Cut Wessex F cimbasso to G, add Quint valve on bell section (C) ?

Repair and modification discussion
Post Reply
barry grrr-ero
4 valves
4 valves
Posts: 838
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 4:40 am

Cut Wessex F cimbasso to G, add Quint valve on bell section (C) ?

Post by barry grrr-ero »

OK, so this is my newest wack-a-doodle thought. I have an older Wessex cimbasso. I want to stretch the range on this thing, and make it more useful for me. To that end, my thought is to cut it to G, then add a 'Quint' valve on the bell section, right after the ferrule that connects the bell to the main body (this would drop it down to "C"). The wrap for a cimbasso bell is very open, so the wrap for the quint valve tubing could be quite open as well. The bore is larger there than it is going through the valve casing. The MTS and 4th valve slides are short on this thing (sharp), but with very long inner slides. Hence, it shouldn't take a whole lot to cut those two slides to the correct pitch (leaving them just a tad sharp, with so much extra tubing that can be pulled out). Much trickier to get at would be the second valve slide. My thought is to perhaps leave it as it is, and use it as a flat half-step valve. Then the fifth valve tubing could be cut to be the true second valve length. Weird, yes, but it might work. If we went with that solution, then I might leave the third valve tubing as it is, and do 2&3 combinations on the third valve.

Another tricky part would be coming up with a functional trigger for the Quint valve mounted on the bell section. Perhaps an appropriate left hand rest would need to be mounted up there as well.

In addition, I suppose if you're going to intervene by introducing a valve to the bell section, you could also cut a small tad from the bell length in the process.

Cutting the horn to G would make fingerings more difficult in flat keys. However, by throwing open the quint valve, you could get-by doing fast runs in flat keys while, more or less, playing in the key of C. Funky, yes, but probably not a whole lot worse than a bass trombonist trying to negotiate fast runs (except for the really good players). I also like the idea of coming back to the fundamental at low G, as opposed to F.

Your thoughts? . . . Rough estimate? . . . Any takers for such a project?
Post Reply