Need help identifying this thing

[NotSkilledHere]

I saw this on Fb marketplace and I have never been so confused. I cant tell if that is meant to be a static rotor or something with missing linkage? it appears to be a full length honr and an f attachement? I know Conn made the 60H and 61H which are C bones with the static rotor but those are shorter horns with a tiny static rotor attachment....

Does anyone know what this might be?

[Finetales]

I would guess something's missing - perhaps an old-school leather strap to activate the valve. But I don't know, I've never seen a wrap that far back before.

[SlideCrook]

28H Alloo Model with valve to E, broken thong trigger linkage (notice the hole on the rotational mechanism, where a string and leather thumb loop would attach). This is a small-medium bore instrument by today’s standards. Available from 1920-1924


The 28H name may throw you off, as it was used for 4 distinctly different models, including a C-Preacher, a tuning-in-slide ballroom model (bell setback for easier mute use), and a Connstellation small-bore in the 50s.

[NotSkilledHere]

28H Alloo Model with valve to E, broken thong trigger linkage (notice the hole on the rotational mechanism, where a string and leather thumb loop would attach). This is a small-medium bore instrument by today’s standards. Available from 1920-1924


The 28H name may throw you off, as it was used for 4 distinctly different models, including a C-Preacher, a tuning-in-slide ballroom model (bell setback for easier mute use), and a Connstellation small-bore in the 50s.

Oh wow that's fascinating! Thank you!! I dont think i can even find traces of another one of these online except a brief mention in an older trombonechat thread. Seems to be in good condition outside of missing and broken thong trigger linkage.

Conn and their repeated reuse of numberings is sometimes annoying haha.

[NotSkilledHere]

So I have new information about this horn. I couldn't get them to send me any more pictures of the front of the bell or receiver but they might be busy or not understand what I mean, but it does indeed look to be a Conn and serial number points to 1907 and seems to not be a 28H? maybe it's a prototype? or a custom build? Curious thing this one is.

[justatrombonist]

That certainly is confusing. I would allude to it being a Conn model of some sorts because of the way the engraving on the bell looks. It appears to date back to the 1920s as previously mentioned. I would hold on that being from 1907 until you get more information. What was the price? It seems sketchy because the background is outside and why would anyone take a vintage trombone outside just to take a picture?

[NotSkilledHere]

Yea it's all over the place haha. and the nickel? or silver plated? outers kinda throw me off because im not sure conn was doing those back then. possible but im honestly not sure.

they are asking $250 and it seems to be someone working at an antiques or vintage store a little outside of Houston. I doubt this has too much usability. maybe as a jazz horn, so im mostly judging on whether or not it's in original enough condition to be collectible

[brassmedic]

Doesn't look at all like a Conn to me. Braces are wrong, cork barrels are wrong, engraving is wrong, wrap is wrong, valve seems to be sitting much higher than any Conn. I don't think Conn ever made slides with nickel silver outers but brass oversleeves. And is that a wing nut on the bell receiver? I wonder if it's a European maker.

[Posaunus]

Doesn't look at all like a Conn to me. Braces are wrong, cork barrels are wrong, engraving is wrong, wrap is wrong, valve seems to be sitting much higher than any Conn. I don't think Conn ever made slides with nickel silver outers but brass oversleeves. And is that a wing nut on the bell receiver? I wonder if it's a European maker.

I agree it does not look Conn-ish.
Case seems to have a place for a lyre. Were these common for European trombones?

[HawaiiTromboneGuy]

I had this old Conn that had the rotor built in the same way as the horn in the photos. Interestingly enough it also came with nickel outers.

[brassmedic]

I had this old Conn that had the rotor built in the same way as the horn in the photos. Interestingly enough it also came with nickel outers.

Now that's a Conn, and you can see that it looks almost nothing like the OP's mystery horn.

[walldaja]

One of the new pictures had "LP" stamped on it--low pitch. Be difficult to play with others.

[JohnL]

Doesn't look at all like a Conn to me. Braces are wrong, cork barrels are wrong, engraving is wrong, wrap is wrong, valve seems to be sitting much higher than any Conn. I don't think Conn ever made slides with nickel silver outers but brass oversleeves. And is that a wing nut on the bell receiver? I wonder if it's a European maker.

