Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post Reply
Leisesturm
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 10:40 am

Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post by Leisesturm » Fri Sep 14, 2018 12:09 pm

Greetings: I am considering an F attachment stencil horn and the only model available has a .547/.562 dual bore slide. I am wondering what the point of this is. Do you really get the blow of a 547 with the sound of a 562? I don't know, somehow I doubt it can be that easy. Elsewhere someone commented that the dual bore makes the sound of the instrument more 'conical', like a Euphonium. That actually wouldn't be a bad thing, if true. Is it? Anyone have actual experience with a dual bore instrument to shed light. TNX
User avatar
BGuttman
Posts: 550
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2018 7:19 am
Location: Cow Hampshire

Re: Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post by BGuttman » Fri Sep 14, 2018 12:19 pm

The 547/562 was developed for Jay Friedman at Chicago. He needed a horn with a lot of sound.

Going from a King 606 it will be a complete air hog and you may find it difficult to get any significant volume (and you'll feel very dizzy as well).

See if you can find a Medium Bore with F like a King 607 or Yamaha 446.
Bruce Guttman
Merrimack Valley Philharmonic Orchestra
User avatar
ghmerrill
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2018 4:41 pm
Location: Central North Carolina

Re: Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post by ghmerrill » Fri Sep 14, 2018 12:20 pm

I have a 1947 Olds Standard that's dual bore. It's about the least conical sounding horn I've played. :shock: No one would mistake it for a euphonium or anything else in the conical family.
Gary Merrill
Wessex EEb Bass tuba
Mack Brass Compensating Euph
Amati Oval Euph
1924 Buescher 3-valve Eb tuba
Schiller American Heritage 7B clone bass trombone (DE LB K/K9/112 Lexan, Brass Ark MV50R)
1947 Olds "Standard" trombone (Olds #3)
hyperbolica
Posts: 232
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 7:31 am
Location: east coast

Re: Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post by hyperbolica » Fri Sep 14, 2018 1:21 pm

I've also got a 547/562 Olds (S-20) and I've owned a 547/562 Conn 70h as well as a 547/562 Holton TR159 and a TR156. In each case, the dual bore slide gives the instrument more "heft" to the sound without requiring more air. In the case of the Olds, I'm using it to back off what I consider the "slide euphonium" sound of a straight 562 bore bass trombone that I've been playing. So, yes, the sound of a 547/562 is somewhat darker than a straight 547, but not as much as going to 562. I think it does require less air as well. It's not a case of extremes, there are more gradual nuances involved. The 547/562 is an intermediate step between the 547 and 562 in terms of sound and air. I personally think it's a great compromise for people who want to play low notes but don't need pedal F and down. Like a 4th bone instead of a true bass.

On the Jay Friedman horns (Holtons), they were supposed to be tenors, and when I played the 156, it just had incredible power. I'm pretty sure the Olds and 70h dual bores pre-dated Mr. Friedman's involvement in design.
User avatar
Matt K
Posts: 766
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2018 10:34 pm

Re: Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post by Matt K » Fri Sep 14, 2018 1:28 pm

The "slide euphonium" phrase is one of my big pet peeves, though I generally understand the sentiment and so when you hear it, know that the author is probably using a dollop of hyperbole. After all, even the most normal, non-musical person is going to be able to tell the difference between any euphonium and any trombone. Even my mother can tell that difference and she can barely play the radio! Never, ever going to happen and if it could that would be awesome because I could bring my trombone to the Euph gigs I did and not have to practice fingerings! It would also make traveling a lot easier!

I've found the "plays like the top, sounds like the bottom' to largely be true but there's more context to it. You won't sound like a bass trombone if you put a tenor bell on the slide. You might sound closer, but there's absolutely no getting around the fact that a bell section from a tenor doesn't sound like a bass trombone. If that were the case, that would be awesome, no point in getting a second bell section! Just get two slides on really any bell section and you're good to go. I even tried that --- I have a dependent tenor bell section. Not at all the same thing.

