| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Trumpetstud
Veteran Member
Joined: 17 Mar 2021
Posts: 208
|
 Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2023 5:44 pm Post subject: Older instruments vs New |
 |
|
It there a benefit or hinderance to playing older instruments vs New Instruments?
I think the obvious response is that the newer instruments may have technology on their side.
So, I have a '70's bach strad and I'm thinking of getting a Couesnon Flugel.
I know they don't have a 3rd valve slide but I've seen a video of Tom Harrell playing his and he added the trigger (think that's what it's called.
Opinions older vs new instruments?
I have so many things going on in my head! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Goby
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 11 Jun 2017
Posts: 652
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2023 6:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Couesnon flugelhorns are nice instruments, and a repair tech can easily add a 3rd slide trigger if you think the horn needs it. Make sure to check that the plating on the valves is in good shape and that you have a French taper flugelhorn mouthpiece.
To address your other question:
Most of the technology in manufacturing is finding ways to make things "good enough" for a lower price. In the old days, the only way to make a trumpet was what we now call the "traditional" way. The process of making an instrument without industrial equipment is much more labor intensive, but yields a better playing instrument, generally speaking. The downside is that it takes more time and is therefore much more expensive. Take Bach for example, almost every professional player prefers the New York era horns to the modern ones. Those old NY Bach bells were made by cutting a sheet of brass and hammering it into shape before spinning it on a mandrel, and the new ones are made by a giant machine that stamps out a flower-shaped pattern which can be turned into a finished bell very quickly.
https://bachloyalist.com/bell-manufacturing-process/
There are other methods like bending bells with pitch, lead, or ice. Most modern factories fill bells with soapy water and freeze them before bending. Back in the day, there were no industrial freezers, so bells were filled with lead or with pitch in order to bend them. Pitch and lead are pretty nasty to work with, but usually yield a more concentric bend, which is why some custom makers still use them today.
As you can hopefully see, "technology" does not always make for a better product, just one that can be made faster and at a lower price.
On the other hand, the ability to analyze instruments with computers is a great advantage. You can determine the intonation pattern of a trumpet beyond the limit of human hearing with a microphone and a computer program. There is also the ability to make parts and tooling that are precise and consistent thanks to CNC lathes.
With all this technology available, surely manufacturers would come up with new designs that sound even better than originals, yet how many manufacturers (large and small) are still copying vintage instruments? How many (unsponsored) professionals still choose vintage instruments?
That's not to say that new instruments are bad and old ones are good. Not at all. Most old horns have leaky valves, plus you have to worry about red rot, repairs, and cracks in tubing that might leak air. New instruments should have tight valves and slides, and a guarantee that they are ready for professional use right out of the box. You can buy a great playing instrument for a reasonable price from a number of brands and know that the quality is consistent with no chance of buying a "lemon" horn. But if you're after the vintage sound, there is no substitute for the real thing, just be prepared to either spend top dollar for excellent condition or on restoration work to get it into professional playing condition. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Brassnose
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 07 Mar 2016
Posts: 2053
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2023 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Modern instruments can be made to higher precision levels, simply because modern machinery can be more precise. Personally I have times when I gravitate towards vintage instruments and other times I prefer modern instruments. There is nothing wrong with either as long as they are in working order and allow you to do what you want.
The trouble with the web today is simply that there is „an even better trumpet just around the corner“. As I said in another thread, I’d be perfectly happy with my Bach I bought in the days when the internet was just about invented. If I didn’t know about all those other cool trumpets, who knows, maybe I’d still only own the Blessing and the Bach and nothing else.
Over the last few years I have come to the conclusion that it’s more about the specific instrument. If I don’t play a horn, a mouthpiece, a mute for a longer time and naturally pick another horn of my list below, I’ll usually sell it. No need to keep unused stuff.
So, all in all there is a benefit in playing clean instruments in good shape that you get along with. There is a hindrance in playing dirty, halfway functional instruments or instruments you struggle with otherwise. Old vs. new, not so much.
_________________
2019 Martin Schmidt eXcellence
1992 Bach 43GH/43
1989 Kühnl & Hoyer Model 15 flugel
1980/2023 Custom Blessing Scholastic C 😎
1977 Conn 6B
1951 Buescher 400 Lightweight
AR Resonance, Frate, Klier |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LittleRusty
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 12664
Location: Gardena, Ca
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2023 9:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Goby wrote: | | Most of the technology in manufacturing is finding ways to make things "good enough" for a lower price. In the old days, the only way to make a trumpet was what we now call the "traditional" way. The process of making an instrument without industrial equipment is much more labor intensive, but yields a better playing instrument, generally speaking. The downside is that it takes more time and is therefore much more expensive. |
I’m not sure what “industrial equipment” means. For me “industrial equipment” is equipment used by industry. That might be a coal fired forge or a CNC machine.