Proportions don't look right for a German-style instrument. Maybe French? To me, it looks to be more in the American style.

The six-digit serial number says that it had to be made by a fair-sized company.

[NotSkilledHere]

the wrap definitely seems not too German to me as their wraps tended to really resemble a circle/loop as oblong in nature as could be. I tried to look at some French horns and they didnt seem to fit the bill. If anything the British and American wraps seemed to fit best. Some old Holtons and Boosey & Hawkesseemed to match the wrap pattern and relative valve placements too. but the wraps seemed too uniform in bends to match the pictured horn.

I just got a message from the seller telling me it's a Martin. appears mystery has been solved.

Martin.PNG

https://www.horn-u-copia.net/show.php?s ... Martin+%22

check the first picture. it seems to me to be the most similar at least visually to what I can see.

[JohnL]

https://www.horn-u-copia.net/show.php?s ... Martin+%22

check the first picture. it seems to me to be the most similar at least visually to what I can see.

Yeah, that looks like a winner. I wonder if it originally had a linkage like the one shown in the Horn-U-Copia image?

Based on the Martin serial number list, it dates from 1931-1932.

[NotSkilledHere]

https://www.horn-u-copia.net/show.php?s ... Martin+%22

check the first picture. it seems to me to be the most similar at least visually to what I can see.

Yeah, that looks like a winner. I wonder if it originally had a linkage like the one shown in the Horn-U-Copia image?

Based on the Martin serial number list, it dates from 1931-1932.

it probably would be something similar. Though I'm not surprised that the linkage has since disappeared when it seems to more or less be attached to that little loop thing. would a leather/string linkage have been a more efficient method to actuate the rotor?

[brassmedic]

One of the new pictures had "LP" stamped on it--low pitch. Be difficult to play with others.

Old low pitch is pretty close to modern 440. Should be fine.

[brassmedic]

https://www.horn-u-copia.net/show.php?s ... Martin+%22

check the first picture. it seems to me to be the most similar at least visually to what I can see.

Yeah, that looks like a winner. I wonder if it originally had a linkage like the one shown in the Horn-U-Copia image?

Based on the Martin serial number list, it dates from 1931-1932.

That loop looks like an attachment point for a string. I doubt it had a metal bar linkage.

[JohnL]

That loop looks like an attachment point for a string. I doubt it had a metal bar linkage.

Early 1930's seems a bit late for a thong. Could be they used string to connect the linkage to the valve?

[brassmedic]

That loop looks like an attachment point for a string. I doubt it had a metal bar linkage.

Early 1930's seems a bit late for a thong. Could be they used string to connect the linkage to the valve?

I've never seen that setup. Have you? And I don't see a solder mark from where the original lever was taken off or fell off, but the photo is rather blurry.

Here's a Conn from 1927 that has the sling: https://cderksen.home.xs4all.nl/Conn70H1927image.html

Also possible that the Martin serial number list is not accurate.

[NotSkilledHere]

I made an almost insultingly low offer which they accepted and promptly shipped me the horn. And it has now arrived.

So It is a Martin Handcraft Symphony model horn. Certainly an interesting build if nothing else.

The slide section appears to be in decent condition inside and out although in dire need of deep clean and alignment. Interestingly the slide lock is on the tenon side and the little twisty slide lock ring is built INTO and INSIDE of that little ferrule decorative bit at the end of the barrel. Just twist to unlock or lock it. I put a small shank mouthpiece into it and it wobbles about like a bobblehead, and i put an Olds 1* into it which i assume has the Olds shank on it and it seems to fit right at home. I wasn't aware Martin horns used olds shanks but then and again ancient horns have many quirks.

The bell section feels like a tank and my first thought was "heavy." both tuning slides move. the rotor moves, although the rotor cap is like stuck on there. If you look at the pictures you can see there used to be what i would assume is some sort of second nub or thingy of some sort that broke off in the past so the mechanical linkage as pictured on hornucopia seems likely. it appears that whatever spring loaded functionality was used to return the rotor to the original position was a part of that linkage. There is no sort of linkage saddle anywhere near the front brace where the linkage would have attached so it would have more or less just swung about freely until you put your thumb in it.

