TubeNet

Anyone that knows anything about the Higham patented thing called Clear Bore?

Basically I know nothing specific about this old British brand. Yet my suspicion goes towards the architechture of the tubing within the pistons. As few bends and obstructions as possible. Detailed photos will tell us.

Klaus

From an earlier thread.

Interesting that it appears to have been intended for rotary valved instruments.

pgym wrote:From an earlier thread.

Interesting that it appears to have been intended for rotary valved instruments.

Thanks for the link to the older thread!

A patent concerning that early British made rotary valves surprises me very much. I cannot exclude their existence, but I doubt it. As I have understood British valve making, Besson/Boosey & Hawkes never made rotary valves themselves. Even for their then new prestige line of trombones, the Sovereigns, they imported the rotary valves from Markneukirchen. The ball & socket joints in the levers were the exact same as in Hoyer horns and in B&S brasses. When the old British piston horns became obsolete, B&H didn’t start a production of rotary French horns. They imported Lidl and Hoyer horns and added to the original engraving of these. The British school market also imported a lot of Italian made single and compensating horns. One common brand was Anborg.

The only British maker making their own rotary valves to my knowledge is Paxman, and they only started making horns for real after WWII.

I have a few Highams entries in my galleries. I just look through them in the index. All valves are pistons.

Klaus

Vince Simonetti has a Higham "clear bore" 4 valve rotary BBb in his collection that dates to around 1900 (click here and search for "clear bore"), and the helicon in the earlier thread is a rotary, so Higham made (or at least assembled) a few rotaries:

OTOH, Vince also has a 3 piston EEb that has the "Panted / Clear Bore" inscription, so maybe the technology was adapted for pistons. (Or maybe the "Patent / Clear Bore / yada-yada-yada" was part of their corporate seal and was engraved on everything regardless of what type of valves they used?)

Interesting link!

The body and bell of the rotary sample very well might be British. However the valve transmission looks quite a bit Bohemian (= Cerveny) to me. And that constellation very well could have happened.

Klaus

imperialbari wrote:...As few bends and obstructions as possible. Detailed photos will tell us...

The actual instrument is a EEb with 4 piston valves, that looks almost like Vince's that pgym pointed to but with an added fourth valve. Here is a link to ebay.

pgym wrote:From an earlier thread.
Interesting that it appears to have been intended for rotary valved instruments.

Thanks for that link too. Because of that I am even more curious because now we are aware of at least two piston valved instruments stamped Clear Bore, the concept that was intended for rotaries?!

As a side note, many older trombone players talks about Higham trombones as very, very good instruments. So it would be nice to have a chance to test one of those too...

I owned one of these in college and after. It was a three valve Eb, silver, with the same inscription, but without the word "Dunn" on it. It played well, with a sweet mellow sound. It came with a possibly matching mouthpiece with a large bowl and a very small shank, which I eventually sold together with the horn. I wish I had kept it.
Other goods made at the time seemed prone to brag about both patents and Exhibition (usually World's Fair) medals. I always assumed "clear bore" was early marketing talk. After all, "occluded bore" "stuffed up bore" or "obstructed bore" just don't have the same cache for brass players.
I understand there was a prison at Strangeways, and always wondered whether any of the prisoners were allowed (or compelled) to labor at the Higham factory. I have never found any history on that point.
In any case, I really liked my Higham tuba, and wish you the best with yours.

From "http://www.angelfire.com/music2/thecorn ... s_h_k.html", which was the #1 hit when Googling " 'clear bore' brass "
=====================================
Joseph Higham

(Manchester, England 1842 – p1950)

