Differences between Shires’ axials (bass)
- BrianJohnston
- Posts: 771
- Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2020 7:49 pm
- Location: North America
- Contact:
Differences between Shires’ axials (bass)
I was just looking at a post that shires made, and they have a number of different types of axial valves (at least for bass, I don’t know about tenor). Standard weight, lightweight and bollinger. What are the differences between these and how did they reduce the weight on the axial? Are there lightweight options for tenor?
Bach Brass Artist
Fort Wayne Philharmonic
Lima Symphony Orchestra
Fort Wayne Philharmonic
Lima Symphony Orchestra
- Burgerbob
- Posts: 5429
- Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 8:10 pm
- Location: LA
- Contact:
Re: Differences between Shires’ axials (bass)
The valves themselves are not different.
Lightweight have some braces removed and less overlapping valve slide tubing.
Bollinger have a short 2nd valve tuning for flat G.
Lightweight have some braces removed and less overlapping valve slide tubing.
Bollinger have a short 2nd valve tuning for flat G.
Aidan Ritchie, LA area player and teacher
- BigBadandBass
- Posts: 266
- Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2020 11:17 am
- Location: Ohio
Re: Differences between Shires’ axials (bass)
As Aidan said, I should also add the lightweight has cut down legs on the tuning slides whereas standard as a full E-pull on the F side. There is also less nickel sleeving on the tuning slides of the lightweight.
I don’t see why a lightweight tenor couldn’t be made
I don’t see why a lightweight tenor couldn’t be made
- paysonmcc
- Posts: 45
- Joined: Tue May 21, 2019 4:40 pm
- Location: ATX
Re: Differences between Shires’ axials (bass)
The Bollinger model also had shortened stop arms on top of the valve (the place where the arm screws in to the actual valve). This shortened the throw of the valves greatly. I don't know if the model still has this feature as I never hear anyone mention it.