Saxophones King 660 - Not sure who made this? King; Conn; Keilwerth; Armstrong...?

[silver-sax]

And photos of late Keilwerth Toneking...

 

[silver-sax]

Keyguards for 3040/3055 and 3050.

 

[thomsax]

What do you want to say with all the uploaded pictures?

 

[silver-sax]

Are you kidding?

 

[Stocker]

Guess I joined here at just the right time - I've been looking for some time for evidence that the 4M Connquest was actually produced and not just something they had almost ready and then pulled the plug on. (I've never seen a King "Sonic XL" either.)

You can tell the diff between a Keilwerth made Armstrong (the Heritages and Coufs) and an Armstrong made one which just knocked off Keilwerth specs...

The 3050 and 3055 were the latter, I think. Although I suppose it is possible the bodies were JK, but usually they would have JK serials then...

The 3050 was contemporary to the 3040 - it had additional hand engraving so it must have been higher-positioned in some sense.

 

[silver-sax]

I'm a little surprised that no one has noticed that the 3050 model has adjustment screws on the kee guards, unlike all other Armstrong models. And the keywork is silver-plated and then coated with a clear lacquer.

 

[silver-sax]

Tomorrow I will try give measurements of several Conn and King altos.

 

[JayeNM]

Guess I joined here at just the right time - I've been looking for some time for evidence that the 4M Connquest was actually produced and not just something they had almost ready and then pulled the plug on. (I've never seen a King "Sonic XL" either.)

View attachment 36270



The 3050 was contemporary to the 3040 - it had additional hand engraving so it must have been higher-positioned in some sense.

Nice to see you here, Andy.

I guess they made at least ONE 4m.....@silver-sax has it FS on eflayUK 😀

 

[JayeNM]

I'm a little surprised that no one has noticed that the 3050 model has adjustment screws on the kee guards, unlike all other Armstrong models. And the keywork is silver-plated and then coated with a clear lacquer.

I am not sure I have ever serviced a 3050, but have done 40's and 55's.

I think I would have remembered if the 55 had adjusting screws.

Interestingly only the 55 had rth.

 

[silver-sax]

So,
Conn 4М. serial number 000447 (good number!):
neck tenon-24.6mm, inside diameter of narrow end of neck-12.5mm, diameter of bell-124mm, weight of neck-125gr, weight of sax without neck - 2387gr
Conn 25M. serial number 7107942:
neck tenon-24.6mm, narrow end of neck-12.6mm diameter of bell-123mm, weight of neck-120gr,
weight of sax without neck - 2415gr
King 670. serial number 7126156:
neck tenon-24.4mm, narrow end of neck-12.5mm, diameter of bell-119.5(120)mm, weight of neck-125gr,
weight of sax without neck - 2404 gr.
King 675: ?

Conn 5M. serial number 42 30883:
neck tenon-24.5mm, narrow end of neck-12.5mm, diameter of bell-126mm, weight of neck-122gr,
weight of sax without neck - 2319gr (sax with an almost invisible engraving on the bell; you can hardly see anything).
Conn 5M (rolled tone holes; serial number 786312v (yes, letter "v"!):
neck tenon-24.5mm, narrow end of neck-11.7mm, diameter of bell-131mm, weight of neck-122gr,
weight of sax without neck - 2304gr.

All horns have inscription "Made in USA" near serial number.

 

[JayeNM]

OK, what about body tube diameter where it meets bow ferrule ?

Also, take a few tonehole diameters ...I usually do B, G, F, E and Eb.

Looking at body tube taper then whether any sorta progression in tweaking hole sizes.

Then, neck...is octave pip on all located same place ?

Also, can you do a 'natural pitch' test of each neck ? Like this:

View: https://youtu.be/k1d3ACFPGzU?si=lKRfTMTFUp_QvGhB

 

[silver-sax]

Some interesting information on a German website (I saw this information on this site 25 years ago, but I’ve just found it again).
UMI has decided to produce professional saxophones in the Selmer style.
The new models are due to be released in late 1997.
The recommended retail price for the Conn 4M (King 675) is 4,300 DM, and for the Conn 25M (King 670) it is 3,230 DM.

