You sound great on it! As us old guys get older, weight becomes a real concern, and these modern horns are not getting lighter! I did notice quite a bit of F linkage noise. I hope there is a way to quiet that down. It could be a problem if one uses it in the studio.
For all you equipment gurus and horn fanatics out there (who else would watch this stuff?! Haha), I’ll attempt a basic explanation of WHY the carbon fiber slide makes a trombone sound & feel the way Kieth explained/demonstrated. The combination of much lower slide mass and the higher material damping coefficient of carbon fiber composite (relative to brass/copper alloys) leads to sound attenuation, which changes the characteristic brilliance and vibrance of a brass instrument’s tone. This is most evident in the transient (first moment) of the sound, which is an important part of how humans identify and differentiate sounds. The transient helps distinguish a trombone sound from a clarinet or saxophone sound of equal volume. In other words - it is a large part (along with the supersonic shock waves!) of what characterizes a cylindrical brass instrument’s sound & makes a trombone sound like a trombone! I’ll attempt to go one level deeper: A material’s response to vibrations at frequencies above its resonant frequency is largely dependent on its mass/inertia (rather than flexibility/stiffness, which dominates below its natural resonance frequency). Lower mass allows for easier high frequency response and greater mass inhibits that response (largely through high inertia). The greatly reduced mass of the carbon slide requires a much lower threshold of amplitude before causing the material to vibrate, especially at higher frequencies. The higher damping coefficient of the carbon composite, relative to brass alloys (which are among the materials with lowest damping), means that when the material is caused to vibrate, it loses more of the energy to internal friction/thermal loss. Thus, instead of ringing with a relatively longer decay, like copper alloys might (imagine a ringing bell/chime), that vibration quickly dissipates. This explains why an ultra-light carbon slide feels instantly responsive/resonant even to relatively small player input, but then also attenuates some of that sound. If you analyze the waveforms, I believe you’d find that the upper-mid and higher frequencies (2k+hertz) that shape a notes’ characteristic transient and timbre are disproportionately/more attenuated with the carbon slide. This results in a “super responsive feel”, yet “dull sounding” instrument (lacking some of the instrument’s characteristic clarity and brilliance), in contrast to a copper alloy slide (of any practical mass, really). All this is not to say that the sound becomes indistinguishable as a trombone when built from carbon fiber, but I would certainly argue that it does become less “trombone-ish” in character to some extent. And attempts by the player to overcome this tendency necessarily require more energy/effort in sound production (effectively playing louder with more compression, relative to a standard brass horn). Some players may find this sacrifice to be justified in order to reduce the mass of the instrument, for ergonomic/medical reasons. Others might also be sold on the “cool factor” or benefits in damage/deformation resistance granted by carbon fiber’s high stiffness/modulus. It is probably an ideal horn for recreational outdoor adventures, etc…. By the way, I see no reason why someone couldn’t re-design a version of the trombone that adjusts for the tendencies of carbon fiber construction, in order to achieve an end result that matches our traditional aural image for the instrument. This is where Butler/DaCarbo could, IMO, really make a lasting impact on the instrument’s future, beyond selling as a niche instrument that re-uses designs that were honed for many years according to the results obtained using copper alloy construction. A development of new designs is in order, if carbon composites are to become sonically equal or prefereable to brass trombones. [This is all largely informed by my extensive studies on acoustics and material science, which I pursued in order to understand instrument function and design (brass instruments and guitars).]
I was inclined to challenge your pontifications and your frankly dismissive attitude, but to what end? I believe that, unless you are prepared to research and manufacture such a new instrument, yourself, perhaps the real test here is for an individual to actually purchase and play the instrument of their own choosing. The most significant “deadening” I heard when I began playing my Butler equipment was the apparent loss of overtones heard by my left ear, while playing the horn. Other musicians, listening in front of the bell, (and the recordings I made to hear for myself) detected far less of a tonal difference. I suggest that the vibrations of the actual tubing may contribute somewhat less to the net sound of the instrument than does the vibration of the air column within said tubing. But then again, my decades of being an engineer, an acoustician, and a musician have led me to what appears to be a different approach to the evaluation of sound. I suggest there is ample room for differences in approaches and conclusions.
