Sax on the Web Forum

Swirve.com Links: Swirve.com Free Email Games Fantasy Sports E-Cards Movies Horoscopes Freebies Web Search

Sax on the Web Forum / Conn Saxophones / Good or not?

soprano player
User ID: 9774843 Nov 22nd 8:08 AM
Conn Chu alto, serial M200538, from 1920s
Naked Lady alto, serial #665192

Are these any good? Any advice or opinions welcome, as I'm an idiot in front of American saxes.

Dave Dolson
User ID: 9209903 Nov 22nd 11:25 AM
Soprano player: It's me again. I recently picked up a '25 Conn Chu alto which had been gold re-plated by a previous owner. A really nice alto with a huge voice and especially resonant in the low end. The tone is decidely more modern than my Buescher TT alto. The keywork is a bit clunky.

If I only had one alto and the Conn was it, I would be very happy with it. Mine lacks the articulated G# but does have the front-F (neither of which are a major issue for me).

The microtuner neck limits my ability to tune sharp (if required) when I use a longer mouthpiece (e.g., the new Selmer Soloist), so I'm using a shorter Meyer piece on the Chu. Old Conns are nice horns. When I bought the Chu, I also tried a newer ('48?) Conn alto, two new Yamahas (62 and silver Custom) and a nice MKVI. Both Conns were superior to those mentioned and the Chu was the best of 'em that day. DAVE

soprano player
User ID: 9774843 Nov 22nd 12:28 PM
Thanks again Dave.
How exactly does the microtuner work? Obviously it's to "tune" the horn, but are they reliable, or is there any mouthpiece that can't be used with these horns with microtuner necks besides the longer ones?

Dave Dolson
User ID: 9209903 Nov 22nd 1:35 PM
Soprano player: The microtuner is a screw-in/out device, When you see it, you will instantly recognize it's purpose. I place my mouthpiece all the way onto the cork, butting up against the flat part of the tuner. Then, I screw the tuner in and out to tune the horn. Very easy. The problem was the length of some pieces. Spome microtuners may be frozen, though . . . and may be a source of leaks. (I haven't seen any like that, though). DAVE

OnyxSax
User ID: 9683713 Nov 22nd 7:58 PM
With all things being equal, the M200,xxx alto would probably be more desirable. That horn dates to 1927, which was the heyday of the Chu. The horns around the 200,000 mark (give or take 20,000 units) are among the most sought after vintages for collectors, for good reason as well, they're really good horns.

The 665,xxx horn may be a sleeper. It's a 1950s 6M, which are usually very underrated horns and they don't fetch the kind of prices that pre-World War II Conns do. Still, the horn is essentially similar to the earlier Conns except for the lack of rolled tone holes and the forked Eb mechanism.

sopranoplayer
User ID: 2720884 Nov 22nd 9:35 PM
How does the sound compare between the Chu and Ladyface? Which one if brighter and bigger?

OnyxSax
User ID: 9683713 Nov 22nd 10:36 PM
I don't play a whole lot of alto. I've played a few 6Ms, but no Chus. I do have pretty extensive experience with Chu tenors and 10Ms, and here is how they compare...

...The 10M is a more powerful horn with somewhat better ergonomics. The Chu does not have as much power, but the tone is more complex. The keywork is slightly more awkward but seems to be lighter. Personally, I don't mind sacrificing the additional power for the more complex tone.

Brightness I think is going to be more of a function of the finish (silver vs lacquer) and the resonators (metal vs nylon). At our Maryland get-togethers, we have compared virtually identical horns except for finish and resos and found that silver is brighter than lacquer and metal resos are brighter than nylon. We've been able to do this with a pair of 10Ms (319,xxx vs 354,xxx), a pair of Conn Straight Sopranos (165,xxx vs 200,xxx) and a pair of Conn Curved Sopranos (26,xxx vs 49,xxx), and the results have always been the same.

paulwl
User ID: 8437443 Nov 23rd 11:15 AM
Frankly, I think this is a self-fulfulling prophecy. The psychological factor is so important in playing and hearing tone, and the perceived results vary so from player to player, that it's hard to see how it could be otherwise.

