Vintage Conn 8H Comparison!

[@PosauneundPapier]

I gotta say, the 60’s one just sounded more “interesting”. One of the changes they made with the modern 8h was making the bell thicker; however, with the modern 8ht (as well as 88ht, 88hto, 88hcl) they went back to the thinner bell more reminiscent of the original Elkhart horns.

[@IceburgMO]

I have played a early-mid 50s 8H for the better part of 35 years, and she has been through a lot of wear and tear. Still my favorite horn to play in most situations, from funk and jazz to ska and rock. You can get bright and stop traffic or still catch those subtle nuances. I was told, eons ago, that it was because of how the coprion bells were set up and fused, as opposed to later years (and the alloy blend, I'm sure). Mine is on a second slide and through a few welds but I love it. I'd love to find another before this one finally disintegrates on me, but seems like i'm always a step behind a good one. :)

[@SchmittMusicTromboneShop]

That is a great era for the 8Hs! Every once in a while I am tempted to order in a brand-new 8H to see how it compares but there is very little call for straight large bore tenors nowadays (kind of a shame IMHO but there it is…)

[@MrTBoneMalone]

His review of these two horns is pretty good. I was actually surprised that there could be that much noticeable difference between the two horns in their sound. The 62 sounded rounder and darker to me, and the 75 sounded brighter with sharper articulation in my opinion. Both good in different ways but different. For classical, I'd absolutely prefer the 62.

[@BillMontana]

Thank you for this and all your videos. As an older musician coming back to the trombone I am looking for a couple of instruments that will suit my needs and will be pleasing to my ear. I like the older 8H and believe it would fill certain playing conditions like playing classic band music and be a good companion to a King 3B which I would use in smaller groups playing dixieland or standards. Right now I have a King 2B and it is just to small a bore and limited in its uses for me.

[@SchmittMusicTromboneShop]

Thanks for watching! I tend to agree with you on the 2B; I know a few players who really manage to make them open up and sing (and to be fair, the vintage 2Bs do feel more open to me then modern iterations) but for the most part I think modern playing demands have passed the .480" bore by. I have been playing my 3B for over 15 years and I really appreciate it for it's versatility (frankly, if approached right I have even used it in certain classical settings.) The 8H is one of the classic designs that I frankly think is not seen enough; with all of the valve development over the past 40 years most players have decided that any downsides the valve might create are worth the benefits but there is color to the sound and nuance to the response of a great straight large bore tenor that I have yet to see replicated on any F-attachment tenor (although the Shires Twin Valve might be close...)

[@alanwitton5039]

Sounds like a great horn!

[@robertmarsh3588]

Interesting! Would live to hear a 8H or 88H comparison from the Elkhart era to a 1995 onwards Gen 2 model.

[@woofelator]

I seem to have one from around 1951

[@Don-rz6jq]

I played on a Conn 8H for 20 years 1975 type and mine had a warm tone with nice low end projection. Actually maybe my ears are wearing out as I approach 70 ; but I was hearing the opposite then what he said. The 75 version had a warm timbre similar to a baritone. The 62 version was brighter slightly and would work well for lead jazz parts IMO. The winner although in that department is a King 2B.

[@SchmittMusicTromboneShop]

One of the things we enjoy about what we do is that everyone experiences instruments differently; thanks for your feedback!

[@jmathesonjr]

I thought the '62 model had a little more overtones to it than the '75. I agree with every thing said in the video about the '62. I also think that the next guy playing both in the exact same setting might say the same thing about the '75. I have to wonder how much the mouthpiece played in the reviewer's experience. If anyone is looking at buying one of these instruments, go into the shop and try them both just like was done here. I will bet that it would be an even split down the middle as to which model is better. From this video, though, my vote goes to the '62.

[@ng21sm12]

I've got an Elkhart Conn 8H from 2016. How do these modern Elkhart Conns compare with the older models?