We have done extensive blindfold testing with brass and our carbon fiber horns and every test we have done results in a close to 50 50 split on determining which horn was brass or carbon fiber. Meaning, out front the two materials sound the same. There is a difference to the player and as Keith has pointed out it is right focus of the air stream that achieves the best resonance. I personally feel that the tendency is to over-blow the horn, when the exact opposite achieves the best results. Let the horn do the work. If you want scientific documentation about carbon fiber vs brass here it is: This is part of a review from Doug Yeo. "An article by Hannes Vereecke and Wilfried Kausel, “Carbon Reinforced Polymer: An Alternative to Brass?” International Trumpet Guild Journal, Vol. 37, No. 1 (October 2012), 41-43. This is an excellent description of the acoustical properties of brass and carbon fiber as applied to brass instrument bells. The second may sound a bit surprising: Hannes Vereecke, The Sixteenth-Century Trombone: Dimensions, Materials and Techniques (Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 2016), 41-44. Vereecke is an acoustician who has studied musical instruments, particularly trumpets and trombones. His book on the sixteenth-century trombone is, to my mind, the best single volume devoted to construction and the playing properties of the Renaissance trombone, the instrument we popularly call the sackbut. In his discussion about the acoustics of brasswind instruments, he devotes several pages to a comparison of brass and carbon fiber. He concludes that: “Playing tests revealed that the listeners were not able to distinguish between the sounds of the two instruments [brass and carbon fiber]. Therefore, it can be concluded that while the bell material affects primarily the playability of the instrument, in this case the difference in sound may be beneath the threshold of detection. CFRP [carbon fiber reinforced composite] has found a place in contemporary trombone design, and the same improvement in responsiveness is also confirmed there.” I believe there are two design factors that determine if a CF instrument feels dull or feels more resonant to the player. Building methods: We build our bells using prepreg carbon fiber that results in a resin to CF ratio of 60% carbon and 40% resin. This is the strongest, lightest and stiffest way to build carbon fiber composites. The stiffer material results in more resonance. DaCarbo uses a resin infusion method that results in a 60% resin 40% CF. They build beautiful instruments but to me feel less resonate compared to our horns in (very biased) playing tests. Secondly the most important factor is wall thickness of the bell. After testing many bells with various thicknesses we decided on a bell that is .03 (comparable to most brass bells). Any more than this, the bell feels more dull and less than .03 feels brittle and edgy. I found your comments to be interesting and if you have ideas on design I would love to hear them. I do believe that there is no substitute for real world testing.
