| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
VetPsychWars
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 7196
Location: Greenfield WI
|
 Posted: Wed May 12, 2010 8:51 pm Post subject: I feel like starting an argument |
 |
|
Before WWII, Conn, King, Buescher, and some other makers were turning out trumpets and cornets that played well and people were buying... by the thousands.
Vincent Bach made perhaps maybe a thousand. Maybe a little more.
What the heck? These Bach instruments sucked. The intonation wasn't nearly as good as these others.
Stupid mythology.
Tom
_________________
1950 Buescher Lightweight 400 Trumpet
1949 Buescher 400 Trumpet
1939 Buescher 400 Cornet
GR65M, GR65 Cor #1 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Crazy Finn
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 27 Dec 2001
Posts: 8336
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
|
| Posted: Wed May 12, 2010 9:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Vincent Bach capitalized on the post-war public school band boom. This probably primarily happened after they were bought by Selmer and production increased - though I am speculating on that.
Obviously, Olds and Conn also did quite well in this areas for a time. Not sure how Bach became top dog. Marketing? Did the others falter when Bach was surging (Conn was bought and production moved to Texas, etc)? I would be interesting to know. Bach was already established as the standard by the time I became part of the American public school band program in the 80's - so I don't really know.
I'm sure that many will say that Bach became best because of it's quality. However one actually feel about Bach quality - I kind of doubt that this is the case simply because that's not how things in the market usually work. In theory, the best products are the ones that succeed, but in reality, it's the ones that have the best name recognition, marketing, and market coverage.
_________________
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 |
|
|
lmf
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 20 May 2007
Posts: 2190
Location: Indiana USA
|
| Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 9:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Tom,
Was more money spent for artist endorsements, advertising, perks to high school/college music directors, and other incentives by Bach during that time? Did Bach claim to be more innovative? Did professionals, bands and orchestras choose Bach instruments for some reason? Did the other major brands not do as much marketing back then as Bach may have done?
If more was done by Bach in those areas....it may have "turned the tide" in favor of the brand.
If this were not the case, one would have to continue to research for reasons that Bach pulled ahead of the others.
Best wishes,
Lloyd |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LittleRusty
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 12664
Location: Gardena, Ca
|
| Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 10:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Obviously the fundamental premise is wrong since one cannot reconcile it with the facts.
The reason Bach became dominant is that the trumpets were clearly better and preferred by the discriminating professional. One who can truly tell the difference between nylon and brass valve guides if they both existed in those days.
Tom, just tweaking your chain since you stated you wanted to argue. 
[edit] geeze who profread this post?
Last edited by LittleRusty on Thu May 13, 2010 2:44 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J.P.S.
Veteran Member
Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Posts: 151
Location: D.C.
|
| Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 10:38 am Post subject: Sound |
|
|
I will take the bait.
I don't think it was ever about pitch.
Bach's sound different. I know they are often harder to play but we choose to sacrifice comfort for the sake of the sound they produce.
In situations where sound doesn't matter so much, there are lots of other brands of trumpet that are easier to play. Sometimes "easier" is the way to go. Other times sound is what matters.
And, yes, there has been plenty of criticism leveled at the Bach sound. Interestingly, people still play them and win jobs on them.
BTW, I love my Holton model 47 Bb. I play it everyday. But there is no substitute for my Bach C.
John |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jazz_trpt
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 25 Nov 2001
Posts: 5734
Location: Savoy, Illinois, USA
|
| Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 11:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
"Excuse me, is this the right room for an argument?"
_________________
Jeff Helgesen
Free jazz solo transcriptions! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Crazy Finn
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 27 Dec 2001
Posts: 8336
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
|
| Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 12:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LittleRusty wrote: | | The reason Bach became dominant is tha the trumpets were clearly better and preferred by the discriminating professional. One who can truely tell the difference between nylong and brass valve guides if they both existed in those days. |
I understand why Bach has maintained it's hold (more or less) on it's spot as the standard trumpet in junior high and high school - it's the band directors and college music education. In college, future band directors take instrumental methods classes. These instructors often give pointers as to which brasses are good, which mallets are well-made, which sticks are well balanced, and which clarinets and flutes are recommended. They also see what the trumpeters in their college band play - Bach Strads, mostly. So, that's what they tell their band students to get when they reach that point. Many directors aren't trumpet players, so this is their formative knowledge that informs their suggestions and recommendations. Trumpet players also, having grown up with Bachs and a standard, likely have one as well, so that's what they recommend often too. Knowing this, it's easy to understand how Bach maintained it's hold on this market.