So take a full tenor trombone. Okay, now swap out the 547 slide for a 562 slide. There is a difference. It isn't a bass for sure. At least how most people think of it. It has a broader sound than a 547. The 547/562 might then split the difference to some degree. In my experience they will sound closer --- maybe not all the way there but pretty close --- to the lower slide. They will feel a little closer although perhaps not all the way there to the upper slide. So they don't "split the middle" per-se in the sense that they aren't 50% feel & sound of one and 50% feel & sound of the other. The ratio is a little bit more complicated.

In the case of stencils, the reason is almost always that they are copies of other horns. It might NOT be a stencil too; Wessex has a "Super tenor" that is sort of in that vein and was designed for a specific purpose and type of player in mind. The original design of this stencil is probably for the same reason. Looking for players like Bruce mentioned. Note that the 90s, heavier bells and bigger slides were pretty popular. That trend sort of died down but there are still some players who prefer it and sound really great on those types of setups. To tie it back to the first statement, when the pendulum swung that direction there were a lot of people who felt quite vindicated at what they felt like were accurate descriptions of that type of sounds as, "an arms race", "tanks", "cannons", so on and so forth. As to whether the horn will work, or even that style of horn will work are dependent on your physiology as well as the type of playing that you can do. I'd generally not recommend one without playing it first but with the full acknowledgement that it will probably be okay for many players.
Leisesturm
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 10:40 am

Re: Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post by Leisesturm » Fri Sep 14, 2018 1:50 pm

You guys are awesome. In fact, it is the Wessex stencil I am looking at. They are sold out of the 'straight' .547 and have (so far) not responded to inquiry about when, or if, one is coming back.
hyperbolica
Posts: 232
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 7:31 am
Location: east coast

Re: Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post by hyperbolica » Fri Sep 14, 2018 1:57 pm

I had my TR156 in the late 80s. It was a 547/562 no trigger 9" bell Friedman tenor. I never explored the low range with it, but for orchestral tenor stuff - 1st parts - it was very powerful. I played a lot back then, and could drive that kind of hardware, even in the high range.

These days, having developed a slight breathing problem, I'm looking for that size to back off the traditional specs for a bass. So still 547/562, but with a 9" bell and two triggers. For my purposes, that completely replaces a bass. But I'm a tenor player, and really don't like what I consider the nebulous, unfocused sound of a big Edwards, especially the 562/578 dual with a 10" bell. I have a bass with standard specs (562, 9.5" bell) and it's just too dark (too far in the direction of a euphonium sound - hyperbole? well, more of an analogy), so moving half way in between a tenor and a traditional bass gives me the sound I like.

Try playing a TR159 below the staff and tell me that's not a gorgeous, full, wonderful sound. It only has one valve, but that horn would be great as a double trigger.

I also had a prototype from Wessex, dual trigger, 547, 8.5" bell. That was one hell of a horn, but it sounded like a rip saw down low. I replaced the bell with a 5b 9" bell, and that helped, but a dual bore slide would have made it perfect - extremely powerful in any range, use a 4G and it would be a huge Friedman style tenor, or a 1.25G and it's a powerful commercial bottom bone.

I think that Wessex "supertenor" was a project by Chip Hoehler to take some of the great things about the old Holtons, and build it into a modern horn with a great valve. He loved the old Holtons. I had my eye on that Wessex as well (pbf555), but got the Olds S-20 instead, which added TIS to the mix, which really warms up the sound.

Is the phrase "slide euphonium" hyperbole? Maybe. But it helps you visualize the problem with the sound. There is such a thing as too dark, and I think a lot of current bass trombones live in that territory.
Kbiggs
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2018 11:46 am
Location: Vancouver WA

Re: Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post by Kbiggs » Fri Sep 14, 2018 5:47 pm

It’s the player that makes the sound, not the instrument. I’ve always thought the phrase “Boy that horn sounds great!” was odd.

My experience after playing an Edwards dual bore bass for 7 or 8 years was that it took more air, so I had to learn to use more of my lung capacity all the time, and I had to learn to play more efficiently at the chops. It also meant that I had to plan some phrasing and breathing more carefully. It sounded “broader” (whatever that means). It was also easier to play mf to fff (and louder when necessary), but difficult to play mp and softer—that is, it always sounded “loud,” not just present. It took some effort to play mp and softer in order to get a pure, focused sound rather than a “blah,” lifeless sotte voce sound.

