Out of interest - Are any of those 36J CC known to actually exist?Rick Denney wrote:But here's the punchline: The catalog page says: "Front Action. BBb Orchestra Grand--34-J. CC Orchestra Grand--36-J."
That was 1924.
Some upstart company called "York" bought the pattern ...Neptune wrote:Out of interest - Are any of those 36J CC known to actually exist?Rick Denney wrote:But here's the punchline: The catalog page says: "Front Action. BBb Orchestra Grand--34-J. CC Orchestra Grand--36-J."
That was 1924.
Maybe they discontinued the CC through no demand at that time?
+1 for this theory.bloke wrote:I've seen two numbers stamped on Conn bells and female tenons be the same as the last two digits of the serial number of the instrument...
...except when they weren't.
No! [pounds fist on table] The model number depends on whether it is front-action or top-action. All Conn tubas of that vintage and size had detachable bells, and in the 1934 catalog that included 20J, 22J, 30J, 34J, 36J, and 80J.sloan wrote:I agree that the most likely scenario is that the body was offered with BOTH bells, and *therefore* that the model number depended on the fact that the bell was detachable and NOT on whether it was upright or bellfront.
Which answers the question that started the thread: it's a 36J.
Yes, they definitely existed, and several on Tubenet own or have owned them. We've certainly seen pictures. Donald Stauffer played one professionally in the 40's (he wrote about it in his book).Neptune wrote:Out of interest - Are any of those 36J CC known to actually exist?
Maybe they discontinued the CC through no demand at that time?
The confusion would be downright malicious if Dr. Sloan finds a 20J bell and stamps "54 36J" on it. I'm strongly in favor of that plan. Klaus, you're the only one who'll be around in 2109 to explain it.imperialbari wrote:54 on both parts makes it very much likely, that they ware made in the same batch.
Buying a recording bell with #54 might be a nice gimmick, but would potentially lead to false conclusions on TubeNet in 2109.
See my reply to Rick - Neither "5" nor "4" appear in the serial number on the 2nd valve casing.TubaTodd wrote:+1 for this theory.bloke wrote:I've seen two numbers stamped on Conn bells and female tenons be the same as the last two digits of the serial number of the instrument...
...except when they weren't.
Ken, look at your King. You should see that all of your slides have a 3 digit number on it that matches the last 3 digits of your serial number. I know my previous Conn 56J was labeled as such. Do any of your slides have a 54 on them? That may have been how they made sure that all of the parts went together.
Out of curiosity...why the desire for a recording bell? Nostalgia? Pitch? To have Options? Because you CAN?
Your commitment to historical integrity is truly astounding.sloan wrote:The problem may be people like bloke - I think he said that he had a recording bell ... but he was planning on re-working it into an upright bell. This is how interesting bits of history disappear! Instead, he should polish it up, apply just the right shade of lacquer (and, stamp it with a "54" so I can claim it's original equipment.)
Rick Denney wrote:No! [pounds fist on table] The model number depends on whether it is front-action or top-action. All Conn tubas of that vintage and size had detachable bells, and in the 1934 catalog that included 20J, 22J, 30J, 34J, 36J, and 80J.sloan wrote:I agree that the most likely scenario is that the body was offered with BOTH bells, and *therefore* that the model number depended on the fact that the bell was detachable and NOT on whether it was upright or bellfront.
Which answers the question that started the thread: it's a 36J.
Rick "being able to aim the bell was the crucial feature of the top-action design that could be placed in a playing stand for instant access by the string-bass doubler" Denney
I had not compared it to your picture, but thought it might interest you. It was the picture I had mentioned before that Stauffer copied in his book. It wasn't until later when I looked at your picture and realized that yours was not the earlier New Wonder Orchestra Grand Bass but rather the later DeLuxe Orchestra Grand Bass.sloan wrote:Well...you are the one who sent me TWO copies of the same picture of a ONE-PIECE upright bell.
In 1924, the only difference between a 34J and a 36J was pitch. In 1934 (the catalog that covers your instrument, by visual confirmation, despite what you think are the correct dates), the difference between a 34J and a 36J was valve configuration. Does it really seem even remotely likely that in between (by maybe one year) it was bell detachability? If you can live with the fact (confirmed by the pictures Klaus posted) that the 1934 catalog covers your instrument and not the 1924 catalog, then the difference was valve configuration.so what if that one was from 1924?
Yes - if you are confident that there were NO one-piece upright bell 3XJ's in 1933, then I'll happily agree that the model number depended only on the action (AND THE NUMBER) of the valves.
My idea? It's not my idea. I'm reading it out of the freaking catalog. Pay attention!So...can you complete the chart? Please summarize your idea of what differentiates a 30J, 34J, 36J (2xJ and 80J are for extra credit). And why is there no 32J?
that should keep you awake all the way to Dubai.
Humorous... right?sloan wrote:Some upstart company called "York" bought the pattern ...Neptune wrote:Out of interest - Are any of those 36J CC known to actually exist?Rick Denney wrote:But here's the punchline: The catalog page says: "Front Action. BBb Orchestra Grand--34-J. CC Orchestra Grand--36-J."
That was 1924.
Maybe they discontinued the CC through no demand at that time?
Okay--Page 15 is as far as my copy goes.imperialbari wrote:The almost blank last page has a copyright notice saying December 1934.
Page 12 covers the 43J.Rick Denney wrote:Okay--Page 15 is as far as my copy goes.imperialbari wrote:The almost blank last page has a copyright notice saying December 1934.
Rick "also missing page 12" Denney
I seem to recall some remembered history suggesting that Conn let the open third partial go flat on purpose to bring the fifth partial into tune. They figured a 20J player could easily use 1-3 for the F, which is what I had to do on mine. A flat third partial is nothing unusual for a BAT, of course.bloke wrote:Is there a consensus that the bell is the same as a 25J bell and the body's bugle is the same as the 2XJ (albeit "top action") instruments as well?
I'm certainly of that belief. I recall that a friend in Arkansas owned one of these for a time, and (just like all of the 2XJ tubas) the F is quite flat.
all those in need of confirmation can ship a (bell front, please - 26" diameter preferred) 2XJ bell to me for testing.Rick Denney wrote:I seem to recall some remembered history suggesting that Conn let the open third partial go flat on purpose to bring the fifth partial into tune. They figured a 20J player could easily use 1-3 for the F, which is what I had to do on mine. A flat third partial is nothing unusual for a BAT, of course.bloke wrote:Is there a consensus that the bell is the same as a 25J bell and the body's bugle is the same as the 2XJ (albeit "top action") instruments as well?
I'm certainly of that belief. I recall that a friend in Arkansas owned one of these for a time, and (just like all of the 2XJ tubas) the F is quite flat.
The compatibility of the bells could be confirmed (though I don't doubt it) by measuring the bell tenon diameter.
Rick "Good morning! Almost around to Dubai time" Denney
When I had a 25J, Altieri custom made a gig bag for it.sloan wrote:any suggestions on a gig bag?
I believe a large Protec gig bag will fit this instrument My Holton rattles around in one, and it's as big around an only a couple inches shorter than the 36J. I have four or five inches to spare in the length, and even if some of that was used up making the bell space bigger, it would fit.sloan wrote:And now...any suggestions on a gig bag? or even a light-duty "hard" case (just strong enough to have wheels, just big enough to avoid disassembling and putting into the two boat anchor original equipment cases.
