Surface finish on horns
Dec 18th, 2006,
Some definitions needed for researchers about surface finishes found on vintage horns.
Silver - Normally this is silver plated on Brass. It is possible to have a solid silver bell, but unlikely. Silver normally turns black when tarnished.
Chrome - Looks like silver, does not tarnish. Plated on Brass. Mirrored finish.
Nickle or German Silver - Looks like "silver brass" Tarnishes less than silver or brass. This also was very shiny when original. This metal may go all the way through or be plated on brass.
Gold - Real Gold is used on top line horns and mouthpieces, do not confuse this with gold colored brass. Gold will be plated on brass. Solid Gold is not an option. Gold gets a little dull when tarnished.
Lacquered Brass - this is the normal finish for most instruments. This looks yellow, please don’t call it "gold". The lacquer can easily be re-applied by a competent repair tech.
Unlacquered Brass - this is raw brass. When brass is tarnished, it can be brown, green, or even orange. All brass instruments were originally polished up real nice and shiny. Polished brass will have a mirrored finish, but can still be yellow, yellowish-silver, or reddish.
Patina - Patina is a chemical surface treatment used to treat metal to reduce corrosion. I have never seen a musical instrument with patina. I do see many tarnished or corroded horns on eBay falsely listed as having a patina.
If you don’t know the finish, don't polish it. Each finish requires a different polish.
Books
Instrument Characteristics Topics
metals and finishes Posts
metals and finishes
Reply #2 - Dec 18th, 2006
I would distinguish between plated surfaces.
Horns often are silver plated, or gold plated. Since gold is difficult to plate directly over brass, horns are often silver plated first, then gold plated on top. A common finish for plated silver horns was to be silver plated, and then gold plated inside the bell. This is often called a "gold wash" bell and is not bare brass.
Horns may also be nickel plated. NickEl can often look like the horn was chrome plated, that is, it has a different luster than silver.
The plated surfaces are very thin, therefore, although they may remove deep corrosion better, any abrasive-type cleaner can easily polish right through, or severely wear plating.
This is one reason that knowledgeable collectors would prefer to find a piece in original condition, because there are non-abrasive ways to restore these finishes.
Reply #3 - Dec 19th, 2006
I am afraid that you have missed the solid copper bells on such as the Conn Coprion, one model by Holton, and my personal favorite, the York Master Model trumpets and cornets. I am still looking for a cupric belled York Master Model cornet to add to my playing collection. In retrospect, I am sure that there are other cupric belled horns that I have missed. Were the Olds Recording Model, and the Reynolds Contempora model trumpets, cornets, and trombones rightly in this lineup?
Reply #4 - Dec 19th, 2006
I would consider using the term Patina (either chemically induced or natural) to describe the finish on a horn only if it was planned.
I don’t consider the brown and green splotches on brass or the black surfaces on silver horns to be Patina any more than the brown areas on my (red) Volkswagen. Well, it used to be red.
But I do agree with Pryorphone on the fact that most, if not all, collectors and conservators want horns in "as-found" condition. Get me the parts, I will take it from there.
Reply #5 - Jul 18th, 2007
Wikipidia says......
"Patina is a chemical compound formed on the surface of metal. Patinas form on metal from exposure to the elements. They are often deliberately added by artists and metalworkers. Patinas may be used to 'antique' objects, as a part of the design or decoration of art and furniture."
When patina is described on a brass instrument it is describing the natural finish that develops over time...giving the instrument an aged look that is different than any other plating or lacquer finish. Many people feel that this is better than polishing an old horn back up...and with raw brass unless it's disgustingly corroded...I have to agree......It gives an antique "credibility” and reduces the un-necessary removal of the metal that can take place when polishing with abrasives.
Reply #6 - Jul 18th, 2007
It is my understanding that a patina does provide a layer of protection to the metal.
It would be interesting to know what the old makers recommended for their products.
Reply #7 - Dec 7th, 2007
Well, Brasso was introduced in England in 1905, and I imagine it was in wide use by musicians on their raw brass horns. Silver polishes have been around for a long, long time on the commercial market, too, and the old vinegar and salt combination has long been popular for brass and copper.
The one thing I'm sure of is that members of bands kept their instruments polished up as a matter of pride. I've seen lots of photos of brass bands where everyone is wearing white gloves. I presume that is to help keep the instruments shiny and avoid the hard work of polishing.
When I got my old New Yorker euph., it was a rainbow of brass tarnished colors, from brown to green. It took a solid hour of work and almost an entire can of Brasso to get all that stuff off it.
While I understand that collectors would prefer to receive their instruments without the seller botching up a polish job, it seems to me that any playable instrument should be returned to the condition in which it would have been played. To me, that means the best polish it can take.
Of course, avoiding scratches and other abrasive marks is always a goal.
Reply #8 - Dec 7th, 2007,
I THINK I agree with your perspective, but I don't know what the original owner's intentions may have been. I truly wish I knew the perspective of the . . . say the Civil War musician. I don't think there would be any doubt that they wanted the horn to work. How important the appearance of the horn was is another matter.
From what I have read, the lubrication of choice for the brass horn was spit. I don't know whether they used anything on the valve slides, nor do I know whether they had a treatment for the surface of the instrument.
Reply #9 - Dec 7th, 2007,
Well, I'll do a little research on how metals were polished in Civil War days. It'll take a little digging, since that's an era a little before my time of interest, which is the turn of the 19th century to the 20th.
Still, one thing I doubt has changed with musicians is their pride. Look at the bands around...fancy uniforms, and all. I'd be willing to wager a good deal that polished instruments were part of that pride. Things weren't all that primitive then. They had rags. They had vinegar. They had salt. They had rouge powder.
There are a lot of photos of bands out there...even some from the Civil War era. I don't think I've seen a lot of ugly, tarnished horns in them.
I have read about saliva as a lubricant, and it was always available. Another possible lubricant in that era was whale oil. It was used on a lot of things, like clocks and other close-tolerance stuff. I'll bet it got some use on worn valves, too, although most of the valves then were rotary.
I had a rotary-valved Eb bass from the Civil War era at one point that I thought I would eventually restore, but I ended up trading it for an old radio. Wish I still had it.
Reply #11 - Dec 10th, 2007,
We have quite a collection of Civil war era horns in our band, and most are not plated. They are either brass or German silver (nickel). I'd guess that most were kept polished, since they were rather new instruments at the time. A brass or nickel horn that has never been allowed to tarnish badly can be kept nice and shiny by 'spit' polishing it with a cloth. No polishing mediums are needed.
The idea of using spit as a valve oil would have been hard to do, if you're speaking of this era. Most valves were rotary, so the only lubricating spit that could easily reach the valve surface would come through playing the horn. I'm thinking they must have used something else, such as kerosene, coal oil, or some other type of lamp oil.
Reply #12 - Dec 10th, 2007,
I've been told that modern valve oil is nothing more than deodorized kerosene. At $5 for a 2 oz bottle, that kerosene is selling for $320 per gallon!
Reply #13 - Dec 10th, 2007
Quote:
The idea of using spit as a valve oil would have been pretty hard to do, if you're speaking of this era.
English and French style instruments were piston valve in this era.
Reply #14 - Dec 10th, 2007
Most valves were rotary, so the only lubricating spit that could easily reach the valve surface would come through playing the horn. I'm thinking they must have used something else, such as kerosene, coal oil, or some other type of lamp oil.
I know I've read in a manufacturer's literature that recommended using only spit for lubrication. I just can't find it now. So, if anyone runs across it, please post!
Reply #15 - Feb 25th, 2010, at 12:47pm
Silver - Normally this is silver plated on Brass. It is possible to have a solid silver bell, but unlikely. Silver normally turns black when tarnished.
according to the HN White web site, White started producing sterling silver bells in 1925 -1928 on its KING instruments, first as "Silver Tone" and then as "Silver Sonic".
Without a doubt what makes H. N. White instruments unique is their use of Sterling Silver Bells. Sometime between 1925 and 1928, The H. N. White Company introduced the "Silver Tone" Sterling Bells option to Liberty Trumpets, Master Cornets, Clarinets, and the entire Trombone line of instruments. As stated in the 1928 complete catalog, "Sterling Silver Bell produces better tone, being clearer, richer, and more resonant, with a more pleasing quality." The engravings on "Silver Tone" instruments are some of the most elaborate and attractive works of art ever produced by an American manufacturer. A short time after World War Two (1949-1951), "Silversonic" replaced "Silver Tone" and the engraving was not as elaborate (except on Artist level), but the quality of tone remained the same. In addition, Saxophones were given the option of having a Sterling Silver Bell with the introduction of the World Famous "Super 20" and later "Silversonic Super 20", which were some of the most sought-after production saxophones ever made.
"Sterling Silver" is at least 92.5 per cent silver
I've been informed that other manufacturers also produced "sterling silver" instruments but usually as a special order. I don't know for sure.
Reply #16 - Mar 30th, 2010
Of domestic manufacturers, in addition to H.N. White Corp. Bach, Getzen, and Reynolds, and perhaps others made trumpets, cornets, and trombones with solid Sterling silver bells, and/or lead pipes.
Reply #2 - Dec 18th, 2006
I would distinguish between plated surfaces.
Horns often are silver plated, or gold plated. Since gold is difficult to plate directly over brass, horns are often silver plated first, then gold plated on top. A common finish for plated silver horns was to be silver plated, and then gold plated inside the bell. This is often called a "gold wash" bell and is not bare brass.
Horns may also be nickel plated. NickEl can often look like the horn was chrome plated, that is, it has a different luster than silver.
The plated surfaces are very thin, therefore, although they may remove deep corrosion better, any abrasive-type cleaner can easily polish right through, or severely wear plating.
This is one reason that knowledgeable collectors would prefer to find a piece in original condition, because there are non-abrasive ways to restore these finishes.
Reply #3 - Dec 19th, 2006
I am afraid that you have missed the solid copper bells on such as the Conn Coprion, one model by Holton, and my personal favorite, the York Master Model trumpets and cornets. I am still looking for a cupric belled York Master Model cornet to add to my playing collection. In retrospect, I am sure that there are other cupric belled horns that I have missed. Were the Olds Recording Model, and the Reynolds Contempora model trumpets, cornets, and trombones rightly in this lineup?
Reply #4 - Dec 19th, 2006
I would consider using the term Patina (either chemically induced or natural) to describe the finish on a horn only if it was planned.
I don’t consider the brown and green splotches on brass or the black surfaces on silver horns to be Patina any more than the brown areas on my (red) Volkswagen. Well, it used to be red.