[Editorial note: If you think about it, most of the playing we do in orchestral and symphonic band music, and to a lesser extent in brass bands and jazz bands, is at the p to mf level. Why make playing more difficult? Or, as Peter Ellefson told me once, “Why dance ballet in logging boots?”]

My belief about the “slide tuba” or “tubby” sound that sometimes happens with dual bore slides is that younger or inexperienced players will use them in an attempt to produce a bigger or fuller sound. Unfortunately, because of the larger, second leg of the slide emphasizes the middle and lower harmonics and the decreased resistance of the air column, the younger player will decrease aperture size in an attempt to compensate. That, I believe, is one source of the “tubby” or “slide tuba” sound.

Also, if you compare the modern American sound on this larger equipment to someone playing a single bore, more traditional instrument (think a Conn 70H or a stock 50B), it’s going to sound “bigger” and “darker.”

Larger, dual bore horns certainly have their place, as does the more traditional bass trombone sound. It really depends on the player and the requirements of the music.

There are, of course, dual bore tenors. The same challenges apply—focused sound, greater use of air, slightly “louder” sound overall—but to a lesser degree. Again, my opinion and experience. YMMV.
I have known a great many troubles, but most of them have never happened.
—Mark Twain (attributed)
2bobone
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2018 1:10 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post by 2bobone » Fri Sep 14, 2018 5:51 pm

I own a Conn 70H with TIS and dual bore slide from the early 1930's. I credit it with helping me build a solid career. A GORGEOUS sounding instrument ! Let me leave you with this image in mind : Picture a guy who weighs 395 pounds and can bench press 300 pounds. Now ---- Imagine a guy who weighs 175 pounds and who can ALSO bench press 300 pounds. The difference between those two examples is the difference between a horn with a straight bore and one with a dual bore. The sound of a straight bore is comparatively fat, loose,dumpy and unfocused when compared to the lean, solid, chunky and focused characteristics of a dual bore. The same work is accomplished, the same notes are played, but the sound has more "authority". Let's face it ----- it's impossible to put the difference into words, but once you've tried it [ and you owe it to yourself to do so ], you'll understand. Onward !!
Kbiggs
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2018 11:46 am
Location: Vancouver WA

Re: Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post by Kbiggs » Fri Sep 14, 2018 6:03 pm

2bobone wrote:
Fri Sep 14, 2018 5:51 pm
I own a Conn 70H with TIS and dual bore slide from the early 1930's. I credit it with helping me build a solid career.

Let's face it ----- it's impossible to put the difference into words, but once you've tried it [ and you owe it to yourself to do so ], you'll understand. Onward !!
Yes, words are inadequate. The exception that proves the rule. And YMMV.
I have known a great many troubles, but most of them have never happened.
—Mark Twain (attributed)
whitbey
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 9:44 am
Location: Rochester Michigan North of Detroit.
Contact:

Re: Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post by whitbey » Fri Sep 14, 2018 6:22 pm

I have two horns with 547/562 slides. There are notes in my profile. I love duobore. Every horn I have except two is a duobore. My bass and my pbone are single bore.
I have trouble with back pressure with the single bore horns. My face ends up getting uptight and I end up pushing the MP into my face. Duobore just relaxes my playing. I feel like my air is more efficient and I get more sound with less air. If I needed smaller I would need to go 525/547 but I don't. In Theory, I guess if I could keep my embouchure perfect on a single bore horn I would use less air. I guess that is where reality matters more. Do what works for you.
I have heard some say the sound is set by the leadpipe bore and the other side is only about comfort. I fit that school of thought. I have heard some say your air is the small side and the other will make the sound. To me, not so much.
When I was considering buying a new duobore slide I tried my bass slide on my tenor and had no trouble with air. That made me more confident I would be ok on the duobore.
Kbiggs
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2018 11:46 am
Location: Vancouver WA

Re: Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post by Kbiggs » Sat Sep 15, 2018 9:13 am

I’d like to temper what I said above.

