Bach 50: Lengthening the 2nd valve tubing, making slightly more open

[JTeagarden]

Greetings, my first post post-OTJ era!

I am trying out a mid-70s dependent Bach 50, and while I love the sound of the horn, and its magical slotting ability, coming from an independent Yamaha 613G, I don't like the very short tubing in the second valve (which places a usuable low C in flat 5th, and a usable low B natural on the stockings).

It seems odd that the dependent valve would offer so little in the way of a usable extended range, but maybe there was some good logic to it: In any case, wondering whether it is possible to add a longer 2nd tuning slide to put the low C in around flat 3rd, and/or easier/cheaper things to do to make the horn slightly more open in the valves?

It seems to be all-original horn, right down to the side-by-side paddles.

P.S.: I suspect this has been answered 100 times in the past, but until I post 3 approved threads, I cannot use the search function!

[BGuttman]

Welcome!

Firstly, the original 50B2 was in F/flat E. Intended to be a sort of "quick E pull". That may be what you have.

There are tuning slides that will put your second valve in Eb or D. D is more popular, but both work well. Slides alone may be hard to find, but some of the Techs here can make you a slide or an extension to your current tuning slide to let you play in Eb or D with both valves.

As to the open problem, Bach had traditionally "tight" valves. You can have the valves "trued" (i.e. have the bumpers adjusted so that the rotor ports align with the casing ports. This may make the valves a little more open. Otherwise, you are pretty much stuck where you are short of an expensive valve replacement. At one time Osmun Brass in Acton MA offered to ream out the rotor a little, but this may not do a lot even though it may not be as expensive.

[WGWTR180]

Greetings, my first post post-OTJ era!

I am trying out a mid-70s dependent Bach 50, and while I love the sound of the horn, and its magical slotting ability, coming from an independent Yamaha 613G, I don't like the very short tubing in the second valve (which places a usuable low C in flat 5th, and a usable low B natural on the stockings).

It seems odd that the dependent valve would offer so little in the way of a usable extended range, but maybe there was some good logic to it: In any case, wondering whether it is possible to add a longer 2nd tuning slide to put the low C in around flat 3rd, and/or easier/cheaper things to do to make the horn slightly more open in the valves?

It seems to be all-original horn, right down to the side-by-side paddles.

P.S.: I suspect this has been answered 100 times in the past, but until I post 3 approved threads, I cannot use the search function!

A good tech can easily lengthen/add to that valve tubing to your liking. As far as the valves a good tech can let you know whether the ports can be opened or not. But coming from the Yamaha it might take time to play the valves they way you need to. They could also just be tighter than you'd like.

[elmsandr]

Greetings, my first post post-OTJ era!

I am trying out a mid-70s dependent Bach 50, and while I love the sound of the horn, and its magical slotting ability, coming from an independent Yamaha 613G, I don't like the very short tubing in the second valve (which places a usuable low C in flat 5th, and a usable low B natural on the stockings).

It seems odd that the dependent valve would offer so little in the way of a usable extended range, but maybe there was some good logic to it: In any case, wondering whether it is possible to add a longer 2nd tuning slide to put the low C in around flat 3rd, and/or easier/cheaper things to do to make the horn slightly more open in the valves?

It seems to be all-original horn, right down to the side-by-side paddles.

P.S.: I suspect this has been answered 100 times in the past, but until I post 3 approved threads, I cannot use the search function!

https://trombonechat.com/viewtopic.php?t=38772

See attached for a picture of the “factory” D extensions and a suggestion of how to make some if you have skill (or just want to show to a tech make you something quick).

I love Bachs, but with very few exceptions, trying to make the factory valves play better is a stretch. The basic design just doesn’t cut it most of the time. The only Bach valve I like is on my single 50B. All the others have left me wanting and turning toward a torch.

Cheers,
Andy

[JTeagarden]

I haven't commited to buying the horn yet, it's part of a large exchange of small-bore tenors with a player in the Chicago area, each has the right, but not the obligation to buy any or all of the horns for a price we have already agreed to.

The Bach 50B has an agreed price of $2,500, which seemed reasonable, the horn is in very good mechanical condition.

[Burgerbob]

Not a bad price, but it will need work to split the triggers and build a D slide.

And it won't be more open ever... There's a reason we moved on to better valves.

[JTeagarden]

Thanks for the advice, assuming I like the horn otherwise and can play test something with more open valves, any reason to think that a new valve cluster wouldn’t be a similar improvement to this horn?