@@popinmid I certainly didn’t intend my post to be dismissive of the instrument in question - why would I go to the trouble if that were the case? And why would I have studied this topic intensely if I didn’t believe it has great potential?! I love this stuff and posted to reply to a previous post/question. You’re exactly correct that the sound out front is all propagated from the standing wave of the internal air mass in the horn. My previous explanation pertains to how that standing wave is affected when the material vibrates (and to what extent). Sorry for the confusion. The overall effect of the attenuation that occurs is certainly noticeable to the player, but is a more subtle coloration of the resulting tone out front. And, studies have indicated that changes to the thickness/vibrations of the material in the last 1/3 of the horn’s tubing (after the diameter increases significantly) affect the standing wave far less. This suggests that a carbon fiber bell makes much less difference to the tone than a heavy, LW, or carbon outer slide. As an outer slide gets lighter in mass, it starts to have a noticeable effect on the player feedback and transient response in the sound. The fact that listeners in blind tests cannot identify which bell is carbon or brass, if both bells are identical in taper, doesn’t surprise me that much (depending on the listener). Player sensory feedback (in the left ear and on the chops) really makes a difference in a player’s trained/automated response while playing. In other words, well-practiced players’ bodies react based on the feedback they’re used to receiving. That’s why adjusting the Edwards “harmonic pillars” works (but make no audible difference to listeners, besides the results of a comfortable player). But, many discerning professionals players (who record themselves often using good equipment) even find that removing or changing the rubber crook bumper from the slide makes a noticeable difference in the response of the instrument. I agree, based on my own tests, but the change seems to scale with the slide’s mass - Less difference on heavier slides. It is logical. And, the players are also the ones who notice because they spend hours per day listening to their own tone. They know the change that happened. Random listeners have DRASTICALLY less context to help them differentiate. And that difference has little bearing on their life anyway. If half of listeners can tell the difference, that still suggests an audible difference. For those of us who are concerned about that last 1-5% difference in response feedback and overtones in our sound, the difference is notable. It is up to you whether you like it or not. If you’re playing on a mic in a room so loud your acoustic sound is lost, then the sound engineer may have more control of your sound than the horn. Your playing is still affected by the sensory feedback of the horn, until you acclimate. Anyway, I was just trying to explain the basics of how CFRP reacts differently than brass alloys in the context of musical instruments. Take it or leave it. I can provide academic sources for all my explanations, but nobody’s paying me to write this, haha. If I have time, maybe I’ll do it…
@@20Posaunen I would be interesting in reading these sources/papers. As someone who's also interested in acoustic properties of Carbon fiber, I would like to understand not only the effect of change in material (carbon vs brass) in the bell specifically but also weight and relative composition of brass/metal throughout the instrument. Particularly, I understand it that DaCarbo instruments tend to be heavier and use a higher proportion of brass parts (in the tuning slide, neckpipe, crook, etc) in comparison to the Butlers.
I have been waiting for you to do a comparison of this Bass Trombone. I guess I am confused a bit regarding the sound, however. At once, you mention that it is "Responsive," but at the same time, one must put a bit more air than in a brass horn to make it "Come alive." Do these sound more "Alive" or "Less flat" live than is conveyed in a video? It does have a stable sound on the one hand with that solid core, but do the colors really come out? I would like to know what we are sacrificing here but I guess it is a need for an "Energetic air flow." Still, very impressive and it looks fun. What type of situations would you recommend this horn for? Would a studio situation be best due to its lack of "Resonance/bouncing Sound?" Another great review! Thank you as always!
Please see my main comment. Let me know if it helps answer your questions. I’ve played and listened to various Butler, Shires prototype, BAC, etc., horns with carbon fiber composite slides and/or bells, etc. This video demonstrates well the resulting sound characteristics of carbon fiber construction, especially if you listen back-to-back with Kieth’s demos of the Greenhoe or Shires bass bones.
@@20Posaunen Well, thank you that is quite an education. I am wondering what type of new design you might envision that would allow the carbon fiber to sound a bit more brassy. It seems that the cylindrical nature of the trombone that produces that "transient tone" you speak of pretty much must remain the same to achieve that sound. Which is to say, I wonder what a new design of this futuristic trombone might be. So you assign this to the "niche" category. Okay, what niche would be best, musically that is. I could not see it in a symphonic orchestra, but perhaps a small ensemble? Again, it sounds nice as a recording instrument or maybe, something ambient, filling in the background. I will check out the other comparisons with the Shires and Greenhoe. Thanks.