I started to have some breathing problems several years ago, and was diagnosed with adult onset asthma about 3 years ago. That might account for my personal experience of a dual bore bass being such a “lung sucker.” Also, a bass with a dual bore slide and Thayer valves is going to have very little resistance. I think these two factors, as well as my desire to pursue a somewhat more “traditional” bass trombone sound, influenced my decision to go back to a Bach 50.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not against dual bore trombones. Specifically, I like the modern American bass trombone sound, especially when played by someone who can fill the horn and get a nice, full and focused sound. I just can’t do that anymore.
I have known a great many troubles, but most of them have never happened.
—Mark Twain (attributed)
hyperbolica
Posts: 232
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 7:31 am
Location: east coast

Re: Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post by hyperbolica » Sat Sep 15, 2018 9:36 am

Back to the OP, that Wessex is a fine instrument. I haven't played it specifically but I've played so many so much like it that I feel I know what it's about. I would equate it a Holton tr-159. You have to be a really powerful player to get the most from this. It's really built on the Friedman model, and of course Friedman is best Known for that huge Chicago Symphony sound. Not to say you couldn't play quintet or Solo with it, it's just meant for powerful players, and maybe larger groups and venues.

There are dual bores of various sizes. From sub-500 bore to the 562/578 monsters. There is nothing inherently good or bad about dual bore. I think they split the difference of the characteristics of the two individual bores. So a 547/562 is going to play larger than a 547. An 8.75" bell is likewise going to play a little bigger than an 8.5" bell.

The Wessex will play somewhere between a Bach and a Holton, probably like the tr-159. If you buy it, please report back here.
Leisesturm
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 10:40 am

Re: Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post by Leisesturm » Sat Sep 15, 2018 7:10 pm

What I would love is one ‘do it all’ model that would allow me to duet with Horn, and solo against pipe organ, and play Cello transcriptions. Is that crazy? Cello goes to C below the bass clef and its a hard cutoff. Horn goes up to (concert) G above the Treble Clef, that is not a hard cut off. Do I need a dual rotor.562? Can a .562 play to the top of the Treble Clef? Is there such a thing as a dual rotor .547 or .547/.562?
User avatar
BGuttman
Posts: 550
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2018 7:19 am
Location: Cow Hampshire

Re: Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post by BGuttman » Sat Sep 15, 2018 8:44 pm

You don't need a dual rotor. You can get to low C on a conventional F-attachment (but it's WAY out on the slide).

You can hit Bb above the treble staff on a bass trombone. Alan Raph can do it. But it takes a LOT of practice.

You can play most of the horn lit on a horn with an F-attachment. Remember, the basic horn is the length of an f-attachment trombone and has a "trigger" to make it the length of a regular Bb trombone. And it's bore is WAY smaller.

A King 3B-F should be able to do all you are looking for. But you need to practice the doggone thing. You won't be able to just pick it up and play like [insert trombone god here].
Bruce Guttman
Merrimack Valley Philharmonic Orchestra
User avatar
Matt K
Posts: 766
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2018 10:34 pm

Re: Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post by Matt K » Sat Sep 15, 2018 9:01 pm

What I would love is one ‘do it all’ model that would allow me to duet with Horn, and solo against pipe organ, and play Cello transcriptions. Is that crazy? ... snip ...Is there such a thing as a dual rotor .547 or .547/.562?
I have such a horn. I do quite like it; it's a Shires that I had built a custom dependent rotor configuration for. I have a 562, 547, and 525/547 slide for it at the moment. At various times, I've had a 508/525, 525, and 547/562 as well with it. However, there are some caveats and I might not recommend going the route I did... nor would I probably take the route again in hindsight.

Realistically, depending on your skill level even a King 3BF would be fine for what you want. I actually had a King 3BF that was pullable to E or so that had a tremendous low range. Like, unbelievably good. That would technically tick all your boxes even so you probably have more options than you think.