But I do agree with Pryorphone on the fact that most, if not all, collectors and conservators want horns in "as-found" condition. Get me the parts, I will take it from there.
Reply #5 - Jul 18th, 2007
Wikipidia says......
"Patina is a chemical compound formed on the surface of metal. Patinas form on metal from exposure to the elements. They are often deliberately added by artists and metalworkers. Patinas may be used to 'antique' objects, as a part of the design or decoration of art and furniture."
When patina is described on a brass instrument it is describing the natural finish that develops over time...giving the instrument an aged look that is different than any other plating or lacquer finish. Many people feel that this is better than polishing an old horn back up...and with raw brass unless it's disgustingly corroded...I have to agree......It gives an antique "credibility” and reduces the un-necessary removal of the metal that can take place when polishing with abrasives.
Reply #6 - Jul 18th, 2007
It is my understanding that a patina does provide a layer of protection to the metal.
It would be interesting to know what the old makers recommended for their products.
Reply #7 - Dec 7th, 2007
Well, Brasso was introduced in England in 1905, and I imagine it was in wide use by musicians on their raw brass horns. Silver polishes have been around for a long, long time on the commercial market, too, and the old vinegar and salt combination has long been popular for brass and copper.
The one thing I'm sure of is that members of bands kept their instruments polished up as a matter of pride. I've seen lots of photos of brass bands where everyone is wearing white gloves. I presume that is to help keep the instruments shiny and avoid the hard work of polishing.
When I got my old New Yorker euph., it was a rainbow of brass tarnished colors, from brown to green. It took a solid hour of work and almost an entire can of Brasso to get all that stuff off it.
While I understand that collectors would prefer to receive their instruments without the seller botching up a polish job, it seems to me that any playable instrument should be returned to the condition in which it would have been played. To me, that means the best polish it can take.
Of course, avoiding scratches and other abrasive marks is always a goal.
Reply #8 - Dec 7th, 2007,
I THINK I agree with your perspective, but I don't know what the original owner's intentions may have been. I truly wish I knew the perspective of the . . . say the Civil War musician. I don't think there would be any doubt that they wanted the horn to work. How important the appearance of the horn was is another matter.
From what I have read, the lubrication of choice for the brass horn was spit. I don't know whether they used anything on the valve slides, nor do I know whether they had a treatment for the surface of the instrument.
Reply #9 - Dec 7th, 2007,
Well, I'll do a little research on how metals were polished in Civil War days. It'll take a little digging, since that's an era a little before my time of interest, which is the turn of the 19th century to the 20th.
Still, one thing I doubt has changed with musicians is their pride. Look at the bands around...fancy uniforms, and all. I'd be willing to wager a good deal that polished instruments were part of that pride. Things weren't all that primitive then. They had rags. They had vinegar. They had salt. They had rouge powder.
There are a lot of photos of bands out there...even some from the Civil War era. I don't think I've seen a lot of ugly, tarnished horns in them.
I have read about saliva as a lubricant, and it was always available. Another possible lubricant in that era was whale oil. It was used on a lot of things, like clocks and other close-tolerance stuff. I'll bet it got some use on worn valves, too, although most of the valves then were rotary.
I had a rotary-valved Eb bass from the Civil War era at one point that I thought I would eventually restore, but I ended up trading it for an old radio. Wish I still had it.
Reply #11 - Dec 10th, 2007,
We have quite a collection of Civil war era horns in our band, and most are not plated. They are either brass or German silver (nickel). I'd guess that most were kept polished, since they were rather new instruments at the time. A brass or nickel horn that has never been allowed to tarnish badly can be kept nice and shiny by 'spit' polishing it with a cloth. No polishing mediums are needed.
The idea of using spit as a valve oil would have been hard to do, if you're speaking of this era. Most valves were rotary, so the only lubricating spit that could easily reach the valve surface would come through playing the horn. I'm thinking they must have used something else, such as kerosene, coal oil, or some other type of lamp oil.
Reply #12 - Dec 10th, 2007,
I've been told that modern valve oil is nothing more than deodorized kerosene. At $5 for a 2 oz bottle, that kerosene is selling for $320 per gallon!
Reply #13 - Dec 10th, 2007
Quote:
The idea of using spit as a valve oil would have been pretty hard to do, if you're speaking of this era.
English and French style instruments were piston valve in this era.
Reply #14 - Dec 10th, 2007
Most valves were rotary, so the only lubricating spit that could easily reach the valve surface would come through playing the horn. I'm thinking they must have used something else, such as kerosene, coal oil, or some other type of lamp oil.
I know I've read in a manufacturer's literature that recommended using only spit for lubrication. I just can't find it now. So, if anyone runs across it, please post!
Reply #15 - Feb 25th, 2010, at 12:47pm
Silver - Normally this is silver plated on Brass. It is possible to have a solid silver bell, but unlikely. Silver normally turns black when tarnished.
according to the HN White web site, White started producing sterling silver bells in 1925 -1928 on its KING instruments, first as "Silver Tone" and then as "Silver Sonic".
Without a doubt what makes H. N. White instruments unique is their use of Sterling Silver Bells. Sometime between 1925 and 1928, The H. N. White Company introduced the "Silver Tone" Sterling Bells option to Liberty Trumpets, Master Cornets, Clarinets, and the entire Trombone line of instruments. As stated in the 1928 complete catalog, "Sterling Silver Bell produces better tone, being clearer, richer, and more resonant, with a more pleasing quality." The engravings on "Silver Tone" instruments are some of the most elaborate and attractive works of art ever produced by an American manufacturer. A short time after World War Two (1949-1951), "Silversonic" replaced "Silver Tone" and the engraving was not as elaborate (except on Artist level), but the quality of tone remained the same. In addition, Saxophones were given the option of having a Sterling Silver Bell with the introduction of the World Famous "Super 20" and later "Silversonic Super 20", which were some of the most sought-after production saxophones ever made.
"Sterling Silver" is at least 92.5 per cent silver
I've been informed that other manufacturers also produced "sterling silver" instruments but usually as a special order. I don't know for sure.
Reply #16 - Mar 30th, 2010
Of domestic manufacturers, in addition to H.N. White Corp. Bach, Getzen, and Reynolds, and perhaps others made trumpets, cornets, and trombones with solid Sterling silver bells, and/or lead pipes.
metals and finishes
The Metal that makes the horn
Aug 30th, 2006,
In a recent conversation I realized that we need to gain a little knowledge (for the site) on the actual metals used to make horns.
I have played on Euphoniums that are brass, chrome over brass, silver plated brass, gold plated brass and Gold over a few layers of silver on Brass.
I recently sold a cornet that was what I was told was "German silver" (nickel). The German silver was dull silvery, like a Buffalo Nickel.
I have also noticed that brass comes in many different hues. I won't bore you with the chemistry, but the color differences reflect different amounts of the different metals used to make that brass mix. Just look at the common ones out there like "rose brass" its red!
Reply #1 - Aug 31st, 2006,
In addition to whether the different metals have a musical effect on the instrument, there is also the issue of the durability of the material. Certain coverings wear better than others and are more durable than others.
German silver as an example, as it ages becomes more fragile, than brass of the same age.
Reply #2 - Sep 1st, 2006
Sometimes trying the extremes gives understanding about the influence of the (bell) material. The metal of the bell is the most important factor, the rest of the tube set is not that critical in sound performance
My master had a fluegelhorn made of lead. The sound was unbelievable soft and mute, like coming from far away. Playing that horn required some energy and my master reported that the bell would heat up a little during longer times of play because of energy loss. The energy lost that way will of course not result in any sound. The thing was heavy too...
Thus, I believe that soft materials give a soft sound, but also cost the player extra energy.
The other extreme is glass instruments, we have a glass orchestra here in Denmark and the tones of these instruments is loud, sharp, and precise. I've had a blow on one of these, and they give sound for the effort.
I have looked apart from bore shapes here, but of course the instrument maker make use of the material best suitable for the horn he is going to make - if costs allow him to do that. Who would not like to have a BBb bass in pure 24k gold - but who could pay!?
Reply #3 - Sep 1st, 2006
So, then the hardness of the material is what gives its projection characteristics. And is brilliance/mellowness a function of the same thing? (I'm thinking that that may possibly be a function of the shape of the tubing and not the metal)
And I assume that thickness also plays a role.
So - thinking out loud - if two metals had the same degree of hardness - could there still be a variation in playing characteristics?
Reply #4 - Aug 8th, 2007
Here are some things I have read: (So, at least some of it must be true)
Brass was first discovered before it was known how to purify zinc. It couldn't be alloyed in the now conventional manner because the zinc would evaporate before alloying. So, the original brass was made by melting copper, and mixing in as much zinc as possible, and then covering it to keep the zinc from escaping. Copper combines with zinc done in this fashion to make approximately 82% alloy.
Before WWII, makers used a readily available and inexpensive brass alloy, because it was made in large quantities to national specifications (which varied from country to country) and used for military rifle cartridges. Brass that was used before WWII, based on a sample from a 1936 Martin was 80% copper to nearly 20% zinc with trace lead and antimony. It is known as “low brass".
By metallurgical standards the US specification was less pure than other countries. It is said that one production manager of a major British maker, claimed that US brass was the reason why they couldn’t compete in making trumpets and trombones with the sound of those of US makers. Other instrument makers such as Gibson in its Mastertone banjos used the same brass. The pre-war ones have a superior tone to the post-war ones.
Since WWII the standard has been 70% copper to about 30% zinc. It is known as "cartridge brass".
Today makers use an array of special alloys in trumpets, horns, and trombones. Some makers use gold brass in euphoniums. Gold brass tubas are not common.
Then there is rose brass, which is also known as goldmessing.
When York low brass instruments from the 1920's to mid' 1930's are bright-dipped, the body is yellow and the bell is pink. The bells are not rose brass, but an alloy that can be annealed to be extremely soft but will quickly work-harden to an extreme. It is known as "Admiralty brass".
There is speculation that silverplate bonds to "low brass" better than "yellow brass". Today, most companies use a thin layer of "copper strike" as a "glue" for the primary metal to be plated...The thin coating of copper plating sticks great to most metals, and silverplating sticks great to the layer of copper.
Reply #5 - Dec 12th, 2007
We've all seen older horns that are so rotten as to be impossible to work or solder, and horns of the same age where the brass is quite workable and restorable. Looking at instruments on eBay, a good eye can pick out horns that cannot be repaired or restored. Obviously, there was a difference in composition of material on these instruments when new.
What is the cause of some of these horns aging so badly? Does zinc evaporate from the copper over time?
