Saxophones Left Hand Pinky Table Opinions?

[GCinCT]

I realize that I have to be completely fair here. I have never played a Mark VI. I did have a Mark VII for a while and didn't like the tilting table. It is very possible that the smaller table on a VI would suit me well.

 

[lydian]

I'll second that. Love the Mark VI table, hate the VII, but partly for aesthetic reasons. I have an old Yamaha with the SBA style. Not crazy about it. Much prefer the smoother transitions and extra leverage I get on the VI style. Least favorite of mine is the old in-line style for many reasons. But that seems to be the overwhelming favorite of most In this thread.

 

[JayeNM]

In the protoype development phase of the Cafesaxophone saxophone, we were going to eschew the horrible tilting table and go back to the Selmer BA or Conn design. That concept may have risen up to bight me on the bum but I still belive it was better then.

I am not sure "tilting vs. non" would really be a dealbreaker for most prospective buyers, myself.

 

[JayeNM]

The Mark VI table was adopted by virtually all manufacturers as soon as the patent expired, and is now the de facto standard, though the size usually ranges from too big to gargantuan... I for one wish that weren’t the case. This has been an enlightening discussion for me, I hope it continues.

I am not sure it IS the de-facto standard anymore actually...I think MOST "intermediate" or above models these days have gone to the tilted Bb and the hinged armature to the C#...that design which I still hold to be "a solution to a problem which never existed" ....at least the major mfr's that have crossed my bench in the past 8 years or so. I only find the same-plane VI-type table on student models now, mostly....and sometimes not even on those.

 

[Zasterz]

Feel the same about the whole inline vs offset tonehole thing. What’s everyone swears was an indispensable ergonomic improvement causes me pain in my right wrist radiating up to my shoulder on Selmers which I don’t experience on Conn.

 

[skeller047]

I am not sure it IS the de-facto standard anymore actually...I think MOST "intermediate" or above models these days have gone to the tilted Bb and the hinged armature to the C#...that design which I still hold to be "a solution to a problem which never existed" ....at least the major mfr's that have crossed my bench in the past 8 years or so. I only find the same-plane VI-type table on student models now, mostly....and sometimes not even on those.

Huh? That’s what I mean, the tilting Bb plus C# linkage is the de facto standard.

 

[lydian]

I am not sure it IS the de-facto standard anymore actually...I think MOST "intermediate" or above models these days have gone to the tilted Bb and the hinged armature to the C#...that design which I still hold to be "a solution to a problem which never existed" ....at least the major mfr's that have crossed my bench in the past 8 years or so. I only find the same-plane VI-type table on student models now, mostly....and sometimes not even on those.

Can you elaborate on the problem that never existed? The way I see it, if you remove the armature and press C#, you can no longer slide to Bb. It's kind of required if you want to use the rollers to go from one key to any of the other two.

 

[Grumps]

I've played Selmers from sopranino to bari. King altos and tenors. Martin and Conn from soprano to bari. I don't think I've ever given a thought to the left hand pinkie table other than taking it as is. From memory, I may not even be able to describe them. Not to be sour grapes. Just offering another perspective.

 

[Pete Thomas]

I am not sure "tilting vs. non" would really be a dealbreaker for most prospective buyers, myself.

No it wouldn't, nor would it figure highly in the selling points. It's just that my aim was to develop my own ideals which could be viewed as either honesty and integrity or just pure ego (e.g. "Pete knows best"). In the end the main selling point may have been the lemur in the coffee tree engraving.

I'd still be up for a Cafesaxophone Saxophone, but cannot do it by myself is what I learned.

 

[JayeNM]

No it wouldn't, nor would it figure highly in the selling points. It's just that my aim was to develop my own ideals which could be viewed as either honesty and integrity or just pure ego (e.g. "Pete knows best"). In the end the main selling point may have been the lemur in the coffee tree engraving.

Amazing your engraver got that to fit on a pinky table touch, actually....

 

[JayeNM]

Can you elaborate on the problem that never existed? The way I see it, if you remove the armature and press C#, you can no longer slide to Bb. It's kind of required if you want to use the rollers to go from one key to any of the other two.

