TubeNet

Hey everybody. I've been playing a lot of side gigs on Bass Trombone lately. I've got a rather cheap horn that I found at a yard sale a while back. It's an E. F. Durand silver large bore tenor with an F attachment, but it's actually terrible. I got it when I was very young so I never took very good care of it. That coupled with the fact that, from what I remember, it wasn't in the greatest shape when I got it makes me think that the prices I would have to get it fixed would be far too much for what the horn is worth in it's prime. And I know, because I've had it appraised.

However, that's not the only reason I want to get rid of the thing. It's actually quite junky when it comes to intonation, and no matter what I do, I can't seem to stay consistently in tune under any circumstance unlike other trombones I've played.
Anyway, long story short, I'm looking into getting myself a real bass trombone for both college and the rest of my life when it comes to playing gigs outside of the school setting. Mack Brass has some fairly inexpensive horns and I've really been considering picking up one of their bass bones as I've seen some fairly good reviews on them, but I'm hoping somebody that owns the horn can come forth and say what they know about the instrument from their own experience.
Also, if anybody has one of these or another type of double rotor bass trombone that they're looking to sell for under 1000$ or preferably under 500$, shoot me a message. I live in central Massachusetts.
Thanks!

I didn't play it myself but my friend with the new "Packer" single rotor trombone was thrilled with the purchase.

I received another Mack instrument in the last few days (a small, special-ordered off-catalogue tuba, not a trombone). As always when dealing with Tom, I couldn't be more satisfied. The valve slides, plating, etc. are just about perfect. Dealing with him when you aren't sure is risk free. If you're not happy, he'll pay the return shipping in addition to a refund. So you can try it without worrying.

PM sent

I'm a professional trombonist - tuba doubler, so I might be able to help a little more with this issue.

While Chinese manufacturing has improved a lot on the tuba and euphonium side, a lot of trombonists who have bought Chinese made instruments that are NOT backed by a reputable brand name (so, Bach, Rath, Yamaha, etc don't fall into this category, but importers such as Mack Brass, Dillon's, Schiller, etc DO) have had issues with chrome flaking off the inner slide tubes. Now, these stories have happened over the past few years, and from what I'm seeing, they are happening less and less, but it does seem to be a problem, or at least was.

Now, we all know Mack Brass stands behind what they sell, so I'm sure if it happened you would be cared for, but it's worth considering for the hassle factor.

If you want a quality used bass bone on a budget, the guy to go to is DJ Kennedy - you can find him over at the trombone forum (tromboneforum.org). He can be a little hard to understand (he has a very unique posting and writing style), but he has a house full of trombones and is excellent at helping you find something for your budget (or as close to it as possible). It may not be pretty, but it will be well priced for it's condition, and it should be working well even if it's not a looker. You can find other stuff on the forum as well, but he's likely going to have something that would work for you now.

I'm selling what I think is a pretty good quality bass bone. Let me know if you're interested: viewtopic.php?f=4&t=74241" target="_blank

ValveSlide wrote:

Michael Bush wrote:I received another Mack instrument in the last few days (a small, special-ordered off-catalogue tuba, not a trombone). As always when dealing with Tom, I couldn't be more satisfied. The valve slides, plating, etc. are just about perfect. Dealing with him when you aren't sure is risk free. If you're not happy, he'll pay the return shipping in addition to a refund. So you can try it without worrying.

"Risk free" even for a "special-order off-catalog instrument?"

He said he would take back this "special-order" instrument if you didn't like it?

We didn't discuss it in particular with regard to this instrument. I assume his usual guarantee applies. The instrument is such that the question is unlikely to be tested.

It is easily the highest quality individual example of a Jinbao-manufactured instrument I have seen. I haven't seen all of them, or as many as some, but I've owned some and played more. This one gives up literally nothing in fit and finish (including the alignment and smoothness of the tuning slides) to the model it references.

So, the bottom line, OP, is that you would be wise talk to Tom first. If his instrument is not what you want, you will have lost nothing except time, and you can then go to the hard-to-understand alternative with a house full of heaven-knows-what, one of which might suit you.

About a year ago I bought a Schiller King 7B clone from Jim Laabs. It was $585 delivered to my door. I prefer this to the Yamaha clones offered by others (like Mack -- though if Mack had offered the 7B clone I might well have bought it from Tom.) HOWEVER ...

I'm still settling in with this horn and have been swapping back and forth between a Ferguson V mouthpiece and a Rath B1.5W. I'm now leaning towards the Ferguson because it has a more open backbore and gives a bit better access to the double valve register. An essential addition to the horn was a Brass Ark lead pipe (BH62, and I'm about to try an MV50). As I say, I like the horn and likely won't replace it in the near future. It serves my purposes just fine for community band, small groups, amateur stuff.

If I were a serious student or planning on using such a horn professionally, I would be much more likely to try to pick up a good used one if possible (there are a bunch of Holtons floating around, a bunch of Bachs, some older Conns, some good Yamaha single-trigger basses, and then the more pricey varieties). If I had unlimited funds I think I'd lean towards a Rath. But I wouldn't do any of that before I KNEW what sort of horn I wanted, what sort of sound I wanted from it, and what I found to be comfortable and pleasant to play.

