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

Bach core


Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    trumpetherald.com Forum Index -> Horns
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
dstpt
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Posts: 1272

PostPosted: Wed Jun 22, 2022 7:24 am    Post subject: Bach core Reply with quote

In this current TH thread...

ITG horns and gear... what was good/bad?

https://www.trumpetherald.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=159802&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

...I read this comment from Ron Berndt, aka OldSchoolEuph:

"The Bach Mariachi uses a #43 bell taper, which was designed in 1950 in the context of a very different cultural concept of trumpet sound - one that was much fuller and warmer. It's shape includes the unique geometry at the throat that Bach pioneered on the #6 bell, and used on most bells thereafter, which gives us that mid-tone bump in the curve we call classic 'Bach core.'"

Among Bach aficionados, the “Bach core” is a very real thing. Those who favor other brands have seemed to downplay the notion or even denied its existence. By googling this…

bach core site:trumpetherald.com

…I’ve gotten lots of results to filter through over the next two weeks!

Anyway, here are my questions:

Many have modeled their brands off of the Bach design, which we know has its roots in the 1800s French Besson, yet…

(1) Have any been able to actually duplicate the “Bach core?”
(2) Were they even attempting to capture the “Bach core” in their build?
(3) If this “core” is in the “unique geometry at the throat,” why haven’t they captured it, since they are clearly modeling everything else after the Bach build?
(4) Is the “mid-tone bump in the curve we call classic 'Bach core,’” the “curvature” of the throat geometry, or something else that I’m misunderstanding, and how far from the end of the bell does this happen and for how much length in the bell throat, or has no one ever really spent time reverse engineering it?
(5) To those who have been to the factory, do they have this “unique geometry” included in each bell mandrel, or is this something they do to each bell in a “special top-secret room” for no one but a select few to ever see?

I know some of these seem silly and/or pedantic, but a cursory look at my google results on the subject doesn’t seem to cover these aspects of the subject and yet they seem “core.”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
OldSchoolEuph
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 07 Apr 2012
Posts: 2426

PostPosted: Wed Jun 22, 2022 9:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

(1)Yes, (2)Yes, (3)N/A, (4&5) Don't overthink. Copying is easier than that. The 37/43/72/etc. bell taper is not patent protected. Finding the right material/weight/annealing to truly duplicate or to be a variation on is then a matter of trial & error.

The only person who ever really worked at engineering that geometry into the overall unique geometry of a mandrel was Vincent Bach. Anyone else can simply copy not just that, but the other aspects of popular Bach tapers, and then tweak all of the other factors to suit their application. Some are very close (Yamaha 8335 for instance), some are very different (B&S Heritage claims a 43 bell but is quite unique - but faintly familiar...)
_________________
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
kehaulani
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 23 Mar 2003
Posts: 8964
Location: Hawai`i - Texas

PostPosted: Wed Jun 22, 2022 9:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not sure why worry.

The core sound of a Bach 190-37 and the core sound of a Yamaha Shew are not the same. But you can find another Bach model that sounds the same as another Yamaha model.

So it seems to me that the instrument models may have different core sounds, their brand does not. (Ducks and covers.)
_________________
"If you don't live it, it won't come out of your horn." Bird

Yamaha 8310Z Bobby Shew trumpet
Benge 3X Trumpet
Getzen Capri Cornet
Adams F-1 Flghn
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dstpt
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Posts: 1272

PostPosted: Wed Jun 22, 2022 9:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dayton
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 24 Mar 2013
Posts: 1990
Location: USA

PostPosted: Wed Jun 22, 2022 9:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It seems to me that when most people refer to Bachs having a certain "core" to their sound they are mainly talking about the 18037 (and now 19037).

Of the many horns I have played that are modeled on the 18037 there are a few that have come close to replicating that "core." The Yamaha 9335NYII (haven't played the gen 3 yet) is the closest I can think of. The Shires Model A is also pretty close.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
shofarguy
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 18 Sep 2007
Posts: 7003
Location: AZ

PostPosted: Thu Jun 23, 2022 8:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is such a complex subject because of the many factors in the design and building of a horn and the perception of the horn from its players. But, Pandora's Box has been reopened, so I may as well jump in, too.

