support Tutorials CDs PPT mouthpieces

Saxophones Saxello why it disappears

but as far as someone being specifically identifed with the soprano, of prominent players I only see Bechet, Hodges, and Barnet before the late-50s explosion in interest. And for Hodges and Barnet it was definitely a secondary double. So, as I say, soprano was NEVER a popular heavily used instrument until the late 50s, so its production in the US was always tenuous at best.

But you are right, soprano sax was mostly used as doubling instrument until Kenny G.
We just should give a quick nod/acknowledgment to Steve Lacy here, in fairness.

He was Soprano all the way, Monk chose him to play with him, and Coltrane got the Soprano bug after hearing Lacy and becoming acquainted with him.

He was probably the guy we could call the "bridge (jazz) Sopranist" connecting the 20's-30's to the 60's.....not a small thing.
 
We just should give a quick nod/acknowledgment to Steve Lacy here, in fairness.

He was Soprano all the way, Monk chose him to play with him, and Coltrane got the Soprano bug after hearing Lacy and becoming acquainted with him.

He was probably the guy we could call the "bridge (jazz) Sopranist" connecting the 20's-30's to the 60's.....not a small thing.
All true - in fact Lacy started out as a dixielander.

There have been a couple tradjazzers who found their way to more avant-garde forms - in a way, it seems the transition from trad to avant-garde might be an easier jump than from the very constrained format of bebop to avant-garde.

Pee Wee Russell, for one, just seemed to jump right over. Roland Kirk was never really a bopper, when he plays it straight he's right out of the Hawkins school and he too even shades pre-swing in a lot of things. James Newton and Arthur Blythe are two more avant guys with a foot in pre-bebop styles. Ornette was a R&B guy at first.
 
Back to topic.

We are pretty sure why they stopped making " King Saxellos" ™.

I would like to know what players think of the double G# keys. The extra G# opening is open from open C# down the sax body. Intonation and tone are greatly improved according to H.N. White. The A and other tones in the upper register are improved. Is that true compared to other Bb sopranos? Some guys thinks it was a mistake that the solution with double G# keys disappered, other says it was just extra trouble.

The Saxello low C tonehole placement. The low C opening on Saxello was replaced with two smaller tone holes in vertical line with each other. Use to be a single large tone hole proportional to the bore size. Is the Saxello solution good?
 
The double G# tone hole is for the same reason as on the standard Boehm flute; it allows A to be more fully vented. I think (I don't have a sax ready to hand) that if you look at a standard sax you'll find the A tone hole (closed by LH ring finger) is larger, or higher up the tube, than would be expected. With the double pad, there's a pad linked to that A tone hole key, just below it, on the main stack, that opens with it; and the G# pad that's activated by the LH little finger is located round back.

In old flutes there is also something called a "Dorus" G# key where the G# pad stands open all the time unless closed by the LH ring finger, in which case the LH little finger opens it - a mechanism with two counter-acting springs, and the LF ring finger force is substantially increased when the G# key is depressed. This mechanism had its adherents for a little while late in the 19th century but was supplanted by the one current today with two tone holes.

Theobald Boehm, of course, was a big proponent of the open G# which in theory eliminates all these mechanism complications, but for some reason never made it in the marketplace.

At any rate, I suspect the King designers saw the undervented nature of A, looked at flutes, decided to adapt the flute concept; but no one else did; and for whatever reason the underventing of A turns out not to be a meaningful problem on saxophone. I think, but I'd have to look at some horns, that the flute has the proportionally largest tone holes compared to the bore, of the group flute saxophone and clarinet. So maybe this has something to do with why clarinet and sax operate just fine with a single tone hole for G# and the flute wants that tone hole always to stand open thus the two tone holes.
 
Back to topic.

We are pretty sure why they stopped making " King Saxellos" ™.

I would like to know what players think of the double G# keys. The extra G# opening is open from open C# down the sax body. Intonation and tone are greatly improved according to H.N. White. The A and other tones in the upper register are improved. Is that true compared to other Bb sopranos? Some guys thinks it was a mistake that the solution with double G# keys disappered, other says it was just extra trouble.