But let’s go with traditional instead.
I would say the opposite of the point quoted above. Of the total number of trumpets made the “traditional” way the vast majority are poorer playing instruments. I would also point out that the vast majority of instruments made that way are hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars cheaper.
There is a reason why the term TSO, trumpet shaped object, was popularized over the last few decades.
For me the reason for the difference is whether the trumpets are made by caring craftsmen with an eye to detail, accuracy and quality not the techniques used to build them.
Case in point, just before and during the Bach strike quality dropped. This wasn’t due to a change in manufacturing techniques. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stuartissimo
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 17 Dec 2021
Posts: 990
Location: Europe
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2023 11:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Goby pretty much nailed it. Yes, modern technology can create superior quality products...but mostly in theory. The companies that are able to afford such technology generally tend to use it to optimize their production process rather than create a superior product. That's not to say that the quality of the trumpets didn't improve as well, but it's important to keep in mind that not all gains are spent on improving the product itself (and as was pointed out, some changes were made for other reasons like environmental or worker safety). Combined with the player's ability to compensate for technical flaws, it's the reason vintage instruments can still keep up with (or in some cases even outplay) modern trumpets.
That's the way of the modern world: quantity over quality.
_________________
1975 Olds Recording trumpet
1997 Getzen 700SP trumpet
1955 Olds Super cornet
1939 Buescher 280 flugelhorn
AR Resonance mouthpieces |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Trumpetstud
Veteran Member
Joined: 17 Mar 2021
Posts: 208
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2023 7:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Thanks for the insights! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Goby
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 11 Jun 2017
Posts: 652
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2023 8:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LittleRusty wrote: |
I’m not sure what “industrial equipment” means.
...
Of the total number of trumpets made the “traditional” way the vast majority are poorer playing instruments.
...
Case in point, just before and during the Bach strike quality dropped. This wasn’t due to a change in manufacturing techniques. |
To address your points in order:
When I say industrial equipment, I mean industrial processes (aided by equipment) that speed up the creation of an instrument. This includes lathes making parts accurately, but also includes hydroformed bells, bells made from drawn tubing rather than hand-hammered sheet, and one-piece valve casings.
You are correct that most old instruments are not good. Student instruments outnumber professional instruments, and there were inexpensive and poorly made instruments back in the old days just like there are today. In this discussion, I am talking about the top echelon of trumpets from historical manufacturers like Bach, Besson, Calicchio, and others. For every NY Bach Strad, there are 100 old Pan-Americans and Conn Directors. Among the top tier of instruments, high-quality vintage instruments almost always play better than modern ones when condition is equal.
Bach quality had steadily declined before the strike. You can go through the Bach loyalist and count all of the cost-cutting measures they implemented after Bach's departure from the company. To list a few things: 2 piece valve casings changed to 1-piece, nickel-silver tubing changed to brass on standard weight horns, bending parts with ice rather than pitch or lead, instruments got heavier in Elkhart compared to Mt Vernon (that means a lower scrap rate and more room to sand away flaws). The pre-strike 180 series Bach is almost unrecognizable compared to its predecessors from Mt. Vernon and NY. Breaking up their union was the worst thing the company could have done, but part of a long chain of decisions to put profits over quality. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jeirvine
Veteran Member
Joined: 29 Apr 2022
Posts: 337
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2023 8:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Goby wrote: |
You are correct that most old instruments are not good. Student instruments outnumber professional instruments, and there were inexpensive and poorly made instruments back in the old days just like there are today. In this discussion, I am talking about the top echelon of trumpets from historical manufacturers like Bach, Besson, Calicchio, and others. For every NY Bach Strad, there are 100 old Pan-Americans and Conn Directors. Among the top tier of instruments, high-quality vintage instruments almost always play better than modern ones when condition is equal.
|
Agreed. That said, I would put a 40s or 50s Olds "student" Special or Ambassador up against most modern horns in terms of build and playing quality.
_________________
1932 King Silvertone Artist Bore
1945 Buescher 400
1946 Olds Super
1947 Olds Super Cornet
1948 Couesnon flugelhorn
1951 Olds Special
1956 Martin Committee
1964 Olds Recording
1968 Bach 329 C
1996 Bach 37 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Goby
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 11 Jun 2017
Posts: 652
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2023 8:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jeirvine wrote: |
Agreed. That said, I would put a 40s or 50s Olds "student" Special or Ambassador up against most modern horns in terms of build and playing quality. |
Olds had remarkable quality across their whole range. If you look at old advertising pamphlets and catalogs from the 40's and 50's, they were quite expensive, close in price to a NY Bach. A lacquered Bach Strad was $350 in 1956, which is approximately $3950 in modern dollars, adjusting for inflation. In 1957, an Olds Recording was $289.50, about $3150 today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LittleRusty
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 12664
Location: Gardena, Ca
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2023 9:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Goby wrote: | | LittleRusty wrote: |
I’m not sure what “industrial equipment” means.