OldSchool makes good points and I agree with them. There are some other aspects that I want to address. In my early years on this web forum, I asked members to describe the Bach sound. I can't remember anyone going into detail, other than to say things like, "You'll know it when you hear it," "It's just there," and ambiguous things like that. Most just accused me of Bach bashing, which I wasn't. I really wanted to understand. Over the years following that, I picked up some hints. Zig Kanstul gave a couple of them.

He once said about his 1537 model, that was designed to capture some of the market left by the Conn-Selmer labor dispute, "I could make a trumpet sound like a Bach, but then it would have the intonation of a Bach. Why would anyone buy my horn, then? They would just buy a Bach." So, hint Number 1 is that the Bach sound is created by its acoustic faults or at least its compromises. On that line, how many times have we read one or another manufacturer's take on the Martin Committee that goes something like, " We want to capture the Committee sound, but with modern intonation and slotting." That thinking disregards the idea that faults give an instrument its character, which is part of its overall sound.

Hint Number 2 came from Zig and Charles Hargett, who both told me that Conn-Selmer has at least 5 different #37 bell mandrels, so which one gives the "Bach Sound?" Bach also offers different mouth pipes to go with different bell tapers for their different models, but all are said to have that "Bach Sound." This points to something other than simple geometry. We have to consider things like bracing, port design, water keys, valve casings, etc. In other words, we have to look at the entire manufacturing processes that Bach uses to create these instruments that all are different designs, but have a characteristic "core."

Hint Number 3 is where I'm probably going to get into the most trouble. I came into this forum as a Benge player. I spent my first two or three years here extolling Benge horns like no other. Then, I met Flip Oakes and was blown away by his products. He ruined my Benge! Not really, but he changed my belief. That is the next aspect to consider: Belief. I believe in my Wild Thing instruments. Bach players believe in their Strads. Heck, when I read what some people posted about their Martin Committees, I thought I'd stumbled into a religious cult!

Reality is that Conn-Selmer has spent multi-millions of dollars over decades creating the perception that their trumpets are superior to all others. They have done an incomparable job of this. They began by marketing the Bundy line of student horns that played in such a way as to lead their young players to the Stradivarius line when they upgraded to a professional trumpet. Bundy trained the next generation of trumpet players to buy and play Bach. If you don't like to recognize that idea, you're in denial. You're religious. Religious people are not very open to alternative perspectives. I should know.

It was tough for me to accept that Kanstul trumpets played better than my Benge. It was hard for me to accept that the Wild Thing, which looked and sounded more like the Bach I had eschewed, was far better than my beloved 5X. It was tough for me to concede that the 1970 vintage Bach 37 I played for a week or two was a really, really good trumpet. It was hard, because belief is a powerful thing and hard to change.

Do you want to stir things up? Do what I've done and go to hear the average community ensemble player who plays a Bach 37. My experience is that the sound from that horn won't reach the back of a fair sized auditorium. Maybe not even the "footlights" as Byron Autrey once exclaimed. Are there players who can project with that horn? Of course, but they have to work much harder to accomplish it than I ever did on my Benge or WT. My experience is that many trumpets produce a more effective sound than a Bach 37. Maybe that's a bonus in certain instances. Orchestras don't need much trumpet usually, for one.

Anyway, I've written numerous times what I think makes up the Bach sound. You might not agree with me, but it is what I hear in comparison with other makes.
_________________
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
View user's profile Send private message
Mnc
Veteran Member


Joined: 25 Jun 2005
Posts: 256
Location: Reno, Nevada

PostPosted: Thu Jun 23, 2022 9:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

+1
_________________
Oakes Celebration
Monette B6S-1
GR 66C*
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RandyTX
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 25 Mar 2010
Posts: 5299
Location: Central Texas

PostPosted: Thu Jun 23, 2022 9:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Brian,

I am no authority on this, but recall hearing people say in the past that the reason companies like Yamaha had a hard time 'replicating' that Bach 'ring' or 'core' or whatever you want to call it, had more to do with the way the horns were built, not some intrinsic artifact of pitch tendenices.

