Pt6p mods
-
bort
- 6 valves
- Posts: 11223
- Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 11:08 pm
- Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Re: Pt6p mods
Two other things I think I remember reading about:
-- Includes the PVAK
-- I think believe the receiver is replaced as well (Baer is big on having precise receiver/shank sizes)
-- Includes the PVAK
-- I think believe the receiver is replaced as well (Baer is big on having precise receiver/shank sizes)
-
Bob Kolada
- 6 valves
- Posts: 2632
- Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 1:57 pm
- Location: Chicago
Re: Pt6p mods
Are they applicable to the rotary model? It'd be a bit more work to rebuild the 4th...
-
joh_tuba
- 4 valves
- Posts: 635
- Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 10:34 pm
Re: Pt6p mods
I own a rotor PT6(which doesn't have a 'Baer' version) and have only played a couple of the Baer version of the 6... one done by Baer himself which was stellar(better than any other piston 6 I've played) and a few factory Baer modded 6s that were stinkers compared to the standard factory 6.
I once asked Baer in passing if he had any suggested mods for the rotor 6 and other than possibly shortening the first valve slide if mine blew flat on certain notes he really didn't have much to say. Then again.. I'm just some random guy and he really had no reason to be as gracious as he was in that conversation.
Those are my data points.
I don't know Alan other than that passing conversation but I found him to be very approachable and pleasant and genuinely interested in improving horn design. His zealot like approach to preparing for auditions also translated to his pragmatic approach to improving how his horns perform.
I'm probably missing a lot but off the top of my head his primary focus seemed to be:
1) precise consistent valve alignment(you would be SHOCKED how many horns leave the factory with atrocious alignment.. fixing that can make an ok horn 'light up')
2) removing 'gaps' in the bugle... aka spots in the valve section where the slide tubes don't butt up nicely so the bore suddenly jumps larger and then smaller again
3) a VERY specific 'gap' in the receiver that he considers most optimal
4) arranging slide lengths such that ANY note can have a slide pulled and be spot on in tune without lipping.
I think it's an interesting commentary on the state of tubenet that this thread hasn't gotten a firm answer and discussion.
Seems to me, a LOT of horns could be seriously improved by applying these concepts.
I once asked Baer in passing if he had any suggested mods for the rotor 6 and other than possibly shortening the first valve slide if mine blew flat on certain notes he really didn't have much to say. Then again.. I'm just some random guy and he really had no reason to be as gracious as he was in that conversation.
Those are my data points.
I don't know Alan other than that passing conversation but I found him to be very approachable and pleasant and genuinely interested in improving horn design. His zealot like approach to preparing for auditions also translated to his pragmatic approach to improving how his horns perform.
I'm probably missing a lot but off the top of my head his primary focus seemed to be:
1) precise consistent valve alignment(you would be SHOCKED how many horns leave the factory with atrocious alignment.. fixing that can make an ok horn 'light up')
2) removing 'gaps' in the bugle... aka spots in the valve section where the slide tubes don't butt up nicely so the bore suddenly jumps larger and then smaller again
3) a VERY specific 'gap' in the receiver that he considers most optimal
4) arranging slide lengths such that ANY note can have a slide pulled and be spot on in tune without lipping.
I think it's an interesting commentary on the state of tubenet that this thread hasn't gotten a firm answer and discussion.
Seems to me, a LOT of horns could be seriously improved by applying these concepts.