending you know better. Every time you make an assumption its so far off frankly it's insulting. I'm am used to designing far more complicated things than trombones, and anything you can try to rebut as my ignorance or error, has already been thought of and worked around. If I give a part a big thumbs down, its because it is not even made to work propertly in its native application. If you have a question of how I arrived at a particular conclusion, or how i solved a specific problem, great. That being said, the kid in the classroom trying to tell the teacher they made a mistake on the board act is getting real old.

Aren't you a professor or something? If thats the case it should be beneath you as well.

Doctor's comment made a lot of sense actually... He just mistakenly identified the parts.

It looks like the three parts are Bach parts, yes? Those parts are designed to work with a Bach tapered bell and neck pipe.

I'm going to make an educated guess (I asked on another thread and you didn't mention where you sourced the bell) that that's a Getzen bell and tuning slide.
Getzen bells and tuning slides have radically different tapers then Bach does. Of course the parts aren't going to fit together.

Nothing wrong with that! I commened you for your craftsmanship but like have others have mentioned it's a little odd to complain that different manufacturers parts don't fit together.

Also do you still have any plans to add TIB or TIS to these horns? I know a whole back you mentioned TIS. Would be awesome to see it in action!

Nope! Not Bach, and not Getzen. Yes, trying to finish the slide now, but i have a few customer horns i need to finish first, buts its apart and on my bench.it hasnt been a priority because i honestly havent needed to tune it.

[Specialk3700]

If no one can guess right why don't you just tell us who made the parts?

[mrdeacon]

If no one can guess right why don't you just tell us who made the parts?

I've been doing some snooping and I think I figured it out!!

The bell is a TR183 bell. He mentioned in another post the bell was 9". If you zoom into his last picture reeeeralllly close you can see Holton on the top line and Elkhorn on the second line and USA on the bottom line.

The receiver, flange and the rod are TR181 parts.

Look at pictures of a 80s TR181 before they switched to one piece Bach style recievers and you can tell they're pretty clearly Holton parts. TR180 and earlier parts have a slightly different design.

I'm not sure what the tuning slide is... It's hard to guess since it's been cut.

I'm not sure why he won't tell us the parts... But I'm pretty confident in my guesses.

[mrdeacon]

That would also explain why the parts aren't consistent with each other.

Holton is legendary for being inconsistent over the years. The taper between the TR183 and TR181 bells might even be different between each other.

[Jgittleson]

You're the closest but nope!

[peteedwards]

TR158?

[Jgittleson]

Bach receiver

[SwissTbone]

How will you go about finding enough parts when this goes into production?

[Jgittleson]

How will you go about finding enough parts when this goes into production?

Not very hard to get parts. All the stuff i want to be more precise (compared to the substandard parts i have run into), i will have produced. The stuff that meets the my standards i can buy by 100 at a time if need me. Though that isnt the plan. Id much prefer to Liscence this in the short term, and only do a few myself.

[SwissTbone]

You can buy 100 holton bells? Aren't they discontinued?

[Jgittleson]

You can buy 100 holton bells? Aren't they discontinued?

Cant speak for the horns, but not the bells. I have 10 of them here.

[LeTromboniste]

The patents are filed i guess i can tell you. I took the liberty of patentimg trombones in Db, and D. Whether its a tenor or bass, i have a patent on it.

Tr160 bell (150 158 and 160 same bell), flange, cross brace
Getzen bass tuning crook not cut btw
Getzen valves on the double bach valve and gooseneck on the single
Bach receiver

Do you mean you patented the concept of trombones in D and Db? If that is true, a) that patent will have no value and b) it's incredibly pretentious on your part. There have been trombones in tons of different keys ever since trombones have existed, including trombones in D and Db.

I also find it funny that you present yourself as an "inventor" of a type of trombone, and horn maker when you're reassembling instruments from existing parts. Not that there's anything wrong with Frankenbones, but most people who make them have the humility of not calling themselves instrument builders.

Clearly you are a very skilled machinist, as others have noted, and you have good ideas that can only be commended. But a tiny bit of humility wouldn't be out of place.