However, HOW did Bach get there? As Tom points out, there was a time when Conn and Olds and Buescher and the others all mingled in the trumpet market and Bach was a small maker - smaller than those others. Obviously, Selmer bought the company and boosted production to match some of those other companies - but where did it's market share (at the expense of those others) come from?
I really have doubts that the fact that Bach might have been popular among classical professionals is why it became the predominant high school band trumpet starting in the 70's (maybe - I wasn't in school then, so feel free to correct me). I also doubt that the Bach "Sound" is the reason. It might be why those same classical professionals chose those instruments, but there's a big gap in between those markets that needs to be bridged.
Let me explain.
If you're a average High School trumpeter or Junior High trumpeter, an average musician (don't take private lessons or anything), or even the parent of those trumpeters - you likely don't know who Bud Herseth or Phil Smith are and you certainly don't know what they play. I'm sorry, but this is definitely true. Here on TH, since we bother to post and read, we're students of the trumpet and know things about the instrument and history, far more than the average kid who goes home and plays his Rubank (or whatever) book for an hour or so a week - and that's the majority of trumpet players and also the majority of the market for Bach.
Anyway food for thought - or maybe food for a fight...
_________________
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 |
|
|
Dale Proctor
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 26 May 2005
Posts: 9375
Location: Heart of Dixie
|
| Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 1:20 pm Post subject: Re: I feel like starting an argument |
|
|
| VetPsychWars wrote: | ...What the heck? These Bach instruments sucked. The intonation wasn't nearly as good as these others.
Stupid mythology.
Tom |
So, have you played a large enough sample of pre-WWII Bach trumpets to form this opinion, or did you spend last night in a Holiday Inn Express? 
_________________
"Brass bands are all very well in their place - outdoors and several miles away ." - Sir Thomas Beecham |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nieuwguyski
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 06 Feb 2002
Posts: 2349
Location: Santa Cruz County, CA
|
| Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 2:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bach was based in New York. Conn and Buescher were based in Elkhart, King in Cleveland. No offense to Elkhart or Cleveland, but Vincent Bach had access to more players who would influence future generations.
_________________
J. Notso Nieuwguyski |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lmf
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 20 May 2007
Posts: 2190
Location: Indiana USA
|
| Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 2:39 pm Post subject: Re: I feel like starting an argument |
|
|
| Dale Proctor wrote: | | VetPsychWars wrote: | ...What the heck? These Bach instruments sucked. The intonation wasn't nearly as good as these others.
Stupid mythology.
Tom |
So, have you played a large enough sample of pre-WWII Bach trumpets to form this opinion, or did you spend last night in a Holiday Inn Express? |
Dale,
Tom has to practice somewhere since his neighbor lady doesn't like the sound of his brass instruments.
Maybe the Holiday Inn Express has soundproof walls? After all, Tom has to practice somewhere or his intonation will begin to suffer big time.
Best wishes,
Lloyd
Last edited by lmf on Thu May 13, 2010 2:46 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LittleRusty
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 12664
Location: Gardena, Ca
|
| Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 2:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Crazy Finn wrote: | | LittleRusty wrote: | | The reason Bach became dominant is that the trumpets were clearly better and preferred by the discriminating professional. One who can truly tell the difference between nylon and brass valve guides if they both existed in those days. |
I understand why Bach has maintained it's hold (more or less) on it's spot as the standard trumpet in junior high and high school - it's the band directors and college music education. In college, future band directors take instrumental methods classes. These instructors often give pointers as to which brasses are good, which mallets are well-made, which sticks are well balanced, and which clarinets and flutes are recommended. They also see what the trumpeters in their college band play - Bach Strads, mostly. So, that's what they tell their band students to get when they reach that point. Many directors aren't trumpet players, so this is their formative knowledge that informs their suggestions and recommendations. Trumpet players also, having grown up with Bachs and a standard, likely have one as well, so that's what they recommend often too. Knowing this, it's easy to understand how Bach maintained it's hold on this market. |
A commonly repeated premise which I don't agree with. Sure it might have had a part but it certainly isn't the main reason.