Reply #6 - Dec 12th, 2007
You mean like this?
Reply #10 - Dec 13th, 2007,
Yes, please don't bid on those sad, rotten horns on ebay. They can’t be worth the shipping.
The truth is that it only takes a little elbow grease for some polishing jobs. There are others that are so bad, I haven’t got to them yet. I would rather cleanup 80 years of tarnished brass than re-polish satin silver (on my sousaphone).
Reply #12 - Dec 13th, 2007
There are many centuries old horns that are easily restorable, and then there are horns of the same age where the brass has turned brittle and changed to a form that won't hold solder. Something happens over time to instruments to change the nature of the material, as it would be impossible to build them with brass in the condition as it is now.
But certainly, German silver (which is actually a type of brass) will become fragile with age. And some horns do become at least where they are seamed or if they have gotten too thin. And of course the infamous red rot.
But I'm not familiar with a condition where it won't hold solder.
Regarding modern brass instruments, wouldn't it be interesting to know how they will hold up in 100 years.
Reply #14 - Dec 14th, 2007
When the brass gets to the brittle stage, its impossible to clean. Thus, it won't hold solder.
This is when you either hang the horn or try to anneal the metal to soften it up.
I have a 1 valve Bugle Corp horn that is this way (not even 60 years old) and if I can get my mother to give it back, I am going to try to fix the breaks. I will let you know how it goes. It's not easy and I haven’t tried it in a long time.
I had to have some horns silver plated some time ago and the man from the silverplating comp. told me that you can't put silver directly on brass it just wouldn't hold. So, to get silverplating on you first have to put a thin layer of nickel plating on the brass and on top of that you can put silver and sometimes on top of the silver comes a layer of Platinum or Rhodine (I don't know if that the English word) anyway that's a quit hard metal that doesn't corrode and it gives a very high shine like on Getzen instr. Why am I telling all this? I think that horn makers use a different layer thickness and combinations so can't you just say silverplated sound like this and lacquer like that because the lacquer types they use now are very different from those 20 years ago.
Reply #16 - Mar 30th, 2008,
I hear what you are saying, though, my suspicion is there is a difference between 'merging the metals' as in plating and putting a non-metallic layer on the metal.
Reply #17 - Dec 7th, 2008,
I read a published research paper from Smith & Watkins that clearly showed that even with elite level musicians if blindfolded and the instruments weight was compensated for changes in the bell that they could not reliable pick the light bell from the heavy bell by sound alone. They went to great lengths to make sure the bore was identical on all of these. Now when the instruments’ weights and balance was not maintained it was easy for the musician to tell when playing a different bell be it light or heavy. They even went so far as to use a plastic bell with as close to an identical bore as they could humanly make and again no one could tell it was not the brass bell.
Now for the most part they did not find any difference in sound or vibrational characteristics of lighter versus heavy bell until you went below a certain thickness I want to say it was 3mm or 4 mm I cannot recall now but once you went past that point in thinness you got a serious increase in the higher end harmonics and the response time at the higher freq. also improved which would greatly aid a person that plays in the higher portion of the register.
If I read the paper right, then the heavy bells produced 1 db spl more than the thinnest bell so it was slightly louder. According to them the sound is all in the bore shape and smoothness and has nothing to do with the material. Only 1% of your energy expended leaves the bell so we are talking about some serious lack of efficiency.
If this leads to repeated testing by others it could very well change the design and marketing of brass winds for some time. I doubt it will happen very quickly though since I doubt many in the trumpet world could read these papers and make sense of them, they are math heavy! If not for my background in Aerospace Technology and Applied Science prior to becoming a Business major I would have been lost I am sure.SO take your slide rule or TI-84 graphic Calculator when you go there since they show their work. Some of it was done by Boosey & Hawks and has been built on by this new Company.
I am not saying they have all the answers’, but they make a pretty convincing argument that is for sure!
What if the materials used or the various techniques used to form them play a role. Take the old Conn Coprion bells, their method of plating a mandrel until the weight of the copper became so great it broke free from the mandrel is supposed to be accurate to one millionth of an inch. Since there are no machine marks or induced stress or work hardening etc.... would not the bore be more uniform and smoother than any other method???? If so, maybe this explains the sound we get. Does a higher copper content make the material, say Red Brass more workable than C206000 Yellow brass and hence produce a smother more uniform bore? Does using a heavy amount of material likewise produce a more uniform bell bore that is smoother because of the extra material. Remember these guys or machines are heating and hammering on this material as it spins on the mandrel it is forming itself to a mandrel that itself has tool marks and changing dimensions as it wears? Since a machine would not change how hard the blows are due to material thickness I could see where added material could mean that tool marks where not as deeply formed in the heavier bell as compared to the thinner one etc.....
No matter how we slice it there are still more questions than answers’ in my mind no matter who ends up being right.
Reply #18 - Jan 11th,
I have owned several unplated brass instruments made by Henry Distin in the late 1800's and they seem to form a much darker and harder to polish patina than other instruments of that era. Unrestored horns have a dark brown to black color. Does anyone know if he used a different brass than most others?
Reply #19 - Jan 11th, 2010, at 10:57pm
Seems to me I remember reading that he had a special brass that he imported, but I can't remember where I read that. (Or, whether I just imagined it!)
Reply #20 - Jan 5th, 2011,
This is obviously a huge subject. I don't know if we have any metallurgists hovering in the wings. In reference to the OP's question as to why some old horns seem to age badly, there are other factors to consider than the original composition of the brass. The most likely being unnecessary polishing of the raw surface during the instrument’s lifetime. Any contact with ammonia can be deadly. Plus, the simple removal of what is called the passivating layer (formed originally as a stable oxidation layer) which protects the metals from further exposure to whatever oxidizers are present. This old patina should never be removed. When the equilibrium between the zinc and copper is disturbed, the two metals will begin to react to each other in certain areas of the composition and you get crazed and disintegrating brass. It's a whole can of worms that starts with the original working ie. heating and quenching and the inevitable hardening process. Brass is best left to it's own devices and protected from exposure to corrosive elements. Sure, Brasso will make a horn bright but it's the slippery slope if not the cliff itself.
Reply #21 - Jan 5th, 2011,
While I'm reading through this thread, I'd like to comment on the post below by Lovevixen555 concerning the Smith Watkins report. I'd think that in the case of an array of trumpets with a material thickness in the 3mm range it would be surprising if any difference was noticed in sound or playing characteristics. They would all be built like the proverbial brick outhouse. I have a variety of instruments that run thicknesses from .41mm to .71mm. I have an old Couesnon that is so thin you can practically talk through it. No amount of deadweight added to the structure could fool me into thinking I had my Deprins or a Holton Revelation in my hand. You can puff on the end of the Couesnon and make a sound. I'm not certain what the message of the post was. People have been making brass instruments for a long time.
They generally make them in a style that is in demand at the time. We are not held back so much by lack of technology. Horns can be and are made from a variety of fibers and resins. If that is the suggestion, then definitely much more could be done to advance these materials.
I realize it's an old post but as it wasn't hashed over at the time, I thought it wouldn't hurt to haul it back out in 2011. A lot of people read this site and the subject never stales.
The Metal that makes the horn
Aug 30th, 2006,
In a recent conversation I realized that we need to gain a little knowledge (for the site) on the actual metals used to make horns.
I have played on Euphoniums that are brass, chrome over brass, silver plated brass, gold plated brass and Gold over a few layers of silver on Brass.
I recently sold a cornet that was what I was told was "German silver" (nickel). The German silver was dull silvery, like a Buffalo Nickel.
I have also noticed that brass comes in many different hues. I won't bore you with the chemistry, but the color differences reflect different amounts of the different metals used to make that brass mix. Just look at the common ones out there like "rose brass" its red!
Reply #1 - Aug 31st, 2006,
In addition to whether the different metals have a musical effect on the instrument, there is also the issue of the durability of the material. Certain coverings wear better than others and are more durable than others.
German silver as an example, as it ages becomes more fragile, than brass of the same age.
Reply #2 - Sep 1st, 2006
Sometimes trying the extremes gives understanding about the influence of the (bell) material. The metal of the bell is the most important factor, the rest of the tube set is not that critical in sound performance
My master had a fluegelhorn made of lead. The sound was unbelievable soft and mute, like coming from far away. Playing that horn required some energy and my master reported that the bell would heat up a little during longer times of play because of energy loss. The energy lost that way will of course not result in any sound. The thing was heavy too...
Thus, I believe that soft materials give a soft sound, but also cost the player extra energy.
The other extreme is glass instruments, we have a glass orchestra here in Denmark and the tones of these instruments is loud, sharp, and precise. I've had a blow on one of these, and they give sound for the effort.
I have looked apart from bore shapes here, but of course the instrument maker make use of the material best suitable for the horn he is going to make - if costs allow him to do that. Who would not like to have a BBb bass in pure 24k gold - but who could pay!?
Reply #3 - Sep 1st, 2006
So, then the hardness of the material is what gives its projection characteristics. And is brilliance/mellowness a function of the same thing? (I'm thinking that that may possibly be a function of the shape of the tubing and not the metal)
And I assume that thickness also plays a role.
So - thinking out loud - if two metals had the same degree of hardness - could there still be a variation in playing characteristics?
Reply #4 - Aug 8th, 2007
Here are some things I have read: (So, at least some of it must be true)
Brass was first discovered before it was known how to purify zinc. It couldn't be alloyed in the now conventional manner because the zinc would evaporate before alloying. So, the original brass was made by melting copper, and mixing in as much zinc as possible, and then covering it to keep the zinc from escaping. Copper combines with zinc done in this fashion to make approximately 82% alloy.
Before WWII, makers used a readily available and inexpensive brass alloy, because it was made in large quantities to national specifications (which varied from country to country) and used for military rifle cartridges. Brass that was used before WWII, based on a sample from a 1936 Martin was 80% copper to nearly 20% zinc with trace lead and antimony. It is known as “low brass".
By metallurgical standards the US specification was less pure than other countries. It is said that one production manager of a major British maker, claimed that US brass was the reason why they couldn’t compete in making trumpets and trombones with the sound of those of US makers. Other instrument makers such as Gibson in its Mastertone banjos used the same brass. The pre-war ones have a superior tone to the post-war ones.
Since WWII the standard has been 70% copper to about 30% zinc. It is known as "cartridge brass".
Today makers use an array of special alloys in trumpets, horns, and trombones. Some makers use gold brass in euphoniums. Gold brass tubas are not common.
Then there is rose brass, which is also known as goldmessing.
When York low brass instruments from the 1920's to mid' 1930's are bright-dipped, the body is yellow and the bell is pink. The bells are not rose brass, but an alloy that can be annealed to be extremely soft but will quickly work-harden to an extreme. It is known as "Admiralty brass".
There is speculation that silverplate bonds to "low brass" better than "yellow brass". Today, most companies use a thin layer of "copper strike" as a "glue" for the primary metal to be plated...The thin coating of copper plating sticks great to most metals, and silverplating sticks great to the layer of copper.
Reply #5 - Dec 12th, 2007
We've all seen older horns that are so rotten as to be impossible to work or solder, and horns of the same age where the brass is quite workable and restorable. Looking at instruments on eBay, a good eye can pick out horns that cannot be repaired or restored. Obviously, there was a difference in composition of material on these instruments when new.
What is the cause of some of these horns aging so badly? Does zinc evaporate from the copper over time?
Reply #6 - Dec 12th, 2007
You mean like this?
Reply #10 - Dec 13th, 2007,
Yes, please don't bid on those sad, rotten horns on ebay. They can’t be worth the shipping.
The truth is that it only takes a little elbow grease for some polishing jobs. There are others that are so bad, I haven’t got to them yet. I would rather cleanup 80 years of tarnished brass than re-polish satin silver (on my sousaphone).
Reply #12 - Dec 13th, 2007
There are many centuries old horns that are easily restorable, and then there are horns of the same age where the brass has turned brittle and changed to a form that won't hold solder. Something happens over time to instruments to change the nature of the material, as it would be impossible to build them with brass in the condition as it is now.
But certainly, German silver (which is actually a type of brass) will become fragile with age. And some horns do become at least where they are seamed or if they have gotten too thin. And of course the infamous red rot.
But I'm not familiar with a condition where it won't hold solder.
Regarding modern brass instruments, wouldn't it be interesting to know how they will hold up in 100 years.
Reply #14 - Dec 14th, 2007
When the brass gets to the brittle stage, its impossible to clean. Thus, it won't hold solder.
This is when you either hang the horn or try to anneal the metal to soften it up.
I have a 1 valve Bugle Corp horn that is this way (not even 60 years old) and if I can get my mother to give it back, I am going to try to fix the breaks. I will let you know how it goes. It's not easy and I haven’t tried it in a long time.
I had to have some horns silver plated some time ago and the man from the silverplating comp. told me that you can't put silver directly on brass it just wouldn't hold. So, to get silverplating on you first have to put a thin layer of nickel plating on the brass and on top of that you can put silver and sometimes on top of the silver comes a layer of Platinum or Rhodine (I don't know if that the English word) anyway that's a quit hard metal that doesn't corrode and it gives a very high shine like on Getzen instr. Why am I telling all this? I think that horn makers use a different layer thickness and combinations so can't you just say silverplated sound like this and lacquer like that because the lacquer types they use now are very different from those 20 years ago.
Reply #16 - Mar 30th, 2008,
I hear what you are saying, though, my suspicion is there is a difference between 'merging the metals' as in plating and putting a non-metallic layer on the metal.
Reply #17 - Dec 7th, 2008,
I read a published research paper from Smith & Watkins that clearly showed that even with elite level musicians if blindfolded and the instruments weight was compensated for changes in the bell that they could not reliable pick the light bell from the heavy bell by sound alone. They went to great lengths to make sure the bore was identical on all of these. Now when the instruments’ weights and balance was not maintained it was easy for the musician to tell when playing a different bell be it light or heavy. They even went so far as to use a plastic bell with as close to an identical bore as they could humanly make and again no one could tell it was not the brass bell.
Now for the most part they did not find any difference in sound or vibrational characteristics of lighter versus heavy bell until you went below a certain thickness I want to say it was 3mm or 4 mm I cannot recall now but once you went past that point in thinness you got a serious increase in the higher end harmonics and the response time at the higher freq. also improved which would greatly aid a person that plays in the higher portion of the register.
If I read the paper right, then the heavy bells produced 1 db spl more than the thinnest bell so it was slightly louder. According to them the sound is all in the bore shape and smoothness and has nothing to do with the material. Only 1% of your energy expended leaves the bell so we are talking about some serious lack of efficiency.
If this leads to repeated testing by others it could very well change the design and marketing of brass winds for some time. I doubt it will happen very quickly though since I doubt many in the trumpet world could read these papers and make sense of them, they are math heavy! If not for my background in Aerospace Technology and Applied Science prior to becoming a Business major I would have been lost I am sure.SO take your slide rule or TI-84 graphic Calculator when you go there since they show their work. Some of it was done by Boosey & Hawks and has been built on by this new Company.
I am not saying they have all the answers’, but they make a pretty convincing argument that is for sure!
What if the materials used or the various techniques used to form them play a role. Take the old Conn Coprion bells, their method of plating a mandrel until the weight of the copper became so great it broke free from the mandrel is supposed to be accurate to one millionth of an inch. Since there are no machine marks or induced stress or work hardening etc.... would not the bore be more uniform and smoother than any other method???? If so, maybe this explains the sound we get. Does a higher copper content make the material, say Red Brass more workable than C206000 Yellow brass and hence produce a smother more uniform bore? Does using a heavy amount of material likewise produce a more uniform bell bore that is smoother because of the extra material. Remember these guys or machines are heating and hammering on this material as it spins on the mandrel it is forming itself to a mandrel that itself has tool marks and changing dimensions as it wears? Since a machine would not change how hard the blows are due to material thickness I could see where added material could mean that tool marks where not as deeply formed in the heavier bell as compared to the thinner one etc.....
No matter how we slice it there are still more questions than answers’ in my mind no matter who ends up being right.
Reply #18 - Jan 11th,
I have owned several unplated brass instruments made by Henry Distin in the late 1800's and they seem to form a much darker and harder to polish patina than other instruments of that era. Unrestored horns have a dark brown to black color. Does anyone know if he used a different brass than most others?
Reply #19 - Jan 11th, 2010, at 10:57pm
Seems to me I remember reading that he had a special brass that he imported, but I can't remember where I read that. (Or, whether I just imagined it!)
Reply #20 - Jan 5th, 2011,
This is obviously a huge subject. I don't know if we have any metallurgists hovering in the wings. In reference to the OP's question as to why some old horns seem to age badly, there are other factors to consider than the original composition of the brass. The most likely being unnecessary polishing of the raw surface during the instrument’s lifetime. Any contact with ammonia can be deadly. Plus, the simple removal of what is called the passivating layer (formed originally as a stable oxidation layer) which protects the metals from further exposure to whatever oxidizers are present. This old patina should never be removed. When the equilibrium between the zinc and copper is disturbed, the two metals will begin to react to each other in certain areas of the composition and you get crazed and disintegrating brass. It's a whole can of worms that starts with the original working ie. heating and quenching and the inevitable hardening process. Brass is best left to it's own devices and protected from exposure to corrosive elements. Sure, Brasso will make a horn bright but it's the slippery slope if not the cliff itself.
Reply #21 - Jan 5th, 2011,
While I'm reading through this thread, I'd like to comment on the post below by Lovevixen555 concerning the Smith Watkins report. I'd think that in the case of an array of trumpets with a material thickness in the 3mm range it would be surprising if any difference was noticed in sound or playing characteristics. They would all be built like the proverbial brick outhouse. I have a variety of instruments that run thicknesses from .41mm to .71mm. I have an old Couesnon that is so thin you can practically talk through it. No amount of deadweight added to the structure could fool me into thinking I had my Deprins or a Holton Revelation in my hand. You can puff on the end of the Couesnon and make a sound. I'm not certain what the message of the post was. People have been making brass instruments for a long time.
They generally make them in a style that is in demand at the time. We are not held back so much by lack of technology. Horns can be and are made from a variety of fibers and resins. If that is the suggestion, then definitely much more could be done to advance these materials.
I realize it's an old post but as it wasn't hashed over at the time, I thought it wouldn't hurt to haul it back out in 2011. A lot of people read this site and the subject never stales.
Dealing with Lacquer
Sep 1st, 2006,
An undated paper by Renold O. Schilke concerning this issue, including raw, plating and applying lacquer
Schilke Brass Clinic
The Physics of Inner Brass and the Acoustical Effects of
Various Materials and Their Treatment
By Renold O. Schilke
This undated paper, long unavailable, was printed and distributed at clinics and conventions by the Schilke Company. It can now be downloaded as a MS Word document or a PDF document from the Schilke official site, if you wish.
The physical shape of the inside of a brass instrument and its mouthpiece has always been of great interest, not only to manufacturers of brass instruments, but to those who perform upon them. The harmonics of an open pipe, if the inside diameter is straight, cannot be used on a brass instrument unless the active use of a slide controlling each one of the notes in the harmonic series is applied. Many manufacturers have found that when added tapers are put to the instrument, in other words tubing of a conical shape, that it made it more possible to give a harmonic series that are closer to usable on a brass instrument. By trial and error, they evolved a method of tapering the tubing whereby very good harmonics were created and made usable. However, many years ago Victor Mahillon established a theory in which the pressure points of the nodal pattern of the inner brass could be controlled so as to change the pitch of the individual notes in such a way that a very usable harmonic series could be created. His theory calls for a change of taper at the pressure point of the node that had to be altered in order to make it a usable musical sound.
Let me first explain exactly what happens when an energy impulse is created by expelling air under pressure through the lips during the period of opening and closing, generally referred to as a vibration. This energy impulse is further compressed in the cup of the mouthpiece. This is the reason why the shape of a mouthpiece cup is so important to obtain certain effects that the performer desires. It reaches its maximum pressure point in the throat of the mouthpiece where it sets up the nodal pattern in the air that is already in the instrument, just as the first contact of a violin box (to the string of the instrument) sets up the vibration or nodal pattern in the string. At the last point of rarefaction, which occurs in front of the bell of the instrument, a standing node is formed which gives a rescinding node going back through the instrument and culminates itself in the larynx of the performer. This is the reason why performers with different sized oral cavities will play the over-all pitch of the same instrument differently. A good example of this occurred when Mr. Arnold Jacobs and Mr. A. Hirada of Japan were in my studio trying tubas. To obtain the same pitch, Mr. Jacobs had to have his slide all the way in, making the instrument on the extremely sharp side as his oral cavity was of such a tremendous size it lowered the pitch to the given pitch. However, Mr. Hirada, whose oral cavity is very small, had to pull his turning slide to give approximately eight additional inches of tubing to the instrument in order to play in the same pitch.
In working out a formula to shape the inside of the instrument properly, I first tried to work it out mathematically. In fact, I worked several years in making drawings of the nodal patterns of the trumpet, superimposing them on onion skin paper above one another to find out exactly where the multiples were in both the pressure points and the points of rarefaction. As you understand, it would be only at the singular points that a variation in the taper could affect a note favorably. If it was a multiple point, we could correct one note, but all of the other notes having their pressure point at the same place would be adversely affected. After having worked out a particular formula in this manner, I tried to apply it and found I was mistaken in my calculations. If I had nothing but straight tubing to work with, the formula could be applied as I had applied it. In other words, my original formula consisted of taking the speed of sound, dividing it by the number of vibrations per second, then dividing the nodal pattern from point of rarefaction to point of rarefaction giving me the maximum pressure point of the nodal pattern. As I asserted, if it were straight tubing I was working with, this formula would have worked out very well, but since the mouthpiece and the bell consisted of French curves, I would have had to develop a new formula to every location of pressure points on the instrument.
It was at this time that I met Dr. Aebi and we discussed notes on this particular control of the inner brass. Those of you who have read the articles of Dr. Aebi know that he is an amateur horn player and possibly one of the world's greatest physicists. He had approached the horn in the process of locating the nodal pattern by having the horn completely extended and inserting a small microphone on the end of a rod and taking it through the instrument while a note was being played and the results registered an an oscilloscope. However, during my stay there, we started utilizing a contact mike so we could work with the instrument in its natural shape while a performer was playing a particular note. In following along the instrument with the contact mike right into the oral cavity of the performer and registering the results on an oscilloscope with the aid of a movie camera, we were able to discover exactly the points of pressure as well as the points of rarefaction. At the point of rarefaction on an instrument, if we only had one note to play, it would be possible to lay that particular note without any disturbance even if the tubing at that particular point was completely removed from e instrument. I have often given demonstrations of this with a C trumpet. When the 2nd line G is played on a C trumpet, a pressure point is directly at the water key and when the water key is opened, it completely stops the tone. If a C is played on the instrument, it is on the taper-off of the pressure point and when you open the water key, it sharpens the note a full tone so you could use it as a trill key. If you played the E on the forth space, the note sound would be true whether the water key was opened or not. In other words, there would be absolutely no disturbance from the fact that the water key was open. In fact, at that area, five-eights of an inch of tubing could be cut out of the instrument and if you only had to play that one note, you could play it all day and never have a disturbance in it with that piece of tubing missing.
I know it is hard for people to conceive the idea of changing the pitch of an instrument by only changing the rate of taper one to two thousandths of an inch at exactly the pressure point of the note that you want to affect. On the mouthpipe of my instrument, if you will look carefully through the inside of it, you will see that I have corrected faulty notes in fourteen different places. In some places, the pitch of the note receives almost an eighth of a tone by utilizing less than one thousandth variance in taper over a quarter of an inch length. As stated previously, we can only correct intonation on the note at a particular point. We must find a single pressure point for that note in order to accomplish this. If it goes to a multiple pressure point, too many notes would be affected adversely. Some of the corrections on intonation are clear into the bell area. It is only at the places where we can change it on tapered surfaces that we can make the corrections. On the slides of the instrument, it is impossible to make the necessary corrections. In the bow of the tuning slide it is possible and it is also the reason why, on all my instruments, you will find such a long mouthpipe...longer than anyone else uses.
I hope I have made myself clear in my approach to the physics of inner brass. I know sometimes, at the first hearing, it is difficult to assimilate everything. In fact, in Hamamatsu, in order to demonstrate what I was doing very clearly, I had the men build me a pipe organ of one octave with all the pipes of exactly the same length. Then, by changing the inside proportions of the pipes and rate of taper at the pressure points of the nodal patterns, I was able to produce a true scale over one octave. Again, it is important in the manufacture of a brass instrument not to have braces, particularly at multiple pressure points. Even with the few braces that I have on my sliding bell instruments, two notes are affected. They, of course, change according to the pitch of the instrument that we are working with. On certain trumpets, such as the E flat tuning bell and the G and F, these instruments may be played in tune by the majority of performers without any slide manipulation. The answer to how this is accomplished has already been given to you so if you are in doubt, refer back to my earlier statements.
Let me spend a few minutes referring to the materials and their affect on the acoustics of brass instruments. The majority of bells on brass instruments are made of various forms of brass such as a combination of copper and other metals, depending upon the ultimate properties required. The common formulas contain copper and tin with a certain amount of antimony for hardness. Some use copper, zinc and tin. In my experiments on my instruments, my favorite brass formula until recently was a 60/40 combination of copper and silver which was especially made for me for just the bells of my instruments. However, approximately a year ago, I worked out a new formula for what I term beryllium bronze. This particular material has a wonderful acoustical effect that it has remarkable carrying power. Its projection of sound is quite phenomenal. However, let us go into the various metals that we have experimented with. At one time we ran an experiment in which we used steel, aluminum, various plastics, glass, silver, various combinations of brass and the last one we used was lead. To demonstrate results as quickly as possible, I will choose the two extremes. The steel bell, which we tempered so it was extremely hard, gave possibly one of the most interesting results. Many people test a bell by tapping it with their finger or knuckle and in tapping the steel bell, it would emit a very ringing sound, truly like a bell. However, when we played this instrument, the quality of sound was extremely dead. On searching for the reason for this, we looked at the oscilloscope when the performer played on the instrument and found the sine pattern very faint but the distortion pattern, coming from the vibration of the bell itself, going through at a very jagged and rapid rate, killing the brilliance of sound of the true tone. At the other extreme was the lead bell. This bell, if rapped with your knuckle, emitted an extremely dead sound like rapping on a piece of wood. However the sound that emanated when it was blown was extremely brilliant, brilliant to the point of being mechanical. This showed up on the oscilloscope as a perfectly true sine pattern, there being no distortions in the harmonics either above or below, and, as a result, the sound was absolutely pure but not usable musically, except for a general effect such as a percussion instrument would give. The voice, you know, registering on an oscilloscope, gives harmonics both above and below the note. These distortions, if we may call them such, give warmth to the tone. We have to have that "distortion" in order to have the sound acceptable to our ears as a musical sound.
To continue about materials that go into a brass instrument, it is also necessary to add something concerning the treatment of the metal after it is formed into the bell of an instrument. As far as the over-all instrument is concerned, the more inert it is to vibration, the better it is. However, the thickness of the metal and the temper of the metal in the mouthpipe, turning slide and bell greatly affect the quality of sound produced by the instrument. For instance, with a yellow brass, either 70/30 or 80/20 formula, it is necessary after the bell is formed to anneal it at two different points. This is to take the excess temper out of the bell caused by work hardening. If the temper were left in the bell, we would find the quality of sound had become very dark (remember here the results when we attempted to use a tempered steel bell). Metal with excess temper gives too many vibrations of its own. Regarding the thickness of an ordinary brass bell, I like the vulnerable areas to be under fourteen thousandths of an inch, that is, between twelve and fourteen thousandths. However with the beryllium bronze, I am able to make bells with the vulnerable areas down to six and seven thousandths of an inch and one bell in particular which I finished for Mr. Faddis in New York was down to three thousandths of an inch. This particular bell works exceedingly well for him inasmuch as he plays most of the time in the extreme top register. The response was most excellent for his particular type of work. In other words, it all depends upon where the bell is going to be used and the quality of tone the performer wants from his instrument. All of this determines exactly whether a bell should be built in one way or another. As you can see, many things enter into the acoustical properties producing sound on a brass instrument.
One large point of controversy has always existed between those who prefer a lacquered horn and those who prefer plated horns, either silver or gold, or a third group who prefer their instruments in plain brass without any protective coating whatsoever. Let me give you my findings on the three different finishes of instruments. First, I tried to find myself three instruments that played absolutely identically. One, I silverplated, one I had a very good lacquer job put on and a third I left in brass. Now recall that all three instruments played identically the same in brass, or as close as it is possible to get. I had various players from the Symphony working with me as well as other professional trumpet players in Chicago and they agreed unanimously on the results. The findings were that plating does not affect the playing qualities of brass instruments. That is, the plated instrument and the plain brass instrument played identically. The lacquered instrument, however, seemed to be changed considerably. This instrument, which originally had played the same as the other two, now had a very much impaired tonal quality and the over-all pitch was changed.
To explain these findings as to why the silver and brass instruments played alike and the lacquered instrument did not, let me give you some figures. The silver plating on a brass instrument is only one-half of a thousandth inch thick. In other words .0005 inch. The lacquer that goes on, if it is a good lacquer job, is approximately seven thousandths of an inch thick, or .007 inch. Now to get an idea in your minds as to what these thickness figures represent, an ordinary piece of writing paper is approximately four thousandths of an inch thick so the silver that goes on an instrument is only 1/8 as thick as a piece of writing paper, while the lacquer is almost double the thickness of a piece of writing paper. The silver in itself is very compatible to the brass. The lacquer, if it is a good lacquer and baked on, will be almost as hard as glass and not at all compatible to brass. The lacquer on the bell of an instrument is seven thousandths of an inch thick on the outside and another seven thousandths on the inside which gives you a total thickness of fourteen thousandths or .014 inch. This is already the thickness of the metal of my instruments so the lacquer process would double the bell thickness. As you can see, it is bound to affect the playing quality of the instrument.
So much for the material going into the instrument. Now let us get to the next point which is possible the most important and that is the tightness of an instrument. You are all acquainted with woodwind instruments and know the effect in intonation of a slight leak of a pad. The same is true in a brass instrument. If there s at any time any leak in the valves, in the water key or in any of the solder joints, there will be a definite effect on the intonation. This is caused by disturbance of the nodal pattern. At a leak, a turbulence occurs which creases a standing node and establishes a rescinding node from that point affecting the intonation.
I feel the tolerance on the pistons of a brass instrument should be kept under one thousandth. In other words, a half a thousandth on each side of the piston. This permits free movement and still gives good acoustical qualities to the instrument. Without having the instrument completely air proof, all of these we have been talking about amount to nothing. Any corrections we make in the instrument with a variance of tapers and what not would be ineffective unless the instrument was first absolutely tight. Now that does not mean I feel it is essential for the air to go through the instrument. It is not! If , after our lips were vibrated, the air could be disposed of in another way other than going through the instrument, the tone would be at its best. People who have used and understand physics know that this is true. However, there are people who do not understand this point. I put this as a question one time when I was giving a clinic to some bandmasters after listening to various remarks made by them about air having to go through the horn. I asked, "Is it necessary in the production of sound for the air to carry the sound through the horn?" I had hands by people in the affirmative that it was. To prove my point, I had a tuba player come up on the stage and had him blow some smoke into his tuba and begin to play. He played over a minute before some smoke finally began to tickle out the bell of the instrument. So, it is necessary to have air in the instrument so the player can establish the nodal pattern. It is not necessary for that air to move through the instrument any more than an energy impulse created by dropping a stone in water causes the water to actually move. What happens is, the energy impulse travels along lifting and depressing the water in its particular area ad infinitum. This is true of musical sound in relation to m air. The sound leaves the instrument and keeps on traveling in the same manner.
