Sax on the Web Forum

Sax on the Web Forum Archive / Conn Saxophones / Feel of the Naked Lady

Next 20 Messages

Gjerb
User ID: 7433983 Sep 11th 7:24 PM
Hello all:
I am contemplating the purchase of a 1935 10M "Naked Lady" tenor. Please let me know your opinion of the "playability" of the horn. Also, the reasonable value of a 90% original with no dents. Thanks

mutha potamus
User ID: 9642053 Sep 11th 7:59 PM
HIGHLY playable!

I got my '57 10M cheap for $425 off ebay. While my horn has a full bodied, yet lush sound (ohhh, that bottom end), I've had rare & fundamentally mind altering experiences playing 10Ms from the mid to late '30s. I will one one of these before I die or my life won't be complete.

I'd be willing to pay $1000 (maybe more) for a horn matching your description, provided I got to personally give it an in-depth play-test.

J. Calhoun
User ID: 1244314 Sep 12th 8:26 AM
Free blowing, very big sound. To me the Conns always have a slightly "hoarse" sound that gives them a vocal, singing quality similar to human voice.

The key design is different than modern Selmer keywork. Some say it is harder to operate but for me the Conn layout is easier to use than the Selmer (I have fairly small hands for a guy).

The only thing you have to watch out for is that low F, E, and D on some 10Ms (not altos, not baritones) have a tendency to "gurgle" or waver especially if you put a lot of air through the horn.

Also, with some recently made mouthpieces the mouthpiece has to be located on the neck pulled out very far (like almost falling off) due to the combination of MP and horn design. You can cure this by choosing different MPs, or by having the end of the mouthpiece extended.

retread
User ID: 8882983 Sep 12th 9:12 AM
Playability is no problem after you get used to it. Stack key heights are lower than is common on new saxes, and, at least on mine, the action is very light. Low D and E require a different airstream than my modern Yani, but again it's something you get used to. As J. Calhoun pointed out, a lot of modern mouthpieces play sharp. On mine a new production Selmer Soloist tunes with absolutely no problem.

retread
User ID: 8882983 Sep 12th 9:18 AM
Oh, also I bought my 1936, maybe a little rougher than yours (a few dings), for $800, then paid $360 for an overhaul. I don't know if that was a good price or not.

MojoBari
User ID: 2484284 Sep 12th 11:15 AM
The keys for both hands are in a straight line. Your fingers curl and play towards your thumbs more. You just need to get use to it. Left pinky cluster differance is a big deal for some.

Zman
User ID: 8701433 Sep 12th 4:20 PM
I'm nuts about my '37. I concur with all descriptions.

Two mpcs which work well for me are the Brilhart metal and the Jody Jazz. If your 10M is set up properly, keywork adjustments are no problem.

Mine was $1000 in basically the same condition you describe, than I had Steve Gooodson do his Grand Master overhaul for $1000 since this is my primary tenor. I am pleased with the result.

ferrari
User ID: 3584464 Sep 12th 6:55 PM
I've got a '41 with a Florida Link. Man oh man I surely does love my setup. The above postings on price range sound right to me, although I've had mine for 30 years so what I paid is fairly meaningless. Once you get hooked on a 10M, you'll never look back!

winfried
User ID: 9259363 Sep 13th 5:56 AM
Gjerb, I think, the manufacturing year of 1935 makes this a transitional model, right? Do you have split bell keys or are they left sided?

I don't have the serial number of my early 10M handy, but I think, it was also build in 1935 and has split bell keys (looks very much like a Chu).

Mike C
User ID: 9663323 Sep 13th 5:58 AM
I have 2 10M's from early 40's . Great horns ,I'm totally used to the action and can play very smooth and fast on these. It is the sound that will get you. It's huge and resonating,I concur with the mpc situation. I tried alot for a while and it was really a waste because the horn responds best and in tune with a Link.Once I got the horn and me in sync with this setup I got the best results. I always loved Links but had to see if the grass was greener. The Links give me best results on a 10M (rubber or metal,old or new).I currently use a 7* rubber and don't plan on changing,its a great match with the 10M's I have.

Bob M
User ID: 9342693 Sep 13th 7:56 AM
My 10M is a 1950 bought on eBay for $750.00. Plus $500.00 for an overhaul its a great horn for $1,250.00. A rolled tone hole model from the 30's or 40's would be somewhat more expensive ($500.00 +-).

