TromboneChat

I thought I knew this. I was wrong.

The valve wrap!

Otherwise I'm not totally sure either.

The profile of the bell is different if I remember correctly. The 71h and the 73h shares the same bell profile. I think the 72h has a wider bell-throat. I had to buy a smaller cup to fit the 71h and 73h, that's how I noticed this. When you play a 71h and 73h they also feel more "tenorish" compared to a 72h. The 72h is the same as 70h except rhe 70h is TIS and the 72h is tunibg in bell. I have all those basses stuffed away at the moment so I can't check. This is what I recall from memory. The valve wrap is also different as Aidan said.

/Tom

I have not had the opportunity to play a 72H yet. I have played on a 71H, however. It does lean towards the "tenor" side, as imsevimse states, especially when compared to the other bass trombone I had access to in high school, which was a Holton TR181. That said, it's still very much a bass trombone. The H&B 171 cup mute should fit the 71H and 73H, but is a potential unknown for the 72H, based on this thread so far.

That's off of my memory. It's been over 8 years since I last played it.

The more medium sized the mouthpiece, the better. This likely goes for both models, and certainly for the 71/73H.

The 71, 72 and 73 all share the same bell flare. Tje big difference (other than the obvious valve wrap shape(s) is the slide/bell ratio. The 72 has a longer slide/shorter bell compared to the 71/73.

hornbuilder wrote: ↑Wed Jul 10, 2019 7:01 pm The 71, 72 and 73 all share the same bell flare. Tje big difference (other than the obvious valve wrap shape(s) is the slide/bell ratio. The 72 has a longer slide/shorter bell compared to the 71/73.

I had to check the basses and you are right hornbuilder both bells are the same (both need the smaller cup mute). I have compared slides and bell and I can not se there is a difference there. I have put slides next to each other and bells next to each other.

I tested both with the f-valve slide pulled as far as possible and on both the B is possible. Both must have longer slides compared to modern basses.

I removed the f-tuningslides and compared them. The one on the Conn 72h is longer which means it can be pulled a few centimeters more compared to the 71h, but the maximum total length of both valves seems to be equal when I measure with a string. There is a difference in disposition of what is movable and what is not, but I'm not sure which is best and how this can work.

When I play both horns the 71h seems more thight compared to the 72h which is more open. I wonder what else is different? What about lead pipes? The 72h is an Elkhart from -63 and the 71h is an Abilene from -79.

From the pictures you can se there are differences in the tuningslide and valve section where the 71h misses three braces.

I'm thinking the reason to build the 71h like this is it then shares the first valve design with the 73h. Maybe it was cheaper to have one valve design for the first valve. A design that works also when they add the next valve to build a 73h. The 72h and 71h plays different, but is it possible that might not have been their primary intention but a side effect?

The one to the right is the 71h.

It should be noted that the 71/73H also share their valve wrap designs with the larger, TIS 60/62H, likely to reduce costs of developing, and subsequently releasing, 4 bass trombones at the same time.

Tangent

The H&B 171 does NOT fit the 60/62H.

/Tangent

Well there you go, never say "never"!!

I spoke about the slide/bell length differences based on having a 72 and 73 next to each other, and seeing the distinct dimension differences of those particular examples. There is obviously some variation!!

I started a new thread and put pictures and analysis of my Conn trombones there.https://trombonechat.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=10697

/Tom

imsevimse wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 2:51 am I started a new thread and put pictures and analysis of my Conn trombones there.https://trombonechat.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=10697

/Tom

Thanks for adding!

Others have noted the main differences. Something I've noticed between all of the 7Xh series stuff I've tried is the bell weight. The 72h seems to have a very similar weight bell as the 70h. Pretty thin and very vibrant playing.

The 71h and 73h bells are all over the place, especially the later Texas ones. Some bells are thin like the previous 70h and 72h but some are super duper heavy. I've got a friend with a Texas 71h bell that's almost as thick as a Euph bell! The thing is a tank!

It's the wrap. All 70 series horns (except the 70H because of its tuning in slide and the 73H dual trigger) have the same specs. There will always be slight differences due to hand made construction, but all are the same.

That being said, I will admit the 72H seemed to have a lighter bell than my 71H. Other than that the bell dimensions were the same.

mrdeacon wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 10:12 am Others have noted the main differences. Something I've noticed between all of the 7Xh series stuff I've tried is the bell weight. The 72h seems to have a very similar weight bell as the 70h. Pretty thin and very vibrant playing.

The 71h and 73h bells are all over the place, especially the later Texas ones. Some bells are thin like the previous 70h and 72h but some are super duper heavy. I've got a friend with a Texas 71h bell that's almost as thick as a Euph bell! The thing is a tank!

I worked at the King factory in Eastlake Ohio and was good friends with one of the bell spinners. Bell thickness is pretty much up to the spinners even though they try to be consistent. If the spinner is heavy-handed with the actual spinning and heavy-handed with the emery cloth you get a thin bell. Or if he's pushing to get more pieces to make more $'s on the piece work you wind up with a thicker bell!