[mrdeacon]

Any reason for choosing the TR158/TR160 tenor bell instead of a tweener 9" bell like a King 5B or Bach 45B, or a true 9" bass bell like an Olds or TR183?

I feel like you'd almost get more traction on these if you advertised them as travel tweener horns instead of as a true bass.

I mean I guess they are true basses... Bass tuning slide, single bore bass slide, short bass neck pipe... Just the bell throat is much tighter.

[SwissTbone]

I dont understand why flame wars are started on jgittlesons threads.

One can express his opinion without attacking or insulting anybody. That way, real discussions could take place.

[Jgittleson]

The patents are filed i guess i can tell you. I took the liberty of patentimg trombones in Db, and D. Whether its a tenor or bass, i have a patent on it.

Tr160 bell (150 158 and 160 same bell), flange, cross brace
Getzen bass tuning crook not cut btw
Getzen valves on the double bach valve and gooseneck on the single
Bach receiver

Do you mean you patented the concept of trombones in D and Db? If that is true, a) that patent will have no value and b) it's incredibly pretentious on your part. There have been trombones in tons of different keys ever since trombones have existed, including trombones in D and Db.

I also find it funny that you present yourself as an "inventor" of a type of trombone, and horn maker when you're reassembling instruments from existing parts. Not that there's anything wrong with Frankenbones, but most people who make them have the humility of not calling themselves instrument builders.

Clearly you are a very skilled machinist, as others have noted, and you have good ideas that can only be commended. But a tiny bit of humility wouldn't be out of place.

Well, to each their own. It might have been done before, but no one took out patents....

[Jgittleson]

Any reason for choosing the TR158/TR160 tenor bell instead of a tweener 9" bell like a King 5B or Bach 45B, or a true 9" bass bell like an Olds or TR183?

I feel like you'd almost get more traction on these if you advertised them as travel tweener horns instead of as a true bass.

I mean I guess they are true basses... Bass tuning slide, single bore bass slide, short bass neck pipe... Just the bell throat is much tighter.

Its not tighter, i cut it to match. Only the flare is different.

[Jgittleson]

I dont understand why flame wars are started on jgittlesons threads.

One can express his opinion without attacking or insulting anybody. That way, real discussions could take place.

Thank you!

[Burgerbob]

I dont understand why flame wars are started on jgittlesons threads.

One can express his opinion without attacking or insulting anybody. That way, real discussions could take place.

IMO, I don't see a lot of flaming, just honest questions.

[LeTromboniste]

Do you mean you patented the concept of trombones in D and Db? If that is true, a) that patent will have no value and b) it's incredibly pretentious on your part. There have been trombones in tons of different keys ever since trombones have existed, including trombones in D and Db.

I also find it funny that you present yourself as an "inventor" of a type of trombone, and horn maker when you're reassembling instruments from existing parts. Not that there's anything wrong with Frankenbones, but most people who make them have the humility of not calling themselves instrument builders.

Clearly you are a very skilled machinist, as others have noted, and you have good ideas that can only be commended. But a tiny bit of humility wouldn't be out of place.

Well, to each their own. It might have been done before, but no one took out patents....

That's absurd. It's like if you said you could patent the trombone itself because nobody else took patents.

Novelty is one of the basic criteria of a patent's validity. Anybody can prove, should you sue them, that trombones in D have existed since at least the 16th century. I literally wrote my previous comment while holding a bass in D in my other hand. There are numerous historical text that describe trombones in D, plus hundreds if not thousands of instruments in circulation. There's at least one Db trombone that is over two centuries old.

Let alone the fact that these have existed for almost as long as trombones have existed, the very idea that tuning a trombone (let alone brass instruments or instruments in general) in different keys represents any kind of novelty is absolutely ludicrous. If anything, just look at the variety of bass trigger tunings discussed on this very forum. Aside from valve tunings, I know of examples of trombones pitched in any one of these keys : Bb, A, G, F, E, Eb, D, Db, C. The only ones I have yet to see is B, Ab and Gb, and I'm sure there are some out there.

