Jazz T-Bone: The homepage for Joe Jackson

Saturday March 22, 2003

Hey folks.

Yesterday morning I was able to get over to the exhibit hall and play many of the horns that Dillon brought down. They were just setting up, but Jose Vidal was nice enough to hustle some horns out as I would not have the chance to make it to the exhibit during their operating hours (Based on this, I want to plug Jose, Eddie Clark and Dillon Music for their attention to customer service...).

As a jazz player I wanted to post my impression of the different equipment I tried. I'm hesitant to do so, because I don't want to throw off the vibe of "this horn was better than that horn" - that's not my purpose. Just felt like maybe posting my impressions about the horns.

Since I basically went there for the purpose of trying Shires, I'll start with them:

Horn #1: .508 slide, 8 inch yellow bell, #2 leadpipe:

First impression was of an extremely open horn - More open than my Bach 36. Lush, dark tone. Lots of overtones across the range of the horn. The low and medium registers play extraordinarily well. Upper register, again fairly big, smooth core. All of the notes slot great, but natural slurs have an extremely neutral sound.

No bad notes on the horn, and no notes that really resonate more than others like you find on vintage bachs and kings. The high Bb partial feels a little flat - in fact the entire horn felt a little low even w/tuning slide pushed in.

Horn #2: .508 slide, 7 1/2 inch yellow bell, #2 leadpipe:

The character of this horn was almost identical to #1 except that the horn had a bit more point to it and the 7th & 8th partials required a bit less effort to focus. The high F, E Natural and Eb were more practical on this horn, in terms of being able to play up to and back down from them.

Horn #3: .500 slide, 7 1/2 inch yellow bell, #2 leadpipe:

This horn had a more pure and centered sound, but I found all of the Shires horns had the exact same fundamental sound characteristics regardless of the options. The differences had to do with the size of the core, relative "heaviness" of the sound, and focus/compacness of notes in the middle and upper register.

Horn #4: .508 slide, 7 1/2 inch yellow bell, #1 leadpipe:

Once I changed to the #1 leadpipe the horn began to feel more like the classic medium-sized jazz horns (e.g. King 3B, 6H, Williams 6).

Again, sound characteristics still the really brilliant dark sound with lots of overtones. More compact in the upper reg.

Unfortunately I did not have the opportunity to try a .500-bore slide with a number 1 leadpipe.

My personal conclusion is that the Shires are extraordinary instruments. They remind me of my old Earl Williams trombones, and would be something that I would take a long, hard look at if the majority of my work was not big band lead trombone. The mechanics of the horn (workmanship, slide feel and mechanics) was as good as I've ever seen.

Horn #5: Rath medium-bore trombone, rose brass bell:

I apologize that I do not know if this was the .500-bore R10 or the .500/.510 R1, as Jose did not have the list out yet (remember he was still setting up).

Much like the Shires, this horn felt like a great horn for someone who switches between playing large-bore instruments in orchestras and wind ensembles and needs something they can immediately identify with when they go to their jazz gigs.

A fairly large-core sound, with a heavy dose of overtones. I found it to be a bit darker than the Shires, but the slot was more pronounced, and it had an overall slightly more compact core, seemed more directional. (I don't try to judge projection from behind the horn, but the sound and feel made me thing the Rath probably projects just a bit more that the .508-bore #1 leadpipe Shires).

This horn was closer to what I was looking for, but still not really in the ballpark - this is not the horn's fault, just that I need something with a lot of edge and a lot of projection, and a real compact core.

And the punchline to my experience: I met Jose needing to buy a horn and intending to fall in love with a Shires or a Rath, and what gem did I discover?

King 2B 2102L Jiggs Whigham model, lightweight slide

This horn seems to represent the perfect compromise for me, a horn with close to the projection of my Bach 12, but without the "trumpetlike" (as described by my sectionmates) character in the high register.

This is the fastest-responding horn I have ever played, kind of like a Martin Urbie Green but with a less diffuse sound and much more focused feel. The notes jump out of the horn. The horn moves around very cleanly, with very neutral "slot". Very pure sound everywhere, in fact, extremely pure sound.

We took this horn over to the band hall and Jeff Martin and Ben Patterson and some other folks whose opinions I trust listened to it along with the 1949 Bach 12LT, my 1969 Earl Williams model 6, and a 1961 King 2B.

Up close the Williams wins, no question. Only the 2B JW was close in terms of the quality, brilliance and depth of overtones, and most importantly the transmission of what folks felt was the essential personality of "my" sound. (this has roundly been the #1 complaint of the Bach 12, is that it dosn't convey "my sound"...)

Then we had them stand about 40-50 feet away and I played some big band trombone-type stuff. Obviously the 12 projected the most, with a compact core, but again with very little overtones. One guy charaterized it as lots of point, but little body. Playing the 12 loud is what was most likely to make people laugh uncomfortably, as if to say, "is it OK that this kind of sound is occuring? Is something going to break or is someone going to be hurt?" (a phenomena which I love, by the way - just not really true to my musical personality).

The Williams did not seem to project nearly as well as the Kings and the Bach, which is probably why the Earl is my favorite horn if I was not currenly a lead trombone player.

The 2B Whigham projected with almost as much point as the Bach, but in addition to the point people thought that much of the essential body of the sound carried along with the point.

The feel of the horn playing loud is going to take some getting used to, but at normal volumes I already feel almost as comfortable moving around on it as I do my Williams. So I reckon I'm going to stick with this one.

So anyway, that's the punchline to the story - went in with a checkbook prepared to drop $2,000 plus on a Shires and instead bought a $950 King. Oh well, the money will get spent on something else. Maybe I'll take all of you guys out for dinner next time we all get together.

Peace and bro'hood,

Joe

Back To Rants