peterpick
Member
- Messages
- 760
- Locality
- Lewes, East Sussex
i've been playing the beaugnier 'special perfect' and the sml 'super 45' (both altoes) sort of alternately for a while now. the beaugnier arrived in playable condition, whereas the sml needed work (and you should hear what my saxtech had to say about them.... maybe i'll tell you during this post. there are results audible on soundcloud if you search for my name (
View: https://soundcloud.com/peter-pick
), although why any of you good people should wish to listen to me playing the saxophone i can't imagine. they are both french of course, but an argument about a 'french' sound falls absolutely to pieces when you compare these. strangely, the beaugnier ('playable') plays down to the bottom but only forms the lowest notes if approached gently.... my experience is normally that reluctant lower notes have to be shouted with a strong tongue, and this is largely true of the sml, but the beaugnier comes out warm at a whisper and barks and splits if pressed. that might be due to an imperfect seal on a closed spring pad further up, i thought, rather than the more usual bottom pads don't seal properly problem.
what really interests me is the tone. the beaugnier is warm and fluffy, it has lots of air in the sound and is in excellent tune from top to bottom, even when i play it. although i was fascinated by the g# articulation switch in practice i haven't used it. i love playing this alto on its own, the sound is rich and it can be played with great restraint, although it also produces a tolerable volume if pumped. it also does wonderful things if you hold down the front f and a few left hand keys, shooting up into a really fairly tuneful altissimo. i can't make it work properly with my berg larsen so i'm using a lawton ebonite at the moment, lawtons are great mouthpieces, they seem to make most things playable. this means that i can't use the berg at all currently because i've lost the extreme mouth violence required.
we had our usual MESHMASS recording on saturday and i set up happily with the beagnier and it worked fine on the first duet but i started to get lost in the mix when all the things started playing (computer, phone, guitar). strangely (perhaps) the recording doesn't reflect this impression - the beaugnier sounds fine, i just couldn't hear it at the time.... so i strapped on the sml.
the sml is keen and dark, slick like a muscular fish, no fur only scales, all tendon, strong and focused and clear and clean. it has great strength in the middle register where it comes through all manner of extraneous guff (otherwise known as MESHMASS) clear and untroubled. better at that than my mark VI, i reckon. i could hear the sml alright, but what i could hear was that i was even less in tune than usual. i think it was aldevis who warned me about that. i do have vintage french mouthpieces which might help with this problem (i have been told) but they do not seem to make holes in the end of them which you can blow into. the tips are so narrow that they're useless to me. the sml has what i can perhaps describe as a coltrane quality about it, that sort of dry authoritative tone, but it also plays very sweetly if treated gently and has a wonderfully clear upper register. there is some MESHMASS which demonstrates it on soundcloud too https://soundcloud.com/meshmass/halfway-through you will have to excuse that it is rather long, it is MESHMASS and not completely edited yet.
i think my point is (or will be, if i ever get round to it) that these 2 saxes could hardly be more different, and that both are exceptional instruments. they have their limitations and their fields of excellence. neither is quite as flexible as the mark VI i think.... perhaps the great advantage of that legendary selmer is that it is the most flexible or adaptable of saxes, as well as being well-built. which i cannot say for the sml.
the sml looks beautiful. it is a great design, even the ergonomics are pretty good. it's clean and functional. but instead of solder they seem to have used sod all, and of course rolled toneholes while often greatly desired are a complete arse to level off. poor rupert banged them out from inside and all the pearls fell off the keys. personally i love it and look lustfully at rev d and gold medal versions when i see them what with all those lovely adjustment screws all over the place. not sure if i dare to buy another one though after rupert's harrowing experience. he told me also that he bought a job lot of 5 some years ago and not one of them was in tune. one of them he just had to give up on and it's still lying around for spares.
), although why any of you good people should wish to listen to me playing the saxophone i can't imagine. they are both french of course, but an argument about a 'french' sound falls absolutely to pieces when you compare these. strangely, the beaugnier ('playable') plays down to the bottom but only forms the lowest notes if approached gently.... my experience is normally that reluctant lower notes have to be shouted with a strong tongue, and this is largely true of the sml, but the beaugnier comes out warm at a whisper and barks and splits if pressed. that might be due to an imperfect seal on a closed spring pad further up, i thought, rather than the more usual bottom pads don't seal properly problem.
what really interests me is the tone. the beaugnier is warm and fluffy, it has lots of air in the sound and is in excellent tune from top to bottom, even when i play it. although i was fascinated by the g# articulation switch in practice i haven't used it. i love playing this alto on its own, the sound is rich and it can be played with great restraint, although it also produces a tolerable volume if pumped. it also does wonderful things if you hold down the front f and a few left hand keys, shooting up into a really fairly tuneful altissimo. i can't make it work properly with my berg larsen so i'm using a lawton ebonite at the moment, lawtons are great mouthpieces, they seem to make most things playable. this means that i can't use the berg at all currently because i've lost the extreme mouth violence required.
we had our usual MESHMASS recording on saturday and i set up happily with the beagnier and it worked fine on the first duet but i started to get lost in the mix when all the things started playing (computer, phone, guitar). strangely (perhaps) the recording doesn't reflect this impression - the beaugnier sounds fine, i just couldn't hear it at the time.... so i strapped on the sml.
the sml is keen and dark, slick like a muscular fish, no fur only scales, all tendon, strong and focused and clear and clean. it has great strength in the middle register where it comes through all manner of extraneous guff (otherwise known as MESHMASS) clear and untroubled. better at that than my mark VI, i reckon. i could hear the sml alright, but what i could hear was that i was even less in tune than usual. i think it was aldevis who warned me about that. i do have vintage french mouthpieces which might help with this problem (i have been told) but they do not seem to make holes in the end of them which you can blow into. the tips are so narrow that they're useless to me. the sml has what i can perhaps describe as a coltrane quality about it, that sort of dry authoritative tone, but it also plays very sweetly if treated gently and has a wonderfully clear upper register. there is some MESHMASS which demonstrates it on soundcloud too https://soundcloud.com/meshmass/halfway-through you will have to excuse that it is rather long, it is MESHMASS and not completely edited yet.
i think my point is (or will be, if i ever get round to it) that these 2 saxes could hardly be more different, and that both are exceptional instruments. they have their limitations and their fields of excellence. neither is quite as flexible as the mark VI i think.... perhaps the great advantage of that legendary selmer is that it is the most flexible or adaptable of saxes, as well as being well-built. which i cannot say for the sml.
the sml looks beautiful. it is a great design, even the ergonomics are pretty good. it's clean and functional. but instead of solder they seem to have used sod all, and of course rolled toneholes while often greatly desired are a complete arse to level off. poor rupert banged them out from inside and all the pearls fell off the keys. personally i love it and look lustfully at rev d and gold medal versions when i see them what with all those lovely adjustment screws all over the place. not sure if i dare to buy another one though after rupert's harrowing experience. he told me also that he bought a job lot of 5 some years ago and not one of them was in tune. one of them he just had to give up on and it's still lying around for spares.
Last edited by a moderator:
