True, Monel and I haven't gotten along - so far. This means that the valves have always been rather sluggish for me. Someone suggested that it could be my personal chemistry - what I blow into the horn. (I'm not talking food here.) Perhaps that is because monel for the valves I have experienced may have had a higher copper and/or zinc percentage making it easier to oxidize? One of them was a CG Benge which, after five years of suffering I had replated and now it is still a find horn forty years later. Educate me, please.
LJ
I got all excited when I saw how many replies this post had. Thinking we were going to go into some interesting piston talk. Imagine my disappointment when I found out most were about literally (see what I did there) nothing to do about pistons.
Fair enough! I can make a contribution that is germane to the subject of the thread and also speaks to the question in LJ's original post.
As early as the 1930's, Conn was promoting the development and use of "Crysteel" valves ("smooth as crystal and hard as steel") in its trumpets and cornets. Based on information from the Conn Loyalist website, Conn catalogs and marketing materials, and posts from TH members, I gather that the Crysteel process involved brazing pistons together using a Monel alloy, burnishing them via a mechanical process in order to harden them (since exposing Monel to high temperatures tends to soften it, as Goby mentioned), and then nickel plating them.
The Crysteel process is mentioned at around 5:10 in the following pre-WWII Conn factory tour video:
The term "Crysteel" leads some to believe that Conn used stainless steel pistons, but this is not the case. Crysteel (as a term) was coined by a perhaps overly creative marketing team, the same team that came up with "Airfloat slides", "Cali-bore", "Connite", "Coprion", "Electro-D bell", "Lustre-Conn", "Vocabell", and so on.
If anyone has more accurate information about Conn's Crysteel valves and/or process, please let me know. _________________ "He that plays the King shall be welcome . . . " (Hamlet Act II, Scene 2, Line 1416)
"He had no concept of the instrument. He was blowing into it." -- Virgil Starkwell's cello teacher in "Take the Money and Run"
Joined: 15 Nov 2001 Posts: 1832 Location: Terre Haute, IN USA
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2024 12:04 pm Post subject:
LJ wrote:
True, Monel and I haven't gotten along - so far. This means that the valves have always been rather sluggish for me...
I've had good and not so good Monel and nickel plated valves. In most cases problems were resolved with serious cleaning and a change in valve oil - sometimes a light re-lapping of the valves to get an even matte finish.
It may be my imagination but it seemed that clean up after lapping was quicker with nickel plated valves.
I have a 102 year old Conn with a 1992 Anderson valve plating job running happily with standard Ultra-Pure and a UMI 7X (.470 CG) with Monel valves that need the to be re-lapped and cleaned about two dozen times - finally playing with no problems - using Denis Wick with Teflon.
(Serious cleaning requires Simple Green, alcohol. and a cleaning rod with cheese cloth.)
If you do a search on the topic, you will find many players who believe that their personal chemistry is a factor in valve oil performance. Others, including myself, feel that different trumpets respond better with a specific brand and weight of oil.
Oh - I did some searching on the Stainless Steel question - Adam Getzen posted that
Quote:
The thing is, it is not more technically difficult to manufacture stainless steel pistons. We could very well make them. You cannot, however, switch SS pistons into any horn without it greatly affecting how our horns play. Redesigning all of our horns and giving up on years of having arguably the most reliable pistons in the industry is not something we are eager to do.
So I guess stainless can affect the way the horn responds - all other factors remaining equal.
To the OP, have you considered simply taking a horn you like that has Monel pistons and having the valves rebuilt by someone who does that kind of work (Dr. Valve, Mark Metzler, Charlie Melk, etc.)?
The process would machine the pistons and then nickle plate them and fit them to their cylinders (following a re-hone of the cylinders). These days it costs $600-$800 to do all three valves. _________________ "He that plays the King shall be welcome . . . " (Hamlet Act II, Scene 2, Line 1416)
"He had no concept of the instrument. He was blowing into it." -- Virgil Starkwell's cello teacher in "Take the Money and Run"
That is exactly what I did with the CG Benge and it's a fine horn now.
Re: the original post. I am still trying to discover current, active manufacturers who use nickel-silver pistons.
The discussions here have been interesting, but maybe Getzen/Edwards and DQ have exhausted the list? They must be kind of lonely.
People that use "Anyways" or "I could care less" get me every time.
And I lol was the one who was sticking up for you.
Louise Finch wrote:
Apparently I have been annoying but using the word “ anyway” in the correct way.
"Anyway" is okay. I think "Anyways" (with an "s" on the end) is what Mr. Getzen was identifying as improper usage. Your post (with the correct usage) probably made him recall the error other people make.
This. I was trying to highlight proper use while pointing out the annoyance of adding the S.
Also it was always my understanding that Crysteel valves were chrome plated not nickel. Could be wrong though. _________________ Brett Getzen
President
Getzen Company
Joined: 26 Sep 2004 Posts: 1843 Location: Lake Charles, LA
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2024 2:59 pm Post subject:
[quote="Louise Finch"][quote="Halflip"]
Louise Finch wrote:
Getzen wrote:
Louise Finch wrote:
Anyway back on topic.
People that use "Anyways" or "I could care less" get me every time.
And I lol was the one who was sticking up for you.
Louise, The term "I could care less" is an all too often seen\heard saying here in the US. It drives me crazy because it literally has the complete opposite meaning of what is intended, which is of course "I could NOT care less". If one "could care less" then they currently have some sliver of care about a topic and are saying there is a way for them to have less care or interest. On the other hand, if one "could NOT care less", that means they have zero care or interest in something.
Louise wrote:
"If so, I wonder why he quoted my post above? I'm not sure lol that Brits and Americans always speak the same language. I understand, "I couldn't care less", but I've never heard of "I could care less" or "anyways". Maybe they are commonly misused phrases in the US, equivalent to "would of" instead of "would've" in the UK, or unbelievably pre-madonna from a School Teacher. I think she meant prima donna. She wasn't lol talking about one of my kids, but writing a secretary's report from the brass band, saying that we are a happy band with no prima donnas. All of this is going over my head lol." _________________ Larry Woods
LDWoods
All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2, 3, 4Next
Page 2 of 4
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