After all Apple tried the same ploy with their computers. They supply them to educators and schools for discounted pricies since the future teachers and business leaders will be the ones making the purchasing recommendations and decisions. Many of them are not computer users, so this is their formative knowledge that informs their suggestions and recommendations.
I am ignoring your point about trumpet players recommending them since they own one. That wouldn't have applied as Bach was gaining market share. It would have actually worked against them since they were the underdog.
Anyway, look where Apple is. An also ran in the business world, except in some niche areas. They currently are gaining market share among some consumer computer users, but in my experience, and yours may vary, not in business.
I suspect Bach's success was more the right quality at the right price at the right time combined with the right marketing.
Another premise I don't accept is that all of the other competitors had better quality at that time. Just as we don't have hard evidence that Bachs of that era were bad, we don't have hard evidence that anyone else was better. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LittleRusty
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 12664
Location: Gardena, Ca
|
| Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 2:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nieuwguyski wrote: | | Bach was based in New York. Conn and Buescher were based in Elkhart, King in Cleveland. No offense to Elkhart or Cleveland, but Vincent Bach had access to more players who would influence future generations. |
Interesting theory. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
VetPsychWars
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 7196
Location: Greenfield WI
|
| Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LittleRusty wrote: | | nieuwguyski wrote: | | Bach was based in New York. Conn and Buescher were based in Elkhart, King in Cleveland. No offense to Elkhart or Cleveland, but Vincent Bach had access to more players who would influence future generations. |
Interesting theory. |
One that has merit, in my opinion.
I was up late and goofy, by the way. But seriously, there had to be a reason why the focus shifted. Benge, for example, was another boutique brand and it didn't take off while Bach did.
Tom
_________________
1950 Buescher Lightweight 400 Trumpet
1949 Buescher 400 Trumpet
1939 Buescher 400 Cornet
GR65M, GR65 Cor #1 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LittleRusty
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 12664
Location: Gardena, Ca
|
| Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 6:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| VetPsychWars wrote: | | LittleRusty wrote: | | nieuwguyski wrote: | | Bach was based in New York. Conn and Buescher were based in Elkhart, King in Cleveland. No offense to Elkhart or Cleveland, but Vincent Bach had access to more players who would influence future generations. |
Interesting theory. |
One that has merit, in my opinion.
I was up late and goofy, by the way. But seriously, there had to be a reason why the focus shifted. Benge, for example, was another boutique brand and it didn't take off while Bach did.
Tom |
Tom,
I actually think this is an interesting topic and my humorous attempt to "provoke" you was meant in fun.
In the early 70's the trumpet players in my high school thought that Benge was the best brand. There was a lot of debate about "hand" made vs "machine" made at that time too. The Bachs were machine made and the Benges hand. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Crazy Finn
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 27 Dec 2001
Posts: 8336
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
|
| Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 7:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LittleRusty wrote: | | Crazy Finn wrote: | | I understand why Bach has maintained it's hold (more or less) on it's spot as the standard trumpet in junior high and high school - it's the band directors and college music education... Knowing this, it's easy to understand how Bach maintained it's hold on this market. |
A commonly repeated premise which I don't agree with. Sure it might have had a part but it certainly isn't the main reason.
After all Apple tried the same ploy with their computers. They supply them to educators and schools for discounted pricies since the future teachers and business leaders will be the ones making the purchasing recommendations and decisions. Many of them are not computer users, so this is their formative knowledge that informs their suggestions and recommendations. |
Apple's failure to capture market share is an interesting comparison. However, one of the primary differences that dictated Apple's failure to catch on is it's proprietary nature - you either bought a genuine Apple at 3x the cost or an IBM clone for much cheaper. Businesses operate on the bottom line, so this is important. Also, it was easier and cheaper for programmers to write for the MSDos system (licensing) than the Apple OSes (of the Apple II and Mac). In addition, the IBM/286/386 didn't really become dominant in the home market until Windows 3.1.
If you live in out-state anywhere in the pre-internet era - say the 80's, and you don't know anything about trumpets, you ask your Band Director. What does your Band Director know about trumpets? He knows that the kids in his college band played Bachs. He knows the trumpet professor (who taught Brass methods) played a Bach and recommended one. The local music store pretty much has student trumpets and the only pro model available is a Bach Strad (37 obviously). Thus, that's what the kids in his HS band play, so that's what you'll get.