[LeTromboniste]

I dont understand why flame wars are started on jgittlesons threads.

One can express his opinion without attacking or insulting anybody. That way, real discussions could take place.

IMO, I don't see a lot of flaming, just honest questions.

Exactly. There's a difference between question and criticism vs. insult.

[Jgittleson]

Well, to each their own. It might have been done before, but no one took out patents....

That's absurd. It's like if you said you could patent the trombone itself because nobody else took patents.

Novelty is one of the basic criteria of a patent's validity. Anybody can prove, should you sue them, that trombones in D have existed since at least the 16th century. I literally wrote my previous comment while holding a bass in D in my other hand. There are numerous historical text that describe trombones in D, plus hundreds if not thousands of instruments in circulation. There's at least one Db trombone that is over two centuries old.

Let alone the fact that these have existed for almost as long as trombones have existed, the very idea that tuning a trombone (let alone brass instruments or instruments in general) in different keys represents any kind of novelty is absolutely ludicrous. If anything, just look at the variety of bass trigger tunings discussed on this very forum. Aside from valve tunings, I know of examples of trombones pitched in any one of these keys : Bb, A, G, F, E, Eb, D, Db, C. The only ones I have yet to see is B, Ab and Gb, and I'm sure there are some out there.

Its much more complicated than i simply patent D and Db. A lot of the factors that make up the horn are proprietary and are in detail in the drawings.

[SwissTbone]

IMO, I don't see a lot of flaming, just honest questions.

Exactly. There's a difference between question and criticism vs. insult.

C'est le ton qui fait la musique.

[Jgittleson]

He is right. Some of you guys are so contrarian its absurd. Others have great questions and feedback.

[mrpillow]

Cut the ad hominem discourse on all sides or this thread goes bye-bye.

[Jgittleson]

The patents are filed i guess i can tell you. I took the liberty of patentimg trombones in Db, and D. Whether its a tenor or bass, i have a patent on it.

Tr160 bell (150 158 and 160 same bell), flange, cross brace
Getzen bass tuning crook not cut btw
Getzen valves on the double bach valve and gooseneck on the single
Bach receiver

Do you mean you patented the concept of trombones in D and Db? If that is true, a) that patent will have no value and b) it's incredibly pretentious on your part. There have been trombones in tons of different keys ever since trombones have existed, including trombones in D and Db.

I also find it funny that you present yourself as an "inventor" of a type of trombone, and horn maker when you're reassembling instruments from existing parts. Not that there's anything wrong with Frankenbones, but most people who make them have the humility of not calling themselves instrument builders.

Clearly you are a very skilled machinist, as others have noted, and you have good ideas that can only be commended. But a tiny bit of humility wouldn't be out of place.

Ok now that im not trick or treating with my daughter and can actually read this.

So let's sum this up. You show me someone who made ANY of the models i have gone through, and i will gladly concede I invented something. FWIW, i hold several dozen utility patents in various fields, and have Liscenced some with moderate success (if it was with booming success, i likely would be on a beach somewhere drinking something exotic). It's something i do.

Mechanical application and advancement in a unique and propriety manner constitues a patent. How much do you know about patent law? I happen to be fairly well versed. Patents are purposely as broad as possible, in order to encompass as much as it can under its protection. I have more than one patent in process for these horns. Searches have come up clear. It doesnt matter who was first to invent. It does matter who was first to patent. Thats how US Patent law works. Whether you think it's enforceable or not is immaterial, it is up to lawyers and a judge to take care of those things. I just make stuff and let the lawyers take care of that part.

[Jgittleson]

Here is another example of shoddy workmanship. These are all bach parts. The old lever fits the pivot screw just fine, the new one not at all, even though it comes in the kit. Why? Because it appears to be plated and i will guarantee no one took the plating into account. Either needed to be bigger to start, or had to be drilled out. I happen to have the exact bit to do it, but when you spend $110 on whats advertized as a drop in kit, why should I have to??

[Jgittleson]

So, As long as you have a drill press, compound slide with soft jaws, caliper to measure the pivot, know how to convent to a drill bit, and know where to order a good hss one, then yea, sure, walk in the park!