This will prove to be an interesting project horn if nothing else. any advice on what I should do with the rotor to make it useable again is welcome tho I would prefer to bring the horn back to original condition if possible.

[JohnL]

I believe the little "ear" that I've circle here

valve_edit.jpg

is the end of a spring, something like this one:

spiral_torsion_spring.jpg

As for the stops, I expect they're internal to the valve, like this:

S_Valve-Inside.jpg

I've seen later Martin basses with that sort of bumper setup.

[NotSkilledHere]

I believe the little "ear" that I've circle here

valve_edit.jpg

is the end of a spring, something like this one:

spiral_torsion_spring.jpg

As for the stops, I expect they're internal to the valve, like this:

S_Valve-Inside.jpg

I've seen later Martin basses with that sort of bumper setup.

That actually does seem to have been what it was. I opened up that rotor side and found the clock spring as pictured though not with as many curls. It was soldered to the inside of the cap with quite a lot of solder and that appears to have made it's way underneath the little clip part that extends outside the cap and made it seem kind of like a mounting point for something else. The other end had to be aligned and slipped into the end seat and then I placed it back together and screwed the screw on the outside back in. now it does in fact spring back into position. as intended.

unfortunately the cap on the other side of the valve that looks much more like a normal valve cap that is probably concealing the internal bumper stops is like stuck in place so I have to wait for a tech to open it when i take it to them to clean the entire horn and realign the slide.

let me take it apart the spring side and take some pictures.

[NotSkilledHere]

photos as promised

IMG_8883.jpeg

IMG_8884.jpeg

IMG_8885.jpeg

IMG_8886.jpeg

IMG_8887.jpeg

[NotSkilledHere]

oh yea. something interesting I read while browsing for literature about Martin horns and the symphony line of horns back then, in the 1922 and 23 catalogs, they picture a straight horn and mention that f attachments are available and make specific mention of Nickel STEEL inner and outer slides....not nickel silver. nickel STEEL.

[JohnL]

Nickel steel would be an odd choice for a slide material. Much harder to work with than brass or nickel silver.

[NotSkilledHere]

I agree. I suppose once the slide is straightened and aligned, the tubes themselves wont be much prone to denting or bending I guess? but yea it would certainly make it harder to fix if the tubes themselves warped or dented.

[brassmedic]

I've never heard of nickel steel. I googled it and it said it's nickel + iron. Wouldn't it rust?

[BGuttman]

I've never heard of nickel steel. I googled it and it said it's nickel + iron. Wouldn't it rust?

Nickel plus iron is often called Stainless Steel. The nickel-iron alloy doesn't rust.

[NotSkilledHere]

I've never heard of nickel steel. I googled it and it said it's nickel + iron. Wouldn't it rust?

Yea it's certainly interesting. I have heard that nickel is used in stainless steel to aid in rust/corrosion resistance because that's what it's exceptionally good at, but not nickel steel specifically as stated until I read that.

It appears it may be any one of a variety of various alloy combinations so I have no clue which combination and specific mix Martin's nickel steel is.

It seems that nickel steel or nickel alloy steel is a combination of nickel, iron, chromium, and a mix of other various other metals (molybdenum, titanium, copper, among others) to adjust desired properties but the result seems to be extensive resistance to corrosion including water and salt water (rust included), reducing and oxidizing acids including sulfuric and phosphoric, extensive resistance to corrosion related cracking and pitting, and corrosion resistance at elevated to declined temperatures. and of course increased hardness, strength, and durability.

To me the combination of nickel, iron, and chromium lends itself to possibly just being called stainless steel maybe?

So which combination of alloys and materials is Martin's tubes? im not sure.

[brassmedic]

I've never heard of nickel steel. I googled it and it said it's nickel + iron. Wouldn't it rust?

Nickel plus iron is often called Stainless Steel. The nickel-iron alloy doesn't rust.

I see a lot of sources that define stainless steel as mainly iron and chromium, with nickel as a possible additive. Is that wrong? Are you saying nickel steel and stainless steel are the same thing?