The most common thing brought forward seemed to be that Bach bells were hammered out, while Yamaha used a more mechanical process, something called 'hydroforming' if I remember correctly, which changed (dare I say deadened) the way they responded?

I don't know what Yamaha has done recently, but there's no question they are much closer to getting that sound out of their newer models than with the original Xeno's and earlier. I have no idea if they've gone to a less automated and more 'human/physical' way of forming bells, or figured out some other way, but they do sound a lot more alive, and 'ring' more than in the past.
_________________
"Music is like candy, you throw the (w)rappers away."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
shofarguy
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 18 Sep 2007
Posts: 7003
Location: AZ

PostPosted: Thu Jun 23, 2022 9:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

RandyTX wrote:
Brian,

I am no authority on this, but recall hearing people say in the past that the reason companies like Yamaha had a hard time 'replicating' that Bach 'ring' or 'core' or whatever you want to call it, had more to do with the way the horns were built, not some intrinsic artifact of pitch tendenices.

The most common thing brought forward seemed to be that Bach bells were hammered out, while Yamaha used a more mechanical process, something called 'hydroforming' if I remember correctly, which changed (dare I say deadened) the way they responded?

I don't know what Yamaha has done recently, but there's no question they are much closer to getting that sound out of their newer models than with the original Xeno's and earlier. I have no idea if they've gone to a less automated and more 'human/physical' way of forming bells, or figured out some other way, but they do sound a lot more alive, and 'ring' more than in the past.


I think you're right about Yamaha's high end models. I had one handed to me at a trumpet hang in Phoenix a few years ago. It played and sounded as good as any quality trumpet from Bach, Kanstul, B&S or whatever. Other models I've come across just didn't have the liveliness, resonance or projection.

The thing is that there are other hand-hammered bells on other quality horns and still the "Bach Sound" legend persists. I know that things like bell bow radii, valve slide bend radii, receiver design and weight, brace design, weight and placement, etc., all make a difference.

In my own practice these days, I've discovered a certain pitch that makes a specific place on my first valve casing vibrate. It just so happens that I typically rest my thumb on that very spot when I'm playing, so it dampens the resonance of that particular pitch. If I place my thumb on the slide saddle instead, the tone resonates freely. I assume that a finger ring would change my grip and make my horn more consistent note-to-note. Little things like that make up bigger differences.
_________________
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
View user's profile Send private message
dstpt
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Posts: 1272

PostPosted: Thu Jun 23, 2022 10:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm open to all kinds of views, which is why I posted this on TH. It does not bother me if you love or hate Bach tpts...I grew up playing them, since Texas is a Bach/Yamaha state, or at least, that's what most of the band directors push/encourage their students to buy. Having freelanced for years here, I’ve almost exclusively sat next to one of the two brands. There have certainly been some on tour with different brands. Oh, and the lead player for shows was a Benge player, although, he would sometimes play his son's Bach. His own dad owned a music store in a neighboring state, so he had a surplus of Benge tpts at home.

Anyway, since 2016 I have done my horn safari and have played various brands. I had gotten frustrated with Bach, since all of the ones I'd purchased had a deadness to them. I'd sometimes get to play on another's Bach, one that they'd purchased at the factory after having playtested 100 in a single day, and could see that there were definite differences from what I had. (Cue all Yamaha players: "If you'd only buy a Yamaha!”) I’ve also heard stories by some who have made that trek to ConnSelmer and come home empty-handed, having not found something worth even bringing back for a college student of theirs.

Now having playtested dozens of brands of Bb tpts over these past few years, and having listened to others play the same horns, I’ve resolved that ultimately a trumpet will sound like a trumpet will sound like a trumpet! Hahahaha!…especially when comparing the sound to an oboe, flute, violin, or trombone! IOW, will the “Bach core” really be heard by most audience members?! When I play alone, I like certain qualities I hear in a good Strad. (For the sake of argument, I’ll limit this conversation to what I’d call a really “good” Strad.)