Also, I'm now using a Brilhart hard rubber Personaline and a Brilhart Tonalin, both about 7*, with terrific results.

paulwl
User ID: 9272753 Sep 13th 2:34 PM
Winfried wrote:

>> Gjerb, I think, the manufacturing year of 1935 makes this a transitional model, right? Do you have split bell keys or are they left sided? <<

>> I don't have the serial number of my early 10M handy, but I think, it was also build in 1935 and has split bell keys (looks very much like a Chu). <<

So what, other than the naked lady, makes it NOT a Chu?

There really isn't a Transitional Chu model. The Chu Berry tenor stayed pretty much the same right till the end.

Last Chu I am aware of was #2630xx (late 1934). Features "previewing" the next tenor model are few -- stovepipe octave vent and curved side E key are about it.

First tenor we would recognize as model 10M -- left side bell keys, automatic diamond shaped pinkie table, T touch for fork F# key, etc -- was #2631xx (same year).

This model emerged pretty much full blown, without a lot of changes made for many years. (The curvy wire piece in the bell keyguard changed to a straight wire very early on. Then, after WW2, the 10M lost its fork Eb keycup. There were more radical changes in the 50s onwards.)

"10M" of course was the model number Conn used for both the split and left bell tenors, which only adds to the Connfusion.

Gjerb
User ID: 9279843 Sep 17th 10:21 AM
Guys...the specifics are: serial number 277792, which places it between 1936 and 1937. It has rolled tone holes.

saxpics
Moderator
User ID: 1314254 Sep 17th 10:41 AM
paulwl is right, to a great extent: the name "Transitional" is a completely made-up name that refers to a range of Conn horns produced between about 237xxx and 263xxx, plus or minus a couple hundred serial numbers, where Conn introduced a variety of interesting keywork and engraving modifications, but didn't include them on all models all the time. Yep: the patents were comin' fast and furious at that time and some experimentin' was being done ...

The model name in advertisements was still New Wonder or simply "6M".

Horns produced after 263xxx or so are considered "Naked Lady" models (or Artist models, if you prefer Conn's nomenclature), as paulwl indicates. Only the curved soprano and C melody retained the split bell keys. The bass and bari had right-hand bell keys.

Rolled tone holes were introduced on the Conn about 1919 or so and were discontinued around 1948, so that's not an issue here.

I've done a considerable amount of research on the Conns and posted it to my website, www.saxpics.com/conn, with lotsa pictures, if you'd like to check 'em out.

Mike S.
User ID: 1411674 Sep 21st 1:25 PM
I wouldn't trade my Conn 10M for the world! I am in the process of selecting/buying yet another tenor to add to my ever growing collection, and am having ONE HELL OF A TIME trying to find a new horn that comes even close to the sound/feel of the old Conns.

John T.
User ID: 8506593 Sep 26th 2:53 PM
OK, everybody knows how wonderful the 10M's are, thats why Lester Young, Hawk & Gordon played one during their Careers.

Anybody want to give feedback on the 6M Alto Naked Ladies??
I recently tried one made around 1949 or so, and, liked EVERYthing about it except for the G# Pinky Table which felt awkward for me little pinky.

Zman
User ID: 8701433 Sep 26th 3:49 PM
I had an interesting 10M experience this morning.

I've been using Java 3's on my Brilhart 7, but had been bothered by some squeaking and chirping which was minor but consistent and annoying. So, in rehearsal with my jazz ensemble this morning, just for hoots I threw on a RJS 2H Filed, and man, what a difference! Totally cleaned it up, and seems to have richened the mid-range tone.

Guess I'll be switching to RJS to keep my 10M happy.

retread
User ID: 1648184 Sep 28th 11:04 AM
Add to the list of mouthpieces that work great with an early 10M--Yanagisawa HR. Just tried it and I'm impressed.

ferrari
User ID: 9056633 Sep 28th 9:13 PM
Drilled reeds, especially with Link STM's make the low end of the 10M's effortless.

Max H
User ID: 0582664 Oct 4th 3:25 PM
Just got a'57 6M about 3 weeks ago. What a horn! She sings, cries, screams and laughs...what a dream! Looks like she's been stored in a closet for the past 45 years. The lacquer has a shiny, aged butterscotch look and the nickel keywork is spotless. I'm in love with my Naked Lady!