[BGuttman]

Nickel plus iron is often called Stainless Steel. The nickel-iron alloy doesn't rust.

I see a lot of sources that define stainless steel as mainly iron and chromium, with nickel as a possible additive. Is that wrong? Are you saying nickel steel and stainless steel are the same thing?

There are dozens of Stainless Steel alloys. Some use chromium, some use nickel, some use cobalt, some use all three and other metals. One of the stainless alloys I dealt with was 316, which had Iron, Chromium, Nickel, and a trace of Molybdenum. Used for high corrosion applications or where contamination was a potential problem.

[Posaunus]

"Nickel Steel" as used by Martin in 1922 is a vague term that their marketing folks latched on to, and (because of its non-specificity) has no technical meaning. It could be some sort of an iron alloy (with nickel, chromium, molybdenum, etc.) - even what we might describe these days as "stainless steel" (which term covers a wide variety of alloys, heat treatments, etc.). Remember that in 1922, alloying was (somewhat surprisingly) still in the development stage, and the terminology "stainless steel" was not yet widespread (or perhaps even in existence). In any case, whatever that material was, it must not have worked very well for trombone slide tubes, and seems to have disappeared. Think of it as a historical digression.

[NotSkilledHere]

well maybe it is stainlesss steel. I believe iron chromium is the original stainless steel formula. nickel appears to be listed as a possible and popular added alloy partner among other metals to change certain properties in the end product, depending on which kind of stainless steel you want.

googling nickel iron leads to wikipedia: "Some manufactured alloys of iron–nickel are called nickel steel or stainless steel."

it appears on googling as well that stainless steel wasnt even a the standardized term back then. Hell Ford called it rustless steel in 1932 apparently, which is a year after this horn was made based on existing Martin serial lists.

also a little googling the history of stainless steel seems to conclude that after WWI, particularly in the 20's, a variety of chromium and nickel based combinations were tried and developed.

my guess is that it nickel steel in the 1922/23 catalogs would be referring specifically to a variety of subspecimen of stainless steel that specifically contains nickel in a significant quantity. there are no more catalogs I can find between 1923 and 1934 and then the horn lineup was different so I cannot verify if any change in referenced material name happened over the years for them.

[Doug Elliott]

As the alloy called "nickel silver" has no silver in it, I would bet "nickel steel" was also just a marketing misnomer.

[JohnL]

'Scuse me while I dust off my metallurgist hat. I haven't worn it in quite few years...

First off, stainless steel...
As Brad mentioned, the primary alloying element that gives stainless steel its corrosion resistance is chromium. A lot of stainless steels (primarily the 300-series alloys) also contain nickel (generally around 8-10%).

The term "nickel steel" refers to an alloy steel (not stainless) where the main alloying element is nickel. At one time, nickel steel was pretty common; the base material for the "Harvey" armor used on warships in the late 19th century was nickel steel, roughly 0.2% carbon, 0.6% manganese and 3.5% nickel. Nickel steel fell out of favor as better alloys were developed; I don't think anyone makes them any more. I see online that the AISI-SAE alloy series for nickel steel series (23xx and 25xx) were apparently deleted in 1959.

Me, I think it's just a bad edit in the catalog. Drawing slide tubes from steel would be a whole lot more difficult that drawing them out of brass or nickel silver and I don't see where nickel steel would offer any advantage.

EDIT:
I can imagine someone unfamiliar with brass instruments reading scrawled or smudged copy for the catalog and getting "nickel steel" rather than "nickel silver".

[NotSkilledHere]

Ah ok interesting!!

I could only see nickel steel being perhaps stiffer and harder and less prone to dings or warping bending once set straight perhaps?

Ill take another closer look at the tubes when I get home. Out of curiosity....would nickel steel as used on battleships be magnetic by chance? Maybe ill test a fridge magnet on it

[JohnL]

Out of curiosity....would nickel steel as used on battleships be magnetic by chance? Maybe ill test a fridge magnet on it

Yes, nickel steel would be magnetic.

Another common use for nickel steel was in firearms.

003.jpeg

[brassmedic]

'Scuse me while I dust off my metallurgist hat. I haven't worn it in quite few years...