Most of my Bb tpt playing is in daily practice and in a pit playing musicals, and there we’re playing into microphones. Now, how much of the “Bach core” is getting to the 3150-seat audience?! Maybe to some, few, a smidgen, none? If I’m playing a passage with the lead, where we dovetail playing the same line intermittently, then I’d want my sound to be as close to his/hers as possible. Other than that, there would be few instances where playing a different brand will matter…much, IMO. To clarify, I’m talking about professionals who are sensitive to a degree that they won’t make just any sound, but that their selection of equipment and approach to playing has a certain tonal character and level of matching with the ensemble. If I am playing 1st on a classical choral/orchestral piece by Mozart/Brahms/Beethoven/etc., then my C tpt sound will be in keeping with that setting and section. I pretty much know my tonal constraints, but this “mystery” that surrounds the “Bach core” has been somewhat evasive as I’ve heard people try to describe it through the years. Do I hear it? Yes. Is it desirable for me to have? At this point, I’m enjoying it, and I don’t see that changing.

Again for the sake of argument, let’s say there is an actual “Bach core.” How much of it is perceived by an audience member, and how frequently during a performance would/could it be reasonably perceived by most audience members? Or is it just for matching in the section, or only in isolated orchestral passages, or mainly for helping the player and/or other surrounding players to latch on to your/my center of pitch & sound, etc.? If you’re playing big band, small combo, recording sessions, latin, rock, and other settings, then all of this talk about “Bach core” might not be important at all. There might be an exception for a player who “identifies with” that “core” and “hinges” everything they do on “that sound,” so that might make an exception.

shofarguy wrote:
...Over the years following that, I picked up some hints. Zig Kanstul gave a couple of them.

He once said about his 1537 model, that was designed to capture some of the market left by the Conn-Selmer labor dispute, "I could make a trumpet sound like a Bach, but then it would have the intonation of a Bach. Why would anyone buy my horn, then? They would just buy a Bach." So, hint Number 1 is that the Bach sound is created by its acoustic faults or at least its compromises. …
Interestingly, having gotten away from Bach Bb & C tpts over the past few years and now coming back to them, I’m finding ones that have better intonation and clarity of sound than I’d experienced before. I picked up a Cleveland C that plays better in tune than any previous Bach C tpt that I’d owned, including a 2007 Chicago model. The 2002 Bach 43 that I got used about 18 months ago also is a great player, as is the 2021 Bach 37* that I just got at ITG three weeks ago. The intonation on these horns is better than I remember with previous horns, so does that mean that CS is doing better in some way, or have they made some adjustments that have positively affected intonation and yet kept the “Bach core?” I want to believe that but have no way of proving any of this.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
OldSchoolEuph
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 07 Apr 2012
Posts: 2426

PostPosted: Thu Jun 23, 2022 10:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

RandyTX wrote:
Brian,

I am no authority on this, but recall hearing people say in the past that the reason companies like Yamaha had a hard time 'replicating' that Bach 'ring' or 'core' or whatever you want to call it, had more to do with the way the horns were built, not some intrinsic artifact of pitch tendenices.

The most common thing brought forward seemed to be that Bach bells were hammered out, while Yamaha used a more mechanical process, something called 'hydroforming' if I remember correctly, which changed (dare I say deadened) the way they responded?

I don't know what Yamaha has done recently, but there's no question they are much closer to getting that sound out of their newer models than with the original Xeno's and earlier. I have no idea if they've gone to a less automated and more 'human/physical' way of forming bells, or figured out some other way, but they do sound a lot more alive, and 'ring' more than in the past.


The cookbook is where the magic is, but it's in the annealing, not the working.

