34J? 36J?

[imperialbari]

The almost blank last page has a copyright notice saying December 1934.

[Alex C]

But here's the punchline: The catalog page says: "Front Action. BBb Orchestra Grand--34-J. CC Orchestra Grand--36-J."

That was 1924.

Out of interest - Are any of those 36J CC known to actually exist?

Maybe they discontinued the CC through no demand at that time?

Some upstart company called "York" bought the pattern ...

Humorous... right?

[Rick Denney]

The almost blank last page has a copyright notice saying December 1934.

Okay--Page 15 is as far as my copy goes.

Rick "also missing page 12" Denney

[sloan]

The almost blank last page has a copyright notice saying December 1934.

Okay--Page 15 is as far as my copy goes.

Rick "also missing page 12" Denney

Page 12 covers the 43J.

[sloan]

I promised pictures. I failed to deliver pictures. A host of picture fans (well, 1) asked for pictures. So, here
are a pair of quick and dirty iPhone pix. Perhaps not "horn-dorn" quality, but adequate to answer questions about the details of the wrap, the valves, etc. For scale: 24" bell, 42" from floor to bottom bow with the tuba standing on the bell. Other measurements available by special request.

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.

For mouthpiece geeks - that's a Stofer Geib. It doesn't go as far into this receiver as it does into my new style King 2341 - but I'm not sure which receiver (if any) is the "mismatch". [Lee? are you out there?]

[Rick Denney]

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.

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.

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

[sloan]

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.

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.

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

all those in need of confirmation can ship a (bell front, please - 26" diameter preferred) 2XJ bell to me for testing.

No self-respecting BBb BAT driver would use the 3rd partial. All notes in that register should be taken down an octave as a matter of common performance practice. Or, rarely, up an octave, or two - but certainly not "as written". Only CC players are constrained by the printed page.

[Steve Marcus]

any suggestions on a gig bag?

When I had a 25J, Altieri custom made a gig bag for it.

[Rick Denney]

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.

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.

And it's not too expensive, either.

Rick "but don't let it slip off your shoulder" Denney

[imperialbari]

viewtopic.php?p=315462#p315462

[sloan]

This tuba is currently in my shop. I believe that I have an answer regarding the '54', but I don't know if you will like it. I feel very strongly that I am correct, but would never claim to be absolutely certain about much of anything.

- When this 4-valve front-action 6/4-size Conn BBb tuba had all of it's dents removed and was relacquered, I believe that it was probably a recording bell tuba.

- I believe (at that time) this tuba was mix-and-matched (bell-wise, to increase its desirability) with a 1960's Conn 21J (top-action/short-action/3-valve/upright bell) tuba.

- I believe that these two tubas' 7-1/4" bell collars (and bells) were swapped between the 21J (formerly upright bell) and this front-action (formerly recording bell) tuba.

- I believe that '54' is the last two digits of the (now surely converted to a 20J now "recording" bell) 1960's top-action/short-action 3-valve tuba.

- The engraving on this bell looks like classic/less-elaborate 1960's 2XJ engraving (not more-elaborate 1930's-'40's etc.) and the '54' on the male and female bell tenons does NOT match up with the last two digits of the serial number of the 4-valve front-action valveset because (again, as is my belief) the female collars (again, with their mated bells) of the two tubas were swapped during the dent-removal/relacquering of the 4-valve front-action Conn.

"or so sayeth the" bloke

All quite plausible. Except that most people I've talked to claim that the number on the tenons is not supposed to have any relationship with the numbers on the valve set. They all say that the tenon numbers were simple 0-99 "shop numbers" to keep matched sets together.

Under this model, there's no way (other than forensic disassembly) to tell if the bell "belongs to" the body - only that the tenons belong with each other.

Any theory on why there's no "groove" to hold on to the set screws? I'm planning on adding "dimples", once you have it back together again.

One point, though. Let's assume that the upright bell was installed during rehab (probably in the early 90's). Is it possible that this effectively LENGTHENED the bugle by a small amount? Recall that (for me) the main bugle is on the flat side (on the other hand...a lot of tubas appear to be a bit flat in my hands...perhaps it's me, eh?)

In any event, i'm interested in this horn as a player, not a collector's item. If I had bought it for a collection, it's doubtful that you would be making some of the changes we have in mind. BTW - I talked recently with the previous owner, and he says that he had seriously considered all the changes you are making (including reversing the #1 loop). Great minds...and all that.

About 3 months after I get it back from you, it will probably be back for an adjustment on the thumb ring. I already know it's in the wrong place (for me) now - but I'm not sure I know where the RIGHT place will turn out to be, once I settle on a good playing position.

Does this mean that it's back on your "active" list of projects? Did the tubing you had on order (were trying to order) arrive? When do we see the photo essay?