The Saxello low C tonehole placement. The low C opening on Saxello was replaced with two smaller tone holes in vertical line with each other. Use to be a single large tone hole proportional to the bore size. Is the Saxello solution good?
As to the "low C", this is another case of underventing - these are actually the low D tone holes - low D is emitted here. D is an undervented note on all saxophones. Not only King on the Saxello, but also Holton and Beaugnier on some models have used two holes here to improve venting of D. I think some of this has to do as well with the curve of the bow being at the same place. I can't comment on whether the dual tone hole solution is better than the single tone hole, not having access to otherwise identical instruments of both configurations. I will say that considerable mention is made in internet consultations with beginner saxophonists, about the undervented D and raising that pad whereas little if any information seems extant on the undervented A. That leads me to believe that for whatever acoustic reason the undervented A is more of a curiosity and the undervented D can actually cause issues.
 
Back to topic.

We are pretty sure why they stopped making " King Saxellos" ™.

I would like to know what players think of the double G# keys. The extra G# opening is open from open C# down the sax body. Intonation and tone are greatly improved according to H.N. White. The A and other tones in the upper register are improved. Is that true compared to other Bb sopranos? Some guys thinks it was a mistake that the solution with double G# keys disappered, other says it was just extra trouble.

The Saxello low C tonehole placement. The low C opening on Saxello was replaced with two smaller tone holes in vertical line with each other. Use to be a single large tone hole proportional to the bore size. Is the Saxello solution good?
I am not sure what you are referring to with the double G# key. The G key is a double key, that is both cups are on the same sleeve and cannot be actuated separately . The G# key was moved to the bottom side of the body for space reasons and doubles as a reservoir for condensate. And yes, I can see how you may call one of the two G cups a G# key but it really isn't because it can't be operated to play a G#.

The Low C is the same thing and from what I can tell, it is just the smaller bore / diameter of the body that required that design because there was simply no space to accommodate a single larger key.

And whatever some guys think, (my grandma used to say leave the thinking to the horses, they have bigger heads) it works but adds more complexity in terms of adjusting the pads because you need to make sure they (in both cases) are perfectly synchronized.
 
I am not sure what you are referring to with the double G# key. The G key is a double key, that is both cups are on the same sleeve and cannot be actuated separately . The G# key was moved to the bottom side of the body for space reasons and doubles as a reservoir for condensate. And yes, I can see how you may call one of the two G cups a G# key but it really isn't because it can't be operated to play a G#.
...
In other words, exactly what I wrote above - it's the sax analogy to the modern Boehm flute. Two tone holes for G# - although one of them's always closed along with the A tone hole by the LH ring finger. The other one opened by the LH little finger. The exact size and position of the one that's linked to the A tone hole is not critical - this is why many flutes including mine have a little donut in the tone hole for easier production of the high E.

If you don't have a double hole for emitting A, you've got to increase the size or raise the position of that single tone hole (or both) to compensate for its underventing.

The only question is, is the back side G# on an old King sax still articulated (meaning, does RH index finger force it closed?) or is it non-articulated as in the flute?
 
Darn naming convention, throws me off every time.... LOL
The only question is, is the back side G# on an old King sax still articulated (meaning, does RH index finger force it closed?) or is it non-articulated as in the flute?
Yes it is articulated but the C# key is not linked to the G# key, similar as in the pearl button G# key designs of the Buescher TT as opposed to the roller key design of the series IV and later models.
It's kind of funny how you automatically adjust to the different designs but it was throwing me off a bit when I did some comparison recordings and some more technical phrases were like dang,,, it's the other horn
 
Last edited:
If you don't have a double hole for emitting A, you've got to increase the size or raise the position of that single tone hole (or both) to compensate for its underventing.

And that's where the more cylindrical body of the Saxello does not allow the large single tone hole. I mean, maybe they could have come up with a different solution but it's pretty crammed in that area, right under the left hand pinky table. And the double key solution works just fine, as long as it is set up correctly.
 
Darn naming convention, throws me off every time.... LOL
I refer to tone holes by the note that's emitted when they're the first open hole. I generally refer to stack keys by the finger. A lot of people like to call them by the note that comes out when you CLOSE the stack key, while referring to side keys by the note that comes out when you OPEN the side key, leading to things like the low C# tone hole being BELOW the so-called "low C key", or the LH ring finger controlling the pad over the tone hole that emits A, but yet being called by some "the G key", And again, the tone hole controlled by that so-called "G key" being ABOVE the tone hole controlled by the LH little finger which is called (correctly) the G# key and G# tone hole. Nope.