@@SpockMonroe I’d guess the current niche market is primarily those who need the lower carrying weight and who want dent-resistance for rougher gig conditions. As for the design shift, I was just thinking of maybe choosing bell/leadpipe tapers and a bore & bell diameter that bring out some of the frequencies and response that the CFRP may slightly dampen. It wouldn’t necessarily be a drastic change - I just meant that basing a CF model off a 6H sounds like a great idea, but to get a more accurate 6H sound, the design might actually need some non-6H specs. I could have written that more coherently in the first post. BAC has made some slides with CFRP tubes & alloy crook & brass cross brace, which I found to have a slightly less diffuse/covered sound than most carbon slides. Either way, musically I *personally* prefer the sound, feel, and response brass alloy instruments in all situations. I also like to have enough mass/inertia in my left hand to help reduce any unwanted movement caused by the slide arm wagging to and fro - keeps the mouthpiece stable on the chops without disturbing the sound. But, again, I also think the use of carbon fiber in horns is VERY cool and worth continued pursuit and development. If I could afford to have every horn I want, there’d be at least one Butler in my studio! And I invite/challenge Butler DaCarbo, etc., to continue development and make a horn that changes my mind! Oh, I do some family brass quintet caroling each Christmas from a pontoon boat on the lake where my mom lives. That would be an ideal setting for a Butler bass trombone IMO, but I unfortunately can’t justify the cost until they start throwing $ at us in exchange for spreading holiday cheer! Haha
Well, thank you again for taking the time to provide such a well-written, thoughtful response. Your clear and concise writing reflects a mastery of a few related topics and reminds me of a composer friend of mine. Glad to hear you would like a Butler in your studio. So would I! Of course, I also would like to have a studio! Also, the floating pontoon gig sounds ideal and fun, too. Happy Holidays to you!@@20Posaunen
Keith, what are your thought on those valves for a Bach bass modification? Obviously, they won't be as open as axials. For reference, I really like Shires axials but am more than happy with their rotors.
Not if you hold it correctly. The weight is carried by the grip of the ring finger and pinky, pressing towards your palm. If you’re stressing the middle finger, your horn needs adjusting or your grip needs changing.
You sound great on it! As us old guys get older, weight becomes a real concern, and these modern horns are not getting lighter! I did notice quite a bit of F linkage noise. I hope there is a way to quiet that down. It could be a problem if one uses it in the studio.
Could probably replace the valves if ud like
For all you equipment gurus and horn fanatics out there (who else would watch this stuff?! Haha), I’ll attempt a basic explanation of WHY the carbon fiber slide makes a trombone sound & feel the way Kieth explained/demonstrated.
The combination of much lower slide mass and the higher material damping coefficient of carbon fiber composite (relative to brass/copper alloys) leads to sound attenuation, which changes the characteristic brilliance and vibrance of a brass instrument’s tone. This is most evident in the transient (first moment) of the sound, which is an important part of how humans identify and differentiate sounds. The transient helps distinguish a trombone sound from a clarinet or saxophone sound of equal volume. In other words - it is a large part (along with the supersonic shock waves!) of what characterizes a cylindrical brass instrument’s sound & makes a trombone sound like a trombone!
I’ll attempt to go one level deeper:
A material’s response to vibrations at frequencies above its resonant frequency is largely dependent on its mass/inertia (rather than flexibility/stiffness, which dominates below its natural resonance frequency). Lower mass allows for easier high frequency response and greater mass inhibits that response (largely through high inertia).
The greatly reduced mass of the carbon slide requires a much lower threshold of amplitude before causing the material to vibrate, especially at higher frequencies. The higher damping coefficient of the carbon composite, relative to brass alloys (which are among the materials with lowest damping), means that when the material is caused to vibrate, it loses more of the energy to internal friction/thermal loss. Thus, instead of ringing with a relatively longer decay, like copper alloys might (imagine a ringing bell/chime), that vibration quickly dissipates.
This explains why an ultra-light carbon slide feels instantly responsive/resonant even to relatively small player input, but then also attenuates some of that sound. If you analyze the waveforms, I believe you’d find that the upper-mid and higher frequencies (2k+hertz) that shape a notes’ characteristic transient and timbre are disproportionately/more attenuated with the carbon slide. This results in a “super responsive feel”, yet “dull sounding” instrument (lacking some of the instrument’s characteristic clarity and brilliance), in contrast to a copper alloy slide (of any practical mass, really).
