Worst sax I have ever played

[sax_appeal]

Got my hands on an old King this morning. I have no idea what model it was but it was, without a doubt, the worst sax I have ever seen. Ever. Ever ever ever. Its not that it was in bad condition, it was well maintained but it was stuffy, the right hand keys were too far in towards the bell, the left hand palm keys were almost as large as the sax (tenor) itself and the right hand palm keys were quite crooked. It uses the old all-lined-up-in-a-row left hand pinky mechanism which was extremely slow. The only damage was that one of the posts was shoved into the sax, piercing the bell (this was one of the posts for the bell to body brace, which was bent in one place.

Now that I've got that off my chest- I thought that King were supposed to be good. Were a lot of them like this or was this more of a failed one off model?

[shmuelyosef]

IMO: King made some really lousy saxophones until midway into the Zephyr run (about 210xxx-1946 where they did a new body tube and neck and modernized the keywork. This horn laid the groundwork for the Super 20, which is certainly in the top five of many folks "best saxophone ever" list. The Super 20's were excellent well into the 60s when they started to deteriorate somewhat, but were still solid pro horns till the end. The King brand has been producing marginal student horns since the late 70s (about). So, IMHO, the only good Kings are 1946-1952 Zephyrs and 1948-1970 Super20s.

Now open for arrows.

[Carl H.]

You forgot the king marigaux horns, also killers.

[DanY]

The King Marigaux horns were stencils made in France by SML. They are great horns. (Yay i've got one!)

[SAXISMYAXE]

Shmuelyosef,
I couldn't disagree more about the H.N. White KINGS of the 20's. I have written at length about my opinions of these early horns in other posts, so I won't go into detail. Suffice to say that my experiences have been quite different. As we all know, "to each his own" in the wonderful world of Saxophones!

[yrly]

I am not a pro or anything, just played the sax through high school, I picked up a circa 1924 King Alto, and first time I played it I never had any real trouble with it. Was just as easy to work as my newer Yamaha, after two or three uses. I would probably prefer it after a few more plays. Keywork is nice and smooth. Guess its just a matter of personal preference.

[Ramen Iyer]

Funny how some will think that their opinion is the best. Its like their thoughts or experiences are the Ultimate Truth or such like.
Actually the configuration of sax, mpc, reed and state of mind will make the final sound.
Many biggies in the sax world including Steve Goodson will not vouch for King if it wasnt really a grand sax.
My own sax from the 50s is a great piece and has a sound unlike any Ive actually heard or played.
My experience with old horns has been especially favourable, I suppose Im among the most favoured for 0ld saxes.
And each and every old sax i play eventually leaves my side for a wonderful profit.
And im sure my Knig Cleveland will also prove the same !

[Jonno]

Ramen - I think you have the wrong end of the stick. He asks at the end if all kings are bad saxes or not. How can he be trying to state his opinion as truth?

Anyway, I have played an alto king (not sure what type, but around 1930s model) and it was an absolute ripper. It played really good and had a nice sound. SO....I would say all kings do not suck. There is at least one good one (although its not a tenor).

The only downside to living in Australia is that you dont have the abundance of old american brands around. Kings, old conns, beauchers etc are not as common as in the states.

[shmuelyosef]

Shmuelyosef,
I couldn't disagree more about the H.N. White KINGS of the 20's. I have written at length about my opinions of these early horns in other posts, so I won't go into detail. Suffice to say that my experiences have been quite different. As we all know, "to each his own" in the wonderful world of Saxophones!

Perhaps my language was too strong...I found these horns to be a nuisance to set up. I have overhauled several, combination of the double G keys, offset holes on the register pips, and general manufacturing alignments that required extra time (one of them had several posts that were obviously misplaced at the factory...no wonder it was a closet horn, it had been unplayable all it's life). Once these were properly set up, they all had the 'King thing' going, they were nice free-blowing horns. Both the ones that I still have notes on required fairly big offsets in upper and lower key heights (opposite directions) from what I am used to, but they played well. I still occasionally tune up one of them, it is in daily use and from the 20's with beautiful 100% gold plate (this was the closet that was poorly manufactured). So my limited experience led me to believe that, while King had some excellent concepts, the quality of their early horns was somewhat suspect, and this is perhaps why so many of these are in excellent condition and why they did not develop a reputation and sell a lot of horns until the Zephyr.

[SAXISMYAXE]

Shmuelyosef,
After your clarification, I think that we actually agree on all points. I don't think that anyone would argue with your statement about early Kings regarding their quirky mechanical setups.
They are strong and well constructed, but due to some rather interesting mechanical features of design, do tend to go out of adjustment rather frequently, and can take a little extra care to set up properly.
I would say that , for me, the most irritating physical feature is the lack of key guards on the Rt. F# and lft. pinkie G# keys. An easy fix, but a nuisance just the same.
But I love their sound and free blowing characteristics, and have learned to work on them to overcome any mechanical problems (true with all of my horns).