...
Of the total number of trumpets made the “traditional” way the vast majority are poorer playing instruments.
...
Case in point, just before and during the Bach strike quality dropped. This wasn’t due to a change in manufacturing techniques. |
To address your points in order:
When I say industrial equipment, I mean industrial processes (aided by equipment) that speed up the creation of an instrument. This includes lathes making parts accurately, but also includes hydroformed bells, bells made from drawn tubing rather than hand-hammered sheet, and one-piece valve casings.
|
I wouldn’t have used that term but I was just intending to acknowledge I wasn’t sure what you meant.
| Goby wrote: | | You are correct that most old instruments are not good. Student instruments outnumber professional instruments, and there were inexpensive and poorly made instruments back in the old days just like there are today. In this discussion, I am talking about the top echelon of trumpets from historical manufacturers like Bach, Besson, Calicchio, and others. For every NY Bach Strad, there are 100 old Pan-Americans and Conn Directors. Among the top tier of instruments, high-quality vintage instruments almost always play better than modern ones when condition is equal.
|
But I never mentioned old instruments. I was addressing trumpets currently being made.
I was also using the complete data set not limiting it to a small subset.
The OP asked about older vs new. New includes more than just the top echelon.
| Goby wrote: | | Bach quality had steadily declined before the strike. You can go through the Bach loyalist and count all of the cost-cutting measures they implemented after Bach's departure from the company. To list a few things: 2 piece valve casings changed to 1-piece, nickel-silver tubing changed to brass on standard weight horns, bending parts with ice rather than pitch or lead, instruments got heavier in Elkhart compared to Mt Vernon (that means a lower scrap rate and more room to sand away flaws). The pre-strike 180 series Bach is almost unrecognizable compared to its predecessors from Mt. Vernon and NY. Breaking up their union was the worst thing the company could have done, but part of a long chain of decisions to put profits over quality. |
Okay, in addition to poor morale there were changes to the manufacturing processes. It is interesting to note that the processes created by these changes you mention are now the traditional processes from 50-60 years ago. (Geeze am I that old?)
My point was that inexperienced or uncaring workers using traditional methods can, and do, make inferior instruments using the same processes that workers who produce the top quality instruments.
I think new industrial equipment like a lathe with a digital readout vs one using manual measurements will not only be cost cutting due to lower man hour costs but can also ensure better more consistent quality. Although amortizing the purchase cost might show otherwise. 🤷♂️ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dayton
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 24 Mar 2013
Posts: 2044
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2023 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Opinions older vs new instruments? |
There are terrific older horns and terrific newer horns. It's all about which is right for you.
Really old horns may have a blow that is quite different from most modern horns, and may lack some of the intonation aids that most modern horns have. [Edit: They may also have different mouthpiece tapers.] But if you can live with that and like the sound, why not?
Parts can also be a challenge. Repair shops might have bins with parts for Bach, Yamaha and Getzen, or can easily get them...but probably don't for King Liberty, French Besson Mehas or Holton Super Collegiates.....So repairs might take longer and cost more compared to modern trumpets. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
starkadder
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 01 May 2008
Posts: 542
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2023 12:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
One of the issues in the old vs new is that at all times a certain fraction of what is made is junk. Junk does not last. Junk is not loved and cared for.
There were junk horns made in the "good old days".
There are junk horns made today with modern technology and materials.
When we talk about old horns, we already have a firm opinion about which models are well-made and are from builders who developed a reputation for quality. Of those, the ones that survived were loved and cared for because they were good instruments.
Today's new horns have the potential to become tomorrow's old horns. It's stupid to lump the Monettes with the Medninis.
Age != quality. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LittleRusty
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 12664
Location: Gardena, Ca
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2023 1:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| starkadder wrote: | One of the issues in the old vs new is that at all times a certain fraction of what is made is junk. Junk does not last. Junk is not loved and cared for.
There were junk horns made in the "good old days".
There are junk horns made today with modern technology and materials.
When we talk about old horns, we already have a firm opinion about which models are well-made and are from builders who developed a reputation for quality. Of those, the ones that survived were loved and cared for because they were good instruments.