Oh yeah...any thoughts on "authentic" (how about "better"?) finger buttons?

Here's a thought...suppose...just suppose...I lost interest in acquiring a front-facing bell to give me both options and instead wanted to make the beast into an "upright-only" horn. You have seen that I already have an Altieri bag to hold the tuba with the bell attached (but this entails certain minor hazards). I don't expect that I'll ever use the two cases (anyone want to buy cases for a 2(3)X Conn bell and body?) What would it take to convert it to a fixed upright bell? Option A: permanently fix the current bell section. Option B: go one segment lower and fit a brand new bell. Where's that guy from Kanstul when you need him?

but...I go on...I haven't seen a bed since Tuesday morning....going on 50+ hours now...

[sloan]

Of all the arguments presented, I'm most convinced by the "engraving analysis". My current best guess is that the bell (and tenons) were added to the body during re-hab.

Alas, this does not quite explain why the BELL is stamped "36J".

[imperialbari]

Knew there was a secret behind bloke’s punchy sound.

K

[sloan]

Of all the arguments presented, I'm most convinced by the "engraving analysis". My current best guess is that the bell (and tenons) were added to the body during re-hab.

Alas, this does not quite explain why the BELL is stamped "36J".

Once that is filled in, filled, sanded, and polished, what would you like to have stamped on there this time around...??

Not the point. The question is: is there someone *legit* who stamped "36J" on bells. If there are, then the easiest assumption is that they did it. If there aren't, then what would be the point in "forging" it?

There *might* be the question of what, precisely is being branded. At least we can reasonably assume that "36J" refers to a model of tuba (although we might still argue about what model that might be, exactly. I think Rick was claiming that a 1933 "36J" was, by definition, equiped with a front-facing bell ONLY. This theory seems to be put in some question when you find an upright bell marked "36J".

Unless, of course, there was massive part replacement/reworking - or forgery.

Some people appear to have positive knowledge about what the pair of "54"s means - perhaps
one of them knows what the "36J" means?

[pjv]

This horn looks (for whatever thats worth) exactly like my 1930 36J=a BBb front-valved .773 four banger with a recording bell (just like in the Conn brochure).

Whats the chance that the bell was a front bell and has been cut?

-Pat

[Tundratubast]

Hi Ya-all,

Just acquired a 36J with a recording bell, it is 1930's 36J-2 Silver satin w/ the gold washed interior bell. Now, for identifiers, the body bell tenon is very clearly stamped w/ 36J it is a BBb w/ four front action pistons. The bodies tenon is also stamped with a 19. The bell does not have a 36J stamp on it anywhere. It does have a 19 in a smaller stamp font than the body. It also has a 57 stamped 180 out from the 19. ????? on the 57. This maybe the Bloke theory, someone added the 19 to the bell to try to keep them together in to the future, Where the 57 actually was the original matching number, Remember, the 19's font sizes don't match.

I'm also using a lacquered upright bell for the upcoming concerts, (director hates anything that resembles a sousa, or a front facing recording bell.) First of all the satin recording bell is elaborately engraved, almost covering the top half of the bell, The lacquered bell has a smaller seemingly new version of engraving artwork, but does sport the naked lady design. This bell has absolutely NO stenciled numbers of any sort on the tenon rim. Both bells do have the bell screw slot in the rim.

This 36J looks just like the photo in the 1934 catalog, and like Sloan's 36J. Here is my 36J;
http://tinypic.com/a/1yotz/3" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank

The bell I'm borrowing is from a newer 21J, It will be put with a 24J to become a 25J. Again, no model number or a set matching number on the bell.

My thoughts on this now are, that the model number depicted the body design, i.e. 3 or4 valves, Front or Top Action valves. And the bell design was not the factor, and it became an "as ordered option" by the dealer or individual buyer. Where the importance that a particular bell design went with a specific body design, seems irrelevant. We all remember the KISS system. Maybe we're reading to much into the CONN numbering madness. I'll post pictures after the next sunny day. Stand by for October.

Intonation wise, the horn actually is very good, EXCEPT, the low G in the staff is 20 cents flat, where the D below the staff is right on. But again, the G was a dog in an old 30's Holton 105-4 bell front I had several years ago. Might be just an idiosyncrasy for the horn and not the model.

It is a really fun horn, I don't necessarily like the size and pancake design of the 24" upright bell, I like the 20" bell on the 345"s much better.

Just my .02.

[Tundratubast]

Tundra's bump w/ photo

[Bob Kolada]

Tundra's bump w/ photo

Very cool! Now for a pic of it next to your Holton!

[Wyvern]

Tundratubist, That is a Beautiful tuba!

[imperialbari]

I agree with Jonathan, and then I also love your high resolution documentation.

It is impossible to own all kinds of tubas, but where many modern models leave me cold, this one would be welcome, if money and space were available.

Klaus