TromboneChat

I need opinions about adding an F attachment to my new Shires/Marshall Gilkes .500 small bore trombone.

Why exactly?

I'm not against the idea, I use a King 3B/F at work and I LOVE it. But, that's a pretty cheap horn and it's a little bigger than your Shires.

Just get a horn designed to have an F attachment, like a 3BF. Or is the valve a drop in option for Shires? If that's the case, go for it.

Their small bore F attachment horns are superb. I’ve only played one though. If I could convince my better half that it would be prudent for me to buy a new one, I’d probably get an MD+ with an F attachment.

That said, my King 3BF is also pretty great.

Does Shires do small F attachments on custom order? I know you can get Rath to make you an R12F for example, but haven't heard of anyone doing that with a Shires. If that's an option, I'd go that route.

My only specific recommendation is that if you're going all in on adding a custom valve section to a small jazz horn, consider having it built in G with an additional slide for F. A horn smaller than a 3B that you're probably not going to be playing low Cs on is the perfect use case for the mid-register facility of a G valve.

Shires posted a .508with a valve on their story on instagram and i asked if that would become a standard option and they said “Absolutely!”

Do you have any specific concerns?

Many years ago I ran with people on the east coast who played jazz, popular music, and genres outside of jazz and pop on similarly sized straight trombones. I have seen a few 0.500 bore f attachment trombones over the years. It sounds to me like you may already have something in mind to play on it. The trombone modified as such will offer many options and has potential to expand the horizon of anyone for whom you play.

They use the same rotor as their alto. As of a few years ago the pricing was the same as the large bore offering but they didn’t make them Modular

Finetales wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 9:38 pm Does Shires do small F attachments on custom order? I know you can get Rath to make you an R12F for example, but haven't heard of anyone doing that with a Shires. If that's an option, I'd go that route.

My only specific recommendation is that if you're going all in on adding a custom valve section to a small jazz horn, consider having it built in G with an additional slide for F. A horn smaller than a 3B that you're probably not going to be playing low Cs on is the perfect use case for the mid-register facility of a G valve.

This makes the most sense for 99%+ of tenor players, too. Sure, you may need a low C eventually, but certainly not daily.

Cheers,
Andy

elmsandr wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:36 am

Finetales wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 9:38 pm Does Shires do small F attachments on custom order? I know you can get Rath to make you an R12F for example, but haven't heard of anyone doing that with a Shires. If that's an option, I'd go that route.

My only specific recommendation is that if you're going all in on adding a custom valve section to a small jazz horn, consider having it built in G with an additional slide for F. A horn smaller than a 3B that you're probably not going to be playing low Cs on is the perfect use case for the mid-register facility of a G valve.

This makes the most sense for 99%+ of tenor players, too. Sure, you may need a low C eventually, but certainly not daily.

Cheers,
Andy

Certainly for a tenor player who uses a small bore. Your need for the outer positions is minimal: occasionally a C in the bass staff or a B below it; never an E below the bass staff. For a small bore tenor player, sometimes a trill valve (half or whole step) makes more sense than a true attachment.

BGuttman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 7:14 am

elmsandr wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:36 am
This makes the most sense for 99%+ of tenor players, too. Sure, you may need a low C eventually, but certainly not daily.

Cheers,
Andy

Certainly for a tenor player who uses a small bore. Your need for the outer positions is minimal: occasionally a C in the bass staff or a B below it; never an E below the bass staff. For a small bore tenor player, sometimes a trill valve (half or whole step) makes more sense than a true attachment.

If you play weddings, you 100% need an F valve (not a G valve) on your commercial horn. Proud Mary is on the set and there's no bari player? Better get ready to pop some loud low Ds and C#s.

Of course you could just bring two horns, but it's much easier to just have a 3BF.

But yeah, most of the time a small tenor doesn't need those low notes.

Just get a 2nd valve on the 3B!(…yes, I’ve thought about it…)

As have I!

Will the Shires .500 bore Gilkes horn be a stuffy difficult blowing instrument in the F Attachment range? An article on a Thompson Music site talks about a so called "advanced rotary valve". What's the difference in sound and response between a "traditional rotor valve" and an "advanced rotary valve"? Are these terms synonymous, both referring to the same valve? I don't want to install a non-free blowing valve that produces an unstable funky sound on a new Marshall Gilkes model horn. The Shires Team has implied to me that the valve could be interchanged with a "gooseneck" which would cause the horn to become a straight tenor trombone with no valve.

