Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

950025 Posts in 62841 Topics- by 15177 Members - Latest Member: Hank K
Jump to:  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: King 2B vs Conn 4H  (Read 4534 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
greg waits

*
*
Offline Offline

Location: rowlett texas
Joined: Jul 30, 2002
Posts: 5742

View Profile WWW
« on: Apr 26, 2011, 10:22PM »

I would like to know what the opinion is among those with experience with these two models.

I know I am oversimplifying things here, but for arguments sake, the 2B is essentially to King as what the 4H was to Conn. Bore size, bell size very similar.

Among those who have played both, how do these compare?

Logged

It is what it is; no more no less
Dantheman

*
Offline Offline

Location: JHB South Africa
Joined: Dec 3, 2006
Posts: 953

View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: Apr 26, 2011, 11:15PM »

The 2B literally falls into a trumpet section in my opinion. It colours and blends easily. It plays with a lot of core at low volume but brightens up very quickly. It's also very easy to play and records well.

The 4H however blows wide open and sounds much larger than it is. (not unusual with Conns of that era). It doesn't blend as easily as the 2B but it's more likely to be heard in an acoustic situation. Because of the wide open lead pipe and consequential lack of resistance, I find it very relaxing and fun to play. Pedal notes and double pedal notes. Easy as playing a bass bone. Stratosphere. No problem.

From a commercial point of view, if I could only own one I would feel safer with a 2B.
From an artistic point of view, the 4H.

BTW. I'm playing a 2B+ 1st generation with gold brass bell. It's taken months to sort out the slide which for some reason is really heavy, and I've put a heavy counterweight on. The horn is now sweet magic.
Logged
lowerlip
« Reply #2 on: Apr 27, 2011, 05:18AM »

Well, I played 2b hn white and 2b silversonic anniversary for years. I got hold of a 47 4h for cheap.
I stripped the lacquer, and worked on cleaning up the slide a bit.
I am a forceful player and the 4h is much better suited to me. I like a very open blow and the 4h seems less resistant in many ways.
I cant say one was better than the other, just my tastes and needs have changed over the years.
I've played many 2b's and a great one is hard to beat. I have played only 1 4h, the one I own and I still have a 2b. The king has been in the closet for 3 years now.
Logged
greg waits

*
*
Offline Offline

Location: rowlett texas
Joined: Jul 30, 2002
Posts: 5742

View Profile WWW
« Reply #3 on: Apr 27, 2011, 09:59AM »

I picked up an early 50s 4H online last week. It arrived the other day.

It has a lot of potential. It too needs some cleaning up, but it isn't trashed by any means. I think I will spend some $ and time getting this one sorted out.

There are times when I am primarily playing lead in a loud band where the 6H just is missing that extra "oomph". A problem that I tend to have is that my sounds leans towards dark.....and normally I don't have a problem with it. I always say if you want to play bright and edgy, buy a trumpet.

But in those situations, it is just a lot of work to cut through the din with my 6H (not as hard as say, on my old Bachg 12s, but still a challenge).

I am very curious to learn if a 4H might better suit the bill on lead calls. I do wish it had an 8" bell though.

Anyone see that sweet gold plated 26H on ebay? Now THAT is a nice looking horn!
Logged

It is what it is; no more no less
sabutin

*
Offline Offline

Location: NYC
Joined: Sep 26, 2005
Posts: 4522
"A professional freelance NYC lower brass player."


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: Apr 28, 2011, 01:00AM »

The 2B literally falls into a trumpet section in my opinion. It colours and blends easily. It plays with a lot of core at low volume but brightens up very quickly. It's also very easy to play and records well.

The 4H however blows wide open and sounds much larger than it is. (not unusual with Conns of that era). It doesn't blend as easily as the 2B but it's more likely to be heard in an acoustic situation. Because of the wide open lead pipe and consequential lack of resistance, I find it very relaxing and fun to play. Pedal notes and double pedal notes. Easy as playing a bass bone. Stratosphere. No problem.

From a commercial point of view, if I could only own one I would feel safer with a 2B.
From an artistic point of view, the 4H.

What Dan said.

Plus...since Dorsey, the characteristic 2B timbre is a very widely accepted "jazz" sound. In reality it is no more or less "jazzy' than the timbre of any other horn but repetition breeds familiarity and there we are. If Jack Teagarden had been the trombonist who rose to commercial swing era superstardom instead of Tommy Dorsey, then the 4H/24H sound would be the "jazzy" one.

So it goes.

S.
Logged

Visit <http://samburtis.com/>. Lots of information on that site in the form of articles plus a link to my method book "Time, Balance & Connections-A Universal Theory Of Brass Relativity" which includes several chapters of the book.
griffinben

*
Offline Offline

Location: The Wilds of the Northeast
Joined: Jan 28, 2003
Posts: 2187

View Profile
« Reply #5 on: Apr 28, 2011, 06:47AM »

I have done time on both the 2B (and variants thereof: Jiggs, 2B+, Silvertone...)and the 4H (from lots of eras and 24H's).  I have a slightly different take on the blowing and blend characteristics of each.

The thing about the 4H is that it DOES blow bigger than you think it would, and the sound IS bigger...but the sound is bigger about 20-30 feet away, but sounds a bit narrower behind the bell than the 2B.  The 2B can blow smaller (not always) but I feel that you can hear more immediately behind the bell, and that can feel more natural.  Unless you adjust yours ears, the 2B might feel more natural.

In terms of sound, its like 6H vs. 3B.  The 4H blends, but its more colorful, a bit huskier.  And so it blends like a a brick of a different color.  It'll still hold up the trumpets, but you can hear the difference.  The 2B melds into the wall with the same color until you step on the gas and sizzle it out.  I don;t think of one being better or worse, just different.  But we do know what most people think they want to hear.

I think if more people played horns with truly individual sounds, the 4H would be just fine (Martin Committee, King, and real vintage Conn trumpets; Buescher, King and Conn saxes) then it would be a wall of sound that was a beautiful mosaic.  But with mainly Bach trumpets (and other similarly "clean" sounding horns from Kanstul and Callichio that seem to dominate) and Selmer saxes (Or Keilwerth, Yamaha, etc.) we have the great middle ground that makes anything outside it sound...foreign.

*sigh* I have hijacked this thread and made a lament for the loss of individual voice.

-Ben
Logged
Gabe Langfur

*
Offline Offline

Location: Boston, MA, USA
Joined: Apr 9, 2000
Posts: 4354

View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: Apr 28, 2011, 08:55PM »

Wait, Ben...let me get this straight...you want to hear big band music that sounds like it's being played by HUMANS?

Weird.  ;-)
Logged

Gabe Langfur
Bass Trombonist
Rhode Island Philharmonic
Vermont Symphony

Lecturer of Bass Trombone
Boston University
Guest Artist/Teacher in Trombone
University of Rhode Island

S. E. Shires Artist
griffinben

*
Offline Offline

Location: The Wilds of the Northeast
Joined: Jan 28, 2003
Posts: 2187

View Profile
« Reply #7 on: Apr 28, 2011, 09:23PM »

Wait, Ben...let me get this straight...you want to hear big band music that sounds like it's being played by HUMANS?

Weird.  ;-)

I appreciate this comment, I really do...but its not quite that...

I want a big band, or any band for that matter (be it brass quintet, jazz combo, big band, or orchestra) to sound individual...like several disparate elements contributing toward a common good.  A common musical good no matter what path it takes.  I just feel that we've gotten to a point where most people treat the path most taken.

i am willing to acquiesce that there are several individual voices within a particular sonic timbre...but I feel that there has a been a great loss of the individual voice (in terms of timbre) in the name of the whole.  In other words, the greater good has trumped the individual.  And that's what I lament.

Whether that is human or not, I leave to the ear of the beholder...

But I personally celebrate the individual sound in the midst of the great mediocre timbrel palette.

FWIW,
Ben
Logged
Gabe Langfur

*
Offline Offline

Location: Boston, MA, USA
Joined: Apr 9, 2000
Posts: 4354

View Profile WWW
« Reply #8 on: Apr 28, 2011, 09:50PM »

I started responding, and then thought better of it and started a new thread: http://tromboneforum.org/index.php/topic,56269.0.html
Logged

Gabe Langfur
Bass Trombonist
Rhode Island Philharmonic
Vermont Symphony

Lecturer of Bass Trombone
Boston University
Guest Artist/Teacher in Trombone
University of Rhode Island

S. E. Shires Artist
sabutin

*
Offline Offline

Location: NYC
Joined: Sep 26, 2005
Posts: 4522
"A professional freelance NYC lower brass player."


View Profile WWW
« Reply #9 on: Apr 29, 2011, 05:12AM »

I appreciate this comment, I really do...but its not quite that...

