Differences between Shires’ axials (bass)

Post Reply
User avatar
BrianJohnston
Posts: 771
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2020 7:49 pm
Location: North America
Contact:

Differences between Shires’ axials (bass)

Post by BrianJohnston »

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
User avatar
Burgerbob
Posts: 5429
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 8:10 pm
Location: LA
Contact:

Re: Differences between Shires’ axials (bass)

Post by Burgerbob »

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.
Aidan Ritchie, LA area player and teacher
User avatar
BigBadandBass
Posts: 266
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2020 11:17 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Differences between Shires’ axials (bass)

Post by BigBadandBass »

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
User avatar
paysonmcc
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue May 21, 2019 4:40 pm
Location: ATX

Re: Differences between Shires’ axials (bass)

Post by paysonmcc »

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.
Post Reply

Return to “Instruments”