Bach bells have been hydroformed for 20 years or so, but that is the blank we are talking about. The working after that point is probably pretty close to everybody else. I don't know if Yamaha uses a method that lands at a different step in the process, but I imagine it is pretty similar. As I explain in detail in the Bach book, I believe hydroforming the blank provides a more uniform, and consistently optimal result. Brett Getzen has disagreed with me on that point here, and his firm builds fine trumpets as do a number of other hammering shops. I think the "best" can be debated, but I would be surprised if anyone disagreed with the statement that hydroforming blanks makes for greater consistency (just as annealing in ovens with climate compensating controls vs freehand with a torch does)
_________________
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
Steve A
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 26 May 2006
Posts: 1799
Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Jun 24, 2022 5:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

shofarguy wrote:
Orchestras don't need much trumpet usually, for one.


It's definitely true that many orchestral pieces have small trumpet parts, but no one who's played the last few pages of a Shostakovich symphony would say this claim is broadly representative. (Or a Mahler symphony, or Bruckner, or even quite a bit of Tchaikovsky.) There's plenty of orchestral trumpet writing that requires a ton of playing from the players, particularly in view of the fact that two or three trumpets are often responsible for playing up to the same volume level as the rest of the orchestra put together.

You don't like Bach trumpets, fine. You don't have to. But the suggestion that they don't work well are extensively disproven every single day in an uncountable number of professional musical workplaces all over the world.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
dstpt
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Posts: 1272

PostPosted: Fri Jun 24, 2022 5:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

shofarguy wrote:
...Hint Number 2 came from Zig and Charles Hargett, who both told me that Conn-Selmer has at least 5 different #37 bell mandrels, so which one gives the "Bach Sound?" Bach also offers different mouth pipes to go with different bell tapers for their different models, but all are said to have that "Bach Sound." This points to something other than simple geometry. We have to consider things like bracing, port design, water keys, valve casings, etc. In other words, we have to look at the entire manufacturing processes that Bach uses to create these instruments that all are different designs, but have a characteristic "core."...
Someone has to know, is this story true?

Clerk: Mr. Bach, there’s a customer who wants a 43 bell.

VB: Well, sell him one.

Clerk: We don’t have any in stock.

VB: Take one off the wall, stamp it 43, and sell that one!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
shofarguy
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 18 Sep 2007
Posts: 7003
Location: AZ

PostPosted: Fri Jun 24, 2022 6:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Steve A wrote:
shofarguy wrote:
Orchestras don't need much trumpet usually, for one.


It's definitely true that many orchestral pieces have small trumpet parts, but no one who's played the last few pages of a Shostakovich symphony would say this claim is broadly representative. (Or a Mahler symphony, or Bruckner, or even quite a bit of Tchaikovsky.) There's plenty of orchestral trumpet writing that requires a ton of playing from the players, particularly in view of the fact that two or three trumpets are often responsible for playing up to the same volume level as the rest of the orchestra put together.

You don't like Bach trumpets, fine. You don't have to. But the suggestion that they don't work well are extensively disproven every single day in an uncountable number of professional musical workplaces all over the world.


First of all, I don't "prefer" Bach trumpets. I think Bach has made great instruments. I also think there has never been a better marketing strategy in the history of trumpet manufacturing. That is not a slam. It's a statement of admiration, as I am an entrepreneur and sometime business owner, myself.

If you read my posts, you will notice that I concede that the 37 Strad is played effectively by professional players. My focus is on amateur players and my experiences over the years playing next to them while using other makes. I have constantly had to play at the lower dynamic limits of my ability in order to blend with many amateur Bach players. I've had similar experiences with players of certain Yamaha trumpets.

My points above were addressing the factors involved in the "Bach Core" legend. I have never written that there isn't such a thing. But, I'm not a fan boy, either. I try to understand the things I become interested in and look at them from as many perspectives as I can.
_________________
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
View user's profile Send private message
OldSchoolEuph
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 07 Apr 2012
Posts: 2426

PostPosted: Fri Jun 24, 2022 6:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Classic Bach Core is a recognizable component of the spectrum produced by most Bach bells and leadpipe combinations. It can be accentuated or attenuated by materials and build elements. It is a component, NOT the totality of the spectral arc of a given horn.