Established in 1842 by Joseph Higham (b Manchester 1818; d Manchester 1883), the company was making instruments for the Army by 1852, and by 1863, they were supplying instruments for the Army and Navy and exporting them as well. In 1857, the firm patented the "clear bore system" for rotary valve brass instruments (GB # 123) and in 1895, the "echo bell" trombone (GB #13630). Higham’s cornets had a valve system which consisted of a piston traveling through what appears as a valve casing, operating a rotary valve. Patented by Higham in Great Britain 1857 (GB #123) (Eliason 1981, 44), these valves are much like those of FISKE, who patented the idea much later in 1866 in the United States (US #74331). Some cornets also had a patented quick-change key devise attached to the tuning slide to change the instrument from Bb to A, or vice versa (Rose [1995], 206-207). In 1860, Higham founded the 1st Manchester Volunteer Battalion Band. According to Talks with Bandsmen: A Popular Handbook for Brass Instrumentalists (Rose [1995], 202), he was the first manufacturer to offer instruments as prizes at Brass Band contests in England. He supported such events and helped to establish the Brass Band contest as a viable performing vehicle.

In 1852, William Hillyard (b Athlone, Ireland 1821; d ?Philadelphia) worked for Higham after apprenticing with his uncle, John McNeill in Dublin. He also worked for Henry DISTIN. In 1862, William opened his own instrument manufactory in London (1862-1894) and later in Philadelphia (1896-1897) as "Hillyard & Barnes." Between 1871 and 1882, the famous Alexandre Le Forestier worked for Higham in Manchester before going to J. W. PEPPER as foreman from 1888 to 1895.

In 1883, Higham’s son-in-law, Peter Robinson (b Salford 1835), succeeded him as owner of the company. In 1892, the firm had expanded so much that it opened a branch in London with R. D. Cubitt as manager. 1893, the company had already produced 46,000 instruments, according to their records. In 1894, the company had over 90 people on its payroll, most of them English by birth or naturalized as such. In c1904, the company began to produce woodwind instruments. Peter Robinson sold out his portion of the business in 1911. In 1923, "Mayers & Harrison" were the owners (Clifford Bevan, "Higham, Joseph," in The New Grove Dictionary of Musical Instruments lists the date as 1930). In 1934, the owners became the "Premier Drum Company." During WWII, production of instruments ceased. After the war, "Mayers & Harrison" became the owners once again.

The firm was represented at the London International Exhibition of 1862, being awarded a medal for improving the tubular arrangement in cornets. In 1865, the company also won a medal in Dublin for their instruments(Clifford Bevan, "Higham, Joseph," in The New Grove Dictionary of Musical Instruments). The company was represented at the Columbian Exhibition in Chicago in 1893 (Waterhouse 1993, 175).

Main references for the above were The New Langwill Index (Waterhouse 1994) and

Clifford Bevan, "Higham, Joseph," in The New Grove Dictionary of Musical Instruments. Other references are listed throughout the entry.

=====================================

see also: http://books.google.com/books?id=QHbmAA ... ss&f=false" target="_blank

Thanks for your comments and links so far, much great information. However it is still somewhat unclear what the concept of Clear Bore really is other than it has something to do with valves...

Now I have tested the instrument a little and it seems to be a real keeper. It is remarkably good in all aspects and very easy to play, with as Tom wrote a sweet mellow sound. Intonation is very good and it even plays well all the way down in the fourth valve register and on with a little help of one or two fake tones. I compared it with mother's Boosey 3 valve EEb compensator from 1923 which is very good and this one seems to be even better.

Just a reflection over things. There is much talk about bettering constructions and make, in our case, instruments that plays better in tune, with better sound bla bla bla. However after playing this one and a couple of other instruments about 100 years old, both slide trombones and different valved instruments, I think that much of what today seems to be improvements could be found in those older instruments but has somehow been forgotten over time. So is it a simple case of reinventing the wheel over and over?! There also seems to be a, growing, interest for old stuff even if we today can buy new shiny instruments that after heavy R&D and tweaking will play almost as good as the old ones?!

Maybe it is not a too bad idea after all to do well made copies of old proven designs that do not cost an arm and a leg which could be used for daily work and make the more esoteric developments for those that always wants to have something that no one else have?

Problem is that changes have been made for cutting production costs, not as alleged for improvements in the instruments.

Two makers more or less have admitted to that. Several years ago Getzen issued a costlier vintage version of their best Bb trumpet. In more recent years Conn have issued a vintage version of the famous Conn 8D horn. Much pricier that their current production model.