[LeTromboniste]

Just to be clear, I never said your design as a whole was not original, or that didn't invent anything, nor did I say that you shouldn't patent what you did invent. Whether your various innovations will prove to be solutions to existing problems or to the contrary, solutions in search of problems, you're absolutely right to patent them, and to patent your design, and if they succeed, good for you and good for all of us who might benefit from them. There are and ever will be improvements that can be made to trombones. Again I'll reiterate that your work looks good and well assembled and I find it interesting, and I'm all for trombones in other keys and would be curious to try your horn.

My goal was not to insult you. I merely pointed out, and I stand by it, that tuning a trombone to a different key is in no way a novelty in itself, and that claiming the contrary is presumptuous, as is presenting oneself as an instrument builder when you are not making any of the main components of the instrument and are using mostly stock parts from established makers (granted, that is a lot of hard work and you seem to do it well, and I do praise you for it). Especially if you then make compromises on your design to accommodate the not ideal parts, like you said you did (which is entirely normal for a mod project of course) or go to great lengths to complain about the problems with the parts you're using, instead of doing what any instrument maker I know would do, which is to make the parts themselves from scratch.

This will be my last post here since I think all that needed to be said had been said. Keep up the good work and I hope your project will meet success. In the meantime I and countless others will continue playing bass and alto trombones in D built by other makers, patent or not.




PS to moderators, despite my best efforts to make it clear it is not meant a personal attack but a reasoned and rational argument on the core issue at hand of trombone design, this is considered as an ad hominem attack, then I fear there is apparently not much space left for discussion and rational debate on this forum.

[Jgittleson]

Just to be clear, I never said your design as a whole was not original, or that didn't invent anything, nor did I say that you shouldn't patent what you did invent. Whether your various innovations will prove to be solutions to existing problems or to the contrary, solutions in search of problems, you're absolutely right to patent them, and to patent your design, and if they succeed, good for you and good for all of us who might benefit from them. There are and ever will be improvements that can be made to trombones. Again I'll reiterate that your work looks good and well assembled and I find it interesting, and I'm all for trombones in other keys and would be curious to try your horn.

My goal was not to insult you. I merely pointed out, and I stand by it, that tuning a trombone to a different key is in no way a novelty in itself, and that claiming the contrary is presumptuous, as is presenting oneself as an instrument builder when you are not making any of the main components of the instrument and are using mostly stock parts from established makers (granted, that is a lot of hard work and you seem to do it well, and I do praise you for it). Especially if you then make compromises on your design to accommodate the not ideal parts, like you said you did (which is entirely normal for a mod project of course) or go to great lengths to complain about the problems with the parts you're using, instead of doing what any instrument maker I know would do, which is to make the parts themselves from scratch.

This will be my last post here since I think all that needed to be said had been said. Keep up the good work and I hope your project will meet success. In the meantime I and countless others will continue playing bass and alto trombones in D built by other makers, patent or not.




PS to moderators, despite my best efforts to make it clear it is not meant a personal attack but a reasoned and rational argument on the core issue at hand of trombone design, this is considered as an ad hominem attack, then I fear there is apparently not much space left for discussion and rational debate on this forum.

Hey man, you're more than in title to your opinion, but i never said i was building horns from scratch. I dont pretend to be, either. Im sure the people i Liscence it out to will. All i am doing it making a better mousetrap with parts from the old one. Thats still building a custom horn, and still inventing a new breed of trombone. When/if it goes into production, thats a different story. I think you have a misconception about the pitch im patenting. The D you are referring to is an octave below mine, and has nothing in common with it.

At the end of the day, Im going to keep developing this, into tenors as well. I've have a few highly respected people in the industry reach out to me with interest, some as players who want one, others who want to work out potentially producing them. Ill say this much. Either way, These will be at a booth at next years ITF. I encourage everyone to try them.

[Finetales]

The D you are referring to is an octave below mine, and has nothing in common with it.