Feel free to offer an alternative theory. What's erroneous about it? You buy what your private teacher (if you have one) or your Band Director thinks is good. Nowadays, it's easier to study alternatives with the internet and forums such as this, so it's less of an influence than before. However, it still happens today. For example, what do I know about french horns? Not that much - the Conn 8D and Holton Farkas are good models. My fellow lesson teacher has about the same knowledge as me. What to my two advanced horn players have? Conn 8D's - the "Bach Strad" for horn players.
_________________
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 |
|
|
Crazy Finn
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 27 Dec 2001
Posts: 8336
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
|
| Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LittleRusty wrote: | | nieuwguyski wrote: | | Bach was based in New York. Conn and Buescher were based in Elkhart, King in Cleveland. No offense to Elkhart or Cleveland, but Vincent Bach had access to more players who would influence future generations. |
Interesting theory. |
Indeed. This is a interesting theory about how Bach came to dominate the ranks of legit professions - one that seems to have some potential merit (in my opinion).
_________________
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 |
|
|
VetPsychWars
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 7196
Location: Greenfield WI
|
| Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 7:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hypothesis:
After Selmer bought out Bach, they marketed aggressively. By that time, they owned Buescher... what other brands did they own by then?
Tom
_________________
1950 Buescher Lightweight 400 Trumpet
1949 Buescher 400 Trumpet
1939 Buescher 400 Cornet
GR65M, GR65 Cor #1 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Crazy Finn
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 27 Dec 2001
Posts: 8336
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
|
| Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 8:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| VetPsychWars wrote: | Hypothesis:
After Selmer bought out Bach, they marketed aggressively. By that time, they owned Buescher... what other brands did they own by then?
Tom |
I don't think they owned any of the other big ones, yet.
Olds and Benge were still independent.
Conn was owned by some clueless corporation starting sometime in the late 60's I think. Eventually they moved their production to Abilene, Texas. I'm sure the Conn experts can be more precise.
Conn and King were joined in the UMI conglomerate during the 80's. Selmer didn't buy UMI until the 2000's. That's around the same time that they bought Leblanc (Holton, Martin).
_________________
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 |
|
|
LittleRusty
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 12664
Location: Gardena, Ca
|
| Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 8:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Crazy Finn wrote: | | [Feel free to offer an alternative theory. What's erroneous about it? You buy what your private teacher (if you have one) or your Band Director thinks is good. |
So the OP indicated that other horns dominated the market before Bach. So therefore the majority of the teachers were exposed to other horns, not Bach. Therefore they would be inclined to recommend horns other than Bach.
So obviously when Bach was building its initial reputation it couldn't be due to your theory. Perhaps later after they had already gotten to a majority, but not intially. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Crazy Finn
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 27 Dec 2001
Posts: 8336
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
|
| Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 8:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LittleRusty wrote: | | Crazy Finn wrote: | | [Feel free to offer an alternative theory. What's erroneous about it? You buy what your private teacher (if you have one) or your Band Director thinks is good. |
So the OP indicated that other horns dominated the market before Bach. So therefore the majority of the teachers were exposed to other horns, not Bach. Therefore they would be inclined to recommend horns other than Bach.
So obviously when Bach was building its initial reputation it couldn't be due to your theory. Perhaps later after they had already gotten to a majority, but not intially. |
I agree completely. All these other companies had a share of a fairly diverse market prior to and after WWII (after which Bach was still a small maker), so teachers at that time would be familiar with a much broader range of potential horns: Buescher, Conn, Olds, Cleveland, King, Holton, and some others I'm forgetting. Benge and Schilke were later, I think - and much less prolific in terms of production, at least initially.
That's why I too wondering how Bach got this position. If you read my previous hypothesis, it's only describing how I think Bach maintained their market share, not how they achieved it in the first place. That is what I'd like to know, as well. I wasn't there at the time, so I don't know what happened. On the other hand, I have witnessed the gradual rise of Yamaha's presence in the school band market. But, as I said, I wasn't there when Bach began it's conquest of this segment.
I think we're actually on the same page, here. 
_________________
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 |
|
|
|
|
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
|
