Page 2 of 2

Re: Straight versus f-attachment

Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2018 2:31 pm
by elmsandr
Pre59 wrote: Sun Dec 30, 2018 10:45 am I practice them and use them almost every time I play in public, in the form of tritone intervals.
Ain't no big deal..
No big deal to you. I have tables of data that can tell us what percentage of people in each physical size range will have problems. That’s why there are industrial ergonomics.

Can it be done? Sure. Should it? Maybe not. Just because it was always done that way does not mean it should be done that way. Look at Mr. Yeo’s post about his new horn and the challenges he has seen with repeated stresses.

That said, still trying to build a long double slide in Eb so that I can use my straight Bach 45 in more settings...

Cheers,
Andy

Re: Straight versus f-attachment

Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2018 7:15 pm
by timothy42b
elmsandr wrote: Sun Dec 30, 2018 2:31 pm
That said, still trying to build a long double slide in Eb so that I can use my straight Bach 45 in more settings...

Cheers,
Andy
Would that be EEb? Sounds useful.

Re: Straight versus f-attachment

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 7:35 am
by elmsandr
timothy42b wrote: Sun Dec 30, 2018 7:15 pm
elmsandr wrote: Sun Dec 30, 2018 2:31 pm
That said, still trying to build a long double slide in Eb so that I can use my straight Bach 45 in more settings...

Cheers,
Andy
Would that be EEb? Sounds useful.
Yup. Also probably good for a double take or two with the straight bell section and the bass sound.

Lengths line up pretty good for some standard parts, too. Just have to take two slides, trim them a little bit and make them into one.

Staying somewhat on topic, this should also keep almost all reaches within ~20” of the center of the shoulder. That’s a pretty good reach distance that is good for over 95% of most populations.

Cheers,
Andy

Re: Straight versus f-attachment

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 7:47 am
by BGuttman
Osmun Brass actually made one of these for Doug Yeo some time ago. Used two Bach 50 slides and a custom bell section. Was in Eb. I think it got 9 positions on the double slide. They were showing it off one day I happened to be there and they let me toot on it. Except for the Bartok Gliss I wasn't sure what I'd so with the thing, but it was certainly impressive.

Re: Straight versus f-attachment

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 8:25 am
by LeTromboniste
BGuttman wrote: Mon Dec 31, 2018 7:47 am Osmun Brass actually made one of these for Doug Yeo some time ago. Used two Bach 50 slides and a custom bell section. Was in Eb. I think it got 9 positions on the double slide. They were showing it off one day I happened to be there and they let me toot on it. Except for the Bartok Gliss I wasn't sure what I'd so with the thing, but it was certainly impressive.
With a Bb valve?

Re: Straight versus f-attachment

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 8:36 am
by BGuttman
LeTromboniste wrote: Mon Dec 31, 2018 8:25 am
BGuttman wrote: Mon Dec 31, 2018 7:47 am Osmun Brass actually made one of these for Doug Yeo some time ago. Used two Bach 50 slides and a custom bell section. Was in Eb. I think it got 9 positions on the double slide. They were showing it off one day I happened to be there and they let me toot on it. Except for the Bartok Gliss I wasn't sure what I'd so with the thing, but it was certainly impressive.
With a Bb valve?
No valve.

Re: Straight versus f-attachment

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 10:12 am
by BillO
Seems a bit weird to talk abut purity of tone and false notes in the same argument. I would be willing to bet every trombonist on earth could play a low Db with more purity of tone using an F-att than by doing it with false notes.

In any case, this thread seems to have gotten a bit silly. Play what suits your needs best. It seems obvious to me that most top symphony players use F-att instruments because they find it suits their needs better. If that's not your situation, then fine - play it straight. Why argue about it?

Happy and prosperous New Year to all!!! :good: :good: :good:

Re: Straight versus f-attachment

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 10:28 am
by harrisonreed
So opposed to valves that we must reinvent the tombone slide and give it even more bends so that we can be pure!

Oh, wait.