"bass and alto trombones in D"

[Jgittleson]

Back to the regularly scheduled programming. The lever boss took some fitting to make work, the threads were not usable, and the clearance wouldn't allow for the lever to fit. And to round it off, the pivot screw's threads were also non functional. Now that that's all done, ive decided to modify the valve to use the linkage i have on hand, rather than vice versa. It would have been a lot easier before the valve body was in the horn, oh well. Need to drill and tap 2 new holes, and plug the old ones. Since ideally that part of the rotor is very low pressure, some grubs screws and locktite will be just fine. When finished, the arm will operate like normal, and the 2 original holes will be behind the stops. I may try this operation on a junk valve body first, since i may have to freehand drill the holes (always dangerous, especially with it needs to be tapped and alignment is important). Ideally i will be able to hold the horn under my drill press somehow, should be interesting!

The only other job on the bell is to tighten up the rear bearing on the valve body. The kit with collets is on its way, then ill just have to cinch it down, and lap to round if needed. Ive never swedged a valve before, so looking forward to the process. Will probably try it on a junk body laying around first to make sure i know what I'm doing.

[afugate]

[snip]
I've pointed this out before, and I hope you take it to heart. You're a talented machinist, with good ideas and a strong set of skills. However, instead of referencing your own skills in your sales pitch, you tend to denigrate the work of others. I think it works against you.

Hey my buddy's back!
[snip]
That being said, the kid in the classroom trying to tell the teacher they made a mistake on the board act is getting real old.

Aren't you a professor or something? If thats the case it should be beneath you as well.

I was the kid in second grade who realized his teacher had made a mathematical error at the chalkboard and asked her about it. She did not chastise me. She praised me.

I have no idea if doctortrombone knows anything about what you are building. But he's speaking volumes about how you are saying it.

I was interested in this project / thread for a while because I think this is an interesting concept. But I've grown to the point that I cringe when I open it because I expect to read more goofiness.

You appear to be a talented machinist / skilled craftsman. I wish I could learn more from your work.

--Andy in OKC

[BrassedOn]

“It's like if you said you could patent the trombone itself because nobody else took patents.....Anybody can prove, should you sue them, that trombones in D have existed since at least the 16th century.”

I guess that’s why patent attorneys exist. And anyone with standing (either having invented the trombone or been harmed by this thread) should persue the matter.

The second thing I would do when I finish my time machine (for which I will have filled a patent as soon as I can make the flux capacitor work right and travel back in time to patent that, thanks to Dr. Brown neglecting to file) will be to travel to the 15th century and file my trombone patent in all keys, including 1/4 tone scale keys, in case you’re even thinking of thinking about that.

[Jgittleson]

Alright i think this idiocy has reach its logical conclusion. I started this here to share something new and innovative, and yes, whether you agree or not, falls under the auspices of a proprietary invention. Im sorry to those of you who were interested, but quite frankly, I've had enough from the select few who just persist to badger rather than share in good heart conversation.

Mods, if you'd care to either lock the thread or delete it for all i care, thanks!

[peteedwards]

The second thing I would do when I finish my time machine (for which I will have filled a patent as soon as I can make the flux capacitor work right and travel back in time to patent that, thanks to Dr. Brown neglecting to file)

I always tell my boss I've stopped work on all other projects to work on a time machine. As soon as its done, I'll go back in time & complete all other projects on schedule.

It would be pointless to patent the time machine because someone else could always go back a little further in time & patent it before me. It could go back & forth like that endlessly but it would be just a big waste of time.

[hyperbolica]

The patents are filed i guess i can tell you. I took the liberty of patentimg trombones in Db, and D. Whether its a tenor or bass, i have a patent on it.

Tr160 bell (150 158 and 160 same bell), flange, cross brace
Getzen bass tuning crook not cut btw
Getzen valves on the double bach valve and gooseneck on the single
Bach receiver

Do you mean you patented the concept of trombones in D and Db? If that is true, a) that patent will have no value and b) it's incredibly pretentious on your part. There have been trombones in tons of different keys ever since trombones have existed, including trombones in D and Db.