First off, stainless steel...
As Brad mentioned, the primary alloying element that gives stainless steel its corrosion resistance is chromium. A lot of stainless steels (primarily the 300-series alloys) also contain nickel (generally around 8-10%).

The term "nickel steel" refers to an alloy steel (not stainless) where the main alloying element is nickel. At one time, nickel steel was pretty common; the base material for the "Harvey" armor used on warships in the late 19th century was nickel steel, roughly 0.2% carbon, 0.6% manganese and 3.5% nickel. Nickel steel fell out of favor as better alloys were developed; I don't think anyone makes them any more. I see online that the AISI-SAE alloy series for nickel steel series (23xx and 25xx) were apparently deleted in 1959.

Me, I think it's just a bad edit in the catalog. Drawing slide tubes from steel would be a whole lot more difficult that drawing them out of brass or nickel silver and I don't see where nickel steel would offer any advantage.

EDIT:
I can imagine someone unfamiliar with brass instruments reading scrawled or smudged copy for the catalog and getting "nickel steel" rather than "nickel silver".

Thanks! Very interesting.

[timothy42b]

That got me curious. In the old days when we had central high pressure steam boilers serving multiple buildings, the mechanics had to crawl inside to retube them. Nasty job. A manual rotary tool would seal the new ones to the end plates. It was physically strenuous and filthy work, I was glad to see those go.

Anyway, there were nickel steel boiler tubes, but when I searched for nickel steel, it doesn't seem to have much iron:

ASTM B865 UNS N05500 Nickel Alloy Steel Tube

Overview

ASTM B865 is the standard specification for precipitation-hardening nickel alloy bars, forgings, and forgings stock for high-temperature service. This standard covers UNS N05500, which is a precipitation-hardening nickel-copper alloy commonly known as Alloy K500.



Here are some key aspects covered in the ASTM B865 standard for UNS N05500:Chemical Composition: The standard specifies the required chemical composition of UNS N05500, including the percentages of nickel (Ni), copper (Cu), aluminum (Al), titanium (Ti), and other elements. These elements contribute to the alloy's corrosion resistance, high strength, and ability to be precipitation hardened.Mechanical Properties: ASTM B865 defines the minimum mechanical properties such as tensile strength, yield strength, elongation, and hardness requirements for UNS N05500 bars, forgings, and forgings stock. These properties ensure the alloy's suitability for high-temperature service and its ability to withstand demanding operational conditions.Manufacturing Process: The standard outlines the methods of manufacturing UNS N05500 products, including hot working, cold working, heat treatment, and precipitation hardening. It provides guidelines for the various stages of production to achieve the desired mechanical properties and microstructure in the finished products.



Chemical Composition of ASTM B865 UNS N05500



Grade Ni Al C Iron Si Mn Ti Cu S
N05500 Min 2.3 0.35 27.0
Max 63.0 3.15 0.18 2.0 0.5 1.5 0.85 33.0 0.01

I couldn't get those to line up right, but it's basically 2/3 nickel, 1/3 copper, a little bit of iron and manganese.

[NotSkilledHere]

Out of curiosity....would nickel steel as used on battleships be magnetic by chance? Maybe ill test a fridge magnet on it

Yes, nickel steel would be magnetic.

Another common use for nickel steel was in firearms.
003.jpeg

have gotten home and tested the variety of fridge magnets and rare earth magnets i have sitting around my apartment against the slide, inners and outers together and separately. they neither repelled or attracted. So it is certainly that it isn't true nickel steel as outlined as the mentioned examples of actual use as firearm parts, battleship armor, or boiler tubes.

[Posaunus]

Don't obsess about the terminology from the marketing dept.
The slide is what it is.
You can't do metallurgical analysis at home.

[JohnL]

ASTM B865 isn't steel at all; it's a Nickel-Copper-Aluminum Alloy (UNS N05500)
ASTM Abstract of current spec: https://www.astm.org/b0865-20.html
PDF of earlier revision of the spec: https://www.htpipe.com/d/files/rod-mate ... m-b865.pdf
It's usually sold under the trade name Monel® K-500

To sorta bring this back to brass instruments, some piston valves are made of Monel (though not the K-500 flavor; I expect they use Monel 400).