So if you're really thinking about something you'd use heavily and seriously, and for the rest of your life, I'd suggest you think a little harder about exactly what you want. Realize, that you're unlikely to get that for under $1,000, and certainly not for under $500, though you might well be able to get something "good enough, at least for a while" in that range.

I know nuttin about cimbassos. Are they trombone range, bass trombone range, something different? Could one be used on a community band bass bone part by someone for whom a bass bone is too heavy? (not a picky community band; last concert had no bass bone at all, and the euph player did the important parts on the side.)

Varies quite a bit, typically more contrabass than bass, but ... I suspect nothing without a slide can really duplicate the useful range of a bass trombone. Cerveny's very unpopular cimbasso line includes this .560 bore F cimbasso CVT 576, which would be somewhere in there physically.


As you can see, it rests on the ground, so it won't trash your left hand and arm like a 2-valve bass trombone. I'd expect it to work better than a euphonium.

even though the bass bone and cimbasso have a similar midrange, in a typical concert band using a cimbasso on the bottom trombone part, some of the higher parts could be difficult or in effective, the lower cimbasso range Would be seldom used if at all. and you woul have to be careful not to over balence on typical material in the staff. This gets a lot of bass trombonists in trouble, too soft and you don't project, then suddenly your too loud. On the larger cimbasso I think this problem would be worse given that it's even larger. Also keep in mind that most band arrangements aren't written for bass trombone at all, they are actually written for third tenor trombone so that any school band can play them.

Sort of going sideways on this post: Cimbasso in concert band works perfectly well on the tuba part. That was the intention for it in the opera orchestra, that is for it to be the true bass/bottom of the trombone section. To use it on a higher part really seems to put a little too much depth of sound on what is not the actual bass line. (sort of an inversion of the sonority) Certainly in rare and unusual orchestrations it could have a novel effect on a more soloistic part.. A look at the Caribinieri Band from Italy will visually give an idea of its placement/use in a fully instrumented band. I've looked at many Italian Band scores (hundreds and hundreds of the Grand Intrumentationze) ) and can not recall ever finding a part called "CImbasso" yet it is used regularly in that particular band, even in parade.
I have used it often in concert band on certain numbers, particularly Italian marches such as L'Inglessina. It is a wonderful addition. It also works extremely well on certain jazz/pop arrangements where the tuba part is playing in the trombone ensemble rather than the old standby role of playing time. I would use it to replace the bass trombone only if that bass bone part were the true bass, harmonically and orchestrationally. But then that could possibly be the 5th bone part that sometimes appears in Kentonesque big band charts. Sorry, this should have been a separate thread. BTW - I have seen the Mack lable on at least 1 Jin Bao cimbasso, which happens to be a first class horn. If you talk with Tom and make a good case, you may be able to special order Jin Bao instruments not necessarily in his catalog.

PaulMaybery wrote:Sort of going sideways on this post: Cimbasso in concert band works perfectly well on the tuba part. That was the intention for it in the opera orchestra, that is for it to be the true bass/bottom of the trombone section. To use it on a higher part really seems to put a little too much depth of sound on what is not the actual bass line.

The bore on yours is more like .725, am I right?

It's a different instrument than the one pictured above, which is only .560. If you consider that in slide trombones, .547 is a tenor where .560 is bass, we're talking about a real difference here.

Michael Bush wrote: The valve slides, plating, etc. are just about perfect.

I am pleased to hear that quality improvements I have been working on with Jinbao are appearing in all their products. That can only be good for the future of Chinese manufactured brass.

Now for an idea following the discussion of cimbasso on bass trombone part. I have been thinking about Wessex making a valved bass trombone configured rather like a cimbasso using our new front action euphonium compensated valve set and regular bass trombone bell. It could be used for valve player to cover bass trombone part in band, or in orchestra for certain repertoire. For Verdi and even Dvorak I think would be more in line with composer's intentions than a slide trombone. Is there much interest in such?

Donn. The bore on the JIn Bao F cimbasso is nomiinally 725 -730 which gives it a pretty hefty sound. Mine is a Wessex and for some reason I am partial to it, and also its bright silver finish. It's a gem. The Minnesota Orchestra just used it in a concert version of Verdi's Othello. Hopefully they will be buying their own soon. No problem using it in a large symphony or concert band.

In the summers, one the the players in the band I direct in Colorado uses a BBb Rampone-Cazanni. The bore is more like a large euphonium/bass trombone bore. But the 18 foot length and the close to 4 feet of taper at the bell seem to balance things out. It packs a wallup.

Jonathan. I think a valved Bb Bass Trombone in cimbasso form would be usuable and a fun horn to have. I'm thinking rotary valves such as on the Kaiser euphonium would be rather classy. (matching the cimbasso) Maybe an optional 5th valve. Tenors with 4 rotarys would be fun as well, completing the Verdi trombone section. But on the latter there would likely be some resistance from accomplished slide players. Those valved tenors would need to be damn good horns to compete with the custom bone market.

