Saxophones The New Jim Schmidt re-designed Saxophone

If he got enough orders production costs could be reduced considerably... which would produce more orders... and so on.

Jim Schmidt is trying to contract out some of the manufacturing to places with cheaper labour costs. He put together some videos to help train his new Asian workforce and then posted the films on YouTube. For example:



Fascinating stuff for an engineer like me.

Rhys
 
Last edited:
The Goofus "cuesnophone" was similar idea wasn't it and that faded away. The melodica tried it with a keyboard. Apart from doubling on other saxophones, players who double on other woodwind will have problems switching. Imagine a piano laid out the same. No black notes, just a row of white notes smiling at you when you lift the lid. No logic and no landmarks.

Most schools start their woodwind classes on recorder. I can't see many beginners indulging thousands of pounds on a curiosity.

http://bassic-sax.info/version5/vintage-saxes/sax-shaped-things/metal/couesnophone
 
Last edited:
Ads are not displayed to logged in members. Yay!
In the OP Mr Andersson has written 'One note follows the next chromatic note by closing down the next key with the next finger of your hand, and so on down the line, one after the other in linear sequence'.
At face value that would only give eight notes, obviously there are more but how?
 
Colin TB,
It is very logical and the answer is to make new recorders so that 123 of each hand works the the logical way. Sweden changed from driving on the left to the right, which was a far greater problem.

I find the boehm system vey logical. Removing one finger at a time giving a mojor scaleseems simple I struggled with a chromatic mouth organ after playing a diatonic. When do you press the button?

The only problem I've had shifting from left to right is the buttons being on the other side.
 
In the OP Mr Andersson has written 'One note follows the next chromatic note by closing down the next key with the next finger of your hand, and so on down the line, one after the other in linear sequence'.
At face value that would only give eight notes, obviously there are more but how?
there's diagram of the fingering layout here - http://www.jsengineering.net/saxes.asp
 
Oh man! My brain hurts. second finger B second finger knuckle high D. 5th digit pull for Eb and push for D

It reminds me of something I saw, on here I think, that was an elegant engineering solution to playing saxophone with one hand/arm. I think it was devised in the early 20th century for musicians returning from conscripted war duty with less limbs than they set out with.
 
As already said above its been talked about for the last 10 years or so and i do hope Jim gets the sax mass produced because for me someone who redesigns our beloved instrument in the way he has done deserves all the praise we could lavish on him.
If he could sell the horn at a realistic price then i would buy one without hesitation but as Pete says the the ergonomics of learning a new system wouldn't be without its problems.
 
Jim Schmidt and his associate(s) have been trying first to start some co-operation in Taiwan and then in China but haven’t been able to find a way to start such a project in any of those countries yet.

There are, that I know of, less than a handful of these prototypes around and the “ price’ is largely a theoretical one since there isn’t exactly a “ market”.

I am afraid that at that price point and with a production method based on the methods shown in Jim Schmidt video, the horn couldn’t have a lower price and even it would be produced in a faster , industrial, manner, such a horn would need to sell at least 100 pieces p.a. in order to be able to be a viable project.

Which, as usual, brings anyone to the crucial question whether or not a market, this size, exist for a horn that requires the player to adjust his playing to a new instrument requiring a different finger technique.

MY hunch is that if this project will ever become a production and will exit the actual prototypical stage that it has had for 10 or more years, it will forever be a minority project.

There is also a Jim Schmidt flute, by the way.
 
There are a number of consideration if the Schmidt system is to enter the market. The following points are off the top of my head, unrevised but I think make sense...

(a) If this horn offers real advantages and can be produced at the right price it could be viable even though existing players would have to adapt to different fingerings.

(b) In addition to the quality of build which is evident from the youtube footage, Jim Schmidt claims that it offers lightness, improved tonal qualities and a chromatically ordered layout which would enable players to play with increased facility.

(c) Milandro says that there are less than a handful of prototypes in existence.

(d) If JS can find players of reputation to take up these prototypes and adapt their techniques* and demonstrate the instruments' superiority publicly - live performances, CDs, youtube - a market could be created.

(e) A sufficient number (Milandro's 100 or so?) of customers prepared to deal on a cash with order basis would enable an initial production run to go ahead. The price would have to be negotiated with a suitable producer based on that quantity.

(f) There would be tooling and other one-off set-up costs which would require consideration. A way around it would be to accept a lower profit or even none on the first run, so that subsequent production runs would not undercut the value of the first instruments, otherwise the likelihood of getting the first batch of buyers would be seriously reduced.