In other words, and chance of ruining the “special sauce” this horn has with such a conversion, assuming it was done by someone who knows what they are doing?

[JTeagarden]

Also, if I make a couple cheaper mods now, like a different main tuning slide or leadpipe, will I be“remixing the deck” by then changing the valves, and the advantages of the new tuning slide and leadpipe undone?

[BGuttman]

Back in the "Bad Old Days" we used to have Bach 42 and 50 trombones modified with the [new] Thayer valves. Back then a single for a 42 ran about $1000 and a double for a 50 ran about $1600. Today you would pay 1.5 to 1.75 times for the parts. Plus installation. This mod is not cheap. Result? A much more open playing horn.

FWIW, back in the Bad Old Days some folks had Bach 50 trombones fitted with Olds or Reynolds valve sections. Still Bb/Flat-E, but much more open valves.

[JTeagarden]

I went the University of Texas, the Trombone Professor, Donald Knaub, made everyone buy a Bach 42b with a gold-brass bell and a lightweight slide from Giardinelli’s, mine was $750, I worked a good part of the summer to pay back my father.

[tbonesullivan]

I don't know if there was any real logic to the first dependent valved bass trombones other than "we need a low B natural somehow", which the second valve in flat E gave. While the stock tuning is now Bb/F/Eb, I am pretty sure it was Bb/F/Flat E when they first came out. I sometimes wonder if Bb/F/Db would work better in some ways, putting the B natural in "third" position instead of "fourth".

[elmsandr]

Also, if I make a couple cheaper mods now, like a different main tuning slide or leadpipe, will I be“remixing the deck” by then changing the valves, and the advantages of the new tuning slide and leadpipe undone?

Dunno, I really like the tuning slide and leadpipe from 50s. Of the parts I prefer, I’d probably rank them:

1 Bell
2 leadpipe
3 tuning slide
4 handslide
….
4,396 valves

I bought a nice 50B2 once. Split the triggers, got that D extension…. Played it for about two years before I gave up and put thayers on it.

If I did it again, I’d but the new valves sooner and not spend decent money on the stock valves that won’t pay back. Probably also wouldn’t get thayers now, likely just any nice modern rotors. Yamaha, shires, Edwards, or any number of customs; M&W, rotax, meinl, etc.

Listen to Aiden’s recent comparison of many horns… to my ears, all of the Bach belled horns have an “it” factor, even on tiny speakers with whatever random mic he’s using.

Cheers,
Andy

[Burgerbob]

All it takes is a bell, I agree

[TomInME]

I don't know if Pete would be willing to do this again (it was a bit of a hassle), but the 3d-printed valve cores he put in my 50 made a world of difference for about 1/4th (or less) of what replacing the whole valve section would have cost (even accounting for shipping and working through issues with a local tech).
viewtopic.php?p=253920#p253920

I would recommend asking for straight stainless. The brass cores deformed a bit during the finishing process (and are more expensive to print), and the stainless with nylon bushings had an issue where too much plastic came off. (I ended up with one of each)

For an older horn that might not be worth the $$$ for major valve work, it was a great solution.

[WGWTR180]

I don't know if Pete would be willing to do this again (it was a bit of a hassle), but the 3d-printed valve cores he put in my 50 made a world of difference for about 1/4th (or less) of what replacing the whole valve section would have cost (even accounting for shipping and working through issues with a local tech).
viewtopic.php?p=253920#p253920

I would recommend asking for straight stainless. The brass cores deformed a bit during the finishing process (and are more expensive to print), and the stainless with nylon bushings had an issue where too much plastic came off. (I ended up with one of each)

For an older horn that might not be worth the $$$ for major valve work, it was a great solution.

I had Pete do the same for a 1967 Holton TR 180. Made a world of difference!!

[JTeagarden]

I appreciate all the insights.

Aidan, I've enjoyed your Youtube videos, especially the one where you play the same things on 6 different bones, when I heard your 613, and it made the same absolutely acceptable but ultimately kind of uninteresting sounds as my 613G, and then heard you play the the Bachs and the Shires, I decided it was time to get a better horn, and am figuring out that some of what I thought was "me" was actually the horn (a lot of it of course IS me...)

I will settle in with this horn for a couple weeks, try to fiigure out what it wants to do, and then experiment a bit with main tuning slides and leadpipes, the paddles frankly don't bother me, and nothing this rather average bass trombonist can or has had to play has required a 2nd independent valve to date: to quote the philosopher Harry Callahan, "a man's got to know his limitations."