I have no way to travel to the Shires shop to try out the proposed combinations.

brsndhny wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 9:48 am Will the Shires .500 bore Gilkes horn be a stuffy difficult blowing instrument in the F Attachment range?

With a modern, custom valve from a boutique maker? I seriously doubt it.

I own a 0.500 inch bore Shires from before Eastman took Shires over. I like it better than a 6H. I also own a Bach LT42AG and Bach LT42G. I like straight horns: Nobody is taking a knife to my Shires or LT42G. I am retired and do not relish spending large amounts of money on my hobby/addiction.

Years ago Chuck Ward rebuilt an Olds Studio slide for me. I bought it from Sam Burtis. It was a good horn. Most people hot rod the 0.485-0.500 dual bore slides into 0.500-0.500 bore slides. We couldn’t get a 0.485 bore at the time. I elected to use a new King 0.490 upper with the King leadpipe and a new King 0.500 lower. The end result did not blow exactly the same as the original. The difference was within what I would expect between two production horns, side by side. I listened to Chuck Ward’s advice and was satisfied with the outcome.

I own a Duo-Gravis with funky butt side by side triggers and the stock King rotary valves. I put Holton rotary valve oil into it every time that I play it. I think it probably helps fill up any gap due to older tolerances and wear. I am used to it and other than occasional arthritis issues, I am satisfied with the results. Some people are really impressed with a Hagmann valve and open wrap such as my LT42AG has. I could live with Bach’s traditional valve and closed wrap.

From having worked with Chuck Ward and BAC, my experience and expectation is that Shires, Baltimore Brass, Chuck Ward, and BAC are unlikely to do something with an f attachment that fatally changes a horn’s basic characteristics. Neither is that horn ever going to blow the same. No one can predict the outcome of your proposed modification.

Sam Ash has an Olds Recording with an f attachment that at 0.495-0.510 will be very close to the 0.500 bore
Shires. At $705.00, something like this would give me an “outside” and spare gig horn. I could see how much of the literature that I play justifies an f attachment. I have played a straight Olds Recording and know that the straight horns are good horns. It would be reasonable to expect to get most of my investment out of the Olds Recording. There are 0.508 bore King 3Bfs out there that are more mainstream. I do not have the numbers on converting a Shires to an f attachment.

That’s all of the facts, data, and identified subjectivity that I can offer. Good luck.

I wrote a very lengthy full page small print reply, but lost it after being told to login for a second time after trying to post a worthy answer. Unfortunately it was not saved and I did not know it was going to be destroyed. Cheers Guys

Maybe an administrator has it somewhere?

It’s happened twice to me, too. I was trying to give helpful content. Maybe I should have let it go.

If you are planning to make a large post, consider typing it in a Word Processor and copying it over.

I know my computer sometimes seems to like to delete whole paragraphs possibly due to my fingers hovering over the touchpad and doing things I didn't expect. On a short note it's inconvenient, but when whole pages of stuff disappear it's maddening.

Its hard to troubleshoot some of these issues when they arise because I never seem to run into them. That said, I use a very, very vanilla setup for my social media so I don't have any extensions or any additional privacy settings enabled. There's one particular extension that I used to use that gave me a ton of strife that I don't remember the name of, but the basic idea is that it frequently deletes cookies. I stopped using it because it broke like, every site I used it on.

If you do run into issues like that, I do recommend making a comment in the suggestions area of the forum with the OS, browser (and version), as well as a list of all addons you have installed. If I get that, I can possibly figure out root cause. That said, I pretty much always do what Bruce recommended, one way or the other, for this site and others because I also get spell check. I don't always act upon that spell check but sometimes I do!

On the topic of posting, I like to use the preview feature to “save” my work periodically. It also tells me whether or not my formatting is right for photos.

As far as the Marshall Gilkes model with trigger, I’m eager to see what OP finds out from Shires and if they go through with it.

The shires valve won't be stuffy. It isn't stuffy on their alto, so there is even less of a chance of it being stuffy on a tenor. If they can throw in an interchangeable gooseneck, you can't lose.

Welp, there you have it! Marshall was able to get one direct from Shires.

The same video is on Shires facebook page. There it says the valve is .525 bore. It also says that a detachable valve is a standard option for the Gilkes model.