[@thechrismackeyorchestra1042]

your 2016 8H is not an elkhart as that facory burned down in 1970 and production was moved to Abilene Texas, now the Conn name is owned by UMI Too answer your question yes big differences in so much as they now have a different leadpipe ( you can still get the 'Remmington' style pipe) but the best way if to play an Elkie for yourself

[@ng21sm12]

@@thechrismackeyorchestra1042 I can understand your confusion, but this 8H was personally supplied to me by the CEO of Conn & Selmer, Elkhart, Indiana, in 2016, via the Europe Area Rep of Conn-Selmer Europe, and the bell is clearly engraved 'C G Conn, 8H, Made in Elkhart, Indiana, USA'. So I would think that makes it Elkhart-made Conn 8H, even if not made in the original Conn factory. I'd be interested in anyone's further thoughts. By the way, it's for sale if anyone is interested, as I'm having to give up playing. Good nick, one careful owner.

[@thechrismackeyorchestra1042]

@@ng21sm12 Ahh ok that makes a bit more sense, modern Conn's play great but do no longer have the Remmington leadpipe as standard so the blow is more modern with the bach/Morse taper....that said my 58 88 blew totally different from my 69 8H...the later was described by a very well known orchestral player as rding a bucking bronco when you blew a true forte and above

[@thechrismackeyorchestra1042]

@@ng21sm12 and how much for the 8H? ;)

[@thechrismackeyorchestra1042]

@@ng21sm12 and of course when we Bone players talk about Elkie conn's we are reffering to thiose made in the original factory upto 1070....the problem was when production moved to Abilene they didnot take the skilled workforce....and although Conn have moved back to Elkhart they are a very different horn now

[@Don-rz6jq]

Sorry as I missed in your opening; What mouthpiece did you use and what do you recommend for a mouthpiece on the 70’s era Conn 8H.?

[@SchmittMusicTromboneShop]

At this time I was most likely using a Bach 5G. With that said the 8Hs of this., And going into the 1980s, should still be using the Brown & Sharpe Remington paper in the mouthpiece receiver versus the now standard Morse taper; many players find that these instruments play best with a Remington shank mouthpiece but they are unfortunately becoming increasingly difficult to find…

[@bobcat24]

Personally, I can’t tell the difference in sound at all. They both sound exactly the same to me. I’m not sure if it’s just anecdotal/ placebo, or if my ears just aren’t trained to hear the difference. By any means, this man is a great player.

[@davidbucher4095]

I would think sustained pitches would make it easier to distinguish between the two.

[@TerenceHughes4501]

In my professional days I acquired an Elkhart 8H. At the time it was considered the holy grail but I was quite disappointed. It just felt lifeless, kind of dead and not the pleasant experience that my newer 8H was. So I sold it

[@CesarSatos]

Como faço pra ganhar um trombone

[@bradleybunk6463]

Are you using Remington shank mouthpiece? I think that is required for old Conn 8H’s.

[@markbarnes9489]

my 1982 8H came with the Remington but I changed it for something that suited me better so not 'required'.

[@brunomarcoperotto2751]

And what about today's Conn 8H? Thank you

[@SchmittMusicTromboneShop]

That is a good question! I don't know that I have had the opportunity to play a modern 8H; they are very much a special order with Conn at this time (to the point that they typically don't keep any in stock) but, if I had to guess, it may have some of the openness and smoothness in response as the vintage 8H but I would be surprised if it had the same weight and depth of sound...

[@thefunk731]

Conn 1962 all the way!

[@jimryon1002]

I have a newer 8HT (thin bell). I plays great.

[@walkerpercy8702]

The 75 sounded a lot cleaner and easier to play - to my ears.

[@markpatterson8922]

I thought the 75 also sounded like it was speaking easier. The 75 sound seemed lighter, maybe not as deep. I wondered if the 75 had a thinner bell than the 62 (which would be surprising), or was it a difference in lead pipes.

[@mitchellhalpern3772]

Of course from a statistical perspective if the differences in 8Hs within each era are just as if not more significant than the differences between instruments of the different eras than it is impossible to draw any definitive conclusions from this sort of demo. Of course it is still fun to do these demos ☺️

[@okyouknowwhat]

The '75 had a more... boring sound, best way I can describe it.

[@jackburrows5850]

i would agree with you there. it sounded meh

[@jimryon1002]

IMHO, The 1962 sounds much better. It's a shame that this wonderful horn has fallen out of favor.

[@SchmittMusicTromboneShop]

Agreed, although their new 88HNV has just a bit of the 8H sound and feel…