Saxophones Conn 150th Anniversary Alto Saxophone

[ghostler]

I think the difficulty is that it's the reintroduction of the Conn brand name which is something altogether different. Conn as a company that exists to make and develop saxophones no longer exists.

I think perhaps the best way to look at it is this is the new Conn company and not the old one. The old visionaries with their particular drive and incentive are gone. The era and people who bought their saxes, many are no longer with us. There have been improvements in manufacturing, materials, methods, ergonomics and greater knowledge in acoustical design and simulation that were not available 70+ years ago.

Times and focuses have changed.

So, I am in a wait and see position. Meanwhile I'm loving the impressively soft subtone, especially in the lower notes I'm getting from my serviced Le Blanc 7133T Vito (Jupiter) tenor, balancing the upper woodwinds in the Community Band.

The wider bore of my recently serviced 1952 Le Blanc 37 Vito (Beaugnier) alto is so impressively free blowing. I'm stoked, am really going to enjoy it into 2026.

It helps me to relate to the saxists playing and describing this new Conn with its wider bore versus the modern narrower bore.

Let's see what their new line-up will bring.

Most of us like myself already have our share of saxes and aren't candidates for a newer sax. Since I am in my last trimester of life, what I have I can keep serviced and last me until I can no longer play.

Appreciating what I have makes playing all the more worthwhile.

 

[Woodpad]

Well, if I get a hold of one at the Symposium and it gurgles on low B... then we'll know it's a true Conn alto.

Except when they copied it from the Selmer large bore. I only played one, but it had the same gurgle. I put a degurgle my 6M on the to do list for next summer (after a true tone).

 

[Pete Effamy]

Oh for the old days when people remarked upon how an instrument played and sounded..

 

[ghostler]

Oh for the old days when people remarked upon how an instrument played and sounded..

I remember those old days. We didn't criticize mouthpieces nor instruments. There was no Internet. There were favs, but no one cared whether one played a brand name or bargain name mouthpiece. If we found one we liked and someone asked, we'd suggest it. We'd talk about a new instrument being debutted, someone who just played it, what they thought.

We talked about playing. We used now verboten words such as the warmth, brightness, darkness, fluidity, etc., congrats for a good solo, time away spent it in practice. We talked about the next job, concert, who got selected for the 9 piece combo, etc. In spare moments, put together a quick little combo for a ditty.

It was about the fun of playing.

 

[JayeNM]

According to @JayeNM and @turf3 the 6M, 14m, altos and 10m, 16m tenors had the same bodies. Just a difference in refined key work. All had that great Conn sound. All made for many years.
Why didn’t they just modernize the key work and use a great body ?

The Golden Question, right ?

Far as I can discern, 6M's lasted into the mid-70's, it becomes sorta questionable whether Conn Mexico EVER actually produced a 6M IN-PLANT, or whether they just took whatever bodies and parts were left from Elkhart and assembled those until there was nothing left to assemble. Same can be said for 10M's...I know they were assembled and offered until at least '73...I have a catalog and have refurbed one example of an MX-stamped 10M to prove that...but as they didn't seem to go DEEP into the 70's, maybe their modus operandi was the same...assemble whatever's left - but don't bring the tooling to Mexico to fabricate more after that (?)

But the 16M model and body did indeed go to MX ...and THEN RETURNED to the US by '84, 16M's lasted at least until at least the late 80's because they started getting UMI serial numbers.....UMI still cranked them out here, domestically....so the tooling for the Tenor body and 16M keywork was still extant in a factory in the US. And as noted, the 16M body WAS a 10M body.

But around then, it seems.... UMI made the decision to 'modernize' their Conns...and instead of just slapping on more modern keywork to the 16M and renaming it, they scrapped everything and went with their other available option :

sorta reverse-engineered (but-not-quite) Keilwerth designs (the evolutionary thread there would probably have been because Armstrong models were knockoffs of Coufs (Herb Couf owned Armstrong until '84 and originally contracted JK to make the Coufs, but at some point stopped that relationship and started making sorta-copies of the JK's). So UMI, ostensibly, had both the Armstrong - based-on-JK tooling around, and the Conn tooling....and they proceeded with the former, scrapped the latter.

So that was the point where the pro line Conns were dead, really...when they scrapped the 16M body (which was the same as a 10M body).

The followup question, asked on Forums ad infinitum...is, of course, as sax designs are not patent protected, why, in ALL these years of 'modern' horn making, did not ONE COMPANY just copy a 10M (or S20, or THC, or Comm 3, etc) body and neck and outfit it with modern keywork ? In almost 50 years, why not ?

As @Pete Thomas mentions, NOTHING in the marketing of THIS model ever STATES that a classic Conn spec was used in the design of this horn, so I think that is fair to assume that...this will not be any sort of body replica of one of their vintage models.

 

[JayeNM]

Oh for the old days when people remarked upon how an instrument played and sounded..

Devil's Advocate position:

Nothing wrong with healthy skepticism when confronted with new millennium marketing hype on a very high-priced product.