I own a Shires small bore with an F-attachment. I purchased this a while back from someone who used to work there. I'm not sure if it was a prototype or just a fun experiment based on the lack of lacquer and the not quite finished look. I believe the rotor is the same one they use on their altos. Despite the smaller size it plays fine through the lower range and isn't as stuffy as you would think. I found that all of the Shires horns I own always feels and plays bigger than their counterparts, ie a .525 8" Dual Bore setup vs a Bach 36B or MD+ vs a 3B. So for comparison's sake I'd say that it plays somewhere between a 36B and a 79h and definitely bigger than a 3bF.

The bell is an S1YM8 and the slide that came with it is an odd one. It's a dual bore 500-508MD slide with nickel outers/crook and side mounted water key.

I'm looking forward to trying out the Gilkes F model horn if they ever put it into production. If Shires figured out a way to make a closed wrap F attachment with a free blowing valve I would definitely buy one. It would be the perfect horn to play all of these reduced orchestration show books with low C's and B's floating around.

Wanted to resurrect this thread and ask if anyone has had any follow up with the MG horn with the f-attachment and if we know what value they put on it? Also thoughts on how it plays to you would be appreciated.

shinythings7 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2023 9:01 am Wanted to resurrect this thread and ask if anyone has had any follow up with the MG horn with the f-attachment and if we know what value they put on it? Also thoughts on how it plays to you would be appreciated.

It's a .513 valve, identical to the ones used on their Alto w/ Bb valve horns. Valve tubing is .525, so it opens up very quickly from the receiver into the valve and then has a choke on the return thru the valve.

I built Marshall's small bore modular bell section when I was there. There were a lot of design/fit issues, poor fixturing, etc with those small bore valve sections due to a rather quick and poorly planned roll-out of the small bore modular line. They were addressed when I was building them, can't speak to the build quality of the ones being made now.

The one ChoBone posted is a one-off, but looks mostly like the ones being built now except for the new ones come with a single angle brace on the F slide, instead of the double.

Blabberbucket wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2023 9:52 am

shinythings7 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2023 9:01 am Wanted to resurrect this thread and ask if anyone has had any follow up with the MG horn with the f-attachment and if we know what value they put on it? Also thoughts on how it plays to you would be appreciated.

It's a .513 valve, identical to the ones used on their Alto w/ Bb valve horns. Valve tubing is .525, so it opens up very quickly from the receiver into the valve and then has a choke on the return thru the valve.

I built Marshall's small bore modular bell section when I was there. There were a lot of design/fit issues, poor fixturing, etc with those small bore valve sections due to a rather quick and poorly planned roll-out of the small bore modular line. They were addressed when I was building them, can't speak to the build quality of the ones being made now.

The one ChoBone posted is a one-off, but looks mostly like the ones being built now except for the new ones come with a single angle brace on the F slide, instead of the double.

Awesome, thanks for taking the time to respond! Really appreciate your perspective and insight, as I was especially curious what the dimensions were for the valve and tubing.

BGuttman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 7:14 am

elmsandr wrote: ↑Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:36 am
This makes the most sense for 99%+ of tenor players, too. Sure, you may need a low C eventually, but certainly not daily.

Cheers,
Andy

Certainly for a tenor player who uses a small bore. Your need for the outer positions is minimal: occasionally a C in the bass staff or a B below it; never an E below the bass staff. For a small bore tenor player, sometimes a trill valve (half or whole step) makes more sense than a true attachment.

Or very useful in any number of theatre pits when you can’t go past 3rd without limbo dancing under the players chair in front of you

Matt K wrote: ↑Sun Nov 14, 2021 2:23 pm Its hard to troubleshoot some of these issues when they arise because I never seem to run into them. That said, I use a very, very vanilla setup for my social media so I don't have any extensions or any additional privacy settings enabled. There's one particular extension that I used to use that gave me a ton of strife that I don't remember the name of, but the basic idea is that it frequently deletes cookies. I stopped using it because it broke like, every site I used it on.

If you do run into issues like that, I do recommend making a comment in the suggestions area of the forum with the OS, browser (and version), as well as a list of all addons you have installed. If I get that, I can possibly figure out root cause. That said, I pretty much always do what Bruce recommended, one way or the other, for this site and others because I also get spell check. I don't always act upon that spell check but sometimes I do!

I had the same issue twice recently.

JS

Finetales wrote: ↑Thu Nov 11, 2021 9:38 pm My only specific recommendation is that if you're going all in on adding a custom valve section to a small jazz horn, consider having it built in G with an additional slide for F. A horn smaller than a 3B that you're probably not going to be playing low Cs on is the perfect use case for the mid-register facility of a G valve.

I'm chatting with Shires about a modular small bore build with a valve. I asked about a G valve, but they aren't offering different tuning options for their small bore valve sections, unfortunately. G with an additional slide for F seems like a great setup. I may look into having it modified after it is built.

I have a .508 bore Shires with an F attachment and it has served me very well! Great instrument

interesting post. Unless you are Marshall Gilkes, nobody is going to make use of a .500 bore in the bass trombone range; you should be looking at it for alternate positions, particularly jazz players. Just a thought. Think about it as another gear in your transmission....

There’s really nothing stopping you from using that range on smaller horns. It actually speaks more easily than on a bass because of the extra resistance. All the Kings with f attachments I’ve played have an absurdly good low register including the 605F, 3BF, 607F and my franken 500/525 607F.

They also by default have a pretty long pull with the two slides so I can get down to C in tune though I often don’t play C because I have to go all the way out to the end of the slide. It’s easier just to go down into the pedal range, though G is about as low as I can go with any degree of dexterity making some keys harder than other with that limitation.

timbone wrote: ↑Thu Aug 22, 2024 6:27 pm interesting post. Unless you are Marshall Gilkes, nobody is going to make use of a .500 bore in the bass trombone range; you should be looking at it for alternate positions, particularly jazz players. Just a thought. Think about it as another gear in your transmission....

I and the second trombone player occasionally go after "bass range" notes on our 2B trombones as the need is perceived. Dana goes after notes below the straight instrument's range. Other people do too. I have experimented with them at times. I and the second trombone player here are not Marshall Gilles. But Dana is in league with him.

timbone wrote: ↑Thu Aug 22, 2024 6:27 pm interesting post. Unless you are Marshall Gilkes, nobody is going to make use of a .500 bore in the bass trombone range; you should be looking at it for alternate positions, particularly jazz players. Just a thought. Think about it as another gear in your transmission....

There are plenty of real uses for a small bore with a valve (see the other thread). Improvising is the least common reason to want one, but some players use that register and it's nice to have the option.

I have been caught out a few times playing a commercial gig with a straight small tenor and suddenly a random low D appears. Thankfully I can play a low D pretty full/loud as a false tone, and those random low notes are usually not important anyway. But what if they were?

Once again, let me stress that it should not be taken for granted that a single valve on a small-bore Bb instrument should be tuned to the "conventional" F just because of "tradition". It clearly depends on what you want it for. If you want enhanced slide facility in the otherwise awkward low-tenor register wholly equal to that above slide-alone fourth harmonic, then Bb/G(natural) is by far the best tuning—and, yes, there's a "legitimate" really "fat" D2 available in G-attachment 6th position at the end of the slide (and its pedal, D1). [But, of course, Db2, C2, and B1 are missing.]

If, on the other hand, you really (really!) want a continuous chromatic range filling in the tenor gap with a "small"-bore instrument, there are options (other than Bb/F) that have been discussed elsewhere.

I really like the G valve on my Bb/F/G/Eb independent bass and have intended to put G valves on some of my smaller tenors for awhile. Though I must say, having now played with the G attachment for something like 3-4 years, I still prefer the F attachment if I'm only going to have one even for matters of slide facility. The F attachment comfortably puts middle C and B natural, as well as low E, F, and Eb in 1-3 position, which is where I'd play patterns in the upper registers. I have to move out to 4rth for a few notes, and 5th for fewer, but the motion to go from 3rd to 5th isn't so great that it's worth having the notes I mentioned above further out on the slide. In other words, for me, the average amount of time I spent farther out is greater if I'm only on a G, whereas on an F attachment the average slide position is much closer to my face.

Since the overtones are where they are, this also means angular playing and patterns that are repeated in some predictable way (octaves, fifths, fourths, thirds primarily) work very easily, at least for me.

I totally agree, it's worth considering if F attachment is good for your use cases and not just having one because of convention but I do think there is a solid case for F attachment even on a small bore tenor, over a G attachment. A Gb attachment splits the difference, for what it's worth, and would also be worth considering if one is chopping up a horn. I like G attachment on bass because I have a F attachment already so I get best of both worlds, but on a single valve that's quite a different story.