Today's new horns have the potential to become tomorrow's old horns. It's stupid to lump the Monettes with the Medninis.
Age != quality. |
I mostly agree except that being a survivor indicates it is good.
It might have been a closet queen purchased new but hardly or never used while sitting in a closet. Or NOS. While rare it does happen. Both of these could be good or bad. 🤷♂️
Or the survivor might have been great but was played to death. Or the player might not have cared for it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Trumpetstud
Veteran Member
Joined: 17 Mar 2021
Posts: 208
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2023 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Someone brought up student instruments. I've seen on "student" trumpets the device that holds the Lyre (sorry, not sure what that's called". So I've seen those on Couesnon flugels (I believe). So, were Couesnon's student trumpets back in the day? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rogerrr
Veteran Member
Joined: 16 Feb 2020
Posts: 144
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2023 6:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
my Selmer MK6 sax has a lyre holder...and it ain't no student instrument
_________________
Sax player learning cornet & trumpet...and occasionally a little bit of trombone.
( so don't confuse me with an experienced player ) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nieuwguyski
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 06 Feb 2002
Posts: 2349
Location: Santa Cruz County, CA
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2023 10:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My '58 Olds Recording has a lyre holder. Amusingly enough, so does my Holton Superbone. As far as flugels go, Yamaha 631/731 flugels had lyre holders at the same time Yamaha made the 2310 "student" flugel.
I wonder if professional horns (at least used to) have lyre holders to satisfy the requirements of military bands.
_________________
J. Notso Nieuwguyski |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LittleRusty
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 12664
Location: Gardena, Ca
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sd4f
Veteran Member
Joined: 30 Dec 2009
Posts: 102
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2023 12:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
A good instrument is a good instrument. I wouldn't get too caught up in old versus new, insofar as examining what you have before you.
One way or another, a well made old instrument, is still going to be a great instrument, and if its playing characteristics suit, then able to get something usually for a fraction of the price, to what a comparable modern, new production instrument may cost. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Halflip
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 09 Jan 2003
Posts: 1927
Location: WI
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2023 4:22 am Post subject: Re: Older instruments vs New |
|
|
| Trumpetstud wrote: | | It there a benefit or hinderance to playing older instruments vs New Instruments? |
Addressing the OP's original question, I am going to quote myself from another thread that deals with a very similar topic:
When it comes to horns, I have a big collection, most of which could be characterized as "vintage" (or at least "classic"). I enjoy them, but since I am strictly an amateur (and perhaps "dilettante" would be more realistic), I don't need to perform credibly at an audition, blend with a section, etc.
On the other hand, for those who earn a living playing and for whom a horn is a tool which must serve them to a certain minimum standard, a new pro-quality instrument is likely going to do the job better given advancements in both design and manufacturing methods.
I was in a local music store a few years ago where I heard one of the employees trying out saxophones in a demo room. He was playing really well, and later when he rang up a purchase for me, I chatted with him for a few minutes about his playing. He turned out to play professionally, so I asked him if he ever got a chance to try classic saxophones like the Selmer Mark VI or the Buescher Super 400. He replied that he had, but that his modern Yanagisawa was so much easier to play well that he would never trade it for one of those old "legendary" models. For him, the "vintage" horns made him work too hard, so as professional tools they didn't make the grade.
In case you're interested, this is the thread:
https://www.trumpetherald.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=143755
In that thread, my post got me into a big 'back-and-forth' with another poster who was caught up in an enthusiast's fervor for old horns (he was trying to build a collection by buying another used horn every month on a limited budget!). His position ultimately boiled down to a value proposition -- new pro horns cost 'x' times as much as a vintage pro horn, but will never play 'x' times better. My point was that a full-time professional will gladly pay the price of a new horn for even a 5% improvement in playability if that gain helps them win an audition or keep their chair.
At the end of the day, YMMV, especially depending upon what you need from an instrument. I will add this -- I think that the increased consistency and precision of modern manufacturing techniques, properly applied to the steps required to produce a top-tier professional instrument, result in a greater number of 'honeys' and a reduced number of 'lemons' going out the door.
_________________
"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"
Last edited by Halflip on Sun Dec 10, 2023 12:13 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Halflip
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 09 Jan 2003
Posts: 1927
Location: WI
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2023 4:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
On the topic of Couesnon flugelhorns -- I have one. Charlie Melk added a third valve slide trigger, which was helpful. But take a look at the older Courtois flugel (the generation before the current "direct air" valve block architecture). It was also made as a stencil horn under the Leblanc and Noblet brands. I have one of those, too, and I think it has a prettier tone than my Couesnon. It is Mike Metheny's flugelhorn of choice.
_________________
"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" |
|
| 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
|