All this is not to say that the sound becomes indistinguishable as a trombone when built from carbon fiber, but I would certainly argue that it does become less “trombone-ish” in character to some extent. And attempts by the player to overcome this tendency necessarily require more energy/effort in sound production (effectively playing louder with more compression, relative to a standard brass horn). Some players may find this sacrifice to be justified in order to reduce the mass of the instrument, for ergonomic/medical reasons. Others might also be sold on the “cool factor” or benefits in damage/deformation resistance granted by carbon fiber’s high stiffness/modulus. It is probably an ideal horn for recreational outdoor adventures, etc….
By the way, I see no reason why someone couldn’t re-design a version of the trombone that adjusts for the tendencies of carbon fiber construction, in order to achieve an end result that matches our traditional aural image for the instrument. This is where Butler/DaCarbo could, IMO, really make a lasting impact on the instrument’s future, beyond selling as a niche instrument that re-uses designs that were honed for many years according to the results obtained using copper alloy construction. A development of new designs is in order, if carbon composites are to become sonically equal or prefereable to brass trombones.
[This is all largely informed by my extensive studies on acoustics and material science, which I pursued in order to understand instrument function and design (brass instruments and guitars).]
I was inclined to challenge your pontifications and your frankly dismissive attitude, but to what end? I believe that, unless you are prepared to research and manufacture such a new instrument, yourself, perhaps the real test here is for an individual to actually purchase and play the instrument of their own choosing. The most significant “deadening” I heard when I began playing my Butler equipment was the apparent loss of overtones heard by my left ear, while playing the horn. Other musicians, listening in front of the bell, (and the recordings I made to hear for myself) detected far less of a tonal difference. I suggest that the vibrations of the actual tubing may contribute somewhat less to the net sound of the instrument than does the vibration of the air column within said tubing. But then again, my decades of being an engineer, an acoustician, and a musician have led me to what appears to be a different approach to the evaluation of sound. I suggest there is ample room for differences in approaches and conclusions.
We have done extensive blindfold testing with brass and our carbon fiber horns and every test we have done results in a close to 50 50 split on determining which horn was brass or carbon fiber. Meaning, out front the two materials sound the same. There is a difference to the player and as Keith has pointed out it is right focus of the air stream that achieves the best resonance. I personally feel that the tendency is to over-blow the horn, when the exact opposite achieves the best results. Let the horn do the work.
If you want scientific documentation about carbon fiber vs brass here it is: This is part of a review from Doug Yeo.
"An article by Hannes Vereecke and Wilfried Kausel, “Carbon Reinforced Polymer: An Alternative to Brass?” International Trumpet Guild Journal, Vol. 37, No. 1 (October 2012), 41-43. This is an excellent description of the acoustical properties of brass and carbon fiber as applied to brass instrument bells. The second may sound a bit surprising: Hannes Vereecke, The Sixteenth-Century Trombone: Dimensions, Materials and Techniques (Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 2016), 41-44. Vereecke is an acoustician who has studied musical instruments, particularly trumpets and trombones. His book on the sixteenth-century trombone is, to my mind, the best single volume devoted to construction and the playing properties of the Renaissance trombone, the instrument we popularly call the sackbut. In his discussion about the acoustics of brasswind instruments, he devotes several pages to a comparison of brass and carbon fiber. He concludes that:
“Playing tests revealed that the listeners were not able to distinguish between the sounds of the two instruments [brass and carbon fiber]. Therefore, it can be concluded that while the bell material affects primarily the playability of the instrument, in this case the difference in sound may be beneath the threshold of detection. CFRP [carbon fiber reinforced composite] has found a place in contemporary trombone design, and the same improvement in responsiveness is also confirmed there.”