I also find it funny that you present yourself as an "inventor" of a type of trombone, and horn maker when you're reassembling instruments from existing parts. Not that there's anything wrong with Frankenbones, but most people who make them have the humility of not calling themselves instrument builders.

Clearly you are a very skilled machinist, as others have noted, and you have good ideas that can only be commended. But a tiny bit of humility wouldn't be out of place.

No, he filed for a patent, he doesn't own the patent yet. I doubt very much that they will grant a patent based on the key of an instrument. I'm an engineer who married a patent attorney, and I can pretty much guarantee the lawyer is going to be the only one to get anything of value from that application.

[Jgittleson]

I didnt go out and file it as a "Db bass trombone" patent. Im not a moron as some of you seem to assume. And i didnt file only one. Not my first time.

[Bonearzt]

I think I'm going to lock this thread as I agree it has run way beyond it's logical course.
Too much good info to lose by deleting!

Eric

[sirisobhakya]

This maybe regarded as an insult, but it is, at least a part of it, my pure and honest curiosity.

I have kept asking myself from the start: WHY must it be in this key? Why do you steadfastly insist that it must be in this key and the player must learn to play it as it is, instead of the other way around? Why players must learn all the new slide positions just to play this horn? And what makes you think they will do that, except those who want it because it is a novelty?

Why is a bass trombone in high D or even high Eb better than a bass trombone in Bb? A shorter slide? It is easily fixed by ascending valve. Double valves can make it playable chromatically to pedal C with only 5 positions. Is it because "it has unique tone"? The tone can be adjusted easily by changing mouthpiece, or at least other components that can be done without changing the key of the instrument. You also said yourself that "The bottom line is a bass trombone is a different instrument than a tenor", but why is the bass supposed to be in a higher key than a tenor? Resistance? Mouthpiece with a larger throat would solve that just fine, or at most dual bore slide or Thayer valves should do it. Weight? Wouldn't a single rotor more comfortable to hold? Also, weight is not as important as balance.

To sum up: why would one go through hassle of learning new positions, while everything they can get from your horn is obtainable without doing that, and most likely at cheaper price?

I am not a horn builder, although I would like to become one if opportunity permits, so I would not comment anything but praise on your craftsmanship. But I am a player, and also an engineer, and all the above are from these two of my point of view.

[Jgittleson]

I think I'm going to lock this thread as I agree it has run way beyond it's logical course.
Too much good info to lose by deleting!

Eric

Thank you Eric

[hyperbolica]

This maybe regarded as an insult, but it is, at least a part of it, my pure and honest curiosity.

I have kept asking myself from the start: WHY must it be in this key? Why do you steadfastly insist that it must be in this key and the player must learn to play it as it is, instead of the other way around? Why players must learn all the new slide positions just to play this horn? And what makes you think they will do that, except those who want it because it is a novelty?

Why is a bass trombone in high D or even high Eb better than a bass trombone in Bb? A shorter slide? It is easily fixed by ascending valve. Double valves can make it playable chromatically to pedal C with only 5 positions. Is it because "it has unique tone"? The tone can be adjusted easily by changing mouthpiece, or at least other components that can be done without changing the key of the instrument. You also said yourself that "The bottom line is a bass trombone is a different instrument than a tenor", but why is the bass supposed to be in a higher key than a tenor? Resistance? Mouthpiece with a larger throat would solve that just fine, or at most dual bore slide or Thayer valves should do it. Weight? Wouldn't a single rotor more comfortable to hold? Also, weight is not as important as balance.

To sum up: why would one go through hassle of learning new positions, while everything they can get from your horn is obtainable without doing that, and most likely at cheaper price?

I am not a horn builder, although I would like to become one if opportunity permits, so I would not comment anything but praise on your craftsmanship. But I am a player, and also an engineer, and all the above are from these two of my point of view.

I think it's primarily because the good ideas are already taken.
https://www.trombonechat.com/viewtopic.php?t=5592
https://www.trombonechat.com/viewtopic.php?f=57&t=2082

He would be accused of copying Pete Edwards if there weren't something wonky about it. Pete was less self-promoting, more open to discussion, and in the end, produced a more workable design.