Saxophones Low Bb vs low A baritones.

[Pete Thomas]

This came up in another thread. Obviously low A is better if you need or want to play the extra note, but is there something that makes one better or worse than the other in general?

I just don't understand. You mean a low A bari should go for more money? Why?

 

[Pete Effamy]

Obviously lies is better if you need or want to play the extra note

What, “yes, I have a Bari with low A. Honest.”

 

[Stephen Howard]

Well, there's the weight. A low Bb bari a lot lighter than a low A one.

I find that low Bb baris tend to be more 'mellow' in tone - and as such I've always felt that they're a better bet for soloing...at least within the mainstream genre.
I would have previously put this down the the simple difference between vintage baris and modern ones, but I find it rings true with the few modern low Bb baris out there these days.
That said, I have a Conn-Selmer Avant 180 on the bench right now, and that seems to have quite a warm tone. But that was on blowing it when it came in, complete with leaks. It'll be fixed later...and I'll give it another go.

A low A bari will get you more gigs these days.

If something gets wedged down the bottom of a low A bari it's much harder to reach in and get it out.

The majority of low A baritones have dreadful mechanisms for actuating the low A via the thumb key only. Yamaha's mech is sublime.