I know we have talked of many ideas that are somewhat controversial. However I always hate to make a statement unless I have studied it and proven it, not only to myself but to many outstanding performers. I hope these facts prove to be of great interest to you.
Reply #1 - Sep 2nd, 2006,
One thing that really struck me was that in some cases the lacquer is thicker than the metal it covers.
I knew I liked unlacquered horns. . .
When I was growing up, I associated silver-plated instruments with being old, outdated, and worn out. I guess one can learn things as you get older.
Reply #2 - Sep 5th, 2006
That's for me too. My master got very upset every time we came to talk about lacquered instruments, and he used words that can’t be written here. His worst enemy was gold lacquer as it is much harder to remove than clear lacquer, but also is thicker harder, and heavier.
He even had some resistance towards silver plating, but I think the changes in characteristics with silver plating are of a very minor range, if present at all.
Reply #3 - Sep 5th, 2006,
Am I correct that sometimes the gold is a coloring below the lacquer, and sometimes it is in the lacquer itself?
Reply #4 - Sep 5th, 2006,
You are probably right. I’ve never given it much thought, when fighting to get that lacquer off....
Reply #5 - Sep 17th, 2006, at 1:33am
I'm in the process of de-lacquering my York Master, and I think I'm fast becoming a fan of unlacquered horns FROM THE FACTORY!!!
A little Brasso, a LOT of elbow grease, and (IMHO) a minor improvement in the timbre, but it's worth the work. I also like the sound / resonance of red brass lead pipes and bells, but I doubt I'll ever find a bell to fit my York, and I don't think I want to change out the lead pipe.
Reply #6 - Sep 17th, 2006,
A little metal stripper will make quick work of it.
Reply #7 - Sep 18th, 2006,
What Brand? How is it applied?
Reply #8 - Aug 9th, 2007,
Just to respond to the comments about gold lacquer and stripping techniques... When I am stripping a horn, I use a stripper designed for auto detailers. You can buy aerosol cans of it at Wal-Mart in the auto section. It seems to work well. But it WILL burn skin.... trust me.
In my experience gold lacquer is created by using a dye that is added to the lacquer itself. The color may vary by company, model, year mfg., etc. But usually a gold "spot lacquer" can match the color pretty well by just adding extra coats to make it darker (it starts off very light).
Reply #9 - Aug 9th, 2007,
I've not tried the spray types; I've used those that have the consistency of jelly. The ones that work best are labeled Industrial or Aircraft grade. And, you are right, they will let you know if you get some on your skin!
Reply #10 - Aug 9th, 2007, at 11:32pm
I like the spray because I am sure I get in all the little crevices and such...but jelly does sound much easier to control. Where do you get it, and do you just use some type of brush for application?
Reply #11 - Aug 10th, 2007
I got a nice sized jug of it at a NAPA auto parts store.
Reply #12 - Aug 10th, 2007
How long should it be left on?
I've been putting off a Conn 14I that is nickel with burnt lacquer that really plays well, but the burnt areas are unsightly. I always assumed it required a hot dip in some sort of tank to remove it or a tough buffing job.
Reply #13 - Aug 10th, 2007
Burnt lacquer is a little tougher to get to come off than undamaged lacquer, but usually the stripper and a bit of rubbing should get it off. Or, if you are impatient, strip it and then buff off the resistant parts.
Reply #14 - Sep 26th, 2007,
I bought a '63 Conn 5A Victor cornet on eBay a couple of months ago. It looked terrible, and I got it cheap because of it. I removed what was left of the lacquer with Krylon OFF! spray-on paint remover and polished the brass and nickel with MAAS metal polish - good stuff.
Reply #16 - Sep 30th, 2007,
Thanks. I'm probably going to have a cosmetic overhaul done on it, including lacquer. The Conn 5A is a pretty rare cornet, and this one plays very good. Even though it looks much better after my application of "elbow grease", it still has numerous dents and is a little crooked. I'd like to return this fine old horn to the land of the living!
Reply #17 - Dec 7th, 2008,
One other tip is the tough to reach places like the groves on braces or around the valve case can be gotten to with string or yarn. I think Kenton or someone else on this site posted an article on another site and sent me an email about it. That bit there about using string or yarn to get into the tough spots is worth its weight in gold alone!
I am going to be sand blasting my son's Holton 602 after I strip it and replace the lead pipe and receiver. I am probably going to spray it with a coat of clear lacquer for two reasons. 1) The kid is 10 years old and I doubt that he would polish it so that means I would be polishing it weekly. 2)It is very rare, but you can get raw brass poisoning and I would hate for my 10-year-old to be one of the rare people it happens too. It depends on your chemistry but on raw brass anything your skin will leach some of the elements out of the brass. I would imagine if you had an acidic skin chemistry you would be at a higher risk. This is why Bach and one other company will not manufacture raw brass instruments.
Reply #18 - Sep 25th, 2012
I found this to be an interesting disclaimer. Apparently, the instrument makers knew and were concerned about providing an inferior characteristic to their products.
Reply #19 - Sep 11th, 2018,
Found the exact same notice with the warranty card that came with my 54 Olds Special cornet.
Sep 1st, 2006,
An undated paper by Renold O. Schilke concerning this issue, including raw, plating and applying lacquer
Schilke Brass Clinic
The Physics of Inner Brass and the Acoustical Effects of
Various Materials and Their Treatment
By Renold O. Schilke
This undated paper, long unavailable, was printed and distributed at clinics and conventions by the Schilke Company. It can now be downloaded as a MS Word document or a PDF document from the Schilke official site, if you wish.
The physical shape of the inside of a brass instrument and its mouthpiece has always been of great interest, not only to manufacturers of brass instruments, but to those who perform upon them. The harmonics of an open pipe, if the inside diameter is straight, cannot be used on a brass instrument unless the active use of a slide controlling each one of the notes in the harmonic series is applied. Many manufacturers have found that when added tapers are put to the instrument, in other words tubing of a conical shape, that it made it more possible to give a harmonic series that are closer to usable on a brass instrument. By trial and error, they evolved a method of tapering the tubing whereby very good harmonics were created and made usable. However, many years ago Victor Mahillon established a theory in which the pressure points of the nodal pattern of the inner brass could be controlled so as to change the pitch of the individual notes in such a way that a very usable harmonic series could be created. His theory calls for a change of taper at the pressure point of the node that had to be altered in order to make it a usable musical sound.
Let me first explain exactly what happens when an energy impulse is created by expelling air under pressure through the lips during the period of opening and closing, generally referred to as a vibration. This energy impulse is further compressed in the cup of the mouthpiece. This is the reason why the shape of a mouthpiece cup is so important to obtain certain effects that the performer desires. It reaches its maximum pressure point in the throat of the mouthpiece where it sets up the nodal pattern in the air that is already in the instrument, just as the first contact of a violin box (to the string of the instrument) sets up the vibration or nodal pattern in the string. At the last point of rarefaction, which occurs in front of the bell of the instrument, a standing node is formed which gives a rescinding node going back through the instrument and culminates itself in the larynx of the performer. This is the reason why performers with different sized oral cavities will play the over-all pitch of the same instrument differently. A good example of this occurred when Mr. Arnold Jacobs and Mr. A. Hirada of Japan were in my studio trying tubas. To obtain the same pitch, Mr. Jacobs had to have his slide all the way in, making the instrument on the extremely sharp side as his oral cavity was of such a tremendous size it lowered the pitch to the given pitch. However, Mr. Hirada, whose oral cavity is very small, had to pull his turning slide to give approximately eight additional inches of tubing to the instrument in order to play in the same pitch.
In working out a formula to shape the inside of the instrument properly, I first tried to work it out mathematically. In fact, I worked several years in making drawings of the nodal patterns of the trumpet, superimposing them on onion skin paper above one another to find out exactly where the multiples were in both the pressure points and the points of rarefaction. As you understand, it would be only at the singular points that a variation in the taper could affect a note favorably. If it was a multiple point, we could correct one note, but all of the other notes having their pressure point at the same place would be adversely affected. After having worked out a particular formula in this manner, I tried to apply it and found I was mistaken in my calculations. If I had nothing but straight tubing to work with, the formula could be applied as I had applied it. In other words, my original formula consisted of taking the speed of sound, dividing it by the number of vibrations per second, then dividing the nodal pattern from point of rarefaction to point of rarefaction giving me the maximum pressure point of the nodal pattern. As I asserted, if it were straight tubing I was working with, this formula would have worked out very well, but since the mouthpiece and the bell consisted of French curves, I would have had to develop a new formula to every location of pressure points on the instrument.
It was at this time that I met Dr. Aebi and we discussed notes on this particular control of the inner brass. Those of you who have read the articles of Dr. Aebi know that he is an amateur horn player and possibly one of the world's greatest physicists. He had approached the horn in the process of locating the nodal pattern by having the horn completely extended and inserting a small microphone on the end of a rod and taking it through the instrument while a note was being played and the results registered an an oscilloscope. However, during my stay there, we started utilizing a contact mike so we could work with the instrument in its natural shape while a performer was playing a particular note. In following along the instrument with the contact mike right into the oral cavity of the performer and registering the results on an oscilloscope with the aid of a movie camera, we were able to discover exactly the points of pressure as well as the points of rarefaction. At the point of rarefaction on an instrument, if we only had one note to play, it would be possible to lay that particular note without any disturbance even if the tubing at that particular point was completely removed from e instrument. I have often given demonstrations of this with a C trumpet. When the 2nd line G is played on a C trumpet, a pressure point is directly at the water key and when the water key is opened, it completely stops the tone. If a C is played on the instrument, it is on the taper-off of the pressure point and when you open the water key, it sharpens the note a full tone so you could use it as a trill key. If you played the E on the forth space, the note sound would be true whether the water key was opened or not. In other words, there would be absolutely no disturbance from the fact that the water key was open. In fact, at that area, five-eights of an inch of tubing could be cut out of the instrument and if you only had to play that one note, you could play it all day and never have a disturbance in it with that piece of tubing missing.
I know it is hard for people to conceive the idea of changing the pitch of an instrument by only changing the rate of taper one to two thousandths of an inch at exactly the pressure point of the note that you want to affect. On the mouthpipe of my instrument, if you will look carefully through the inside of it, you will see that I have corrected faulty notes in fourteen different places. In some places, the pitch of the note receives almost an eighth of a tone by utilizing less than one thousandth variance in taper over a quarter of an inch length. As stated previously, we can only correct intonation on the note at a particular point. We must find a single pressure point for that note in order to accomplish this. If it goes to a multiple pressure point, too many notes would be affected adversely. Some of the corrections on intonation are clear into the bell area. It is only at the places where we can change it on tapered surfaces that we can make the corrections. On the slides of the instrument, it is impossible to make the necessary corrections. In the bow of the tuning slide it is possible and it is also the reason why, on all my instruments, you will find such a long mouthpipe...longer than anyone else uses.
I hope I have made myself clear in my approach to the physics of inner brass. I know sometimes, at the first hearing, it is difficult to assimilate everything. In fact, in Hamamatsu, in order to demonstrate what I was doing very clearly, I had the men build me a pipe organ of one octave with all the pipes of exactly the same length. Then, by changing the inside proportions of the pipes and rate of taper at the pressure points of the nodal patterns, I was able to produce a true scale over one octave. Again, it is important in the manufacture of a brass instrument not to have braces, particularly at multiple pressure points. Even with the few braces that I have on my sliding bell instruments, two notes are affected. They, of course, change according to the pitch of the instrument that we are working with. On certain trumpets, such as the E flat tuning bell and the G and F, these instruments may be played in tune by the majority of performers without any slide manipulation. The answer to how this is accomplished has already been given to you so if you are in doubt, refer back to my earlier statements.
Let me spend a few minutes referring to the materials and their affect on the acoustics of brass instruments. The majority of bells on brass instruments are made of various forms of brass such as a combination of copper and other metals, depending upon the ultimate properties required. The common formulas contain copper and tin with a certain amount of antimony for hardness. Some use copper, zinc and tin. In my experiments on my instruments, my favorite brass formula until recently was a 60/40 combination of copper and silver which was especially made for me for just the bells of my instruments. However, approximately a year ago, I worked out a new formula for what I term beryllium bronze. This particular material has a wonderful acoustical effect that it has remarkable carrying power. Its projection of sound is quite phenomenal. However, let us go into the various metals that we have experimented with. At one time we ran an experiment in which we used steel, aluminum, various plastics, glass, silver, various combinations of brass and the last one we used was lead. To demonstrate results as quickly as possible, I will choose the two extremes. The steel bell, which we tempered so it was extremely hard, gave possibly one of the most interesting results. Many people test a bell by tapping it with their finger or knuckle and in tapping the steel bell, it would emit a very ringing sound, truly like a bell. However, when we played this instrument, the quality of sound was extremely dead. On searching for the reason for this, we looked at the oscilloscope when the performer played on the instrument and found the sine pattern very faint but the distortion pattern, coming from the vibration of the bell itself, going through at a very jagged and rapid rate, killing the brilliance of sound of the true tone. At the other extreme was the lead bell. This bell, if rapped with your knuckle, emitted an extremely dead sound like rapping on a piece of wood. However the sound that emanated when it was blown was extremely brilliant, brilliant to the point of being mechanical. This showed up on the oscilloscope as a perfectly true sine pattern, there being no distortions in the harmonics either above or below, and, as a result, the sound was absolutely pure but not usable musically, except for a general effect such as a percussion instrument would give. The voice, you know, registering on an oscilloscope, gives harmonics both above and below the note. These distortions, if we may call them such, give warmth to the tone. We have to have that "distortion" in order to have the sound acceptable to our ears as a musical sound.
To continue about materials that go into a brass instrument, it is also necessary to add something concerning the treatment of the metal after it is formed into the bell of an instrument. As far as the over-all instrument is concerned, the more inert it is to vibration, the better it is. However, the thickness of the metal and the temper of the metal in the mouthpipe, turning slide and bell greatly affect the quality of sound produced by the instrument. For instance, with a yellow brass, either 70/30 or 80/20 formula, it is necessary after the bell is formed to anneal it at two different points. This is to take the excess temper out of the bell caused by work hardening. If the temper were left in the bell, we would find the quality of sound had become very dark (remember here the results when we attempted to use a tempered steel bell). Metal with excess temper gives too many vibrations of its own. Regarding the thickness of an ordinary brass bell, I like the vulnerable areas to be under fourteen thousandths of an inch, that is, between twelve and fourteen thousandths. However with the beryllium bronze, I am able to make bells with the vulnerable areas down to six and seven thousandths of an inch and one bell in particular which I finished for Mr. Faddis in New York was down to three thousandths of an inch. This particular bell works exceedingly well for him inasmuch as he plays most of the time in the extreme top register. The response was most excellent for his particular type of work. In other words, it all depends upon where the bell is going to be used and the quality of tone the performer wants from his instrument. All of this determines exactly whether a bell should be built in one way or another. As you can see, many things enter into the acoustical properties producing sound on a brass instrument.
One large point of controversy has always existed between those who prefer a lacquered horn and those who prefer plated horns, either silver or gold, or a third group who prefer their instruments in plain brass without any protective coating whatsoever. Let me give you my findings on the three different finishes of instruments. First, I tried to find myself three instruments that played absolutely identically. One, I silverplated, one I had a very good lacquer job put on and a third I left in brass. Now recall that all three instruments played identically the same in brass, or as close as it is possible to get. I had various players from the Symphony working with me as well as other professional trumpet players in Chicago and they agreed unanimously on the results. The findings were that plating does not affect the playing qualities of brass instruments. That is, the plated instrument and the plain brass instrument played identically. The lacquered instrument, however, seemed to be changed considerably. This instrument, which originally had played the same as the other two, now had a very much impaired tonal quality and the over-all pitch was changed.
To explain these findings as to why the silver and brass instruments played alike and the lacquered instrument did not, let me give you some figures. The silver plating on a brass instrument is only one-half of a thousandth inch thick. In other words .0005 inch. The lacquer that goes on, if it is a good lacquer job, is approximately seven thousandths of an inch thick, or .007 inch. Now to get an idea in your minds as to what these thickness figures represent, an ordinary piece of writing paper is approximately four thousandths of an inch thick so the silver that goes on an instrument is only 1/8 as thick as a piece of writing paper, while the lacquer is almost double the thickness of a piece of writing paper. The silver in itself is very compatible to the brass. The lacquer, if it is a good lacquer and baked on, will be almost as hard as glass and not at all compatible to brass. The lacquer on the bell of an instrument is seven thousandths of an inch thick on the outside and another seven thousandths on the inside which gives you a total thickness of fourteen thousandths or .014 inch. This is already the thickness of the metal of my instruments so the lacquer process would double the bell thickness. As you can see, it is bound to affect the playing quality of the instrument.
So much for the material going into the instrument. Now let us get to the next point which is possible the most important and that is the tightness of an instrument. You are all acquainted with woodwind instruments and know the effect in intonation of a slight leak of a pad. The same is true in a brass instrument. If there s at any time any leak in the valves, in the water key or in any of the solder joints, there will be a definite effect on the intonation. This is caused by disturbance of the nodal pattern. At a leak, a turbulence occurs which creases a standing node and establishes a rescinding node from that point affecting the intonation.
I feel the tolerance on the pistons of a brass instrument should be kept under one thousandth. In other words, a half a thousandth on each side of the piston. This permits free movement and still gives good acoustical qualities to the instrument. Without having the instrument completely air proof, all of these we have been talking about amount to nothing. Any corrections we make in the instrument with a variance of tapers and what not would be ineffective unless the instrument was first absolutely tight. Now that does not mean I feel it is essential for the air to go through the instrument. It is not! If , after our lips were vibrated, the air could be disposed of in another way other than going through the instrument, the tone would be at its best. People who have used and understand physics know that this is true. However, there are people who do not understand this point. I put this as a question one time when I was giving a clinic to some bandmasters after listening to various remarks made by them about air having to go through the horn. I asked, "Is it necessary in the production of sound for the air to carry the sound through the horn?" I had hands by people in the affirmative that it was. To prove my point, I had a tuba player come up on the stage and had him blow some smoke into his tuba and begin to play. He played over a minute before some smoke finally began to tickle out the bell of the instrument. So, it is necessary to have air in the instrument so the player can establish the nodal pattern. It is not necessary for that air to move through the instrument any more than an energy impulse created by dropping a stone in water causes the water to actually move. What happens is, the energy impulse travels along lifting and depressing the water in its particular area ad infinitum. This is true of musical sound in relation to m air. The sound leaves the instrument and keeps on traveling in the same manner.
I know we have talked of many ideas that are somewhat controversial. However I always hate to make a statement unless I have studied it and proven it, not only to myself but to many outstanding performers. I hope these facts prove to be of great interest to you.
Reply #1 - Sep 2nd, 2006,
One thing that really struck me was that in some cases the lacquer is thicker than the metal it covers.
I knew I liked unlacquered horns. . .
When I was growing up, I associated silver-plated instruments with being old, outdated, and worn out. I guess one can learn things as you get older.
Reply #2 - Sep 5th, 2006
That's for me too. My master got very upset every time we came to talk about lacquered instruments, and he used words that can’t be written here. His worst enemy was gold lacquer as it is much harder to remove than clear lacquer, but also is thicker harder, and heavier.
He even had some resistance towards silver plating, but I think the changes in characteristics with silver plating are of a very minor range, if present at all.
Reply #3 - Sep 5th, 2006,
Am I correct that sometimes the gold is a coloring below the lacquer, and sometimes it is in the lacquer itself?
Reply #4 - Sep 5th, 2006,
You are probably right. I’ve never given it much thought, when fighting to get that lacquer off....
Reply #5 - Sep 17th, 2006, at 1:33am
I'm in the process of de-lacquering my York Master, and I think I'm fast becoming a fan of unlacquered horns FROM THE FACTORY!!!
A little Brasso, a LOT of elbow grease, and (IMHO) a minor improvement in the timbre, but it's worth the work. I also like the sound / resonance of red brass lead pipes and bells, but I doubt I'll ever find a bell to fit my York, and I don't think I want to change out the lead pipe.
Reply #6 - Sep 17th, 2006,
A little metal stripper will make quick work of it.
Reply #7 - Sep 18th, 2006,
What Brand? How is it applied?
Reply #8 - Aug 9th, 2007,
Just to respond to the comments about gold lacquer and stripping techniques... When I am stripping a horn, I use a stripper designed for auto detailers. You can buy aerosol cans of it at Wal-Mart in the auto section. It seems to work well. But it WILL burn skin.... trust me.