Re: Straight versus f-attachment

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 10:32 am
by sirisobhakya
harrisonreed wrote: Mon Dec 31, 2018 10:28 am So opposed to valves that we must reinvent the tombone slide and give it even more bends so that we can be pure!

Oh, wait.
Bend(s) in the valve and in the valve wrap is generally tighter than the bend in slide crook, so the argument is still valid...

I think...

Re: Straight versus f-attachment

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 10:38 am
by harrisonreed
When so many people try out as many valves as possible because each one can have positive effects (or negative) on the resistance and response.

Re: Straight versus f-attachment

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 12:23 pm
by LeTromboniste
BGuttman wrote: Mon Dec 31, 2018 8:36 am
LeTromboniste wrote: Mon Dec 31, 2018 8:25 am With a Bb valve?
No valve.
Then you can't play a Bartok gliss on it.

Re: Straight versus f-attachment

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 12:53 pm
by BGuttman
Possibly, but if it was made in F it might do OK.

Re: Straight versus f-attachment

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 8:17 pm
by Mikebmiller
BillO wrote: Mon Dec 31, 2018 10:12 am Why argue about it?
Because this is the Internet and that’s what people do :biggrin: :biggrin:

Re: Straight versus f-attachment

Posted: Wed Apr 24, 2019 12:32 am
by MStarke
Although this is an older discussion just some additional thoughts as I have been thinking about this as well...
Please note that I am NOT a professional anymore - which means I basically do what I want and what I like in trombone playing.

My current orchestral tenor is a replica of a historical German trombone - conical bore, large bell (regular tenor mutes are too small), no valve and no tuning slide.
I love the sound and response, tuning in itself is surprisingly good. It's probably as close to a German trombone as you can get. The sound is very very lively and adaptable.
However it does lack some flexibility due to the missing valve and is overall not the easiest trombone to play due to the missing tuning slide and being quite front-heavy.
Also as a sidenote it does not work at all with typical American mouthpieces, but very well with special German mouthpieces (playing a Klier Gössling moouthpiece on it).

I wouldn't worry at all about using it in any orchestral playing that I still do. It's normally not too demanding and also does not have many surprises. So the missing valve and tuning slide can be easily compensated and it's all about the sound.
But thinking about e.g. brass ensemble gigs - where the sound would also be great - I would be a bit nervous about using it. Anything that requires more notes to be played than typical orchestral charts, parts that have quick passages in the lower range and also potentially more sight-reading just isn't where I would feel comfortable with this trombone.

Therefor - as soon as budget allows it again - I will probably get a typical American tenor with f attachment again.
Quite possibly an 88h - or one of the old and good Blessing copies if I can find one.
Of course I could also get a German trombone with attachment, however I have a Kruspe with attachment available from a friend if needed and also the American tenor would just be even more variation to my collection ;-)

Re: Straight versus f-attachment

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 2:12 pm
by Tremozl
Burgerbob wrote: Thu Dec 20, 2018 6:37 pm Here's another way to look at it... 85 percent of orchestral lit for the bass trombonist could be played on a single bass. Do we see those in orchestras? No.

I think it's a similar situation. As an orchestral player, I want to know the instrument I'm using very well. Constantly swapping back and forth is not really how to do that.
Having a Gb attachment allows a lot of flexibility and agility on bass, even if you don't need to play super low with both triggers down too often.

Re: Straight versus f-attachment

Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 2:21 pm
by Tremozl
BGuttman wrote: Mon Dec 31, 2018 12:53 pm Possibly, but if it was made in F it might do OK.
F contra with double slide could definitely do Bartok, and the BBb contra can as well (though B is at the veeeery end of the slide. Most players will cite only 6 positions on the BBb contra but i can get the 7th.)

Off topic from the Bartok, after dicking around with my BBb contra paired with a Bass Bone slide (which puts it in Eb) I think an Eb contra with a Bb and C trigger would be a really free blowing horn with a bit better low range than the F. With the BBb style bell section it could even sound like a bigger horn too, rather than how the F's sound.