Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: PT 15


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Matt G on August 21, 2003 at 08:10:45:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: PT 15 posted by js on August 20, 2003 at 23:59:19:

I think it probably took longer to engrave that bell then it takes to make about 5 Bach strads now. That is a very "pretty" horn.

You're right about the #25 bell on those old NY bachs, I forgot about that bell. I have a friend with a #37 bell Mt. Vernon, which became popular during those years, and he keeps trying to find a modern 37 bell that feels similar. I told him it is impossible and that he should buy a new one and send it off and hope for the best.

Another Bach parallel.....

The bores on a lot of those were not very big, i.e. like ciraca .440 to .450 during the New York period. Then in Mt. Vernon a lot more .459 horns were made, I think .462 was an option, but very rare. Now every C trumpet that comes rolling off the Bach line HAS to have a .462 bore or it won't get sold.....

The same frien of mine has a Getzen C (copy of an old bach design) with a .459 bore. He remarks about how much easier it is to go between Bb and C now where as before he had a .462 #72 LT Bb and a .462 #239 C. Also, how much easier it is to "pick up and go" with his newer smaller horns and how the horns are cleaner with just as much volume.....

One other. I would like everyone to try a MW 37. Even though it isn't the "old" Bill Bell horns exactly, it is a pretty good horn, almost as good as the old Kings. They are agile, easy to play, and have a sound not heard on a lot of CC tubas now. It has a .689 bore in rotary valves, which a lot of people deem to small before they even pick it up.

Thanks for the pick, Joe. It is nice to see when people used to really enjoy making instruments as an artist and not a business.

Matt G


Follow Ups: