| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Richard III
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 22 May 2007
Posts: 2655
Location: Anacortes, WA
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:52 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| bassguy wrote: | | Richard III wrote: | | Easier to play like a trumpet is not easier to play. Flugel is something you can play leaning back, legs crossed, no air support, looking like you are falling asleep ripping off amazing licks and wowing the crowd. Trumpet is work. Who wants work? |
Sorry Richard III but "easy" (in any context) & "work" are contradictory term, so I am confused. So I will be more direct in my inquiry: all things equal (player, mpc, etc) will a .460 bore limit range significantly? (You wrote that you haven't played a large bore fh since the 70s & can't remember)
I ask because I am slowly getting my chops back, love my sound, but am getting frustrated with some range & endurance issues. Tomorrow nught I will attend a performance of a trumpet & keyboard combo in a venue where I perform frequently as a bassist. I am crossing my fingers that he will have a smal bore flugelhorn that I can try out. (No music stores around here that have flugelhorns to compare. I am considering a used Jupiter 846, we'll see. |
I see your point. This is just for me. Plays like a trumpet to me, means you can use more air. Using more air means the embouchure must resist the air and that, for me, requires more sustained strength. Therefore I get tired faster. Small bore, be it on a trumpet, cornet, soprano cornet or flugel means for me, I get to play longer without getting tired. Also, range comes easier. I've heard from others that they like larger bore specialty horns because they don't have to change their technique so much.
I used to play a Jupiter 846. I compared it after a while to everything else I could find and that was a Conn Vintage One, another Jupiter and an antique Olds. My frustration with the Jupiter was a range and intonation issue. Not really bad, but for me the upper range was too stuffy feeling and the tone suffered. Eventually I traded it in on an Adams, which was the only one that felt like the upper range was the same as the lower range. But again, that was a limited number of horns I had available to try and I like small bore everything.
_________________
Richard
King 1130 Flugabone
King 12C mouthpiece |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bassguy
Veteran Member
Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2017 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Richard III wrote: | | bassguy wrote: | | Richard III wrote: | | Easier to play like a trumpet is not easier to play. Flugel is something you can play leaning back, legs crossed, no air support, looking like you are falling asleep ripping off amazing licks and wowing the crowd. Trumpet is work. Who wants work? |
Sorry Richard III but "easy" (in any context) & "work" are contradictory term, so I am confused. So I will be more direct in my inquiry: all things equal (player, mpc, etc) will a .460 bore limit range significantly? (You wrote that you haven't played a large bore fh since the 70s & can't remember)
I ask because I am slowly getting my chops back, love my sound, but am getting frustrated with some range & endurance issues. Tomorrow nught I will attend a performance of a trumpet & keyboard combo in a venue where I perform frequently as a bassist. I am crossing my fingers that he will have a smal bore flugelhorn that I can try out. (No music stores around here that have flugelhorns to compare. I am considering a used Jupiter 846, we'll see. |
I see your point. This is just for me. Plays like a trumpet to me, means you can use more air. Using more air means the embouchure must resist the air and that, for me, requires more sustained strength. Therefore I get tired faster. Small bore, be it on a trumpet, cornet, soprano cornet or flugel means for me, I get to play longer without getting tired. Also, range comes easier. I've heard from others that they like larger bore specialty horns because they don't have to change their technique so much.
I used to play a Jupiter 846. I compared it after a while to everything else I could find and that was a Conn Vintage One, another Jupiter and an antique Olds. My frustration with the Jupiter was a range and intonation issue. Not really bad, but for me the upper range was too stuffy feeling and the tone suffered. Eventually I traded it in on an Adams, which was the only one that felt like the upper range was the same as the lower range. But again, that was a limited number of horns I had available to try and I like small bore everything. |
Richard II thanx for giving me that heads up on the Jupitor. I respect your opinion enough that I won't risk purchasing an unreturnable instrument with intonation issues, & particularly range issues--given my particular range problems now!
I did manage to try someone's Bach 183 in the parking lot, but I didn't have enough time to evaluate, as Bill had to go in & perform. He liked my sound & wants me to come over, hear more from me, play duets, check out his MF Superb one, etc, etc.
My first impression was that the Bach might have slotted more easily in the upper register, but I was pretty fresh. I need more time to evaluate it at his place, but I think the issue is mostly my chops--largely endurance.
If it comes out that I can play more freely in the upper rwgister using a small bored horn, and the difference is quite marked, then I'll have little choice but to go broke purchasing another flugelhorn (or quit) as the small bore instruments are a lot.
I checked local ads, found a Jean Baptists in a pawn shop in Pamona, but those FLG329s have terrible reviews. Locally there's a used nickel-silver Kanstul 925-2, a Leblanc Arturo Sandoval model, a Courtiose "Brevette" from the 60s in "excellent playing condition" & a B&S Challenger (the latter 2 seem particularly over priced!) All used, all in the $1500-1800 price range.
BTW. On that Bach 183 my sound was pretty thin using the existing Bach mpc, & my Curry 7 FL. The Wicks 4FL was another matter. Nothing beats its depth & fat resonance. I just got a 4BFL I will soon try out, & if its has a similar resonant depth but with better range, will stick just to those two 4 and 4B mouthpieces. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
furcifer
Veteran Member
Joined: 24 May 2014
Posts: 155
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2017 12:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
I love my old Getzen Eterna 4-valve (.460) for everything I've done with it, which includes section work (yes, a few charts call for everybody on flugels), solos in-mic and no-mic. In particular, as the "lead player" on flugel, I particularly liked that it has the "moxy" to still be the "lead voice" in a flugel section without having to run on the ragged edge of overblowing.
...aaaaaaand now Getzen doesn't make them that way anymore. A few cats have tried the new "rounded" looking Eterna 896 and find that it doesn't project as well.
I find it interesting that Getzen's new "Custom" series/Reserve flugels are closer to what Tony Scodwell was talking about, with a .420 bore.
So, to go back over what the OP was asking about bore size affect on sound, I would ask more specifically whether the small bores can hold the lead voice in a flugel section, and what advantages or disadvantages the player may have to compensate for when soloing in-mic or no-mic, as opposed to the .460's. I've just never had a chance to try one of the "weenie-bore" (LOL) flugels in actual performance conditions.
_________________
Stomvi S3 Big Bell -2018
Bach 180ST37 -'80
Benge CG -'78
Buescher LP 9 -1926
Getzen 896S-4 flugel -'86
Conn 18H bone -'64
Getzen M2003E Bb/G bugle
Getzen Titleist 2v soprano G -'79
King K-50 G mellophone
Henri Gautier Cornet C/Bb/A -1919 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shofarguy
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 18 Sep 2007
Posts: 7012
Location: AZ
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2017 8:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| furcifer wrote: | I love my old Getzen Eterna 4-valve (.460) for everything I've done with it, which includes section work (yes, a few charts call for everybody on flugels), solos in-mic and no-mic. In particular, as the "lead player" on flugel, I particularly liked that it has the "moxy" to still be the "lead voice" in a flugel section without having to run on the ragged edge of overblowing.
...aaaaaaand now Getzen doesn't make them that way anymore. A few cats have tried the new "rounded" looking Eterna 896 and find that it doesn't project as well.
I find it interesting that Getzen's new "Custom" series/Reserve flugels are closer to what Tony Scodwell was talking about, with a .420 bore.
So, to go back over what the OP was asking about bore size affect on sound, I would ask more specifically whether the small bores can hold the lead voice in a flugel section, and what advantages or disadvantages the player may have to compensate for when soloing in-mic or no-mic, as opposed to the .460's. I've just never had a chance to try one of the "weenie-bore" (LOL) flugels in actual performance conditions. |
Caveat: I'm not an expert, just observant.
While Bb trumpet has three traditional classes of bell (A, B, & C) I only see two for flugelhorn. I'm leaving out the old Benge 5X flugelhorn (since it didn't really work) and extra large bell trumpets like the Wild Thing, for the sake of the traditional perspective. You can recognize them easily by looking at Kanstul's lineup. The 925 and 1025 have the narrower taper (called internally, "the 6" bell"), while the 1525 has the wider taper (the 6-1/2" bell).
The 6" bell was patterned after an old Besson owned by Hal Oringer. The 6-1/2" bell after the Cousenon Monopol. Generally, the 6" bell produces a more compact sound and projects more forward than the larger bell. The 6-1/2" bell has a heavier, fluffier sound. The 6" horns use a .415" bore, the 6-1/2" a .423" bore. To my remembrance, the smaller horns have a more open blow than the 1525, so there goes the bore effect theory.
More influential to the flugelhorn sound is the mouthpiece shank taper. Both the 1025 and 1525 come stock with a Small Morse taper setup. I have also played each with a French taper setup and can say that both the blow and the sound open up dramatically with that change. Both Morse tapers are used, in my opinion, because getting the clearances right for the French taper is much tougher, especially when you factor in multiple horn and mouthpiece manufacturers. The Morse taper is just simpler.
The most influential puzzle piece in this sound picture has to be the mouthpiece design. A shallow, flat bottom cup will likely produce a trumpet-like sound. A deep, v-cup or parabolic cup will sound less brilliant and edgy. Something like Flip Oakes' WT-FL or, even more so, the Extreme will give the horn a soft, warm-butter sound.
So, for projecting over a large body of sound, a narrow bell taper, a shallow cup with a flattish cup bottom and a Small Morse taper should do the trick.
_________________
Brian A. Douglas
Flip Oakes Wild Thing Bb Trumpet in copper
Flip Oakes Wild Thing Flugelhorn in copper
There is one reason that I practice: to be ready at the downbeat when the final trumpet sounds. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bassguy
Veteran Member
Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2017 12:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| furcifer wrote: | I love my old Getzen Eterna 4-valve (.460) for everything I've done with it, which includes section work (yes, a few charts call for everybody on flugels), solos in-mic and no-mic. In particular, as the "lead player" on flugel, I particularly liked that it has the "moxy" to still be the "lead voice" in a flugel section without having to run on the ragged edge of overblowing.
...aaaaaaand now Getzen doesn't make them that way anymore. A few cats have tried the new "rounded" looking Eterna 896 and find that it doesn't project as well.
I find it interesting that Getzen's new "Custom" series/Reserve flugels are closer to what Tony Scodwell was talking about, with a .420 bore.
So, to go back over what the OP was asking about bore size affect on sound, I would ask more specifically whether the small bores can hold the lead voice in a flugel section, and what advantages or disadvantages the player may have to compensate for when soloing in-mic or no-mic, as opposed to the .460's. I've just never had a chance to try one of the "weenie-bore" (LOL) flugels in actual performance conditions. |
Bottom line to my question, no range limitations with your Eterna? (I had one in the late 70s but was too immersed in the drudgery of daily trumpet etudes to play it) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard III
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 22 May 2007
Posts: 2655
Location: Anacortes, WA
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2017 1:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Try a Bundy. Very easy to play with a light sound. Bach copy so takes Bach taper.
_________________
Richard
King 1130 Flugabone
King 12C mouthpiece |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
furcifer
Veteran Member
Joined: 24 May 2014
Posts: 155
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2017 2:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bassguy wrote: | | furcifer wrote: | I love my old Getzen Eterna 4-valve (.460) for everything I've done with it, which includes section work (yes, a few charts call for everybody on flugels), solos in-mic and no-mic. In particular, as the "lead player" on flugel, I particularly liked that it has the "moxy" to still be the "lead voice" in a flugel section without having to run on the ragged edge of overblowing.
...aaaaaaand now Getzen doesn't make them that way anymore. A few cats have tried the new "rounded" looking Eterna 896 and find that it doesn't project as well.
I find it interesting that Getzen's new "Custom" series/Reserve flugels are closer to what Tony Scodwell was talking about, with a .420 bore.
So, to go back over what the OP was asking about bore size affect on sound, I would ask more specifically whether the small bores can hold the lead voice in a flugel section, and what advantages or disadvantages the player may have to compensate for when soloing in-mic or no-mic, as opposed to the .460's. I've just never had a chance to try one of the "weenie-bore" (LOL) flugels in actual performance conditions. |
Bottom line to my question, no range limitations with your Eterna? (I had one in the late 70s but was too immersed in the drudgery of daily trumpet etudes to play it) |
No, not at all, really. Good useful notes from low C#(2nd-space bass clef) up to the high E (3rd ledger) or F (at least) - depending more on me than the horn at that point, LOL It is mouthpiece sensitive. The Getzen "3C" flugel mouthpiece that came with it worked well enough, but now I use a Marcinkiewicz 3FLD that slots better with an even nicer tone. The notes are just there; I don't feel like I'm having to work to center every pitch.
_________________
Stomvi S3 Big Bell -2018
Bach 180ST37 -'80
Benge CG -'78
Buescher LP 9 -1926
Getzen 896S-4 flugel -'86
Conn 18H bone -'64
Getzen M2003E Bb/G bugle
Getzen Titleist 2v soprano G -'79
King K-50 G mellophone
Henri Gautier Cornet C/Bb/A -1919 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TrumpetMD
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 22 Oct 2008
Posts: 2415
Location: Maryland
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2017 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| furcifer wrote: | | I love my old Getzen Eterna 4-valve .... |
Getzen Eterna 896 4-valve flugelhorn club is growing ... furcifer, trumpetmd, gmonady, rowuk. I've had mind since the 1970s.
Anyone else?
Mike
_________________
Bach Stradivarius 43* Trumpet (1974), Bach 6C Mouthpiece.
Bach Stradivarius 184 Cornet (1988), Yamaha 13E4 Mouthpiece
Olds L-12 Flugelhorn (1969), Yamaha 13F4 Mouthpiece.
Plus a few other Bach, Getzen, Olds, Carol, HN White, and Besson horns. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
furcifer
Veteran Member
Joined: 24 May 2014
Posts: 155
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 12:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TrumpetMD wrote: | | furcifer wrote: | | I love my old Getzen Eterna 4-valve .... |
Getzen Eterna 896 4-valve flugelhorn club is growing ... furcifer, trumpetmd, gmonady, rowuk. I've had mind since the 1970s.
Anyone else?
Mike |
Which would also make yours one of the old ones like mine with the semi-square bell bend. Notice also that the new .420 Custom RESERVE 2-piece copper bell has that same bend, while the regular Custom, Eternas and Capris have that new round bend - which some have tried and remarked that they like the look, but it doesn't project like the older ones.
Did you see the one on ebay this past week that went for $1299.99? I think there were over 20 bidders. Accounting for inflation, that's about what it would have cost NEW. Granted, costs have gone up way more than inflation. A new 896 4-valve in silver plate will cost about a grand more. .....but a growing club indeed! Maybe we should get a crest?
_________________
Stomvi S3 Big Bell -2018
Bach 180ST37 -'80
Benge CG -'78
Buescher LP 9 -1926
Getzen 896S-4 flugel -'86
Conn 18H bone -'64
Getzen M2003E Bb/G bugle
Getzen Titleist 2v soprano G -'79
King K-50 G mellophone
Henri Gautier Cornet C/Bb/A -1919 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TrumpetMD
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 22 Oct 2008
Posts: 2415
Location: Maryland
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 5:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| furcifer wrote: | | Which would also make yours one of the old ones like mine with the semi-square bell bend. |
My horn dates back to 1974. Yes, semi-square. And yes, I've also noticed that the new Eternas and the Custom have a rounder bend. I didn't realize the Custom Reserve went back to the semi-square bend.
| furcifer wrote: | | Did you see the one on ebay this past week that went for $1299.99? I think there were over 20 bidders. Accounting for inflation, that's about what it would have cost NEW. Granted, costs have gone up way more than inflation. A new 896 4-valve in silver plate will cost about a grand more. |
That's a real good price. Higher than I'd spend.
| furcifer wrote: | | .....but a growing club indeed! Maybe we should get a crest? |
Absolutely!
Mike
_________________
Bach Stradivarius 43* Trumpet (1974), Bach 6C Mouthpiece.
Bach Stradivarius 184 Cornet (1988), Yamaha 13E4 Mouthpiece
Olds L-12 Flugelhorn (1969), Yamaha 13F4 Mouthpiece.
Plus a few other Bach, Getzen, Olds, Carol, HN White, and Besson horns. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GuidoCorona
Veteran Member
Joined: 29 May 2014
Posts: 377
Location: Summerville, SC
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 6:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
On the other hand, I seem to have read in a couple of places that newer Getzen 896 units may play more in tune than older ones... So, might one need to choose within a compromise.... Resistance to overblowin in lead roles or large venues for the older units with semi-square bell branch bend, versus better intonation on newer units?
G.
_________________
Cornet: Carolbrass CCR7772R-GSS
Euphoniums: Miraphone M5050. Wessex Festivo |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bassguy
Veteran Member
Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 2:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GuidoCorona wrote: | On the other hand, I seem to have read in a couple of places that newer Getzen 896 units may play more in tune than older ones... So, might one need to choose within a compromise.... Resistance to overblowin in lead roles or large venues
G. |
Can you please elaborate on "resistance or over blowing"? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bassguy
Veteran Member
Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 2:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Richard III wrote: | | Try a Bundy. Very easy to play with a light sound. Bach copy so takes Bach taper. |
Those Bundys are nowhere to be found used.
An observation about the obvious light sound of my friend's Bach 183. With a Curry mouthpiece MY sound was too light--an Achilles heel of mine, that as a trumpet player I was like an Irish tenor who wanted to sound like a Heldentenor. On the Bach 183 my sound was just right with the Wicks. Conversely my Curry mouthpieces sound sufficiently full on my .460" Hawk.
A contacted our local HS band teacher & asked him if I could try out his .413" bore Jupiter 1100 series flugelhorn for about 10 minutes. No reply. (I suspect it's payback. The guitarist I work with hired him only once to play with his Afro-Cuban jazz group & then canned him.) That would've been better to try because of the Large Morse taper that fits my existing mouthpieces.
The guy with the Bach 183 is quite elderly & couldnt have me over when we planned, so the verdict isn't in. I am getting stronger & I anticipate that my range will improve & the notion if bore size & range will become irrelevant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GuidoCorona
Veteran Member
Joined: 29 May 2014
Posts: 377
Location: Summerville, SC
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 3:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Bassguy, by "resistance to overblowing", I am interpreting the following observation by furcifer about his Getzen 896 with semi-square bend:
"I particularly liked that it has the "moxy" to still be the "lead voice" in a
flugel section without having to run on the ragged edge of overblowing.
Or in other words, the semi-square bend of older 896 might allow the player greater sound pressure level without breaking up.
Regards, G.
_________________
Cornet: Carolbrass CCR7772R-GSS
Euphoniums: Miraphone M5050. Wessex Festivo |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard III
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 22 May 2007
Posts: 2655
Location: Anacortes, WA
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2017 6:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bassguy wrote: | | Richard III wrote: | | Try a Bundy. Very easy to play with a light sound. Bach copy so takes Bach taper. |
Those Bundys are nowhere to be found used.
An observation about the obvious light sound of my friend's Bach 183. With a Curry mouthpiece MY sound was too light--an Achilles heel of mine, that as a trumpet player I was like an Irish tenor who wanted to sound like a Heldentenor. On the Bach 183 my sound was just right with the Wicks. Conversely my Curry mouthpieces sound sufficiently full on my .460" Hawk.
A contacted our local HS band teacher & asked him if I could try out his .413" bore Jupiter 1100 series flugelhorn for about 10 minutes. No reply. (I suspect it's payback. The guitarist I work with hired him only once to play with his Afro-Cuban jazz group & then canned him.) That would've been better to try because of the Large Morse taper that fits my existing mouthpieces.
The guy with the Bach 183 is quite elderly & couldnt have me over when we planned, so the verdict isn't in. I am getting stronger & I anticipate that my range will improve & the notion if bore size & range will become irrelevant. |
Bundy same as Bach 182 flugel. They come up every so often. There's a Bundy for sale in pristine condition at my local store for $450. I've played it and it's really nimble. The sound is either a cornetty flugel or a flugelly cornet. Feels great to hold and is a blast to play. For a combo group, I would play it anytime.
_________________
Richard
King 1130 Flugabone
King 12C mouthpiece |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bassguy
Veteran Member
Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2017 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Richard III wrote: | | bassguy wrote: | | Richard III wrote: | | Try a Bundy. Very easy to play with a light sound. Bach copy so takes Bach taper. |
Those Bundys are nowhere to be found used.
An observation about the obvious light sound of my friend's Bach 183. With a Curry mouthpiece MY sound was too light--an Achilles heel of mine, that as a trumpet player I was like an Irish tenor who wanted to sound like a Heldentenor. On the Bach 183 my sound was just right with the Wicks. Conversely my Curry mouthpieces sound sufficiently full on my .460" Hawk.
A contacted our local HS band teacher & asked him if I could try out his .413" bore Jupiter 1100 series flugelhorn for about 10 minutes. No reply. (I suspect it's payback. The guitarist I work with hired him only once to play with his Afro-Cuban jazz group & then canned him.) That would've been better to try because of the Large Morse taper that fits my existing mouthpieces.
The guy with the Bach 183 is quite elderly & couldnt have me over when we planned, so the verdict isn't in. I am getting stronger & I anticipate that my range will improve & the notion if bore size & range will become irrelevant. |
Bundy same as Bach 182 flugel. They come up every so often. There's a Bundy for sale in pristine condition at my local store for $450. I've played it and it's really nimble. The sound is either a cornetty flugel or a flugelly cornet. Feels great to hold and is a blast to play. For a combo group, I would play it anytime. |
D
My recollection is that the Bach only sounded great using my Wick 4FL. However I might put in some quality time with that 183 on Tuesday. For Shiggles, can you please PM me with the name of that music store.....just in case the Bach proved to be spectacular.
While discussing possible range impediments, do you have incremental range limitations when you go from a Curry FLM, to an FL & then a FLD? If so, to what extent? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard III
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 22 May 2007
Posts: 2655
Location: Anacortes, WA
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2017 7:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | While discussing possible range impediments, do you have incremental range limitations when you go from a Curry FLM, to an FL & then a FLD? If so, to what extent? |
Range differences only in the amount of effort and acclimation. Once acclimated no real difference. However the ease of using the FLM sets it apart in terms of just picking up the flugel and go. Upper range feels the same as lower range. Best slotting by far is the FL. I have to be careful with the FLM as it is a bit slippery with the slotting. All of the notes feel very close together.
_________________
Richard
King 1130 Flugabone
King 12C mouthpiece |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bassguy
Veteran Member
Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2017 11:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Richard III wrote: | | bassguy wrote: | | Richard III wrote: | | Try a Bundy. Very easy to play with a light sound. Bach copy so takes Bach taper. |
Those Bundys are nowhere to be found used.
An observation about the obvious light sound of my friend's Bach 183. With a Curry mouthpiece MY sound was too light--an Achilles heel of mine, that as a trumpet player I was like an Irish tenor who wanted to sound like a Heldentenor. On the Bach 183 my sound was just right with the Wicks. Conversely my Curry mouthpieces sound sufficiently full on my .460" Hawk.
A contacted our local HS band teacher & asked him if I could try out his .413" bore Jupiter 1100 series flugelhorn for about 10 minutes. No reply. (I suspect it's payback. The guitarist I work with hired him only once to play with his Afro-Cuban jazz group & then canned him.) That would've been better to try because of the Large Morse taper that fits my existing mouthpieces.
The guy with the Bach 183 is quite elderly & couldnt have me over when we planned, so the verdict isn't in. I am getting stronger & I anticipate that my range will improve & the notion if bore size & range will become irrelevant. |
Bundy same as Bach 182 flugel. They come up every so often. There's a Bundy for sale in pristine condition at my local store for $450. I've played it and it's really nimble. The sound is either a cornetty flugel or a flugelly cornet. Feels great to hold and is a blast to play. For a combo group, I would play it anytime. |
I am giving up on this notion of my large bore limiting my range.....significantly. First off, both the other guys who own smaller bote flugelhorns aren't terribly accessible. One, the local HS teacher with the Jupiter ignored my request to play his flugelhorn for 5 minutes. The other is elderly & wants me to drop by, but keeps calling off because of his health. I am not going to drive to LA just to try out instruments that are too pricey anyway. I am up to my neck in stuff to do.
More importantly, I finally got my Curry 3FL-M today. It's comfortable & the range is decent, but my sound on that mouthpiece is a bit thin. You described the tiny bored Bundy as "cornetty" yourself. Using any small bore, I would have to use a wide throated Wicks to fatten my intrinsically lean tone up. With my Curry FLM & .460" bore flugelhorn I sound "cornetty" enough as it is. Makes no sense to get leaner to go higher--& I really doubt my range would markedly improve! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard III
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 22 May 2007
Posts: 2655
Location: Anacortes, WA
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2017 7:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | More importantly, I finally got my Curry 3FL-M today. It's comfortable & the range is decent, but my sound on that mouthpiece is a bit thin. You described the tiny bored Bundy as "cornetty" yourself. Using any small bore, I would have to use a wide throated Wicks to fatten my intrinsically lean tone up. With my Curry FLM & .460" bore flugelhorn I sound "cornetty" enough as it is. Makes no sense to get leaner to go higher--& I really doubt my range would markedly improve! |
Glad to see you finally got the mouthpiece. Once again, everybody is different in approach. Good thing there are so many horns and mouthpieces in the world. It will be interesting to see where you end up in six months to a year. Please keep us updated. Best wishes.
_________________
Richard
King 1130 Flugabone
King 12C mouthpiece |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bassguy
Veteran Member
Joined: 25 May 2016
Posts: 336
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2017 11:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Richard III wrote: | | Quote: | | More importantly, I finally got my Curry 3FL-M today. It's comfortable & the range is decent, but my sound on that mouthpiece is a bit thin. You described the tiny bored Bundy as "cornetty" yourself. Using any small bore, I would have to use a wide throated Wicks to fatten my intrinsically lean tone up. With my Curry FLM & .460" bore flugelhorn I sound "cornetty" enough as it is. Makes no sense to get leaner to go higher--& I really doubt my range would markedly improve! |
Glad to see you finally got the mouthpiece. Once again, everybody is different in approach. Good thing there are so many horns and mouthpieces in the world. It will be interesting to see where you end up in six months to a year. Please keep us updated. Best wishes. |
In my guitarist's auto repair shop the MP sounded bright. At home today I really like what I'm hearing. Darker than I thought it would be. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