Boehm had it right; he called keys and tone holes by the notes emitted.

I will admit that I am not consistent with this all the time.
 
I refer to tone holes by the note that's emitted when they're the first open hole. I generally refer to stack keys by the finger. A lot of people like to call them by the note that comes out when you CLOSE the stack key, while referring to side keys by the note that comes out when you OPEN the side key, leading to things like the low C# tone hole being BELOW the so-called "low C key", or the LH ring finger controlling the pad over the tone hole that emits A, but yet being called by some "the G key", And again, the tone hole controlled by that so-called "G key" being ABOVE the tone hole controlled by the LH little finger which is called (correctly) the G# key and G# tone hole. Nope.

Boehm had it right; he called keys and tone holes by the notes emitted.

I will admit that I am not consistent with this all the time.
Thanks, I mean I know what you are talking about but, regardless, there will be lots of readers who would be scratching their heads because of the different naming conventions.

Boehm certainly makes sense. And thanks again for the clarification, I think anybody who takes the time reading can figure it out now.
 
That's the crux of the matter. In addition, among other issues, there are differences in the articulation of different brands models that force the player to even rethink the fingering for some phrases that may work on one horn but not on another. On top of that, with every soprano, even new modern ones, there are idiosyncrasies in the intonation that become second nature if you keep playing the same instrument but if you switch between horns, it may take considerable time to have the intonation dialed in again.

The Saxello almost drove King into bankruptcy because it was notoriously difficult to get a good intonation but keep in mind that that really just reflects a factory line assembly scenario. With a little bit of effort, even a Saxello can be set up to play no less in tune than any other soprano.

After my last Uber Haul of my own Saxello and Borgani, I pitted both against my 1928 straight Conn (bare brass, RTH) and, oh yeah, I treated myself to an Electrovoice RE20 in addition to my Sterling ST51.

View attachment 25641

View attachment 25642

View attachment 25644

The clip is Borgani => Conn => Saxello (EQ: -3.4 dB at ~1800 Hz): EQ Ave Maria_NewUltem-Borgani-Conn-Saxello-reverb.mp3
Quite exciting to hear how you would sound following each meditative piano intro

For me the sax tone (and therefore emotion) became richer and more complex from Borgani to Conn to Saxello
 
Last edited:
Quite exciting to hear how you would sound following each meditative piano intro

For me the sax tone (and therefore emotion) became richer and more complex from Birgani to Conn to Saxello
I have to admit, I absolutely love the Conn. I did a previous recording with a 1925 Holton instead of the Conn and it wasn't until after posting it on YouTube that I found a few issues that I still had overlooked on the Borgani and it was before the Saxello overhaul.

This is a dry recording (minimal reverb, no EQ or any other effects) and the difference in tone are even more obvious. The repad of the Saxello (after this recording) really did miracles for the intonation but I didn't want to put up another Youtube video on the same song:
(Borgani - Holton - Saxello)

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSbpRBoEM2A
 
I received my saxello, the sound is very good but i am mitiged by one things, it's probably stupide, but i don't understand why it's really advantages, i don't understand what this form is more usa le than curved or straight.

I don't very understand the idea, it was for who, i don't understand why it sold this, because it's not for the majority player, it's for very special using, and very not for all,


But i love, it has this différent things, this charm, this exotic form, it's just cool soprano to play,

But my sensation is okay, it's really good sax, the sound is whouaou but why it does exists, it was really legit demande for that, it really necessary to create this form, i say i don't know but i know, it's definitively strange thing, strange sensation, it's just "bizarre" instrument.
 
IMG_20240318_132356.jpg
IMG_20240318_132407.jpg
IMG_20240318_132422.jpg
IMG_20240318_132435.jpg
 
Salut Jean-Charles. Nice horn, no doubt.
It is kind of funny to read you. You answer your own original question.
This horn might just have never really made sense. At least, it never found it’s place.
Not as simple and straight (and light ?) as a … straight horn, and not as compact and practical as a real curvy.
Did it contribute to kill King saxophones, no idea.
I’ve been attending concerts and playing in bands for 4 decades, I’ve never seen a saxello in real life.
Just seen videos with Roland Kirk, and pictures of King Curtis.
 
Back
Top Bottom