At any rate, the bell section is the important component here. A tenor bell section is going to basically feel and sound like a tenor and a bass bell section is going to basically going to feel and sound like a bass. If you want more of a tenor sound, go for a tenor. If you want a bass, go for a bass! When I originally built my current setup that I mentioned earlier, I was going for something quite similar. An 'everything' horn. Since it was modular, it had a much wider range of options than the one you are thinking of buying. Had an 8", 8.5", and 9" bells (Bach 36, 2RVET7, Holton 151(I think)). And the 508/525, 547, 547/562, and 562 slides. Once it was made I was a little disappointed because it just wasn't able to do everything I wanted. Even the Duo Gravis I had at the time came out as a clear winner vs. the 9" bell with the 562 slide, and it's definitely on the smaller side. It just doesn't sound like a bass.

Passable in certain contexts? Sure. Actually, really really great in some contexts. I still prefer playing cello suites on my bass but they work very well on the tenor and is a nice deviation as they're obviously quite a different timbre. The second rotor makes some of them doable (prelude to the 1st for example with the low B naturals) and markedly easier than with a single rotor.

On the other side of the spectrum, I had used the 508/525 slide for quite some time and while I liked the setup, actually I loved that setup, it wasn't ever the best horn I had for any context. I really wish I could have made it the best somewhere because it was a real joy to play but for more commercial stuff, my Shires 508 just worked better and for classical stuff the 547 likewise.

At any rate, to answer your other questions:
Leisesturm wrote:
Sat Sep 15, 2018 7:10 pm
Cello goes to C below the bass clef and its a hard cutoff. Horn goes up to (concert) G above the Treble Clef, that is not a hard cut off. Do I need a dual rotor.562? Can a .562 play to the top of the Treble Clef?
Take a listen to Ralph Sauer doing the Prelude to Suite 1: https://youtu.be/kUQTBcdb3eo. Very musical! Was on a 525/547 Conn 88 if my timeline is right on what his setup was prior to getting into Shires. So doable? Absolutely. He made a few edits for notes that you can't really do on tenor... or can do but they're false tones. If its good enough for Mr. Sauer... good enough for me! If you prefer to play them exactly as written though, yeah you'd basically need a second tenor or pull to an E attachment for some of the low stuff... B naturals & Cs.

As far as the altissimo G. Yeah, you can do that on a 562. I can't find anything in particular but Jay Friedman was nailing that register on the 'Friedman Bach' which was a 50 slide on a 42 bell section. It wouldn't be my first choice personally if I was doing horn stuff though.

Honestly, it sounds like you'd be fine with a good medium bore. The stuff you're performing needs you to cut a little and be in the higher ranges. The cello suites can be done on many horns, especally if personal edification is your aim. The Yamahas might be worth looking at because some of them have a pretty easy pull to E. Grain of salt though since I'm selling one at the moment.



EDIT: Actually, it looks like you are correct - C is the lowest note on most of the ones I see but I could have sworn there was a B in there some where. In either case, my point still stands that the 2nd rotor can be useful even on tenor. The E pull still also help . I can't actually reach low C on a tenor if the F attachment is on F. My arms aren't long enough without contorting my body :weep:
Leisesturm
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 10:40 am

Re: Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post by Leisesturm » Sun Sep 16, 2018 12:13 am

My head is spinning. But ... <evil grin> I'm starting to get ideas. Well .. an idea. I just need to know one more thing. Slides. I guess it never occurred to me that slides could be bought, sold, and traded independently of the rest of the horn. Is the mating collar of the slide section a standard diameter by convention so that any bell section will fit any slide?
imsevimse
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2018 10:43 am
Location: Sweden

Re: Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post by imsevimse » Sun Sep 16, 2018 4:07 am

I have several dual bore horns. My take on this is a dual bore plays like the upper slide with a possible sound of the lower slide. Then it is up to the player to make that happen.

The slide euphonium-like sound do happen when the gears are to big for the player to master, too dificult for the player to handle. His techniques is not develloped enough to make the equipment work for him to produce the varity of complex trombone sounds that need to be there.

The trombone has many preffered sounds and on the same horn we need to produce all the sounds we need in the actual context. People with a "slide-euphonium" sound often have only that sound. No sparkles in the trio of a march. No luster in a lyrical ballade. No edge when playing accentuated percussive effect's. In short the sound is dull and introverted. Is this how an euphonium sound? No it is an insult to all euphonium players to be compared like this. A lot of euphonium players do sound bad though.