I want a big band, or any band for that matter (be it brass quintet, jazz combo, big band, or orchestra) to sound individual...like several disparate elements contributing toward a common good.  A common musical good no matter what path it takes.  I just feel that we've gotten to a point where most people treat the path most taken.

i am willing to acquiesce that there are several individual voices within a particular sonic timbre...but I feel that there has a been a great loss of the individual voice (in terms of timbre) in the name of the whole.  In other words, the greater good has trumped the individual.  And that's what I lament.

Whether that is human or not, I leave to the ear of the beholder...

But I personally celebrate the individual sound in the midst of the great mediocre timbrel palette.

FWIW,
Ben

The greatest Duke Ellington trombone section:

Lawrence Brown-subtle, a master of elision and understatement.

Tricky Sam Nanton-pure power.

Juan Tizol-a valve trombonist witha spectacularly beautiful sound. Playng third parts because Duke liked the valve's ability to move around smoothly down there. On a trombone in the key of C.

All of the other sections...equally original and individual approaches to sound.

To this day there is not a large jazz ensemble that I would rather hear. Not even close. Of course, a great deal of the reason for that was Duke Ellington's genius as a composer/orchestrator, but part of that genius...and part of the collective genius that produced the music in the first place and has sustained it over a century...has been its acceptance of "difference."

Why?

I think that this is rooted in the black experience here in the Americas. Individuality was about all that most African-Americans could count on owning through slavery times and well into the 20th century. To some degree the white musicians who took up the music were attracted to that single aspect of the music as much as anything else. They...we...were schooled in the value of the individual by people who had little else on which they could rely from day to day.

And now that reliance on individuality..its glorification, actually...is being threatened by easy technology and subsumed into an academic approach that neither values nor knows how to teach it. Jazz students are being taught to "play like" a pantheon of greats. Technology has made it very simple to access all of the work of all of the masters and it also makes it easy to transcribe them. There are books after books after books about how to understand the harmonic aspects of the music. Digital recording and ultra-compressed versions of earlier analog recordings absolutely, positively destroy much of the "sound" that came out of the best pre-digital recording. I will never forget my shock when I listened to a CD of John Coltrane's "Giant Steps" album. I had heard 'Trane live many times and owned most of his recordings, but when I lstened to this CD he simply wasn't there anymore. Only his notes. His sound wasn't there. Pre-recorded, play-along tracks have replaced much of the original way that one learned how to play the music, so now instead of learning how to have a musical conversation with a group of individuals many younger players only know how to play with a rhythm section that does not respond to the soloist's input. In the studio the live interactions between and among players...the sonic interactions, the subtle blending of timbres...is sacrificed to "isolation." Even in small ensembles, everyone is wearing earphones...usually inadequate earphones, by the way (money money money)...and hearing some muddy mix where the sounds of the individual players are subsumed to the economic necessities of very expensive recording. The same thing happens in live performance after live performance. Sound is sacrificed to money.

And the ball just keeps on rolling.

Downhill, I am afraid.

I speak from experience here. 40 years in the NYC trenches...studios, jazz clubs, concerts, latin dance gigs by the thousands, more B'way appearances than I would have liked to have done...in all aspects of the business, pure sound has been increasingly sacrificed to convenience. Convenience and profit.

The result of all of this? A whole generation...a very large one...of amazingly talented players most of whom do not really have a clue about what made the music great in the first place.

So it goes?

Maybe.

We shall see.

Soon enough.

Not if I have anything to say about it, though.

Bet on it.

Later...

S.
Logged

Visit <http://samburtis.com/>. Lots of information on that site in the form of articles plus a link to my method book "Time, Balance & Connections-A Universal Theory Of Brass Relativity" which includes several chapters of the book.
wgwbassbone
*
Offline Offline

Location: West Hartford, CT
Joined: Jan 19, 2007
Posts: 836

View Profile
« Reply #10 on: Apr 29, 2011, 05:54AM »

I appreciate this comment, I really do...but its not quite that...

I want a big band, or any band for that matter (be it brass quintet, jazz combo, big band, or orchestra) to sound individual...like several disparate elements contributing toward a common good.  A common musical good no matter what path it takes.  I just feel that we've gotten to a point where most people treat the path most taken.

i am willing to acquiesce that there are several individual voices within a particular sonic timbre...but I feel that there has a been a great loss of the individual voice (in terms of timbre) in the name of the whole.  In other words, the greater good has trumped the individual.  And that's what I lament.

Whether that is human or not, I leave to the ear of the beholder...

But I personally celebrate the individual sound in the midst of the great mediocre timbrel palette.

FWIW,
Ben

Well said Ben.
Logged

Holton TR 180 MV 1 and 1/2G
Pages: [1]   Go Up
Print
Jump to: