TubeNet

Apparently silver plated trombones sound more bright than lacquered ones. Trombone players tend to want a darker sound. Silver makes more difference in sound, the smaller the instrument. That's why most trumpets and euphoniums are silver, they want to sound bright. Most horns are lacquer/bare brass because they want to sound dark. Tubas are so big the finish doesn't really make much of a difference.

This is why you are more likely to see silver trombones in jazz ensembles (brighter) and lacquer in band/orchestra (darker).

That is what trombone players tell me...

harold wrote:

Apparently silver plated trombones sound more bright than lacquered ones. Trombone players tend to want a darker sound. Silver makes more difference in sound, the smaller the instrument. That's why most trumpets and euphoniums are silver, they want to sound bright. Most horns are lacquer/bare brass because they want to sound dark. Tubas are so big the finish doesn't really make much of a difference.

This is why you are more likely to see silver trombones in jazz ensembles (brighter) and lacquer in band/orchestra (darker).

This is total BS. There is no difference in sound based on finish. A much more logical reason would be that silver trombones require more labor to produce - thus more expensive.

Agreed.

If your only reason is that silver trombones "require more labor to produce - thus more expensive" then how come isn't the situation the same for every other single instrument out there?

Trumpets... mainly play on silver instruments. They are more expensive, do you think they just like spending lots of money?

Horn players... many play on bare brass instruments. They buy these really expensive lacquer instruments, then pay lots of money to remove the lacquer (thus reducing the value of the instrument).

Trombones... rarely play on silver instruments. Are trombone players just cheap?

If your theory is TRUE, then 95+% of tuba players would play on lacquered instruments. From what I see, many players (maybe 30-40%) play on silver tubas... because of looks right? They're more expensive... even more than trombones, so how come the trend of buying the more expensive silver finish hasn't transferred to trombone players?

... sound.

I think the above examples are about more than just economics. They have a certain sound in their head, and with their smaller instruments, finish matters.

It's not like trombones aren't already among the cheapest instruments out there. Not that you can't spend the money if you're really trying, but you can get an absolute top-notch trombone for $1500 and a professional model for under four grand. I don't think cost is the issue.

Exactly!

If they buy their lacquered trombones for 3000 instead of the silver ones for 3300 because it is cheaper... then why do tuba players spend 11000 on a silver tuba instead of 10000 on a lacquered on?

I see almost all pro trombone players playing on lacquered horns. They can afford silver ones, absolutely... but they care about SOUND and not looks. I see many, many pro tuba players playing on silver tubas (many of them can barely afford them, and it's definitely been established HERE that there is no difference in sound, which I agree with... when it comes to tubas).

Based on the trends... trombone players play lacquered instruments because of sound, not because of $

I've done a little bit of research on http://forum.trombone.org/


Many of the posters there think that silver plated trombones sound brighter than lacquered ones.

However, there are some that disagree. Those who disagree tend to say that silver plated trombones are "more direct" and "more resonant" than lacquered trombones.

Although I may have been a little off by just saying that silver plated trombones were brighter, it seems that the vast majority of trombone players agree that there is a fairly significant difference between the two finishes, when is comes to sound/response.

Opinions on sound and response aside...

quinterbourne wrote:If your only reason is that silver trombones "require more labor to produce - thus more expensive" then how come isn't the situation the same for every other single instrument out there?

I've been told that it actually takes more work to make a lacquered finish. Bare brass needs to be buffed & shined to perfection before spraying the lacquer coat, but a horn destined for silverplate can get away with some discoloration and whatnot. Because of the extra labor involved in prep work for a lacquered horn, it actually costs more to produce.

But, silver plated instruments are priced higher because buyers are willing to pay more.

harold wrote:Eliminate the placebo effect and guess what you have?

The same thing.

Mahillion made a tuba out of cheese and know what it sounded like? A tuba!


Do I believe that musicians are superstitious? Absolutely.

