TubeNet

Bloke...I've seen the Flugabone going cheap at pawn shops and have long wondered about it. Having once played in a community orchestra with an borrowed valve trombone made in the DDR--an absolutely loathsome experience that I never want to repeat--I can certainly appreciate the potential utility of this King.

Though I prefer big MPs on tuba and euph, it's quite the opposite for me on trumpet, where I've found the sweet spot on a Schilke 7B4. I'm not surprised at all that you or anyone else would have a similar revelation on a tenor trombone-derived instrument.

Your Flugabone Blokepiece may not exactly be a million-seller, but, hey, Vincent Bach sells enough examples of the 9AT to keep it in the catalogue...

I agree. those things are so tiny and stuffy that the smaller mouthpieces work much better than a larger on like a 6 1/2 AL for instance. I always use a 12c on mine.

kk

if you have an old Rudy Muck double cup lying around try that just for fun....

ken k wrote:I agree. those things are so tiny and stuffy that the smaller mouthpieces work much better than a larger on like a 6 1/2 AL for instance. I always use a 12c on mine.

kk

I once owned an 1890's Conn double-bell euphonium. The 12C was by far the best mouthpiece I had for playing on the stuffy, blat-prone small-bell side. Not surprised that it's a winner on the Flugabone.

Still, if Bloke's come up with something truly optimised for the Flugabone, why not make it available? It could prove to be of value on the tenor horn and peashooter valve trombones, as well as for solo work on the double-bell euph.

11 and 6 1/2 AL work better for the way I play and feel like two different sizes of the same mpc. 11 works really well on my Williams 6 as long as I don't push it upstairs (otherwise it feels like it backs up). The 6 1/2 AL works great on my Conn 78H.

For valves I have an Olds Flugelbone. 6" bell, rapped up tight but dang what a beautiful playing instrument. It really lives up to the standards of what one expects from a professional quality horn (uh, after the installment of a 3rd valve kicker for the 1[2]3 combi's).
I use my Bach 11 on this as well.

Most tenor "cylindrical" instruments I've played have all been quite stuffy and very tiring (for me) after an entire gig. The Olds Flugelbone runs circles around everything I've tried through the years. As well I have heard great things about the Conn 90G (.547", large shank mpc) and a well made tenor horn also works great, compensating a bit for the brighter sound valve trombones have (compared to slide).

You've probably heard this before, but check out the old Bach NY when they come you're way. I feel they tend to focus the sound a tad better (and the older NY even more so than the NY Mt.Vernon).
Bach claims they're all the same (even though the shanks on the older NY's are visually shorter).

Regardless, I don't care. I put the turn on the recorder, blindfold on and the winner gets to go on stage.

[/quote]
Still, if Bloke's come up with something truly optimised for the Flugabone, why not make it available? It could prove to be of value on the tenor horn and peashooter valve trombones, as well as for solo work on the double-bell euph.[/quote]

Not to mention slide trombones...seriously why isn't there a Blokepiece for trombone/euphonium?

bloke wrote:trombone - credibility issues. I'm a euphonium and bass trumpet DOUBLER, but (though several rungs below the college teacher and military band virtuosi) I CAN play those things, get around well on them, and produce a nice sound. (You may have seen videos of me covering the 5th part in American-Brass-Quintet-ish pieces on euphonium with the Mississippi Brass Quintet.) ...but I'm just not a good enough trombone player that I feel like I have an credibility there... ...and I really don't think a "hey, I have a copy of a 5GS in stainless steel" brings anything new to the table...

Eh...Vincent Bach surely wasn't equally proficient on all the brasswinds he designed mouthpieces for, yet all his MPs were something of an industry standard for decades...though I wonder who the hell would play a 32E

Just out of curiosity, what would you expect/hope to gain from cutting a Flugabone to C? Are we talking response, tone, range, transposition, something else?

bloke wrote:That having been said, I have a second "junker" Flugabone which could be used to "put it back the way it was".

Why not just cut the junker to C "for science"?

bloke wrote: trombone - credibility issues. I'm a euphonium and bass trumpet DOUBLER, but (though several rungs below the college teacher and military band virtuosi) I CAN play those things, get around well on them, and produce a nice sound. (You may have seen videos of me covering the 5th part in American-Brass-Quintet-ish pieces on euphonium with the Mississippi Brass Quintet.) ...but I'm just not a good enough trombone player that I feel like I have an credibility there... ...and I really don't think a "hey, I have a copy of a 5GS in stainless steel" brings anything new to the table...

I'd think your reputation in the tuba world would be solid enough to start off until people catch on. Sure you might not be bringing anything "original" to the table, but you might be able to give Doug Elliot a run for his money