(g) There are alternative business plans. JS could approach a company or an individual prepared to provide the venture capital to enable an initial production run; he may be in a position to finance the operation himself (inventors are often poor, though...) or he could set up a company or consortium and raise the capital by whatever means. Any of these could be combined with getting cash with order customers if need be and if possible.

* Re (d) - I would have thought it unlikely that a professional player would take time off from their career to learn a completely different fingering on their main instrument.

However taking up an instrument with the Schmidt system as a doubler would possibly be reasonably comparable with a sax player deciding to double on, say, clarinet, having never played one before. Because the different instrument would feel different and sound different, the mind could keep the two fingerings separate and performance on the main instrument should not suffer. It is possible to evaluate and quantify learning load by using established methodology - answering the question "How long will it take me to adapt?"

If the player found that Schmidt's horn enabled him/her to achieve better results than on a conventional horn, then the opportunity would be available for the doubler becoming the main horn while retraining on a Schmidt version of the original main horn.

I don't suppose that any of the above has not already been considered by Jim Schmidt.

My feeling is that a small number of respected players adapting, endorsing and demonstrating the superiority of the Schmidt system is an essential ingredient to its commercial launch. If even a few well known players started to regularly use or even better switch to Schmidt instruments the product would achieve lift-off.

Were I Jim Schmidt I would be approaching players and offering them instruments on trial, with a view to them having a modest but worthwhile risk free slice of the action or becoming more substantial investors if they were able and chose to do so.

Again, he could be working on this.

Also there is nothing to stop established players of reputation approaching him to offer giving one of his prototypes a trial.
 
Last edited:
Obviously we don’t know what is happening.

However the fact that is taking so long means that none of this is easy. If it wasn’t easy 10 years ago it is even less easy now. The market is shrinking and the crisis is perduring.

In my experience, and I have some with both Chinese and Taiwanese makers, they are, generally, NOT interested in entering a partnership for this type of project. Both nations are very entrepreneurial but not very well known for, generally speaking, being into ground breaking technology. They mostly do what has proved to be a seller or aesthetic variation on something well accepted. I will mention a very notable Taiwanese exception later.

In other words several Chinese and Taiwanese musical instruments maker could be interested in producing this but they will charge you for any cost. They won’t put a penny of their own money in this.

There is a reason why I mention 100 pieces and that was the figure with which Steve Wedgwood (if I remember correctly) started before he had his C melodies made by a Chinese maker.

The question that is almost impossible to answer is whether there will be a market for 100 pieces a year and not only the first year.

I fear that there wouldn’t be. Many fantasize the return of this that or the other horn or a well made bass light and for little money. The problems is that some things are impossible, some are not interesting for the market and most have too limited a market to offer a suitable return to the investment.

The Silver Eagle project started with lots of interest and quickly got stranded in less than one year.

To date, the ONLY more or less innovative projects, which have been reaching the market in any numbers have been the ones by:
Eppelsheim ( expensive and very specialized instruments the likes of which hasn’t been seen in most cases before or since)

Aquilasax C melodies

Vibratosax ( Thailand) plastic and polycarbonate saxophones

Clarineo (clarinet) & Nuvo (flutes)

Guo (this is Taiwanese instruments!) , high quality grenaditte and plastic flutes
 
Doesn't every Boehm system woodwind instrument (flute, clarinet, saxophone etc) offer a chromaticaly ordered layout. Each hole is a semitone and like this one you have to learn which levers to push to open them in order. I can't help thinking it's a solution for a problem that's already been solved. Switching between flute clarinet and saxophone is simplified by having the common boehm system.

Having had a bash at whistle and bagpipe chanter and fife, the different finger systems are confusing and there's no knuckles involved.

I enjoy playing banjo and mando family. The four string tuned in fifths system means that you can shift from one to the other no problem.

Anything you learn on guitar is just for guitar and this is similar. It's a new instrument. It may or may not offer advantages for a player but it stands alone in the woodwind group like the guitar stands alone in the string group.

If you're going to go for a new instrument then let it be a new instrument not a new way of playing an old one. I might be tempted with a new sound.
 
I enjoy playing banjo and mando family. The four string tuned in fifths system means that you can shift from one to the other no problem.

Anything you learn on guitar is just for guitar and this is similar. It's a new instrument. It may or may not offer advantages for a player but it stands alone in the woodwind group like the guitar stands alone in the string group.

Bass guitar, double bass - tuned in fourths as well...
 