Well, no single valve tuning is a perfect system for all situations. The C-Bb-F-Bb lick in the bass trombone part to Fountains of Rome is really only practical at speed with an F valve. The Mahler symphony trombone parts that are typically played on tenors all go down to low Db a few times, so F is the best choice for those. The Creation lick is easier with a G valve. The "optimal" valve for the Saint-Saens 3 excerpt is probably Gb (it's certainly not F at least). And if you want to be fully chromatic with only one valve, it needs to be flat E (so might as well just make it Eb).

If a tenor player wanted to only have one valve tuning, I think F being the default for orchestral players makes sense, but it's also reasonable that G could be the default for jazz players. I think an even better solution for both cases is a G valve with an alternate slide for F. Then you can have all the advantages of the G valve for most situations, while still being able to play in F when needed.

In a vacuum I feel like Gb is a compromise between F and G, and if you had access to all three tunings on a single-valve horn you probably would never pick Gb (assuming you were equally comfortable on all 3 tunings). On a double-valve instrument it makes sense if you want the double valve notes closer in while retaining the F valve, but for a single-valve instrument G and/or F probably makes more sense.

There are maybe three people in the world who prefer G attachments on trombone and they are all in this thread.

Perhaps the true ideal valve system for tenor is dependent Bb/G/F. Gotta get that middle finger working! (Or thumb if you're old fashioned and prefer roller or bar systems...)

Then you can swap the G tuning slide for one in F; pull the dependent slide (giving Bb/F/Eb) and one can cover bass parts in a pinch or pit.

I do wonder how much weight the extra valve would add over a normal Bb/F tenor. Can't be too much, assuming a normal rotor is used (not sure one could use an open valve in this instance).

I've seen one, I think, in Japan. A 36B set up like a bass with two valves. There was a reason it was for sale.

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 2:53 pm There are maybe three people in the world who prefer G attachments on trombone and they are all in this thread.

That's because 99.9% of trombonists have never tried a G attachment.

And anyway, even as is it's more than three:

On TC: Sesquitone, Windmill, MichaelMedrick, imsevimse, elmsandr

Off TC:

Jay Gibble (Capitol Bones)
Anthony Cecena (https://roweboat.com/fg4b/; Silver3B on TTF)
Alan Charlesworth

And there are doubtless others that don't post here, or do but haven't seen or chimed in on the G threads.

And of course if you include G valves on a 2-valve basses or tenors, there are many more. There are at least 5 in Los Angeles alone.

My bad . There are 8 people in the world in who prefer G tuning, and half of them are in this thread about F attachments on small tenor.

Hope that fixes my mistake

I tried imagining using a G attachment and I had to imagine that I put it back into its imaginary case.

I should point out that Alan Charlesworth is no longer with us and we haven't heard from Anthony Cecena since we moved to Trombone Chat. We miss them both.

Kevbach33 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 3:03 pm I do wonder how much weight the extra valve would add over a normal Bb/F tenor. Can't be too much, assuming a normal rotor is used (not sure one could use an open valve in this instance).

It is actually quite a bit, especially if a shoulder or hand has experienced trauma. My Shires twin valve Bb/F tenor emulates a Duo-Gravis quite well. It plays well, though. We will miss Alan Charlesworth and Anthony Cecena.

Yes, the original post is indeed about an F attachment on a small-bore Bb tenor, but to the extent that, if the intent is (only) to enhance slide facility in the low-tenor register (essentially throughout the bass clef, where we only have three Bb harmonics to work with, spaced a P5 and a P4 apart), the minor-third tuning is far (far!) better: not even close! It's not a matter of having a few more attachment alternates than with the P4 tuning. I get the feeling that some folks think of the use of attachment alternates as somehow "being lazy". For example, using the G attachment in attachment 1st position for the D3 in the Bb-major arpeggio at the beginning of The Creation excerpt, rather than in slide-alone (SA) 4th position. Let me just ask: how would you play a Bb-major arpeggio one octave higher? I'm guessing that nobody would prefer to use the D4 in SA 4th position on the Bb sixth harmonic. You would (of course) use the Bb fifth harmonic, with the complete arpeggio in 1st position. For (at least) two reasons: (1) compact slide motion, and (2) although, on the way out, the Bb3 and D4 are played on different SA harmonics, on the way back, D4 and F4 are on the same (sixth) harmonic, and this requires additional care in articulation in order to avoid an unintended portamento when reaching for a light legato, appropriate for this (and many other) situations. That's why, as Mr Pollard has pointed out, its "better" to play the D3 with the G attachment.