Bach 1, 7, 43, 6, 37 & 72 bell horns (among many more) all have unique tonal spectra that we can recognize - including when other makers use them. Bach core is a part of all of those sounds - key words being "part of".
_________________
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
Steve A
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 26 May 2006
Posts: 1799
Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Jun 24, 2022 6:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

shofarguy wrote:
Steve A wrote:
shofarguy wrote:
Orchestras don't need much trumpet usually, for one.


It's definitely true that many orchestral pieces have small trumpet parts, but no one who's played the last few pages of a Shostakovich symphony would say this claim is broadly representative. (Or a Mahler symphony, or Bruckner, or even quite a bit of Tchaikovsky.) There's plenty of orchestral trumpet writing that requires a ton of playing from the players, particularly in view of the fact that two or three trumpets are often responsible for playing up to the same volume level as the rest of the orchestra put together.

You don't like Bach trumpets, fine. You don't have to. But the suggestion that they don't work well are extensively disproven every single day in an uncountable number of professional musical workplaces all over the world.


First of all, I don't "prefer" Bach trumpets. I think Bach has made great instruments. I also think there has never been a better marketing strategy in the history of trumpet manufacturing. That is not a slam. It's a statement of admiration, as I am an entrepreneur and sometime business owner, myself.

If you read my posts, you will notice that I concede that the 37 Strad is played effectively by professional players. My focus is on amateur players and my experiences over the years playing next to them while using other makes. I have constantly had to play at the lower dynamic limits of my ability in order to blend with many amateur Bach players. I've had similar experiences with players of certain Yamaha trumpets.

My points above were addressing the factors involved in the "Bach Core" legend. I have never written that there isn't such a thing. But, I'm not a fan boy, either. I try to understand the things I become interested in and look at them from as many perspectives as I can.


Okay, you can conclude that it's marketing if you want, and that amateur players really would sound better on Benges or WTs. I'm not sure how pertinent that is to your reference to the amount of trumpet there is in an orchestra, but suit yourself.

Personally, I think the fact that a sizeable portion of the best and most discerning trumpet players feel that Bach trumpet give them their best sounds, despite whatever ease of playing difficulties they might entail, speaks for itself, and I suspect that most of those amateur players choose them because they want to emulate their favourite players, rather than because of some mystical "core" marketing, but to each their own.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
dr_trumpet
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 22 Nov 2001
Posts: 2532
Location: Cope, IN

PostPosted: Fri Jun 24, 2022 7:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think of the Bach "standard" models, the components he actually designed to work together, as part of an overall sound concept that is the Bach sound. For example, every large bore 25 bell Bb I have played sounds to me like a 37 wuth a little more focus and a little more open blow. Every 38 Medium bore Bb I have played is the tighter version of a Bach 37 ML. The 43 bell to me adds a lightness and a brightness to the 37, but it is still the same fundamental concept of trumpet sound. The 72 bell is a more open, easier to color, and more complex sound, but still has the consistency of a singular concept that Bach (the man) had.

When I play a Bach Commercial trumpet, that fundamental is still there. It is a clear component of a singular sound concept, Bach designing a trumpet to create a concept of sound. When the instruments were constructed by Conn-Selmer with heavier gauge brass, the tone was altered by mass, but still, the concept of sound was that which Bach himself created via design.

I know of some things coming down the pipe at Bach which will be unique, but unfortunately, I cannot discuss them. Some unique approaches to instrument design, in this case, instrument refinement, are being done. Keep your eyes and ears open in the near future for something exciting and perhaps a little unique in the history of design and refinement at Bach.

Enjoying the discussion a great deal, as seeing others' feelings and ideas always helps me to define and refine mine.

AL
_________________
Dr. Albert L. Lilly, III DM
Artist/Clinician for Vincent Bach Trumpets (Conn-Selmer)
Principal Trumpet, Hendricks Symphony (Avon, IN)
Arranger/Composer; Lilly Music
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
shofarguy
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 18 Sep 2007
Posts: 7003
Location: AZ

PostPosted: Fri Jun 24, 2022 7:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Steve A wrote:
shofarguy wrote:
Steve A wrote:
shofarguy wrote:
Orchestras don't need much trumpet usually, for one.