So while, as a conductor, I would love seeing historically referenced instruments being used in modern orchestras, I am cautious and sensitive to the player regarding their willingness to sign on. It seems that if top tier first chair players would start endorsing them, the market might swing in that direction. Who knows? We do use rotary trumpets in the US in certain situations, so why not rotary bones for the Italian opera music. But I think for those endorsements, there needs to be absolutely premium instruments and of course that means more $$$$.

PaulMaybery wrote:I think a valved Bb Bass Trombone in cimbasso form would be usuable and a fun horn to have. I'm thinking rotary valves such as on the Kaiser euphonium would be rather classy. (matching the cimbasso)

Just like the Cerveny cimbasso in the picture on the previous page - except it's in F, as it would need to be to serve as a bass trombone. Modern bass (slide) trombone is nominally "Bb", but works only because of the miracle of trombone slide positions.

But even supposing an ideal configuration for playing bass trombone parts, how well will a cimbasso really work? The virtue of a bass trombone is that, given the life-long practice, the tuning really is dead on, everywhere in its range, so arrangers can put it down at the low end of its range with some confidence. A valve instrument, down there, is going to require equal facility with slides, isn't it? Isn't it like adding several valves to the two a bass trombone ordinarily has, and then learning all the positions? The second valve doesn't make slide trombone technique simpler.

I can't recall having an issue centering the low A. I play it thumb (5) and 4 with the 1st valve. The 1st valve is in all the way, and I usually do not tune the 4th valve all that low. I do tune the 5th valve out about 2 inches which brings the BBb right on the mark. Way back when (that's one of my favorite lines - bit it was 1977)) I spent about a year on the Claude Gordon Systematic Approach to Daily Practice with a Gordon disciple, where playing the low register with what amounts to all the wrong fingerings was a daily exercise. So in effect I learned to center those notes with little concern as to where the slides were tuned. But in those days I sported a noticeably visible muscle donut around my chops. (Now its around my waste) But our job, as we all pretty much know, is to get the right sound out of the business end of the horn. And if it is good, then it is good... and of course as we have come from so many traditions and schools of thought there are bound to be a number of solutions for the same problem.
I guess I'm writing a ton of crapolla today. My flight is stuck in Philadelphia. I'm booked in the Holiday Inn Express next to the Phillies Stadium and just bombed by stomach with a Philly Hoagie . I hopefully can get out tomorrow around noon. The door was falling off the plane. I'm glad they cancelled the flight. (Well it really only misfunctioned after it landed) but its the makings of a good story.

I can't recall having an issue centering the low A. I play it thumb (5) and 4 with the 1st valve. The 1st valve is in all the way, and I usually do not tune the 4th valve all that low. I do tune the 5th valve out about 2 inches which brings the BBb right on the mark. Way back when (that's one of my favorite lines - but it was 1977)) I spent about a year on the Claude Gordon Systematic Approach to Daily Practice with a Gordon disciple, where playing the low register with what amounts to all the wrong fingerings was a daily exercise. So in effect I learned to center those notes with little concern as to where the slides were tuned. But in those days I sported a noticeably visible muscle donut around my chops. (Now its around my waste) But our job, as we all pretty much know, is to get the right sound out of the business end of the horn. And if it is good, then it is good... and of course as we have come from so many traditions and schools of thought there are bound to be a number of solutions for the same problem.
I guess I'm writing a ton of crapolla today. My flight is stuck in Philadelphia. I'm booked in the Holiday Inn Express next to the Phillies Stadium and just bombed by stomach with a Philly Hoagie . I hopefully can get out tomorrow around noon. The door was falling off the plane. I'm glad they cancelled the flight. (Well it really only misfunctioned after it landed) but its the makings of a good story.

tmz1m wrote:I'm selling what I think is a pretty good quality bass bone. Let me know if you're interested: viewtopic.php?f=4&t=74241" target="_blank" target="_blank

Holton's are very well respected horns. Many consider them middle of the road bass bones - there are guys I see using them in orchestras, and in big bands and broadway work (although I see more on the commercial side, in all honesty).

To bring this conversation back to the OP's original question, the problem is the plating flakes off after the warranty expires, but way in advance of when any other manufacturer's slide plating would wear. So, no protection, unless Tom will stand behind an instrument that is 5-10 years old. I know of horns that are 100 years old with no plating loss on the slide (or minimal - Conn's being the exception here with their known "Conn wear"), so 10 years is nothing against what can be expected with what a normal pro horn would experience - even a secondary horn. If Neptune is right and they have improved practices to the same level as a Bach, Holton, or even a Conn, then it's a great price. But, until it's well tested, it's a gamble - is the price low enough to be worth it? Only the OP can judge that for themselves.

My recommendation would be to go with the Holton for sale on the forums here. Great price, looks to be in good shape. My preference is for indy valves, vs the dependent setup, but you pay a premium for that, and there are plenty of players on dependent valves, so it's not necessary - it just opens up options.