[JTeagarden]

After several weeks on the horn: These valves suck! The only good thing about them is the sound is about the same as on the open horn, at least with the stock yellow-brass tuning slide (a bit wonkier with a copper tuning slide...)

Going between V1 and V1+V2 is a nightmare.

[BGuttman]

The original side-by-side levers take a lot of getting used to. Most of us had the 2nd valve lever moved so it can be operated by a finger ("split triggers").

And don't say we didn't warn you about the stuffiness of the Bach valves.

[JTeagarden]

I don't mind the sound through the valves, it's sounds like the open horn to me, particularly using the original main tuning slide.

John Sandhagen, the surgeon I would like to hire for this, wisely suggests I try out a Bach 50 with axial-flow valves to see if I like it, he proposed to change the linkage on the existing valves to make them independent, with two triggers, I appreciate a doctor who is frank!

Now to try to find someone in the South Bend area with a Bach 50 with axial-flow valves and a generous spirit...

[elmsandr]

Isn’t there now a Bach trial room in Downtown Chicago? Not a bad way to spend an afternoon. I’ve seen them have tenor trombone trials there, make them bring out shiny new horns for you.

As for simply splitting the levers… pretty sure I wrote this above, I tried that… made it a year before I moved to a valve transplant. YMMV.

(I don’t recommend axials anymore, I’d do any number of improved rotors first.)

Cheers,
Andy

[JTeagarden]

I don't feel very ethical trying out a bunch of Bachs with zero intentions of buying one.

Elmsandr, why did you ditch merely splitting the levers? not enough of an improvement? Also, what do you dislike about axial valves?

[tbonesullivan]

After several weeks on the horn: These valves suck! The only good thing about them is the sound is about the same as on the open horn, at least with the stock yellow-brass tuning slide (a bit wonkier with a copper tuning slide...)

Going between V1 and V1+V2 is a nightmare.

Yeah, with that over braced tight bunch of tubing, the response is just... ugh. A horn of that age also may be due for a valve refit, and possible porting, and then you would have to split the trigger to make them more ergonomic. One of my friends had a 50B2L, and had a friend who was getting his horn converted to take Axials. He got the open wrap independent valve section from him, (from a Bach 50B3O), and it grafted in quite nicely.

[elmsandr]

I don't feel very ethical trying out a bunch of Bachs with zero intentions of buying one.

Elmsandr, why did you ditch merely splitting the levers? not enough of an improvement? Also, what do you dislike about axial valves?

The split levers are a must…. But if you’ve blown through almost any other valves on the planet, you’ll just want them to be better. There’s a reason that an entire industry evolved to replace Bach valves.

As for axials, they just take more effort to keep in top shape. Not difficult, but they are more finicky than any rotor. And rotors have gotten so much better such that the playing characteristics are not such that the openness of the axial is enough to make it worth the effort to me.

As for ethics of going to the showroom… they are probably there anyway, call and tell them what you want to do, if you aren’t stopping anybody else from playing horns, I doubt they will mind. From their side, they’ve got somebody that likes a Bach horn already, maybe they can talk you in to that shiny new 50A3.

Cheers,
Andy

[Kbiggs]

You might consider trying a Bach 50 that has had the valves replaced with one of the newer-designed rotary valves. Perhaps you know someone with a 50 who has replaced the stock valves with ones from Instrument Innovations (Olsen), Greenhoe, M&W, Meinl-Schmidt, etc.?

Many companies (Getzen/Edwards, Shires, Rath, etc.) have their own design for an improved rotary valve. I’m guessing that’s partly in response to their customers saying something like, “The old ‘butterfly valve’ design doesn’t work as well for the demands of modern players.” While that’s true in the case of Bach rotary valves, Conn and King valves work pretty well. Like elmsandr said, “There’s a reason that an entire industry evolved to replace Bach valves.”

Additionally, some people say that valves with a completely different design, like axial flow valves (Thayer), Hagmann, TruBore, Lindberg, and even the old Miller valve (K valve), are too different, and change the character of a Bach 50. A lot of people replaced their old rotaries with Thayers, Hagmanns, and Miller valves. Some of those same people have now gone back to a better-designed rotary. Bach now offers new instruments with Thayers and Hagmanns. The Miller valve isn’t made anymore, although it still has its adherents.