Although most woodwinds have been heavily rationalized, both the saxophone and the flute are not exactly operating as Jim Schmidt postulates his is a true improvement and I disagree that it offers no advantages, the question is if those advantages are worth the money that he is currently asking.

“.......
THE NEW SAX DESIGNby JIM SCHMIDT

If you dig common sense, practicality, good technology and comfortable ergonomics, read on.

The logic behind my fingering system is straightforward. One note follows the next chromatic note by closing down the next key with the next finger of your hand, and so on down the line, one after the other in linear sequence.

This new fingering system is easy to memorize. Chromatic scales sound wonderfully smooth. All scales, regardless of how many sharps or flats are involved, can be easily played. As you know, the conventional fingering is built around the C major scale with the sharps and flats of other scales inserted where they can fit. Because of this, scales with more sharps and flats become difficult to play. The JS sax design overcomes this problem because it is based on the chromatic scale - the only scale to include all twelve notes of the octave.

The Schmidt chromatic fingering makes perfect sense and is a pleasure to play. Since the tone holes are generally located directly underneath the fingers being applied, the player understands that he/she is making the sax longer and dropping the pitch by applying more fingers, making it shorter and raising the pitch by lifting fingers, or venting it for altissimo by lifting some fingers and closing others. This direct link of fingers over tone holes enables players to visualize what they are doing to the sax. It encourages them to use more creativity and intelligence in their playing. For example: it is easy to transpose down a third by simply pressing down 4 more fingers on their keys.

When you look at a conventional sax you see a lot of complicated interconnecting linkages, unnecessary weight and redundant keys (side keys, bis key, F#, Bb. G# etc.). In the new system, scales and tones are cleaner and quicker because each key is independent (except the low note keys) and is not loaded down by interlinkage mechanisms as are, for instance, mid Bb and F# in the conventional Boehm method. Tones are also clearer because you have the choice of closing only those holes which produce the best sound. This is especially true when playing altissimo (the conventional sax locks you out of some of the best altissimo fingerings). This fingering system allows you to do much more. For example, low note trills and interval tremolos are now available - a big advantantage over conventional horns. A unique technique is employed to achieve this which allows two fingers to operate the low note touchpieces instead of just the pinky. For example - you can hold down low B with the ring finger while trilling low Bb with the pinky. This is easy because spring pressures are about 1/3 as heavy as found on conventional horns........."
 
No really, because the idea behind is that when playing any note, ALL the notes below should be OPEN.

This is not quite the case both in the saxophone and even in the flute. The Leblanc Rationale was an attempt towards making the saxophone more complying to this idea.
 
I think Jim Schmidt's design will appeal to those players who want new possibilities from their instruments - it's not likely to be bought by people who just want to play 12 bar blues and jazz standards - and given the extreme conservatism of musical education establishments and instrument retailers desire to only stock instruments that they can sell easily, the JS sax will always be a niche product, if it ever comes to production.
I suspect that the best he'll manage would be to get the parts fabricated cheaply in the far east and set up a small workshop assembling them himself.
Looking at other innovative musical instruments, like the Chapman Stick or the various electronic instruments like the Eigenharp, mass popularity will be highly unlikely. For all the alleged radicalism of popular music, taste in instruments remains very conservative, the two most common guitar designs are the Les Paul and the Strat and Fender and Marshall amplifier designs predominate. Saxophones are mainly judged on whether they're as good as a Mk VI...
Musicians choice of instruments is mainly influenced by the tradition of the past rather than the 'white heat of technology' and at the moment everything's is very retro and vintage.
 
Jim Schmidt and his associate(s) have been trying first to start some co-operation in Taiwan and then in China but haven’t been able to find a way to start such a project in any of those countries yet.

When I spoke to Jim at Namm, he mentioned that he does have a production line manufacturer, however he has to build a new prototype, or at least reconstruct an existing one quite radically to make it so that various components can be made in quantities. It does seem like your statement here backs this up:

In other words several Chinese and Taiwanese musical instruments maker could be interested in producing this but they will charge you for any cost. They won’t put a penny of their own money in this.

in other words he has to supply them with 100% reproducible model down to every mechanism and some of the parts of his prototypes are/were not exactly reproducible efficiently
 

Similar threads... or are they? Maybe not but they could be worth reading anyway 😀

Popular Discussions on the Café

Forum statistics

Topics
27,483
Messages
511,822
Members
7,160
Latest member
SteveS
Back
Top Bottom