So first, let's make sure we are talking about the same thing:

The modification/addition of the 'bar' extension coming off of the (usually scooped) Bb touch... which connects to the little nib added to the outside of the C# touch. So the bar 'pivots' when Bb is depressed, keeping the C# touch stationary...and the bar pivots when the C# is depressed, keeping the Bb touch stationary.

If we ARE talking about that same thing...then my answer would be:

"....One cannot slide from C# to Bb without that scoop and armature apparatus existing ?

Because what I do is...
I slide my pinky finger down across the C# touch to the roller on the Bb touch and my pinky naturally lands smack on the Bb touch, depressing it, while releasing the C#. The roller on the Bb allows a smooth slide to the Bb. I see no hardship there, nor do I feel one.

So I would wonder....If this "improvement" was "required" to go from one key to any of the other two...how did players get along for so long, so well, without it ?
And why was the BA-style table (no scoop, no armature) the model used on so many different asian models for so long (and still used on some) ? "

 

[Grumps]

I've played Selmers from sopranino to bari. King altos and tenors. Martin and Conn from soprano to bari.

Forgot Buescher. Soprano to bari as well. I suppose I'd only remember a specific table if I truly hated it.

 

[lydian]

So first, let's make sure we are talking about the same thing:

The modification/addition of the 'bar' extension coming off of the (usually scooped) Bb touch... which connects to the little nib added to the outside of the C# touch. So the bar 'pivots' when Bb is depressed, keeping the C# touch stationary...and the bar pivots when the C# is depressed, keeping the Bb touch stationary.

If we ARE talking about that same thing...then my answer would be:

"....One cannot slide from C# to Bb without that scoop and armature apparatus existing ?

Because what I do is...
I slide my pinky finger down across the C# touch to the roller on the Bb touch and my pinky naturally lands smack on the Bb touch, depressing it, while releasing the C#. The roller on the Bb allows a smooth slide to the Bb. I see no hardship there, nor do I feel one.

So I would wonder....If this "improvement" was "required" to go from one key to any of the other two...how did players get along for so long, so well, without it ?
And why was the BA-style table (no scoop, no armature) the model used on so many different asian models for so long (and still used on some) ? "

I think we are talking about the same thing. Imagine you remove the bar so the Bb no longer tilts. When you press C# it will go behind the plane of the Bb making it impossible to slide onto it across the roller. You'd have to either lift your pinky to get to Bb or keep the tip on the C# the whole time and pivot your hand down to press Bb with the side.

How did players get along without it? Well they had to do one of the things above, lift or pivot the hand, neither of which is ideal. The leverage from the side of the pinky tip is pretty weak.

 

[Vlad]

No it wouldn't, nor would it figure highly in the selling points. It's just that my aim was to develop my own ideals which could be viewed as either honesty and integrity or just pure ego (e.g. "Pete knows best"). In the end the main selling point may have been the lemur in the coffee tree engraving.

I'd still be up for a Cafesaxophone Saxophone, but cannot do it by myself is what I learned.

What a lovely little image, looks like a piece of gold embroidery or something 🙂

 

[Targa]

No it wouldn't, nor would it figure highly in the selling points. It's just that my aim was to develop my own ideals which could be viewed as either honesty and integrity or just pure ego (e.g. "Pete knows best"). In the end the main selling point may have been the lemur in the coffee tree engraving.

I'd still be up for a Cafesaxophone Saxophone, but cannot do it by myself is what I learned.

I’d have bought one for the engraving alone.

 

[JayeNM]

I think we are talking about the same thing. Imagine you remove the bar so the Bb no longer tilts. When you press C# it will go behind the plane of the Bb making it impossible to slide onto it across the roller. You'd have to either lift your pinky to get to Bb or keep the tip on the C# the whole time and pivot your hand down to press Bb with the side.

How did players get along without it? Well they had to do one of the things above, lift or pivot the hand, neither of which is ideal. The leverage from the side of the pinky tip is pretty weak.

I dunno, I mean everyone has their take on things I just do not think that depressing the C# without the tilting Bb makes it "impossible" to slide. To me that's an overstatement.

That is what the roller is for, the way I see it. As long as a portion of roller is below a portion of the C# touch, I can get my pinky to 'slide' if you wanna call it that, down across the C#, to the roller of the Bb, which at that point begins depressing the Bb, then my finger rolls onto the Bb touch. It doesn't seem un-fluid at all to me.

So I would still argue that one need neither "lift or pivot the hand" on a BA style table at all, actually.

The only instance where I can see what you describe and feel it 'impossible' (or just odd), is if the G# touch doesn't have enough cork on its underside so it depresses down really far, which would take the C# down far with it... and create a larger gap/travel distance to the B roller. (IOW the C# cup opens quite a lot - more than it needs, thus the C# touch depresses a lot, more than it needs to).
That is something which should have been properly regulated out of the factory, and if it wasn't (commonly it isn't especially on budget/student horns, also on horns which have gone thru a whole bunch of "do the minimum to keep it playing servicing over the years, without somewhere in there really getting a nice re-reg along the way) then a tech should have corrected that. The C# keycup need not open much at all to get a clean C# to speak. If that is set correctly then again it feels fine, IMHO.

Anyways...different strokes. I hear what you are saying, I just have never had a problem with response or speed on a BA style (used on so many contemporary models up until pretty recently) table...and truly can say around 66-70% of my beyond-beginner customers don't really care whether the tilting mech is there or not.

IMHO, the true 'revolution' in the table from Selmer came with the changing of the hinge directions and the aligning of the Bb nicely below the C#, with a roller there too. What came next oin the VI has always been to me a "OK, I can take it or leave it" change.

The only vintage table I can think of that really examined that situation and made it the BEST a vintage table could ever get was the 10M and 6M, which actually have a diagonal roller below the C# to make that transition nice and smooth. As others have stated before, those tables were probably 'as far as a vintage table could ever go" as far as fluid transitions.

 

[turf3]

Just for kicks, posterity, and being a wiseguy.....here is yet ANOTHER configuration, sorta infamous to King fans....from the first generation of Zephyrs. Not sure WHAT 😳 they were thinking with this one.....

View attachment 32711

It's the same as the Conn layout except without the plate to slide from C# to Bb. You can just jump over B without too much trouble.

 

[turf3]

Frankly, as a Conn player since 1978, I think the 12M table is the best. You have the three keys in line and C# extends over to the side so if you need to go C# to Bb you just hit the lower part of C# and slide over to Bb.

But Conn also used a two piece low C# that reduces key touch force. The only other traditionally laid out horns I know of like that are the King Zephyr baris and the oldest Buescher 400s.

I find that diagonal slide on 6M and 10M not as optimal as the designers probably hoped.

I really don't like the ever larger tilting low Bb table designs and from the little bit of playing time I have on one, I think the Balanced Action was the best implementation of the modern hinging and 1-2-1 layout. That said, the Super, I think, had better key action all round

One aspect of Selmer design people don't talk about much is key force in the stacks. It is my suspicion that "Balanced Action" was intended to mean more or less equal key forces everywhere. They reduced LH pinky force by lengthening key arms (which of course increases travel) but they also increased spring stiffness in the stacks. Compare a new Selmer to a Conn or Martin to see how much stiffer the stack keys are.

To me, the BA and later designs are based on a theory, that all the fingers should be considered the same and should have similar motion paths and key forces. I'm not sure however that this theory is correct, given the actual observable anatomy of the human hand. Once it was decided to assign the biggest heaviest keys on the thing to the weakest finger (at least for right handers) I believe the older styles of table design are intended to use the limited strength of the pinky in the most efficient way possible, even though it doesn't fit the above mentioned theory of design. Just my two cents, and not presented as fact, just speculation and opinion.

 

[Targa]

No it wouldn't, nor would it figure highly in the selling points. It's just that my aim was to develop my own ideals which could be viewed as either honesty and integrity or just pure ego (e.g. "Pete knows best"). In the end the main selling point may have been the lemur in the coffee tree engraving.

I'd still be up for a Cafesaxophone Saxophone, but cannot do it by myself is what I learned.

When you say cannot do it by yourself is that the development and production etc. or financially?

 

[Pete Thomas]

When you say cannot do it by yourself is that the development and production etc. or financially?

Mostly the development and production. Looking for some unique selling point as opposed to another rebadged horn from Taiwan or China.

The amount of work I had, and would continue to, put into it would have made it difficult to continue CafeSaxophone as non profit.