Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: King 2341 Info Needed


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

Posted by Todd W. White on March 07, 2003 at 20:06:07:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: King 2341 Info Needed posted by Rick Denney on March 07, 2003 at 14:04:12:

Ah - a TEXAN! Small wonder there's such a ripple in this discussion! :)

OK, here we go -

1. I don't agree with the first part of your point, and one of the reasons that I loathe non-verbal communication is the inability for us to hear the tone and voice inflections with printed words. Hence, the use of the caps - until now, it had escaped my attention that HTML was allowed here. Now, let's move on to the last part - I did not make unqualified statements about the 1241 in my original post. In fact, I really did, though not in the depth or specificity that may have been desired by some.

2. I didn't say that the "1241's don't require adjustments" - what I said was that they require little (if any) adjustments. I also said that they don't, therefore, need to have their slides pulled in and out and in and out like a slide trombone while they are being played...

3. Since you didn't get a feel for the era's in which the 1241's that you have played before were built, then it would follow that you made a broad-brush type of statement. Maybe we could approach it this way: Would you say that all of the 1241's you have played pretty much behaved the same, but sounded different, or would you characterize them in way other than that which you have posted?

4. The 1241 came in four basic variations, as I recall:

A. The one with the pre-early 1960's(?) valves and large detachable bells,
B. The one with the the later valves and large detachable bells,
C. The one with the the later valves and smaller-diameter detachable bells,

NOTE: These all had a non-movable upper first-valve slide, a lower third-valve slide, and no spit-valve on the fourth-valve crook just past the valve itself.

and D. The last version, wherein the upper first-valve slide was made moveable (don't try to carry it with that one - this was one of the reasons they soldered it shut. I have heard that some of the early incarnations of the 1241 had a moving slide...), the third-valve slide was shortened on the bottom and lengthened at the top, and they put a spit valve on that pesky little crook on the fourth-valve tubing (two counter-clockwise, full revolutions were required on previous versions to get the water out of there.). This one was cobbled together pretty badly - you could see where the Conn people stuck their round-based supports on the King's, which used a diamond-shaped base on their supports. it looked junky. The change in bracing also changed the way the horn sounded, and affected the intonation, IMHO.

7. You may be right on the bell flare/leadpipe idea. Although, as I recall, the people at the H.N. White Co. did their math very well, and it seems that they were aware of this, as evidenced in the way they designed their baritones, as opposed to their tenor trombones...

I won't get into a rock-throwing war with you about credentials - suffice to say I have done more than I've listed, and am also an acoustic engineer...if you REALLY want to go crazy on all of this, there's a Dr. of physics who has so modified his 1241 that it has twelve valves and takes two hands to play it....now, if I could only remember his name....


Follow Ups: