• FAQ  • Search  • Memberlist  • Usergroups   • Register   • Profile  • Log in to check your private messages  • Log in 

B&S Challenger 3137/1-Bach 180 37


Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    trumpetherald.com Forum Index -> Horns
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Manuel de los Campos
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 649
Location: Amsterdam, the Netherlands

PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2021 8:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

annvill wrote:
Manuel nel 2004: (but I have problems with English, maybe I am the one who reads badly)


Ah! I found it, I posted it in 2011, I guess I was not on acid but I was still in honeymoon, a few weeks after the purchase of that very B&S 3137/1

I remember her, she was silver plated and after I recieved it back for a few small repairs she looked like new, I was so happy with it that I wanted the whole universe to share my feelings.
But the love affair didn't last for long...

Anyway, I like to make my appologizes to everyone here on this forum, sorry for the confusion, I will try to avoid that in future
_________________
Technology alone is a poor substitute for experience. (Richard Sachs)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
annvill
Veteran Member


Joined: 16 Oct 2020
Posts: 155

PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2021 9:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
J. Landress Brass
Veteran Member


Joined: 29 May 2006
Posts: 423
Location: New York City

PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2021 11:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

OldSchoolEuph wrote:
The Challengers are Bach imitations made in a less material and labor-intensive manner that reduces cost, and alters performance.

The horns are built lighter - partially in actual metal thickness, partially in bracing design and (lack of) trim. This can make them more responsive - easier to speak, easier to misspeak... They also tend toward edge and brightness more than a Bach 37 as a result.


This is not true at all. The B&S are not made using cheaper materials nor thinner metal.

Actually the tube stock used is thicker than a Bach, the bells are actually hand hammered and 1 piece too.
_________________
Josh Landress
J. Landress Brass, LLC.
38 West 32nd Street, STE 908, NY, NY 10001
646-922-7126
www.jlandressbrass.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Manuel de los Campos
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 649
Location: Amsterdam, the Netherlands

PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2021 12:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

J. Landress Brass wrote:


Actually the tube stock used is thicker than a Bach, the bells are actually hand hammered and 1 piece too.


And there is the prove that sheet material or one piece design alone equals pure quality
_________________
Technology alone is a poor substitute for experience. (Richard Sachs)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
OldSchoolEuph
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 07 Apr 2012
Posts: 2426

PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2021 1:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

J. Landress Brass wrote:
OldSchoolEuph wrote:
The Challengers are Bach imitations made in a less material and labor-intensive manner that reduces cost, and alters performance.

The horns are built lighter - partially in actual metal thickness, partially in bracing design and (lack of) trim. This can make them more responsive - easier to speak, easier to misspeak... They also tend toward edge and brightness more than a Bach 37 as a result.


This is not true at all. The B&S are not made using cheaper materials nor thinner metal.

Actually the tube stock used is thicker than a Bach, the bells are actually hand hammered and 1 piece too.


Granted, I haven't seen a Challenger since 2013, but back then when I put it side by side with the current generation Bach
- it was physically lighter
- it spoke easier (significantly)
- it did not have as full a core tone
- it went to edge easier
- it was a lot less expensive
Bach uses about the thickest wall stock out there, though after sizing it does thin a little for ML. L bore tubing on the other hand ...

As for the B&S I just pulled out to look at again (not a Challenger, but B&S), the construction of the pistons, the ferrules, the braces, the trim - all flimsy compared to any Strad. Now this horn is basically junk, but the Challengers are pretty decent, so, as Steve Shires has proved repeatedly with designs for Eastman, you can do a lot with quality design to utilize less expensive material and manufacturing methods to still produce good results.


Manuel de los Campos wrote:
J. Landress Brass wrote:


Actually the tube stock used is thicker than a Bach, the bells are actually hand hammered and 1 piece too.


And there is the prove that sheet material or one piece design alone equals pure quality


So, the 2 of you are saying then that by extension, the following horns with 2-piece construction are inferior:
- Buffet American
- HN White King Super-20 Symphony
- KMI Silver Flair (gen-2)
- Rudy Muck Citation
- Leblanc Sonic series including the X707 Al Hirt played
- Olds Recording (and most other classic Olds - the pre-"ultrasonic" ones)
- original Martin Committee
- Taylor Piranha & Chicago

nonsense
_________________
Ron Berndt
www.trumpet-history.com

2017 Austin Winds Stage 466
1962 Mt. Vernon Bach 43
1954 Holton 49 Stratodyne
1927 Conn 22B
1957 Holton 27 cornet
1985 Yamaha YEP-621
1975 Yamaha YEP-321 Custom
1965 Besson Baritone
1975 Olds Recording R-20
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Irving
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 11 Feb 2003
Posts: 1884

PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2021 2:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Being that we are on the subject of B&S Challenger trumpets, there are two main categories. The Challenger 1 and 2. I have a Challenger 1 which is their lower priced model. If Josh Landress reads this, I'd like to know what is the difference between the Challenger 1 &2 in the 37 configuration? B&S told me that the leadpipes are the same, as well as the valve section. Josh?

I will comment about the bell on the Challenger 1. It is a one piece bell, but, it is made out of very thin brass. The body on the other hand, seems to be normal, similar to a Bach.

I don't think that the Challenger 1 is up to the level of a Bach 37. It is pretty tight blowing, although the build quality seems good. Another quirk is that although it professes to be a Bach copy, the dimensions are such that you cannot interchange any of the parts! I'm sure this was done on purpose. For now, the Challenger resides in a case. I did use it for a while though.

Ron, if you are comparing any old B&S with a Bach, then it really isn't a fair comparison. It could be any old student model. It certainly wasn't a Bach copy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Winghorn
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Posts: 2156
Location: Olympia, Washington

PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2021 2:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Monette trumpets use 2-piece bells. At least the 935 model I used to own had one. My Getzen Severinsen Eterna trumpet (great horn!) likewise had a 2-piece bell.

I think both bell designs can produce good results, although my favorite horns over the years all seemed to have one-piece bells.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
J. Landress Brass
Veteran Member


Joined: 29 May 2006
Posts: 423
Location: New York City

PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2021 2:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OldSchoolEuph wrote:
J. Landress Brass wrote:
OldSchoolEuph wrote:
The Challengers are Bach imitations made in a less material and labor-intensive manner that reduces cost, and alters performance.

The horns are built lighter - partially in actual metal thickness, partially in bracing design and (lack of) trim. This can make them more responsive - easier to speak, easier to misspeak... They also tend toward edge and brightness more than a Bach 37 as a result.


This is not true at all. The B&S are not made using cheaper materials nor thinner metal.

Actually the tube stock used is thicker than a Bach, the bells are actually hand hammered and 1 piece too.


Granted, I haven't seen a Challenger since 2013, but back then when I put it side by side with the current generation Bach
- it was physically lighter
- it spoke easier (significantly)
- it did not have as full a core tone
- it went to edge easier
- it was a lot less expensive
Bach uses about the thickest wall stock out there, though after sizing it does thin a little for ML. L bore tubing on the other hand ...

As for the B&S I just pulled out to look at again (not a Challenger, but B&S), the construction of the pistons, the ferrules, the braces, the trim - all flimsy compared to any Strad. Now this horn is basically junk, but the Challengers are pretty decent, so, as Steve Shires has proved repeatedly with designs for Eastman, you can do a lot with quality design to utilize less expensive material and manufacturing methods to still produce good results.


Manuel de los Campos wrote:
J. Landress Brass wrote:


Actually the tube stock used is thicker than a Bach, the bells are actually hand hammered and 1 piece too.


And there is the prove that sheet material or one piece design alone equals pure quality


So, the 2 of you are saying then that by extension, the following horns with 2-piece construction are inferior:
- Buffet American
- HN White King Super-20 Symphony
- KMI Silver Flair (gen-2)
- Rudy Muck Citation
- Leblanc Sonic series including the X707 Al Hirt played
- Olds Recording (and most other classic Olds - the pre-"ultrasonic" ones)
- original Martin Committee
- Taylor Piranha & Chicago

nonsense


The Challenger series valve sections are fantastic and have been used on countless horns, from Sonare, Larson, Cannonball and many others. The horn you have must be an much older and long discontinued horn (after all the B&S name has been making brass instruments for way longer than the both of us have been alive). Granted some of the much older B&S instruments were a low cost trumpet, but that is just not the case today.

As for my comment of the 1 piece bell, it was more of a comparison to Bach manufacturing. Bach uses a stamped bell blank and then hammers, B&S is still 100% hand hammered from sheet. I have nothing against any horn made with a 1 or 2 piece bell, the results can be good from both bells. I would be happy to send you a bell form B&S to examine yourself as I have about 40 in stock for new prototype horns I am working on for them.

I can tell you that after spending a bunch of time in the factory in Germany that the B&S product is as good as anything else being made today.

As for the lower cost, B&S specifically marketed the Challenger 1 to be at a lower price point than a Bach and due to their location in Markneukirchen their cost to manufacture is cheaper than in the US.
_________________
Josh Landress
J. Landress Brass, LLC.
38 West 32nd Street, STE 908, NY, NY 10001
646-922-7126
www.jlandressbrass.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
J. Landress Brass
Veteran Member


Joined: 29 May 2006
Posts: 423
Location: New York City

PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2021 2:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Irving wrote:
Being that we are on the subject of B&S Challenger trumpets, there are two main categories. The Challenger 1 and 2. I have a Challenger 1 which is their lower priced model. If Josh Landress reads this, I'd like to know what is the difference between the Challenger 1 &2 in the 37 configuration? B&S told me that the leadpipes are the same, as well as the valve section. Josh?

I will comment about the bell on the Challenger 1. It is a one piece bell, but, it is made out of very thin brass. The body on the other hand, seems to be normal, similar to a Bach.

I don't think that the Challenger 1 is up to the level of a Bach 37. It is pretty tight blowing, although the build quality seems good. Another quirk is that although it professes to be a Bach copy, the dimensions are such that you cannot interchange any of the parts! I'm sure this was done on purpose. For now, the Challenger resides in a case. I did use it for a while though.

Ron, if you are comparing any old B&S with a Bach, then it really isn't a fair comparison. It could be any old student model. It certainly wasn't a Bach copy.


The difference in the Challenger I and II is the material of the leadpipe and gauge of the bell brass.

As for the tubing as you mentioned the slides are not interchangeable and the initial design and specs were done by Gerhard Meinl himself and was drawn with tooling they had. I have been talking with them about making new external mandrels for tube draw to make the slide tube gauge thinner like what us commonly used on Bach, Yamaha and Shires.
_________________
Josh Landress
J. Landress Brass, LLC.
38 West 32nd Street, STE 908, NY, NY 10001
646-922-7126
www.jlandressbrass.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
OldSchoolEuph
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 07 Apr 2012
Posts: 2426

PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2021 2:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It has been too long ago for me to remember well - but the bell thickness did not stand out so much to me (I suspect it was a Challenger I), what stood out was the hardness. The lack of annealing I think directly affected the tonal character.

As far as Bach "stamping" bells, that is not entirely accurate, and the actual process is ultimately a contributor to improved initial quality statistics, shedding the reputation earned in the 90s into early 2000s, and providing a substitute for the sort of skill and experience that there is nowhere left to apprentice to anymore.

Hand hammering by an artisan sounds great - the benefit of experience and artistry. But what do you do when the artisans are 80 years old? You can't just hand the new kid a hammer and few pages from the QS-9000 book and expect consistent, or often decent, results. The hydro-forming of the initial blanks replaces the long, labor-intensive (yes, expensive) process of stretching out the material into the cone form. That work is responsible not just for the taper longitudinally that needs to be smooth and even, but for the variation in thickness radially without which a bell would produce a very sterile tone (and lop-sided is even worse). Hydro-forming provides a 2-step forming process that ensures the necessary longitudinal tapering and consistent even radial variation on every bell.

This, together with other key aspects of process refinement (annealing schedule, bending and post-bend-correction process, and automation pf rough buffing) promise to help Bach achieve the best quality in fabrication the company has seen even as it has to take on new employees who have not had a chance to learn on student horn fabrication first.
_________________
Ron Berndt
www.trumpet-history.com

2017 Austin Winds Stage 466
1962 Mt. Vernon Bach 43
1954 Holton 49 Stratodyne
1927 Conn 22B
1957 Holton 27 cornet
1985 Yamaha YEP-621
1975 Yamaha YEP-321 Custom
1965 Besson Baritone
1975 Olds Recording R-20
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
J. Landress Brass
Veteran Member


Joined: 29 May 2006
Posts: 423
Location: New York City

PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2021 2:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OldSchoolEuph wrote:


As far as Bach "stamping" bells, that is not entirely accurate, and the actual process is ultimately a contributor to improved initial quality statistics, shedding the reputation earned in the 90s into early 2000s, and providing a substitute for the sort of skill and experience that there is nowhere left to apprentice to anymore.

Hand hammering by an artisan sounds great - the benefit of experience and artistry. But what do you do when the artisans are 80 years old? You can't just hand the new kid a hammer and few pages from the QS-9000 book and expect consistent, or often decent, results. The hydro-forming of the initial blanks replaces the long, labor-intensive (yes, expensive) process of stretching out the material into the cone form. That work is responsible not just for the taper longitudinally that needs to be smooth and even, but for the variation in thickness radially without which a bell would produce a very sterile tone (and lop-sided is even worse). Hydro-forming provides a 2-step forming process that ensures the necessary longitudinal tapering and consistent even radial variation on every bell.


Having spent time in both factories they do make their bells differently and both make a great product. As for the 80 year old hammering out bells, that is just not the case with B&S. In Germany there is a Meister program (a 4 year college degree for instrument making) and many of the workers in the B&S factory (also making Meinl tubas, Scherzer trumpets, Hoyer horns, Courtois trombones, Besson Euphoniums ect) are young and either completes their Meister or in the process of completing it.
_________________
Josh Landress
J. Landress Brass, LLC.
38 West 32nd Street, STE 908, NY, NY 10001
646-922-7126
www.jlandressbrass.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
OldSchoolEuph
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 07 Apr 2012
Posts: 2426

PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2021 4:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

J. Landress Brass wrote:
Having spent time in both factories they do make their bells differently and both make a great product. As for the 80 year old hammering out bells, that is just not the case with B&S. In Germany there is a Meister program (a 4 year college degree for instrument making) and many of the workers in the B&S factory (also making Meinl tubas, Scherzer trumpets, Hoyer horns, Courtois trombones, Besson Euphoniums ect) are young and either completes their Meister or in the process of completing it.


I believe some Alloras, Bundys, Giardinellis and others have also been made in that large complex.

Working with engineers a few years out of college on a daily basis, I am aware of how impressively young minds can do the math, and quote the references - but when it comes to actually anticipating the failure modes of systems, innovating reliable design approaches, even simply grasping the influence of detail elements on system level performance, these kids show the value of experience by their frequent failure. Hands-on craft work is certainly no less in need of real-world experience.

Courtois trombones .... Courtois? trombone? I don't know if that is more depressing, frustrating, or just pathetic.

As a euphonium player, I am keenly aware of how the current Besson euph's fall a bit short of the quality, durability, and arguably tone of the Besson horns of the later 20th century, but it is conspicuous that at the same time, the Meinl tubas seem to still be as good as ever. Of course, the deliberate destruction of the Besson designs and records prior to the ill-conceived move to India under the first incarnation of the conglomerate, "The Music Group", is as much a factor as the shift to an all new workforce in the failing comparison.

I often wonder if the Courtois tooling, designs and data met the same fate.


As for trumpets, perhaps this is a question to consider: does anyone really believe that in the balance, losing the Courtois Evo line to push sales to the B&S Challenger line, was a good thing for the trumpet world?
_________________
Ron Berndt
www.trumpet-history.com

2017 Austin Winds Stage 466
1962 Mt. Vernon Bach 43
1954 Holton 49 Stratodyne
1927 Conn 22B
1957 Holton 27 cornet
1985 Yamaha YEP-621
1975 Yamaha YEP-321 Custom
1965 Besson Baritone
1975 Olds Recording R-20
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
J. Landress Brass
Veteran Member


Joined: 29 May 2006
Posts: 423
Location: New York City

PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2021 5:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

When B&S was under the JA group they private labeled for many different companies such as Sam Ash, Woodwind & Brasswind and others

As for Courtios, Courtois trumpets were unfortunaly not super popular and not the best sellers. Though they made some awesome instruments which were well made and some innovative, the production cost was high and trombone sales were better.

When Buffet decided to close the French factory (which was quite old and outdated) they moved all the tooling and production to Germany to a newer more state of the art facility across from their the clarinet and saxophone factories. And continue to use the French tooling on Courtios production. The trombones are quite excellent and used by top orchestral musicians around the world. The entire section of the Metropolitan Opera are playing Courtios trombones.
_________________
Josh Landress
J. Landress Brass, LLC.
38 West 32nd Street, STE 908, NY, NY 10001
646-922-7126
www.jlandressbrass.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
OldSchoolEuph
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 07 Apr 2012
Posts: 2426

PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2021 5:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As the person who managed to talk a room full of bidders in 2011 to go all the way to $1200 for a very nicely restored but not exceptionally rare 1889 Courtois Arban - I am surprised you don't share my frustration at the end of a 2-century history of trumpet making.


I often get accused here of not liking companies because I tend to be honest about the cons as well as the pros as I see them. In this case, I admit that when it comes to Buffet/Meinl/B&S/VMI, it is true, I am biased - because of Besson and Courtois.
_________________
Ron Berndt
www.trumpet-history.com

2017 Austin Winds Stage 466
1962 Mt. Vernon Bach 43
1954 Holton 49 Stratodyne
1927 Conn 22B
1957 Holton 27 cornet
1985 Yamaha YEP-621
1975 Yamaha YEP-321 Custom
1965 Besson Baritone
1975 Olds Recording R-20
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Crazy Finn
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 27 Dec 2001
Posts: 8331
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota

PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2021 6:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OldSchoolEuph wrote:
I often get accused here of not liking companies because I tend to be honest about the cons as well as the pros as I see them. In this case, I admit that when it comes to Buffet/Meinl/B&S/VMI, it is true, I am biased - because of Besson and Courtois.

Of course, Bach-Conn-Selmer-King get a pass for doing essentially the same thing to countless American makers as Buffet/VMI did to Europe because... 'Merica?

It's fine to not be a fan of B&S horns or think that Bachs are better, but it's more than a little biased to think that Bachs have impeccable QC and B&S horns are flimsily built based on your single sample of one model made at some point. Or bringing the quality of lower priced B&S made stencils into the discussion. I'd be a little biased if I judged Bach Strad quality from some of the shoddy and honestly, sometimes hilariously shoddy workmanship I've seen on TR300s over many long years - not to say that Strad workmanship itself is impeccable, either.

The OP played both and thought the Bach was better. That's really all that matters.
_________________
LA Benge 3X Bb Trumpet
Selmer Radial Bb Trumpet
Yamaha 6335S Bb Trumpet
Besson 709 Bb Trumpet
Bach 184L Bb Cornet
Yamaha 731 Bb Flugelhorn
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
J. Landress Brass
Veteran Member


Joined: 29 May 2006
Posts: 423
Location: New York City

PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2021 6:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OldSchoolEuph wrote:
As the person who managed to talk a room full of bidders in 2011 to go all the way to $1200 for a very nicely restored but not exceptionally rare 1889 Courtois Arban - I am surprised you don't share my frustration at the end of a 2-century history of trumpet making.


As an avid collector of both Besson and Courtios instruments (I have countless old cornets including a Courtios played by Jules Levy in the 1872 Moscow exhibition and Jean Baptiste Arban's Besson cornet) I do feel a great sadness that neither brands are making high brass (Besson cornets excluded) given the hundreds of years of combined brass instrument history. I also feel the same towards the countless American brands that have come to the same demise over the years.
_________________
Josh Landress
J. Landress Brass, LLC.
38 West 32nd Street, STE 908, NY, NY 10001
646-922-7126
www.jlandressbrass.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
OldSchoolEuph
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 07 Apr 2012
Posts: 2426

PostPosted: Tue Dec 07, 2021 3:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Crazy Finn wrote:
The OP played both and thought the Bach was better. That's really all that matters.


That statement is the most important. As far as the individual is concerned, if they find a horn that fits, I don't care what it is, that is great - and I will admit there are players out there who match perfectly with a Challenger. There are also players out there who fit both typical Bach and Yamaha Xeno not so great (me being one of them). Individually, playing what fits is all one should be concerned with.

Crazy Finn wrote:
it's more than a little biased to think that Bachs have impeccable QC
Umm, I never said that... The last decade or so of Bach QC is certainly vastly better than the historical norm there, and more aggressive than what I have seen elsewhere - but speaking to the aggregate of 96 years of Bach QC, no, I would not suggest "impeccable".

Crazy Finn wrote:
OldSchoolEuph wrote:
I often get accused here of not liking companies because I tend to be honest about the cons as well as the pros as I see them. In this case, I admit that when it comes to Buffet/Meinl/B&S/VMI, it is true, I am biased - because of Besson and Courtois.

Of course, Bach-Conn-Selmer-King get a pass for doing essentially the same thing to countless American makers as Buffet/VMI did to Europe because... 'Merica?


As a historian, I was admitting that yes, I don't like what B&S has done. You clearly have not read my book, or you would know I also view KMI very poorly in regards to Benge, and Conn-Selmer quite harshly with regard to Holton - which I have focused on more than anyone else, because in reality, Holton did more to shape the trumpet of today than any other maker (yes, Fontaine-Besson started the modern trumpet - and then did nothing else for 65 years...).

The destruction of records by Conn and by Conn-Selmer at Holton is something I have spoken about many times, but no company was as thorough, and no company was as single-mindedly trying to prevent comparison of future inferior product to past standards, as The Music Group. Conn leadership simply was stupid in disposing of records they ultimately needed to continue when moving, and paid the price of ruin to the company's reputation. Conn-Selmer was closing Holton and saw no future use for the information - with complete disregard for historical importance. You would also have read how Martin never recovered from the greed and stupidity behind RMC - which imploded in only 3 years. Only in the Besson case was there intent to hide something for purposes that come close to scamming the future customer (which of course back-fired on them too, with the India venture being a disaster for sales)

A personal bias tends to skew one's statements. In the interest of the same honesty with which I have written about the failings as well as the strengths at companies including Bach, I felt I should be honest and admit that I just don't like the Meinls and what they have done to European brass making. Maybe that makes me overly negative with regard to B&S. Readers of this thread have lots of other posters' views they can consider as well in addition to this caveat.
_________________
Ron Berndt
www.trumpet-history.com

2017 Austin Winds Stage 466
1962 Mt. Vernon Bach 43
1954 Holton 49 Stratodyne
1927 Conn 22B
1957 Holton 27 cornet
1985 Yamaha YEP-621
1975 Yamaha YEP-321 Custom
1965 Besson Baritone
1975 Olds Recording R-20


Last edited by OldSchoolEuph on Tue Dec 07, 2021 4:09 am; edited 4 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
OldSchoolEuph
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 07 Apr 2012
Posts: 2426

PostPosted: Tue Dec 07, 2021 3:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Crazy Finn wrote:
I'd be a little biased if I judged Bach Strad quality from some of the shoddy and honestly, sometimes hilariously shoddy workmanship I've seen on TR300s over many long years


Clearly our experience differs.

I base my opinions on multiple samples too. And of the many TR-300s I have seen over the years ranging from pristine to beat-to-H, the only ones that did not exhibit durable construction and excellent playing characteristics relative to other "student" horns were made in 2009. This is unique to the TR-300 and TR-300HII however, because every other TR-XXX model horn I have encountered was not remotely up to the same standard of construction or capability - though some were nice looking and could hold their own with a typical Alllora or JP.

- I will admit that the repair work I have seen inflicted on some of those horns though was either laughable or sad (depending on if you were the one who actually paid someone to do that)
_________________
Ron Berndt
www.trumpet-history.com

2017 Austin Winds Stage 466
1962 Mt. Vernon Bach 43
1954 Holton 49 Stratodyne
1927 Conn 22B
1957 Holton 27 cornet
1985 Yamaha YEP-621
1975 Yamaha YEP-321 Custom
1965 Besson Baritone
1975 Olds Recording R-20
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
annvill
Veteran Member


Joined: 16 Oct 2020
Posts: 155

PostPosted: Tue Dec 07, 2021 6:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I believe that the biggest flaw and mistake (including mine) is to associate the B&S Challemger 3137/1 as a clone of the Bach 37. I'm trying to play the B&S with my head free from prejudices .... I must say that in fact everything looks different.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Manuel de los Campos
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 649
Location: Amsterdam, the Netherlands

PostPosted: Tue Dec 07, 2021 6:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

OldSchoolEuph wrote:


Manuel de los Campos wrote:
J. Landress Brass wrote:


Actually the tube stock used is thicker than a Bach, the bells are actually hand hammered and 1 piece too.


And there is the prove that sheet material or one piece design alone equals pure quality


So, the 2 of you are saying then that by extension, the following horns with 2-piece construction are inferior:
- Buffet American
- HN White King Super-20 Symphony
- KMI Silver Flair (gen-2)
- Rudy Muck Citation
- Leblanc Sonic series including the X707 Al Hirt played
- Olds Recording (and most other classic Olds - the pre-"ultrasonic" ones)
- original Martin Committee
- Taylor Piranha & Chicago

nonsense


Indeed nonsense, you didn't get the irony of my replay as a Getzen Eterna and Conn 22B player
_________________
Technology alone is a poor substitute for experience. (Richard Sachs)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    trumpetherald.com Forum Index -> Horns All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 2 of 4

 
Jump to:  
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