Examples? cryonics, heavyweight valve caps, magic mouthpieces

Me thinks that about covers it.

I have read most of the lacquer/silver threads over the years and have always found them amusing. I believe that there is no way to tell any difference between the two finishes unless there is a large sample to compare. Even in a perfect situation with one horn it seems to me that one can't test the unfinished horn, wait until it is buffed,degreased, and lacquered and play it again, then wait until it is stripped, buffed/degreased and plated with silver and play again without many variables coming into play. What about the buffing process? I'd bet that has more to do with the sound than what finish it ends up with.

2 years ago I went to Custom Music and tried PT 606's. I believe there were 8 there: 3 lacquer and 5 or so silver. I chose 4 to really put under a microscope. I had the luxury of time and trained ears around to help make the final decision, which was nice. Of the final 4, 2 were lacquer. It came down to two - a lacquer and a silver. I could not tell the difference between them to save my life. The others listening could not either. So, of course I bought the silver one. Everyone else has one and I don't want to be different. Yes, I am an idiot.

Back to trombones - About a year ago on Ebay there were 2 Bach 42's in the same shape. One was raw brass and one was silver plated. The raw brass went for $300 more than the silver one. The funny thing is is that the raw brass one still had SILVER on the connecting piece between the slide and the bell. Not nickel, SILVER. A note to the seller confirmed that it was a silver horn before he had it stripped. Bone players are not smart. I would hope that tuba players are smarter.

I say that and I paid extra for silver. I must be no smarter than a trombone player.

Cameron Gates

Ok...I got it! Trombone players don't like silver horns because when they rest the horn on their shoulder they don't want to get tarnish marks on their white shirts.

A silver euphonium just looks cool ....DUHHHH !!!

harold wrote: The sound is a result of the tube length not the tube materials.

Don't York BBb and Jupiter BBb tubas have the same length tubing?

I do agree that there is no significant difference in sound between lacquer and silver finishes for tuba. That is why you see about an even spread of lacquered and silver plated tubas amoungst professionals.

However, the fact that 95+% of trumpet professionals use silver horns, while 95+% of trombone professionals use lacquered horns, leads me to believe that it must be because of sound. Most pros don't care how their horn looks...

Cameron Gates wrote:I say that and I paid extra for silver. I must be no smarter than a trombone player.

Dude, you are an artist, get used to it. Rational analysis can only hold you back. Got your heavyweight mouthpiece yet?

Then there are the King Silvertone trombones, which are the same as their historic models, except with a solid sterling bell - most often for the 2B and 3B models.

I might be off subject, but what company was it that made Silvertone trombones for Sears about 35-40 years ago? Believe it or not, my junior high school band had a set of them (1969-71) and they were pretty good.

Here's a good article.

http://www.dallasmusic.org/schilke/Brass%20Clinic.html

It was written by Renold Schilke on different acoustical aspects of designing an instrument. The first couple of paragraphs are about the shape of the tubing in an instrument, but by about the seventh paragraph down it discusses both the effect that materials have on the way an instrument sounds as well as what finish is used.

Schilke's conclusions: Silver plating and raw brass sound and play identically, but lacquer changes the way an instrument plays in a rather noticeable fashion. I personally have an Elkhart Conn 62H bass trombone. About a year ago, I stripped the lacquer off of the bell. It made a VERY noticeable difference--the sound was more lively and resonant, articulations were easier and cleaner, and it seemed to "project" better. Some might call this "brighter," but I call it "more efficient." A lot of trombone players don't like that difference, which is why they use lacquer. I believe that one of the custom trombone makers claims that lacquered horns have a "more refined" sound than silver-plated or raw brass horns.

Raw brass is REALLY hard to keep clean, silver plating is a lot easier but still requires polishing, and lacquer is practically "maintenance free" in terms of tarnish. However, silverplating lasts much longer than lacquer, which is the biggest advantage to me.

Sam Funkhouser