I believe there are two design factors that determine if a CF instrument feels dull or feels more resonant to the player. Building methods: We build our bells using prepreg carbon fiber that results in a resin to CF ratio of 60% carbon and 40% resin. This is the strongest, lightest and stiffest way to build carbon fiber composites. The stiffer material results in more resonance. DaCarbo uses a resin infusion method that results in a 60% resin 40% CF. They build beautiful instruments but to me feel less resonate compared to our horns in (very biased) playing tests. Secondly the most important factor is wall thickness of the bell. After testing many bells with various thicknesses we decided on a bell that is .03 (comparable to most brass bells). Any more than this, the bell feels more dull and less than .03 feels brittle and edgy.
I found your comments to be interesting and if you have ideas on design I would love to hear them. I do believe that there is no substitute for real world testing.
I can't find lightweight slides. Why?
@@popinmid
I certainly didn’t intend my post to be dismissive of the instrument in question - why would I go to the trouble if that were the case? And why would I have studied this topic intensely if I didn’t believe it has great potential?!
I love this stuff and posted to reply to a previous post/question.
You’re exactly correct that the sound out front is all propagated from the standing wave of the internal air mass in the horn. My previous explanation pertains to how that standing wave is affected when the material vibrates (and to what extent). Sorry for the confusion. The overall effect of the attenuation that occurs is certainly noticeable to the player, but is a more subtle coloration of the resulting tone out front.
And, studies have indicated that changes to the thickness/vibrations of the material in the last 1/3 of the horn’s tubing (after the diameter increases significantly) affect the standing wave far less. This suggests that a carbon fiber bell makes much less difference to the tone than a heavy, LW, or carbon outer slide. As an outer slide gets lighter in mass, it starts to have a noticeable effect on the player feedback and transient response in the sound.
The fact that listeners in blind tests cannot identify which bell is carbon or brass, if both bells are identical in taper, doesn’t surprise me that much (depending on the listener). Player sensory feedback (in the left ear and on the chops) really makes a difference in a player’s trained/automated response while playing. In other words, well-practiced players’ bodies react based on the feedback they’re used to receiving. That’s why adjusting the Edwards “harmonic pillars” works (but make no audible difference to listeners, besides the results of a comfortable player).
But, many discerning professionals players (who record themselves often using good equipment) even find that removing or changing the rubber crook bumper from the slide makes a noticeable difference in the response of the instrument. I agree, based on my own tests, but the change seems to scale with the slide’s mass - Less difference on heavier slides. It is logical.
And, the players are also the ones who notice because they spend hours per day listening to their own tone. They know the change that happened.
Random listeners have DRASTICALLY less context to help them differentiate. And that difference has little bearing on their life anyway. If half of listeners can tell the difference, that still suggests an audible difference.
For those of us who are concerned about that last 1-5% difference in response feedback and overtones in our sound, the difference is notable. It is up to you whether you like it or not.
If you’re playing on a mic in a room so loud your acoustic sound is lost, then the sound engineer may have more control of your sound than the horn. Your playing is still affected by the sensory feedback of the horn, until you acclimate.
Anyway, I was just trying to explain the basics of how CFRP reacts differently than brass alloys in the context of musical instruments. Take it or leave it. I can provide academic sources for all my explanations, but nobody’s paying me to write this, haha. If I have time, maybe I’ll do it…
@@20Posaunen I would be interesting in reading these sources/papers. As someone who's also interested in acoustic properties of Carbon fiber, I would like to understand not only the effect of change in material (carbon vs brass) in the bell specifically but also weight and relative composition of brass/metal throughout the instrument. Particularly, I understand it that DaCarbo instruments tend to be heavier and use a higher proportion of brass parts (in the tuning slide, neckpipe, crook, etc) in comparison to the Butlers.
I have been waiting for you to do a comparison of this Bass Trombone. I guess I am confused a bit regarding the sound, however. At once, you mention that it is "Responsive," but at the same time, one must put a bit more air than in a brass horn to make it "Come alive." Do these sound more "Alive" or "Less flat" live than is conveyed in a video? It does have a stable sound on the one hand with that solid core, but do the colors really come out? I would like to know what we are sacrificing here but I guess it is a need for an "Energetic air flow." Still, very impressive and it looks fun. What type of situations would you recommend this horn for? Would a studio situation be best due to its lack of "Resonance/bouncing Sound?" Another great review! Thank you as always!
Please see my main comment. Let me know if it helps answer your questions.
I’ve played and listened to various Butler, Shires prototype, BAC, etc., horns with carbon fiber composite slides and/or bells, etc. This video demonstrates well the resulting sound characteristics of carbon fiber construction, especially if you listen back-to-back with Kieth’s demos of the Greenhoe or Shires bass bones.
@@20Posaunen Well, thank you that is quite an education. I am wondering what type of new design you might envision that would allow the carbon fiber to sound a bit more brassy. It seems that the cylindrical nature of the trombone that produces that "transient tone" you speak of pretty much must remain the same to achieve that sound. Which is to say, I wonder what a new design of this futuristic trombone might be. So you assign this to the "niche" category. Okay, what niche would be best, musically that is. I could not see it in a symphonic orchestra, but perhaps a small ensemble? Again, it sounds nice as a recording instrument or maybe, something ambient, filling in the background. I will check out the other comparisons with the Shires and Greenhoe. Thanks.
@@SpockMonroe
I’d guess the current niche market is primarily those who need the lower carrying weight and who want dent-resistance for rougher gig conditions.
As for the design shift, I was just thinking of maybe choosing bell/leadpipe tapers and a bore & bell diameter that bring out some of the frequencies and response that the CFRP may slightly dampen. It wouldn’t necessarily be a drastic change - I just meant that basing a CF model off a 6H sounds like a great idea, but to get a more accurate 6H sound, the design might actually need some non-6H specs. I could have written that more coherently in the first post.
BAC has made some slides with CFRP tubes & alloy crook & brass cross brace, which I found to have a slightly less diffuse/covered sound than most carbon slides.
Either way, musically I *personally* prefer the sound, feel, and response brass alloy instruments in all situations. I also like to have enough mass/inertia in my left hand to help reduce any unwanted movement caused by the slide arm wagging to and fro - keeps the mouthpiece stable on the chops without disturbing the sound.
But, again, I also think the use of carbon fiber in horns is VERY cool and worth continued pursuit and development.
If I could afford to have every horn I want, there’d be at least one Butler in my studio! And I invite/challenge Butler DaCarbo, etc., to continue development and make a horn that changes my mind!
Oh, I do some family brass quintet caroling each Christmas from a pontoon boat on the lake where my mom lives. That would be an ideal setting for a Butler bass trombone IMO, but I unfortunately can’t justify the cost until they start throwing $ at us in exchange for spreading holiday cheer! Haha
Well, thank you again for taking the time to provide such a well-written, thoughtful response. Your clear and concise writing reflects a mastery of a few related topics and reminds me of a composer friend of mine. Glad to hear you would like a Butler in your studio. So would I! Of course, I also would like to have a studio! Also, the floating pontoon gig sounds ideal and fun, too. Happy Holidays to you!@@20Posaunen
Keith, what are your thought on those valves for a Bach bass modification? Obviously, they won't be as open as axials. For reference, I really like Shires axials but am more than happy with their rotors.
This is cool but I can imagine a dystopian future where all the brass instruments are matte black and string section is all carbon fiber.
Whats the name of the piece in the beginning?
Its an excerpt from Haydns Creation, Achieved is the Glorious Work
@@user-ro9gw3xq5n Thank you very much, I'd never find it on my own
is this available in g/d trigger instead of flat/dflat???
Possibly! Feel free to email me at tromboneshop@schmittmusic.com and I would be happy to chat with Butler about possibilities…
That was a lot thumb movement for the F-valve.
Still going to wreck your middle finger with prolonged use
Not if you hold it correctly. The weight is carried by the grip of the ring finger and pinky, pressing towards your palm. If you’re stressing the middle finger, your horn needs adjusting or your grip needs changing.