It's definitely true that many orchestral pieces have small trumpet parts, but no one who's played the last few pages of a Shostakovich symphony would say this claim is broadly representative. (Or a Mahler symphony, or Bruckner, or even quite a bit of Tchaikovsky.) There's plenty of orchestral trumpet writing that requires a ton of playing from the players, particularly in view of the fact that two or three trumpets are often responsible for playing up to the same volume level as the rest of the orchestra put together.

You don't like Bach trumpets, fine. You don't have to. But the suggestion that they don't work well are extensively disproven every single day in an uncountable number of professional musical workplaces all over the world.


First of all, I don't "prefer" Bach trumpets. I think Bach has made great instruments. I also think there has never been a better marketing strategy in the history of trumpet manufacturing. That is not a slam. It's a statement of admiration, as I am an entrepreneur and sometime business owner, myself.

If you read my posts, you will notice that I concede that the 37 Strad is played effectively by professional players. My focus is on amateur players and my experiences over the years playing next to them while using other makes. I have constantly had to play at the lower dynamic limits of my ability in order to blend with many amateur Bach players. I've had similar experiences with players of certain Yamaha trumpets.

My points above were addressing the factors involved in the "Bach Core" legend. I have never written that there isn't such a thing. But, I'm not a fan boy, either. I try to understand the things I become interested in and look at them from as many perspectives as I can.


Okay, you can conclude that it's marketing if you want, and that amateur players really would sound better on Benges or WTs. I'm not sure how pertinent that is to your reference to the amount of trumpet there is in an orchestra, but suit yourself.

Personally, I think the fact that a sizeable portion of the best and most discerning trumpet players feel that Bach trumpet give them their best sounds, despite whatever ease of playing difficulties they might entail, speaks for itself, and I suspect that most of those amateur players choose them because they want to emulate their favourite players, rather than because of some mystical "core" marketing, but to each their own.


Steve,
I think differently than you do, apparently. I don't jump to conclusions about anything. I gather input from as many sources as possible and build a perspective based around what I have learned. I don't "come to the conclusion," I consider the aspect.

I have preferences, like you do. I have thoughts and observations, like you do. Mine are different than yours, I guess. I like to include anecdotes that people who know better than I have shared with me over the years. They expand my knowledge base. I include them so that the members of this forum can grow in their knowledge, as well.

It's part of my personal makeup to resist "the crowd" thinking. I like to "fly solo" ...with the other soloists.
_________________
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
View user's profile Send private message
kehaulani
Heavyweight Member


Joined: 23 Mar 2003
Posts: 8964
Location: Hawai`i - Texas

PostPosted: Fri Jun 24, 2022 7:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The point's well made that a crappy player will get a crappy sound and one may not tell what the heck they're playing. But that doesn't mean that the horns don't have a core sound, in the ideal.

But regarding Bach, I tend to categorize the "Bach sound" as a Strad. 180-37. The further away one gets from that, the less "Bach core" one gets.

Is it that complicated?
_________________
"If you don't live it, it won't come out of your horn." Bird

Yamaha 8310Z Bobby Shew trumpet
Benge 3X Trumpet
Getzen Capri Cornet
Adams F-1 Flghn
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bethmike
Veteran Member


Joined: 21 Jan 2020
Posts: 192
Location: NW of ORD

PostPosted: Fri Jun 24, 2022 7:34 am    Post subject: Bach Reply with quote

AL wrote
Quote:
I know of some things coming down the pipe at Bach


Funny wording!

I have been told my tone on my 180S37 with a Melk MTV525 leadpipe is very nice. And I am just a pretty good hobbyist.

I like my Bach. And my Kanstul, and my Olds............
_________________
Bach190ML43
Kanstul 1001
Bach NY7
Yamaha 631 Flugel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    trumpetherald.com Forum Index -> Horns All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
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