OnyxSax
User ID: 9683713 Nov 23rd 12:10 PM
paulwl: Normally, I would agree with you that a lot of what is tone concept is in your head, except that different people were involved each of the comparisons and the results were always the same.

super20dan
User ID: 8158483 Nov 24th 7:44 PM
my new wonder is brighter sounding than my 1951 6m.

paulwl
User ID: 9384353 Nov 25th 9:40 AM
>> paulwl: Normally, I would agree with you that a lot of what is tone concept is in your head, except that different people were involved each of the comparisons and the results were always the same. <<

Hmmm. I'd have liked to sit in on some of those sessions!

soprano player User ID: 9774843	Nov 22nd 8:08 AM Conn Chu alto, serial M200538, from 1920s Naked Lady alto, serial #665192 Are these any good? Any advice or opinions welcome, as I'm an idiot in front of American saxes.
Dave Dolson User ID: 9209903	Nov 22nd 11:25 AM Soprano player: It's me again. I recently picked up a '25 Conn Chu alto which had been gold re-plated by a previous owner. A really nice alto with a huge voice and especially resonant in the low end. The tone is decidely more modern than my Buescher TT alto. The keywork is a bit clunky. If I only had one alto and the Conn was it, I would be very happy with it. Mine lacks the articulated G# but does have the front-F (neither of which are a major issue for me). The microtuner neck limits my ability to tune sharp (if required) when I use a longer mouthpiece (e.g., the new Selmer Soloist), so I'm using a shorter Meyer piece on the Chu. Old Conns are nice horns. When I bought the Chu, I also tried a newer ('48?) Conn alto, two new Yamahas (62 and silver Custom) and a nice MKVI. Both Conns were superior to those mentioned and the Chu was the best of 'em that day. DAVE
soprano player User ID: 9774843	Nov 22nd 12:28 PM Thanks again Dave. How exactly does the microtuner work? Obviously it's to "tune" the horn, but are they reliable, or is there any mouthpiece that can't be used with these horns with microtuner necks besides the longer ones?
Dave Dolson User ID: 9209903	Nov 22nd 1:35 PM Soprano player: The microtuner is a screw-in/out device, When you see it, you will instantly recognize it's purpose. I place my mouthpiece all the way onto the cork, butting up against the flat part of the tuner. Then, I screw the tuner in and out to tune the horn. Very easy. The problem was the length of some pieces. Spome microtuners may be frozen, though . . . and may be a source of leaks. (I haven't seen any like that, though). DAVE
OnyxSax User ID: 9683713	Nov 22nd 7:58 PM With all things being equal, the M200,xxx alto would probably be more desirable. That horn dates to 1927, which was the heyday of the Chu. The horns around the 200,000 mark (give or take 20,000 units) are among the most sought after vintages for collectors, for good reason as well, they're really good horns. The 665,xxx horn may be a sleeper. It's a 1950s 6M, which are usually very underrated horns and they don't fetch the kind of prices that pre-World War II Conns do. Still, the horn is essentially similar to the earlier Conns except for the lack of rolled tone holes and the forked Eb mechanism.
sopranoplayer User ID: 2720884	Nov 22nd 9:35 PM How does the sound compare between the Chu and Ladyface? Which one if brighter and bigger?
OnyxSax User ID: 9683713	Nov 22nd 10:36 PM I don't play a whole lot of alto. I've played a few 6Ms, but no Chus. I do have pretty extensive experience with Chu tenors and 10Ms, and here is how they compare... ...The 10M is a more powerful horn with somewhat better ergonomics. The Chu does not have as much power, but the tone is more complex. The keywork is slightly more awkward but seems to be lighter. Personally, I don't mind sacrificing the additional power for the more complex tone. Brightness I think is going to be more of a function of the finish (silver vs lacquer) and the resonators (metal vs nylon). At our Maryland get-togethers, we have compared virtually identical horns except for finish and resos and found that silver is brighter than lacquer and metal resos are brighter than nylon. We've been able to do this with a pair of 10Ms (319,xxx vs 354,xxx), a pair of Conn Straight Sopranos (165,xxx vs 200,xxx) and a pair of Conn Curved Sopranos (26,xxx vs 49,xxx), and the results have always been the same.
paulwl User ID: 8437443	Nov 23rd 11:15 AM Frankly, I think this is a self-fulfulling prophecy. The psychological factor is so important in playing and hearing tone, and the perceived results vary so from player to player, that it's hard to see how it could be otherwise.
OnyxSax User ID: 9683713	Nov 23rd 12:10 PM paulwl: Normally, I would agree with you that a lot of what is tone concept is in your head, except that different people were involved each of the comparisons and the results were always the same.
super20dan User ID: 8158483	Nov 24th 7:44 PM my new wonder is brighter sounding than my 1951 6m.
paulwl User ID: 9384353	Nov 25th 9:40 AM >> paulwl: Normally, I would agree with you that a lot of what is tone concept is in your head, except that different people were involved each of the comparisons and the results were always the same. << Hmmm. I'd have liked to sit in on some of those sessions!