Whatever you do, replace the side-by-side thumb levers. They were an evolutionary dead-end in the development of the modern bass trombone.

[JTeagarden]

Thanks, the side-by-side thumb levers seem like a well-designed psychological experiment to test user frustration.

[JTeagarden]

It seems like M&W rotary valves are crazy expensive (double valve section $4,200?), and Instrument Innovations rotary valves a much more humane $250 per valve (plus additional labor and parts of an amount TBD ...)

Anyone have experience with these two valves to weigh in on their differences?

The unique sound and projection of the Bach 50 is something I really don't want to mess with!

[Burgerbob]

Olsen rotors are good, I've had them on a couple horns (42 and 50).

My current M&W 50 is the best bass trombone I've owned. (I've owned 29 Bach 50s)

Putting better valves on 50s just makes them... better.

[JTeagarden]

Aidan, thanks, in my case, we're probably talking about whether this teenager should buy a Mustang or a Lamborghini - both offer a lot more than I'll be able to handle, and both better than the Subaru I currently drive.

[Burgerbob]

Good point, and I'm not saying everyone should M&Wize their 50s of course. The couple Yamabachs I have currently are also WORLDS better than how they started, just using Yamaha valve sections from the '80s. Anything is an improvement.

[elmsandr]

You might consider trying a Bach 50 that has had the valves replaced with one of the newer-designed rotary valves. Perhaps you know someone with a 50 who has replaced the stock valves with ones from Instrument Innovations (Olsen), Greenhoe, M&W, Meinl-Schmidt, etc.?

Many companies (Getzen/Edwards, Shires, Rath, etc.) have their own design for an improved rotary valve. I’m guessing that’s partly in response to their customers saying something like, “The old ‘butterfly valve’ design doesn’t work as well for the demands of modern players.” While that’s true in the case of Bach rotary valves, Conn and King valves work pretty well. Like elmsandr said, “There’s a reason that an entire industry evolved to replace Bach valves.”

Additionally, some people say that valves with a completely different design, like axial flow valves (Thayer), Hagmann, TruBore, Lindberg, and even the old Miller valve (K valve), are too different, and change the character of a Bach 50. A lot of people replaced their old rotaries with Thayers, Hagmanns, and Miller valves. Some of those same people have now gone back to a better-designed rotary. Bach now offers new instruments with Thayers and Hagmanns. The Miller valve isn’t made anymore, although it still has its adherents.

Whatever you do, replace the side-by-side thumb levers. They were an evolutionary dead-end in the development of the modern bass trombone.

Pendantic point here, Miller valves are not Bach K valves. They look similar, but they have their own unique set of flaws.

Back to OP, yes, getting a couple of valves for $250 is eye opening, but by the time you add the wraps and most importantly the longer tech time… it adds up. Heck, it used to be fairly standard as a $500 dollar install for a pre-made complete double valve set… and that was 20 years ago and required no crazy amounts of buffing and no lever fabrication. Making levers always takes me forever. When I do it myself, it takes several hours. What is the hourly rate of the shop?

Cheers,
Andy

[hornbuilder]

The base cost of the parts of my M&W rotors is a similar figure to the Olsen product. What you're not considering is the cost of all of the other parts required to make a complete valve section, plus, the time "and skill" required to do the work.

Andy, in your comment about a valve install costing $500.00 @20 years ago. You didn't mention that the valve section "kit" cost a substantial amount of money! A single Thayer kit was around $500.00, and a double was @$1000.00 Those kits included all of the prefabricated parts, it was "almost" (actually, having used MANY of those kits, it was far from almost) a "plug and play" solder job. There are more than a few "whacky" Thayer sections out there because the tech treated the kit as a Plug and Play project!!

I make all of the parts for my valve sections myself, (all the bent parts, for example. I also machine many of the turned parts on my manual lathe. CNC machining of the rotor core, casing, bearing plates etc is done specifically to my design) I hand fit each individual rotor assembly. I can guarantee you that the product you receive will be the utmost in quality. This is what I do for a living. I don't do general repair, or work on other instruments. There are no Chinese components on my instruments.

[JTeagarden]

Matt, you’re M&W!

Cool, everyone seems to like your valves, a lot …

And I figured there’s a lot of other “stuff” beyond the valves, and that it adds up.

I have finally reached an age where everything strikes me as expensive, I used to laugh when my father regaled us with stories of penny chocolate bars, but now 10 cent packs of Starburst are my frame of reference …