/Tom
"Do your best and then do better" ttf_watermailonman
User avatar
BGuttman
Posts: 550
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2018 7:19 am
Location: Cow Hampshire

Re: Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post by BGuttman » Sun Sep 16, 2018 4:47 am

Leisesturm wrote:
Sun Sep 16, 2018 12:13 am
My head is spinning. But ... <evil grin> I'm starting to get ideas. Well .. an idea. I just need to know one more thing. Slides. I guess it never occurred to me that slides could be bought, sold, and traded independently of the rest of the horn. Is the mating collar of the slide section a standard diameter by convention so that any bell section will fit any slide?
Some slides fit "foreign" horns but others don't swap directly.

Conn 88H slides all fit. So yo can pair an old Elkie bell with a modern 2525 or 4762 to change things up

Edwards and Shires offer varieties of slides to fit particular bells.

Sometimes you can test out a combination by friction fitting (no bell nut) the pair, although that's not a long term solution.

In other cases you need to replace either the slide tenon or the bell receiver (or both) to make things work. eXAMPLE: A King 606 and Conn 22H are essentially identical, but the King bell nut is on the slide and the Conn bell nut is on the bell.
Bruce Guttman
Merrimack Valley Philharmonic Orchestra
User avatar
Matt K
Posts: 766
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2018 10:34 pm

Re: Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post by Matt K » Sun Sep 16, 2018 8:17 am

Leisesturm wrote:
Sun Sep 16, 2018 12:13 am
My head is spinning. But ... <evil grin> I'm starting to get ideas. Well .. an idea. I just need to know one more thing. Slides. I guess it never occurred to me that slides could be bought, sold, and traded independently of the rest of the horn. Is the mating collar of the slide section a standard diameter by convention so that any bell section will fit any slide?
Conventions sometimes exist within manufacturers. Probably the most widely used for large bores is the Bach 42... sort of. There are several other manufacturers slides that fit it. The part that sticks out of the slide that you insert into the bell section is called a tenon. Tenons that are compatible with Bach 42 and 50 bell sections usually include:

Bach 42
Bach 50
Edwards 454
Edwards 396
Edwards 350
Edwards 327
Courtouis (? certain models)
Some of the Yamaha basses
Shires medum, large, and bass bore*
Greenhoe Bachs (not sure about the new ones, but the old ones are the same part)

*Shires tenons are dfferent but they will at least usually work fairly well together. The opposite setup, a Shires bell on a Bach slide will work more easily as there is just some overlap. However, it isn't always a good match depending on the Bach side of the equation as the tolerances can make the pairing not usable whereas the differences between the other parts mentioned are close enough that you normally don't have to worry about it.

Bach small bores also all share the same receiver as one another and it seems like my Shires bell has mated with Bachs in the past.

As Bruce mentioned, the Conn 88 ecosystem is also compatible with one another.

The Yamaha medium bores (356G, 445, 446, 630, 640 - new, 645, and 646 at least) all share the same tenon as well. They also accept one anothers tuning slides, for what its worth.

Once you get into frankenhorn territory a lot of times you have to just want to be there. It often is not as good as just getting a cheaper instrument that is niche. But it is a lot of fun. I've been doing it for quite some time. You just have to watch out for slide length. If its too long it just won't work. Can't play with others if the horn is too flat. But you can usually pull out the tuning slide or use longer positions the other way around. If you buy a horn that was all from the same model... it will almost exclusively not have that problem. The only exception I can think of to that is the Bach 50A3 (Independent Hagmanns) which were just all built too long and I don't know if they've ever alleviated the Issue. I just saw someone not too long ago with the problem but I don't knwo the full context.
hornbuilder
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed May 02, 2018 9:20 pm

Re: Dual Bore Tenor Bone = Slide Euphonium?

Post by hornbuilder » Wed Sep 19, 2018 9:25 pm

"I own a Conn 70H with TIS and dual bore slide from the early 1930's" These horns were .547-.562" at best (for the dual bore horns) A big step away from the .562-578 basses that are being discussed.
Post Reply

Return to “Instruments”