The important point about the G attachment is not that it provides a few additional attachment alternates beyond those (primarily four) of the F attachment. [Actually, it's a lot more.] Rather, it's because it provides two attachment harmonics (its third and fourth) interleaved between the Bb second, third, and fourth harmonics in a very uniform way—closely mimicking the way the Bb fifth and seventh harmonics, respectively, (automatically) interleave between the Bb fourth, sixth, and eighth harmonics. Just for fun, try playing some of your favourite licks (especially jazzy licks normally played in a light swinging legato at a very fast tempo) above the bass clef without using the Bb fifth and seventh harmonics! Even if you can move the slide that fast in an awkward jerky motion, the articulation will be less than satisfactory—in other words, a lot of work. But with the Bb/G single-valve arrangement, you can now play that fast jazzy lick in a light swinging legato in the lower octave with essentially the same nominal set of (SA or attachment) positions as you would have preferred to play it in the upper octave using all of the Bb harmonics.

I attach here one of my favourite warmups consisting of a chromatically descending series of minor thirds—played in a light swinging legato at a fast tempo (quarter note = 180)—in fact, to be played in a single breath entirely in lip slurs. With the Bb/G tuning, every note can be played on a different (SA or attachment) harmonic—without crossing another harmonic of the same family.

Those of you "minor-third doubters" might want to try this warmup on an attachment-less tenor or one with a "conventional" P4 attachment. Bass trombonists using inline dual-valves tuned Bb/F-G-"Eb" might want to try using just the finger-trigger-operated valve (in combination with SA positions, of course). Hint: there are some less-than-obvious combinations needed in order to get every note on a different harmonic. When I get a little more time (my wife is screaming at me to stop "wasting" time on this—and she may be right!), I'll notate my Bb/G "solution" to this.



.

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 3:30 pm I tried imagining using a G attachment and I had to imagine that I put it back into its imaginary case.

I'm glad you at least gave it a fair shot!

This thread got a little side tracked with consideration of adding a G attachment instead of an F. The reason that G tuning attachments are not being met with a crush of demand may relate to the lackluster popularity of the soprano trombone and the popularity of the (higher) Bb side added to the French horn in F. Why is the violin, with infinite tuning viable and popular while the soprano trombone falls flat? Up the neck, intonation on the violin gets to be more challenging. The partials on both the violin and soprano trombone are getting more closely spaced. But the hand on the violin is moving towards the player and the violin player can see down on the neck (at least when learning the positions). The hand on the soprano trombone moves away from the player. Although the alternate slide positions may be closer to the player as upper range is sought, the sight picture is not friendly. On the other hand, the addition of a Bb attachment side to French horns in F was driven by easier access to more widely spaced partials in the upper range, which raising the pitch of the instrument facilitates. The sight picture is the same on either side of the French horn.

Whether the correlation of the violin and soprano trombone holds up in its entirity, the players who prefer G attachments on small bore trombones are swimming against the stream. The original reason for the F attachment was to add range to bass notes, making the trombone more like the cello in voice. Without a tuning slide that pulls to E, the F attachment gets down to C. (The closed wrap 88H and 42B tuning slides pull to E. I never could get there with an open wrap LT42AG. Baltimore Brass was going to construct an E slide for the LT24AG, but after I purchased a Duo-Gravis in F and D, the need lost priority.) If facility in the high range and certain licks is the higher priority, the G attachment makes sense. To master the G attachment may require more time playing scales. The drawback is the G attachment restricts the low range to D.

The people who like using an additional attachment for facility in the high range may prefer G. If I were going to put two valves on a small bore trombone, I would consider F and D. I like playing Bb in flat third position. And I would leave G attachments to the smart people. Making a small bore with an F attachment tuning slide that can be pushed in for G may make more sense than adding two valves. The number of people wanting an F attachment on a small bore trombone is fairly small and arguable well served by the King 3BF. The number wanting a G attachment on a small bore is smaller yet, and not well supported by marketing numbers. The market for two valves on a small bore trombone is even more anemic. Peas.