Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jools" data-source="post: 614780" data-attributes="member: 10149">Hmm. I've been thinking that way too. Funkster: If you 'do' fancy taking the plunge, then by all means- I'll have a go. To be frank, since Dec I've now successfully stripped, re-built and re-conditioned an alto, two tenors and a Bari! The alto was dead easy, because it was in good shape and small. The first tenor was also new, but is still in bits because it is away to be engraved. The second tenor is an early 60's model that was re-padded about 10 years back, so- again in good shape to be re-assembled 'as is'.The baritone is posing MUCH more of a problem. Mainly because it was in pretty bad shape. Being built at the end of the 30's it has undergone quite a few 'odd-job' repairs over the years. From having one of the cups re-soldered, to having a post replaced with resulting blow torch scars. Some of the pads were original 1930's made whilst some of them were very modern. In addition, most of the corks and felts had perished. As part of the restoration project, I removed what was left of the corks and replaced them with new ones. I also replaced all the felts and used some soft black leather on the larger touch plates. The entire body was lacquered a very dark brown 'honey-bronze' which probably looked very chic in 1940, but now was mostly missing and deeply pitted by 'acidic (probably alcohol) spots. A type of damage which can only be removed by extensive wet-and-dry burnishing. This is taking much longer than anticipated. However, the sax is now a quarter rebuilt the new look is breathtaking. This time I have taken extensive photographs, before and after to show the process in action.As for the sound. This is an issue that could fire up a whole stack of forum threads about 'sax finishes, materials and tone'. However, in my opinion (given that our own very personal opinions on these matters make us the individual players that we are) The sound of the rebuilt saxes is 'considerably better' than their lacquered sound. The tenor was factory-spayed in gold (in fact, more like a kind of 'Hammerite'!) and the original sound was stuffy and 'boxy'. Afterwards, it had all the depth of a vintage horn, with a lovely Ben Webster mid range, with (most surprisingly) a bright ' David Sanborne' top end. Almost like the 'best of all worlds' Kind of result. But then, that is my personal impression.Things to remember when considering somthing like this:1. Are you happy to be without your horn for a few weeks? Where or however you intend to do this, it will take time. 2. Are you happy to live with the visual changes of your 'pride and joy' if it doesn't look the way you hoped?3. If you didn't like the resultant sound or look, could you learn to live with it and develop a new tone.As for the standard critiscism: "won't it tarnish?" . Yes, hopefully it will - if you want that grungy "Tubby Hayes / Mark 6" aura. Otherwise, you could strip it and brasso the whole thing once a year... which is what a local old-timer told me they had to do during the war. They'd strip the saxes down like rifles and clean them once a week. They used to repair them themselves back then. They had to. (he said).Anyway, let me know if you're thinking of it Funkster.</blockquote>

Verification