One significant factor also appears being the dedication and the qualities of shop foremen and of test players.

Klaus

From 'Talks with Bandsman' by Algenon S. Rose (published 1895);

'Joseph Higham was the original patentee of the Clear-bore system, where by a bullet may be made to pass with equal facility, right through an instrument, from the begining of the cylindrical tubing, whether the pistons be pressed down or not.'

CB

Highams wrote:From 'Talks with Bandsman' by Algenon S. Rose (published 1895);

'Joseph Higham was the original patentee of the Clear-bore system, where by a bullet may be made to pass with equal facility, right through an instrument, from the begining of the cylindrical tubing, whether the pistons be pressed down or not.'

CB

It won't matter whether they're up or down if you use a big enough bullet.

Highams wrote:From 'Talks with Bandsman' by Algenon S. Rose (published 1895);

'Joseph Higham was the original patentee of the Clear-bore system, where by a bullet may be made to pass with equal facility, right through an instrument, from the begining of the cylindrical tubing, whether the pistons be pressed down or not.'

CB

Thanks, now we are coming somewhere in understanding the concept. Maybe todays instruments should be built with the same thoughts...

pgym wrote:It won't matter whether they're up or down if you use a big enough bullet.

And maybe they, the instruments, are... It takes a big bullet to get the right sound out of them...

imperialbari wrote:...Problem is that changes have been made for cutting production costs, not as alleged for improvements in the instruments...

Aha, the things that the makers call improvements.

imperialbari wrote:...One significant factor also appears being the dedication and the qualities of shop foremen and of test players...

And therein may be some of the problems too, because if not all of the knowledge is transferred further through generations then every new generation have start over or at least find out part of if again. So it seems there is much to be learnt from studying the old masters which after that could be a great base to use for further development.
So now every maker, start to make instruments "...where by a bullet may be made to pass with equal facility, right through an instrument..." and continue from that.

The free bullet passage is desirable from an acoustical point of view. A less free passage by some makers has been desirable with the purpose of shorter piston strokes. In many piston one can see small indentations caused by insufficient space for the inner knuckles (passage tubes) of the pistons. Keeping the roundness of these takes longer pistons.

Similar considerations have been made about the dimeter of the pistons. The larger the diameter less sharp the turns within the pistons have to be. But the wider diameters lead to a finger spread, which by some players are experienced as being strenuous.

Klaus

imperialbari wrote:The free bullet passage is desirable from an acoustical point of view. A less free passage by some makers has been desirable with the purpose of shorter piston strokes. In many piston one can see small indentations caused by insufficient space for the inner knuckles (passage tubes) of the pistons. Keeping the roundness of these takes longer pistons.

True, however, the wording doesn't specify free passage, only equal facility of passage: strictly speaking, completely blocking the air path when the pistons are in both the up and down position would create equal facility (none) of passage.

Similar considerations have been made about the dimeter of the pistons. The larger the diameter less sharp the turns within the pistons have to be. But the wider diameters lead to a finger spread, which by some players are experienced as being strenuous.

Yet another advantage of rotary valves.

imperialbari wrote:...The free bullet passage is desirable from an acoustical point of view. A less free passage by some makers has been desirable with the purpose of shorter piston strokes. In many piston one can see small indentations caused by insufficient space for the inner knuckles (passage tubes) of the pistons. Keeping the roundness of these takes longer pistons...

Aha, I noticed that, and thought about the beautiful work, with the Higham valves. So for an EEb tuba the valves are of acceptable size but maybe to make the same for a CC or BBb would be impractical then?

pgym wrote:...Yet another advantage of rotary valves...

In theory yes but what about the casings of the rotaries, there seems to be some knuckles and things that may lead to a slightly less free passage, at least on my horns?!

Lingon wrote:

pgym wrote:...Yet another advantage of rotary valves...

In theory yes but what about the casings of the rotaries, there seems to be some knuckles and things that may lead to a slightly less free passage, at least on my horns?!

My point was that, with rotaries, you can make the rotor diameter as large as needed to smooth out the turns and simply make/bend/add an extension to the finger paddles to fit a player's hand comfortably.