Saxophon-Service/Testbericht von Klaus Dapper

 

[JayeNM]

ok so a 4m and 25m seem to have the same five or six specs as each other.

The 25m was a 24m with high F#, adjustable key bumpers, and a the Low Bb touch armature hinging to the low C# touch..

Suggesting 4m, 25m, 24m bodies were all the same, basically.

The 24m IS a King Empire 660...this I know for sure, having sold over a dozen of each.

So thev4m, 25m, 24m, and Empire all seem to be of the same design.

The King 670 liberty has a bell flare 5mm smaller than those, so in the least the BELLPIECE of the Liberty was a different part than all those above. 5mm is beyond a negligible difference, so likely cannot be explained away by 'minor manufacturing allowances' within the same design.

But more dimensions would help determine if what I wrote above is confirmable.

YES, I have seen UMI announcements like that before. People seem to forget...UMI was going toe-to-toe with Selmer Inc. and Yamaha for a good fifteen years there. They WERE trying to produce some upper shelfers throughout that time.

The 5m and 9m were GOOD HORNS. The Armstrong 3055 and Conn 34m were GOOD HORNS, albeit not as slick as the 5 and 9.
They also made a baritone with updated keywork which was quite Keilwerthesque, branded both as Armstrong and Conn.

So they were trying. They weren't just producing crappy Armstrong Altos...

I do recall a quote from a higher up at UMI, after the Selmer acquisition...stating ' it isn't like we were failing, we were competing, but the Selmer offer was just one we couldn't refuse'.

Sadly, tho....it DID end sax mfr'g in US, regardless of how well UMI royalty cleaned up...

A lotta folks here lost their jobs.

 

[silver-sax]

"25m was a 24m with high F#" ???

The 25m was a 24m with high F#...

Suggesting 4m, 25m, 24m bodies were all the same, basically.

The 24m IS a King Empire 660...this I know for sure, having sold over a dozen of each.

So thev4m, 25m, 24m, and Empire all seem to be of the same design.

It’s just ridiculous to read:"King 660=Conn 24M=Conn 25M=Conn 4M"
These are completely different saxophones, and it’s possible that the Conn 4M is made from a different metal to the Conn 25M. The sound is different. Does your logic suggest that 90% of the Chinese saxophones on AliExpress are Selmer SA models?

 

[turf3]

"25m was a 24m with high F#" ???

It’s just ridiculous to read:"King 660=Conn 24M=Conn 25M=Conn 4M"
These are completely different saxophones, and it’s possible that the Conn 4M is made from a different metal to the Conn 25M. The sound is different. Does your logic suggest that 90% of the Chinese saxophones on AliExpress are Selmer SA models?

Why is that ridiculous?

I'm willing to bet the bodies and keycups of all of them were the same C26000 that's used in pretty much all saxophones.

Yes, 90% of the Chinese saxophones sold are copies of the Selmer Super Action 80.

Keep in mind the reality of what was going on in the UMI time period. UNI had bought up the Conn and King brand names. The saxophone market was continuing to shrink, as additional players were entering. At the high end, Yanagisawa and Keilwerth were coming forward in a big way. At the low end, private labeled Taiwanese horns (USA Sax, Antigua Winds, etc.) were starting to be imported in volume. Yamaha and Selmer were the big names. So UMI, to succeed, had to swim upstream against a market that regarded any saxophone with "Conn" or "King" on it as a crappy student horn. So - and here I disagree with their market strategy - they took some designs - probably, in truth, ONE basic acoustic design each for alto tenor and baritone - and tried everything they could to appeal. Labeling some of them "Conn" and some "King" makes a sort of sense there. Having multiple models, divided as "student" "intermediate" and "professional" or whatever terminology of the time, also makes a sort of sense. At their production volumes, and given that profit margins were tiny, they didn't have the resources to design multiple basic acoustic designs. Some tweeks of keywork details, variations in plating and the model numbers engraved, and a bunch of advertising campaigns, that's what they could afford. And if one ad campaign didn't generate sales, they'd change to another one, and who cares if the 1991 ad campaign says things that contradict the 1990 ad campaign?