In my experience gold lacquer is created by using a dye that is added to the lacquer itself. The color may vary by company, model, year mfg., etc. But usually a gold "spot lacquer" can match the color pretty well by just adding extra coats to make it darker (it starts off very light).
Reply #9 - Aug 9th, 2007,
I've not tried the spray types; I've used those that have the consistency of jelly. The ones that work best are labeled Industrial or Aircraft grade. And, you are right, they will let you know if you get some on your skin!
Reply #10 - Aug 9th, 2007, at 11:32pm
I like the spray because I am sure I get in all the little crevices and such...but jelly does sound much easier to control. Where do you get it, and do you just use some type of brush for application?
Reply #11 - Aug 10th, 2007
I got a nice sized jug of it at a NAPA auto parts store.
Reply #12 - Aug 10th, 2007
How long should it be left on?
I've been putting off a Conn 14I that is nickel with burnt lacquer that really plays well, but the burnt areas are unsightly. I always assumed it required a hot dip in some sort of tank to remove it or a tough buffing job.
Reply #13 - Aug 10th, 2007
Burnt lacquer is a little tougher to get to come off than undamaged lacquer, but usually the stripper and a bit of rubbing should get it off. Or, if you are impatient, strip it and then buff off the resistant parts.
Reply #14 - Sep 26th, 2007,
I bought a '63 Conn 5A Victor cornet on eBay a couple of months ago. It looked terrible, and I got it cheap because of it. I removed what was left of the lacquer with Krylon OFF! spray-on paint remover and polished the brass and nickel with MAAS metal polish - good stuff.
Reply #16 - Sep 30th, 2007,
Thanks. I'm probably going to have a cosmetic overhaul done on it, including lacquer. The Conn 5A is a pretty rare cornet, and this one plays very good. Even though it looks much better after my application of "elbow grease", it still has numerous dents and is a little crooked. I'd like to return this fine old horn to the land of the living!
Reply #17 - Dec 7th, 2008,
One other tip is the tough to reach places like the groves on braces or around the valve case can be gotten to with string or yarn. I think Kenton or someone else on this site posted an article on another site and sent me an email about it. That bit there about using string or yarn to get into the tough spots is worth its weight in gold alone!
I am going to be sand blasting my son's Holton 602 after I strip it and replace the lead pipe and receiver. I am probably going to spray it with a coat of clear lacquer for two reasons. 1) The kid is 10 years old and I doubt that he would polish it so that means I would be polishing it weekly. 2)It is very rare, but you can get raw brass poisoning and I would hate for my 10-year-old to be one of the rare people it happens too. It depends on your chemistry but on raw brass anything your skin will leach some of the elements out of the brass. I would imagine if you had an acidic skin chemistry you would be at a higher risk. This is why Bach and one other company will not manufacture raw brass instruments.
Reply #18 - Sep 25th, 2012
I found this to be an interesting disclaimer. Apparently, the instrument makers knew and were concerned about providing an inferior characteristic to their products.
Reply #19 - Sep 11th, 2018,
Found the exact same notice with the warranty card that came with my 54 Olds Special cornet.
metals and finishes
Feb 15th, 2012,
What else can we add to the list?
Leaded Brass or
Free Machining Brass 62.5% Copper, 3.1% Lead, 35.4% Zinc Mouthpieces, Machined parts
Yellow Brass or
Cartridge Brass 70% Copper - 30% Zinc
Nickel Silver or
German Silver 70% Copper-20% Zinc-10% Nickel
Rose Brass or
Gold Brass or
Re-O-loy 85% Copper - 15% Zinc
Red Brass or
Commercial Bronze or
Kruspe Metal 90% Copper - 10% Zinc
Coprion 100% Copper
Monel 31.5% Copper - 66% Nickel - 2.5% Iron, Manganese and Silicon
Stainless Steel 90% Iron - 10% Chromium
Sterling silver 92.5% silver 7.5% copper
Nickel
Reply #1 - Feb 15th, 2012, at 9:52am
Sterling silver 92.5% silver 7.5% copper and Nickle Plated Nickle (Getzen valves)
Reply #2 - Feb 17th, 2012
Leaded Brass (CDA 360) 62.5% Copper - 3.1% Lead - 35.4% Zinc
Also called "free machining brass". Not used in drawn or spun parts, but used a lot in machined parts (mouthpieces, fittings, etc.). There was a recent thread on the trombone forum regarding some chemical analysis on mouthpieces, and almost all of them were this alloy.
Some brass alloys have multiple names. 90-10 is sometimes called "commercial bronze" and 70-30 is sometimes called "cartridge brass".
Now here's where things get screwy...
If you go to a metal supplier and request "red brass", you'll likely get 85-15. If you Google "rose brass", the only hits you'll find are for musical instruments; apparently, the entire rest of the world considers 85-15 to be red brass. 90-10 is also red brass, but it's less common (outside the musical instrument business).
Then there's the proprietary names, like Re-O-loy (Olds Recording bells; looks like 85-15 to me) and the obscure stuff like "Kruspe metal" (good luck with that one).
Reply #3 - Feb 17th,
According to the people of Thein (Germany) Kruspe Metal is CuZn10 which means 90%copper 10% zinc
Reply #4 - Feb 17th, 2012,
OK, I've updated the table.
Reply #5 - Feb 17th, 2012 at 4:43pm
A sample of historic brasses dating from the mid-1600 to the beginning of the 1800 shows quite a hodge podge that includes antimony, tin, iron, lead and nickel and silver. The samples were removed from the interior metal opposite the bell seams. The samples were removed as deeply as possible without compromising the instruments.
Two samples from a Viennese shop at the turn of the 19th century (same shop, same year) showed copper zinc content of Cu 69.09
Zn 30.26 to Cu 71.52 Zn 28.13 respectively.
An older sample from 1700 showed Cu 78.74, Zn 20.25
Is the difference in identical horns significant?
Mar 12th, 2012,
Kevin came up with an interesting article discerning the differences between two mass produced instruments.
http://acoustics.open.ac.uk/802574C70048F266/%28httpAssets%29/B0A1172E6E6A4679802577
I'll admit to having read over it quickly, but it seems to indicate that there are differences in the characteristics of two mass produced instruments, even when a manufacturing error is corrected.
But that the difference is discernible to a professional player not to an amateur (and presumably not to a listener).
I would suggest that maybe the professional player is able to tell the difference because of greater experience with several instruments, where the amateur might have had less experience with multiple instruments and may be less certain what were the characteristics of the instruments, versus his personal characteristics as a player.
Reply #1 - Mar 17th, 2012,
Very interesting article. I would like to see the same done with top line professional cornets. I know that when my Yamaha Euphonium was new, my instructors played 6 horns and then had me play 2 to decide which Yamaha I was getting. Presumably, even expertly built horns show differences.
Feb 15th, 2012,
What else can we add to the list?
Leaded Brass or
Free Machining Brass 62.5% Copper, 3.1% Lead, 35.4% Zinc Mouthpieces, Machined parts
Yellow Brass or
Cartridge Brass 70% Copper - 30% Zinc
Nickel Silver or
German Silver 70% Copper-20% Zinc-10% Nickel
Rose Brass or
Gold Brass or
Re-O-loy 85% Copper - 15% Zinc
Red Brass or
Commercial Bronze or
Kruspe Metal 90% Copper - 10% Zinc
Coprion 100% Copper
Monel 31.5% Copper - 66% Nickel - 2.5% Iron, Manganese and Silicon
Stainless Steel 90% Iron - 10% Chromium
Sterling silver 92.5% silver 7.5% copper
Nickel
Reply #1 - Feb 15th, 2012, at 9:52am
Sterling silver 92.5% silver 7.5% copper and Nickle Plated Nickle (Getzen valves)
Reply #2 - Feb 17th, 2012
Leaded Brass (CDA 360) 62.5% Copper - 3.1% Lead - 35.4% Zinc
Also called "free machining brass". Not used in drawn or spun parts, but used a lot in machined parts (mouthpieces, fittings, etc.). There was a recent thread on the trombone forum regarding some chemical analysis on mouthpieces, and almost all of them were this alloy.
Some brass alloys have multiple names. 90-10 is sometimes called "commercial bronze" and 70-30 is sometimes called "cartridge brass".
Now here's where things get screwy...
If you go to a metal supplier and request "red brass", you'll likely get 85-15. If you Google "rose brass", the only hits you'll find are for musical instruments; apparently, the entire rest of the world considers 85-15 to be red brass. 90-10 is also red brass, but it's less common (outside the musical instrument business).
Then there's the proprietary names, like Re-O-loy (Olds Recording bells; looks like 85-15 to me) and the obscure stuff like "Kruspe metal" (good luck with that one).
Reply #3 - Feb 17th,
According to the people of Thein (Germany) Kruspe Metal is CuZn10 which means 90%copper 10% zinc
Reply #4 - Feb 17th, 2012,
OK, I've updated the table.
Reply #5 - Feb 17th, 2012 at 4:43pm
A sample of historic brasses dating from the mid-1600 to the beginning of the 1800 shows quite a hodge podge that includes antimony, tin, iron, lead and nickel and silver. The samples were removed from the interior metal opposite the bell seams. The samples were removed as deeply as possible without compromising the instruments.
Two samples from a Viennese shop at the turn of the 19th century (same shop, same year) showed copper zinc content of Cu 69.09
Zn 30.26 to Cu 71.52 Zn 28.13 respectively.
An older sample from 1700 showed Cu 78.74, Zn 20.25
Is the difference in identical horns significant?
Mar 12th, 2012,
Kevin came up with an interesting article discerning the differences between two mass produced instruments.
http://acoustics.open.ac.uk/802574C70048F266/%28httpAssets%29/B0A1172E6E6A4679802577
I'll admit to having read over it quickly, but it seems to indicate that there are differences in the characteristics of two mass produced instruments, even when a manufacturing error is corrected.
But that the difference is discernible to a professional player not to an amateur (and presumably not to a listener).
I would suggest that maybe the professional player is able to tell the difference because of greater experience with several instruments, where the amateur might have had less experience with multiple instruments and may be less certain what were the characteristics of the instruments, versus his personal characteristics as a player.
Reply #1 - Mar 17th, 2012,
Very interesting article. I would like to see the same done with top line professional cornets. I know that when my Yamaha Euphonium was new, my instructors played 6 horns and then had me play 2 to decide which Yamaha I was getting. Presumably, even expertly built horns show differences.