(A Yani AW02 costs $5800 new, a new Yama 82 Custom is $5200, a new Selmer SA80-2 $6000-6500, the Eastman 52nd St = $5100, a new Buffet Senzo $6800...give or take a couple hundred across. I am gonna guess Borgani and Rampone have alto offerings under $7g as well).

😎

 

[JayeNM]

There was no Internet. There were favs, but no one cared whether one played a brand name or bargain name mouthpiece. If we found one we liked and someone asked, we'd suggest it. We'd talk about a new instrument being debutted, someone who just played it, what they thought.

We talked about playing.

Well yeah, spot on.

But that shows the limitations of internet conversation. It's not any different on other musician chat forums, or rather instrumentalist chat forums. Trumpet, drums, bass are the other ones I am on and the general scope of discussion is the same.

Interned led to a gear-focused sorta commentary. Not saying that is all bad, it probably resulted in rekindling interest in vintage horns beyond the VI, actually, just as one example.

But it also revealed the limitations of discussing on such platforms.

 

[Pete Effamy]

Devil's Advocate position:

Nothing wrong with healthy skepticism when confronted with new millennium marketing hype on a very high-priced product.

(A Yani AW02 costs $5800 new, a new Yama 82 Custom is $5200, a new Selmer SA80-2 $6000-6500, the Eastman 52nd St = $5100, a new Buffet Senzo $6800...give or take a couple hundred across. I am gonna guess Borgani and Rampone have alto offerings under $7g as well).

😎

Sure. It’s just that after 1 page having no mention of how it might play (I stopped there but presumed the other several pages to be similar), I thought it was worth mentioning.

Agreed about the inflated (?) price of horns, but here’s a question:

How is a pro horn of ( according to Steve Howard and others ) great quality sell for as little as £2499?

That horn is the TJ Custom Signature Raw alto.

 

[Pete Thomas]

How is a pro horn of ( according to Steve Howard and others ) great quality sell for as little as £2499?

That horn is the TJ Custom Signature Raw alto.

I’m sure retail pricing is to a large extent arbitrary. I believe most saxophones factory costs are in the 100s (be it £ $ whatever) often low hundreds for good instruments in some cases. Marketing strategy decides the markup and retail price, not quality.

 

[Grumps]

Interne(t) led to a gear-focused sorta commentary. Not saying that is all bad, it probably resulted in rekindling interest in vintage horns beyond the VI, actually, just as one example.

But it also revealed the limitations of discussing on such platforms.

I came onboard well over twenty-five years ago. The equipment talk was actually quite helpful as I realized I had many valuable mouthpieces in various cases around the house. I also was inspired to try different mouthpieces and quickly realized my true preference for more open tipped pieces and traded for them accordingly online with my vintage mouthpiece bankroll. I also learned more about my vintage horns which had me valuing them even more than the new ones I got to try at online meetups we used to have and of course, the Symposium. But I also picked up numerous playing tips over the years online that have helped me learn new techniques. Also repair tips which have saved me trips to the tech... oh wait... sorry about that last one Jaye.

 

[Pete Thomas]

Interned led to a gear-focused sorta commentary. Not saying that is all bad, it probably resulted in rekindling interest in vintage horns beyond the VI, actually, just as one example.

I came onboard well over twenty-five years ago. The equipment talk was actually quite helpful as I realized I had many valuable mouthpieces in various cases around the house

Very good points so I’ve started a whole new thread as I think that discussion deserves its own topic here:

Saxophones - Has the internet changed players’ attitudes around saxophones and saxophone playing.

This just came up in the Conn 150 Anniversary thread and us possibly worthy of its own discussion. The internet brought with it discussion groups (I fondly remember alt.music.saxophone for a start). Do we now obsess more about gear rather than playing and actual music due to the online forums...

cafesaxophone.com

 

[helen]

Oh for the old days when people remarked upon how an instrument played and sounded..

Before the Internet we didn't have armchair "experts" making claims about stuff they had ZERO first hand knowledge about, and spreading that misinformation far and wide; having it taken as gospel by the uninformed masses; potentially leading to the poisoning of marketplace for new products, resulting in the damaging of long-time, established brand names.

I understand the cynicism that so many have b/c of rampant BS being perpetuated by online SM platforms. However, this constant negativity is doing serious damage beyond our psyches, it is also damaging to our lives and environment. And don't even get me going on AI & its influence on how we perceive what we see online--or ought to at least.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again here: I do believe SM will end up being the thread that unravels society. It has already started.

 

[turf3]

Before the Internet we didn't have armchair "experts" making claims about stuff they had ZERO first hand knowledge about, and spreading that misinformation far and wide; having it taken as gospel by the uninformed masses; potentially leading to the poisoning of marketplace for new products, resulting in the damaging of long-time, established brand names.

I understand the cynicism that so many have b/c of rampant BS being perpetuated by online SM platforms. However, this constant negativity is doing serious damage beyond our psyches, it is also damaging to our lives and environment. And don't even get me going on AI & its influence on how we perceive what we see online--or ought to at least.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again here: I do believe SM will end up being the thread that unravels society. It has already started.

I can understand your concern about reflexive cynicism about any new product that's presented with standardized 202s marketeering BS, and yet it is POSSIBLE that it MIGHT in fact contain things that are obscured by the advertising BS.

But if you remember times like the 1970s, you remember all the nonsense we unquestioningly accepted, just because someone heard it from someone who heard it from someone who heard it from....

- All old sopranos play out of tune
- All old horns play out of tune
- The fork Eb is the bastard key and needs to be ground down and soldered over
- Metal mouthpieces sound bright and hard rubber ones sound dull
- Conn, Buescher, Martin and King saxophones are all old crappy student horns
- You don't need the little set screws on Conn saxophones
- Silver plating confers a (brighter, darker, mellow, piercing, rich, thin) tone
- Gold plating confers a (brighter, darker, mellow, piercing, rich, thin) tone
- Etc
- ETc
- ETc

And so on, and so on, and so on....

Frankly I think I'd prefer the suspicion of today amongst us oldsters who've seen how word of mouth multiplies misinformation, to the credulity of the past.

Basically I trust as near as ZERO as possible to ANYTHING in an advertisement. I will say that in a long life of buying commercial products, I have almost NEVER been pleasantly surprised by a product that delivered more than its advertisement promised, and almost ALWAYS have been disappointed (though rarely surprised) by products that deliver less than the advertisements promise or imply.

 

[Woodpad]

play test

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsBTfOTjpQE

 

[PigSquealer]

play test

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsBTfOTjpQE

See post #36😉

 

[LostCircuits]

The followup question, asked on Forums ad infinitum...is, of course, as sax designs are not patent protected, why, in ALL these years of 'modern' horn making, did not ONE COMPANY just copy a 10M (or S20, or THC, or Comm 3, etc) body and neck and outfit it with modern keywork ? In almost 50 years, why not ?

It's a good question but at least according to some of my pro player friends, the PMauriat tenors are what they consider large bore (I can't confirm this but I've heard it repeatedly from PMauriat owner players), likewise, the B&S are more like American Vintage than MK VI knock offs.

Of course, the question is when does a copy become a copy or when is it some compromise between old and "modern"?

 

[turf3]

It's a good question but at least according to some of my pro player friends, the PMauriat tenors are what they consider large bore (I can't confirm this but I've heard it repeatedly from PMauriat owner players), likewise, the B&S are more like American Vintage than MK VI knock offs.

Of course, the question is when does a copy become a copy or when is it some compromise between old and "modern"?

I don't suppose any of those people claiming such and such a horn is "large bore" has any measurements, do they?

 

[LostCircuits]

I don't suppose any of those people claiming such and such a horn is "large bore" has any measurements, do they?

I believe Ricky Sweum (Air Force Band) did some measurements or at least got some from PMauriat, he's been working closely with them / providing input to them and has some one-off prototypes they gave him. Now, it may be that they gave him some incorrect information but why would they do that?

And, I know Ricky quite well, he's a totally down to earth person but I can ask him next time I run into him. And I heard similar from Chelsea Martinez, so, maybe those are anecdotes but I would not throw them out just because.

 

[ghostler]

But if you remember times like the 1970s, you remember all the nonsense we unquestioningly accepted, just because someone heard it from someone who heard it from someone who heard it from....

Er, no. Speaking of FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt), I remember as a high school student in the late 1960's / early 1970's, the warnings about Yamaha musical instruments mirroring the same comments toward Chinese saxes in general today: "The metallurgy is soft, the keys bend easily. Why don't you spare yourself some trouble and buy a Buescher, Conn, Selmer, Buffet, Le Blanc, King, etc. saxophone?"

Yet, the newly established Yamaha distributor in Honolulu gave a sales flyer to all schools late Spring during my 11th grade, half off on their professional line of instruments. Parents were buying the student models and they had a warehouse needing clearing for a soon new shipment from Japan. My music teacher passed the flyers onto the students.

I brought it home, my dad wrote me out a check, took it to my teacher. A week or two later, he called me into his office and gave me a brand new Yamaha YAS-61 pro alto sax.

For one, the altos keys felt so much better in my hands, keywork was smoother, it played very well in tune compared with the school's student loaner.

It is no different then as it is now. An astute person will look past the marketing wording, community hear-say and distill the facts.

 

[Tuppertn]

An astute person will look past the marketing wording, community hear-say and distill the facts.

If that were universally true, there'd be no need for marketing. Marketing is very deliberately aimed at the gullible, average, non-astute person. Considering the potential buyer pool for a horn like this, it seems pretty insulting to me.

play test

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsBTfOTjpQE

Aaaaaand we still don't know what it actually sounds like. It doesn't even matter, really. There's only going to be 40 of them, so it's not "the return of Conn" anything. It's a collector piece. End of story.