The American saxophone industry was in decline from 1955 or so on, with the decline in big bands, and on life support from 1964 (Beatlemania). The gyrations of American manufacturers and marketeers from 1960 through the early 2000s are EXACTLY what one would expect from an industry where the customer base is ever-shrinking and the ones that remain don't want what you have to sell them.

 

[Stocker]

It wouldn't've been the first time that professional and student Conns shared the same body tube.

 

[turf3]

Consider, for example"

Chevrolet Monte Carlo
Pontiac Grand Prix
Buick Regal
Oldsmobile Cutlass

Need I say more?

 

[JayeNM]

"25m was a 24m with high F#" ???

It’s just ridiculous to read:"King 660=Conn 24M=Conn 25M=Conn 4M"
These are completely different saxophones, and it’s possible that the Conn 4M is made from a different metal to the Conn 25M. The sound is different. Does your logic suggest that 90% of the Chinese saxophones on AliExpress are Selmer SA models?

I am afraid you are likely incorrect... and I'd appreciate e a bit more respect in your semantics, please.

You were the one who gave the measurements....TWICE I asked for MORE measurements and you have yet to provide those.

So BASED UPON YOUR FEW measurements....the 4m and 25m appear to have identical specs.

I am 90% certain the 25m body is a 24m body with a high F# hole. By all means, you can prove me wrong if you get ahold of a 24m and measure it.

Am also 90% sure a 24m IS a King Empire (660).

Again this is from my experiences of working on ALL THESE MODELS (except the 4m which I have never even seen).

So while I appreciate your posts and contributions...if you want to prove someone's assertion as....'ridiculous'....take a calipers to the models in question and measure in MORE THAN four or five places, and post those measurements here.

I am fine with being wrong, but you gotta do more than just insist with no numbers backing it up, is all.

I have no clue why you brought up fake Selmers and AliExpress...are we discussing that here ?

When you then state 'different metals because they sound different'....you are on such shaky ground that it is probably wise not to go there in this thread...

Maybe they sound different because the neck tube is different ? (We could know this if you would provide us with more neck info as I illustrated above). Maybe it sounds different because the bowpieces are different ? Or the body tube holes or taper....?

We dunno, because you have not provided those measurements...and you are the guy with all those horns, currently.

UMI's Conn 34m and King 662 appear to have been the same horn, just rebranded. They may well both be an Armstrong 3055 as well...Other Armstrongs are identical to the Conn 22m....so....

Yamaha has been the Master of such stuff for over a generation...a 475 was a 52, renamed. A 52 first series was a 23 with a different bow, neck, and pinky table. A 34 was a 62 with a 475 neck and no ribs or annealed bell. A 575 was a 62 with a 62 neck and no ribs or annealed bell.

Jupiter 667/9 and 767/9 are the same design just the latter has the high F#. Jupiter Carnegie seems to be a 767 under a different model name. Jupiter Capital Edition is just a 767 with a sterling neck....so, interestingly, Jupe rolled off three different models with identical body geometries and key designs....

This stuff has been going on for ages...

 

[silver-sax]

I took measurements of several parameters. I even weighed the saxophones and the necks.
All the measurements differ, and there are no identical instruments.
Tomorrow, just out of curiosity, I’ll take measurements around the area where the bow connects to the bell and body.

 

[silver-sax]

I measured the diameters of the bell, body, and bow in four zones for three altos, using a caliper
Conn 4М:
1 - 59,5mm
2 - 60,1mm
3 - 57,9mm
4 - 48,6mm
Conn 25M:
1 - 59,6mm
2 - 60,3mm
3 - 58,3mm
4 - 48,9mm
King 670:
1 - 58,8mm
2 - 59,9mm
3 - 57,8mm
4 - 48,7mm

The results vary. And if we consider the data I obtained earlier (post #70), we can conclude that the instruments are completely different. It will be very interesting to see the data for the King 660 and Conn 24M. I had King 660 a long time ago, but I don't have one now. Who owns a Conn 24M and a King 660 right now?