Next 20 Messages

Gjerb User ID: 7433983	Sep 11th 7:24 PM Hello all: I am contemplating the purchase of a 1935 10M "Naked Lady" tenor. Please let me know your opinion of the "playability" of the horn. Also, the reasonable value of a 90% original with no dents. Thanks
mutha potamus User ID: 9642053	Sep 11th 7:59 PM HIGHLY playable! I got my '57 10M cheap for $425 off ebay. While my horn has a full bodied, yet lush sound (ohhh, that bottom end), I've had rare & fundamentally mind altering experiences playing 10Ms from the mid to late '30s. I will one one of these before I die or my life won't be complete. I'd be willing to pay $1000 (maybe more) for a horn matching your description, provided I got to personally give it an in-depth play-test.
J. Calhoun User ID: 1244314	Sep 12th 8:26 AM Free blowing, very big sound. To me the Conns always have a slightly "hoarse" sound that gives them a vocal, singing quality similar to human voice. The key design is different than modern Selmer keywork. Some say it is harder to operate but for me the Conn layout is easier to use than the Selmer (I have fairly small hands for a guy). The only thing you have to watch out for is that low F, E, and D on some 10Ms (not altos, not baritones) have a tendency to "gurgle" or waver especially if you put a lot of air through the horn. Also, with some recently made mouthpieces the mouthpiece has to be located on the neck pulled out very far (like almost falling off) due to the combination of MP and horn design. You can cure this by choosing different MPs, or by having the end of the mouthpiece extended.
retread User ID: 8882983	Sep 12th 9:12 AM Playability is no problem after you get used to it. Stack key heights are lower than is common on new saxes, and, at least on mine, the action is very light. Low D and E require a different airstream than my modern Yani, but again it's something you get used to. As J. Calhoun pointed out, a lot of modern mouthpieces play sharp. On mine a new production Selmer Soloist tunes with absolutely no problem.
retread User ID: 8882983	Sep 12th 9:18 AM Oh, also I bought my 1936, maybe a little rougher than yours (a few dings), for $800, then paid $360 for an overhaul. I don't know if that was a good price or not.
MojoBari User ID: 2484284	Sep 12th 11:15 AM The keys for both hands are in a straight line. Your fingers curl and play towards your thumbs more. You just need to get use to it. Left pinky cluster differance is a big deal for some.
Zman User ID: 8701433	Sep 12th 4:20 PM I'm nuts about my '37. I concur with all descriptions. Two mpcs which work well for me are the Brilhart metal and the Jody Jazz. If your 10M is set up properly, keywork adjustments are no problem. Mine was $1000 in basically the same condition you describe, than I had Steve Gooodson do his Grand Master overhaul for $1000 since this is my primary tenor. I am pleased with the result.
ferrari User ID: 3584464	Sep 12th 6:55 PM I've got a '41 with a Florida Link. Man oh man I surely does love my setup. The above postings on price range sound right to me, although I've had mine for 30 years so what I paid is fairly meaningless. Once you get hooked on a 10M, you'll never look back!
winfried User ID: 9259363	Sep 13th 5:56 AM Gjerb, I think, the manufacturing year of 1935 makes this a transitional model, right? Do you have split bell keys or are they left sided? I don't have the serial number of my early 10M handy, but I think, it was also build in 1935 and has split bell keys (looks very much like a Chu).
Mike C User ID: 9663323	Sep 13th 5:58 AM I have 2 10M's from early 40's . Great horns ,I'm totally used to the action and can play very smooth and fast on these. It is the sound that will get you. It's huge and resonating,I concur with the mpc situation. I tried alot for a while and it was really a waste because the horn responds best and in tune with a Link.Once I got the horn and me in sync with this setup I got the best results. I always loved Links but had to see if the grass was greener. The Links give me best results on a 10M (rubber or metal,old or new).I currently use a 7* rubber and don't plan on changing,its a great match with the 10M's I have.
Bob M User ID: 9342693	Sep 13th 7:56 AM My 10M is a 1950 bought on eBay for $750.00. Plus $500.00 for an overhaul its a great horn for $1,250.00. A rolled tone hole model from the 30's or 40's would be somewhat more expensive ($500.00 +-). Also, I'm now using a Brilhart hard rubber Personaline and a Brilhart Tonalin, both about 7*, with terrific results.
paulwl User ID: 9272753	Sep 13th 2:34 PM Winfried wrote: >> Gjerb, I think, the manufacturing year of 1935 makes this a transitional model, right? Do you have split bell keys or are they left sided? << >> I don't have the serial number of my early 10M handy, but I think, it was also build in 1935 and has split bell keys (looks very much like a Chu). << So what, other than the naked lady, makes it NOT a Chu? There really isn't a Transitional Chu model. The Chu Berry tenor stayed pretty much the same right till the end. Last Chu I am aware of was #2630xx (late 1934). Features "previewing" the next tenor model are few -- stovepipe octave vent and curved side E key are about it. First tenor we would recognize as model 10M -- left side bell keys, automatic diamond shaped pinkie table, T touch for fork F# key, etc -- was #2631xx (same year). This model emerged pretty much full blown, without a lot of changes made for many years. (The curvy wire piece in the bell keyguard changed to a straight wire very early on. Then, after WW2, the 10M lost its fork Eb keycup. There were more radical changes in the 50s onwards.) "10M" of course was the model number Conn used for both the split and left bell tenors, which only adds to the Connfusion.
Gjerb User ID: 9279843	Sep 17th 10:21 AM Guys...the specifics are: serial number 277792, which places it between 1936 and 1937. It has rolled tone holes.
saxpics Moderator User ID: 1314254	Sep 17th 10:41 AM paulwl is right, to a great extent: the name "Transitional" is a completely made-up name that refers to a range of Conn horns produced between about 237xxx and 263xxx, plus or minus a couple hundred serial numbers, where Conn introduced a variety of interesting keywork and engraving modifications, but didn't include them on all models all the time. Yep: the patents were comin' fast and furious at that time and some experimentin' was being done ... The model name in advertisements was still New Wonder or simply "6M". Horns produced after 263xxx or so are considered "Naked Lady" models (or Artist models, if you prefer Conn's nomenclature), as paulwl indicates. Only the curved soprano and C melody retained the split bell keys. The bass and bari had right-hand bell keys. Rolled tone holes were introduced on the Conn about 1919 or so and were discontinued around 1948, so that's not an issue here. I've done a considerable amount of research on the Conns and posted it to my website, www.saxpics.com/conn, with lotsa pictures, if you'd like to check 'em out.
Mike S. User ID: 1411674	Sep 21st 1:25 PM I wouldn't trade my Conn 10M for the world! I am in the process of selecting/buying yet another tenor to add to my ever growing collection, and am having ONE HELL OF A TIME trying to find a new horn that comes even close to the sound/feel of the old Conns.
John T. User ID: 8506593	Sep 26th 2:53 PM OK, everybody knows how wonderful the 10M's are, thats why Lester Young, Hawk & Gordon played one during their Careers. Anybody want to give feedback on the 6M Alto Naked Ladies?? I recently tried one made around 1949 or so, and, liked EVERYthing about it except for the G# Pinky Table which felt awkward for me little pinky.
Zman User ID: 8701433	Sep 26th 3:49 PM I had an interesting 10M experience this morning. I've been using Java 3's on my Brilhart 7, but had been bothered by some squeaking and chirping which was minor but consistent and annoying. So, in rehearsal with my jazz ensemble this morning, just for hoots I threw on a RJS 2H Filed, and man, what a difference! Totally cleaned it up, and seems to have richened the mid-range tone. Guess I'll be switching to RJS to keep my 10M happy.
retread User ID: 1648184	Sep 28th 11:04 AM Add to the list of mouthpieces that work great with an early 10M--Yanagisawa HR. Just tried it and I'm impressed.
ferrari User ID: 9056633	Sep 28th 9:13 PM Drilled reeds, especially with Link STM's make the low end of the 10M's effortless.
Max H User ID: 0582664	Oct 4th 3:25 PM Just got a'57 6M about 3 weeks ago. What a horn! She sings, cries, screams and laughs...what a dream! Looks like she's been stored in a closet for the past 45 years. The lacquer has a shiny, aged butterscotch look and the nickel keywork is spotless. I'm in love with my Naked Lady!