Conn Wonder VS "Chu"

[Roger Aldridge]

Here's a smack down that should be fun for vintage Conn fans! Let's compare early Conns -- specifically, serial numbers BEFORE 143xxx -- with the "Chu" models.

All I'm asking about is their quality of SOUND. For the moment forget about intonation, keywork, etc. Let's just talk about the raw sound coming out of the horn with the early Conns versus the later ones.

Any difference? If so, please try to describe it. Which do you prefer?

[alain]

Hi, let say that the the sound are identical in the pre 143XXX and the chu, you can find good and very good one in each serie. I have a 124XXX and compared it last year to some chu they have in sax shop here in montreal. The one I have beat some of the chu they have. The chu model never exist they are all new wonder model that change slightly over year of production.

[Bootman]

No difference that I have been able to detect, the only difference is in better intonation and keywork. I have several of the pre 143K Conns and have owned many of the later models. In "Chu horns", I prefer the post 200K series.

[OnyxSax]

I was able to try a silver-plated pre Chu side by side with my restored silver Plate Chu and my Lazarus Edition 10M. In terms of sound, the pre-Chu sounded more like the 10M than the Chu, although we're really splitting hairs at this point. All three horns have that distinctive Conn sound.

One player I know recently set his beautiful 220,xxx Chu aside in favor of a 1913 Model. He said it played even bigger than the Chu.

[super20dan]

i have a new wonder that out plays every chu i have ever tried. its an amazing horn and some day i will give it the restoration it richly deserves.its actually a new york selmer but every inch a conn!(alto)

[birdlegs]

I have a chu alto 217,xxx serial number that just wails! I've tried it against 6Ms and there's no comparison. It has gold plate.
I bought a chu tenor (167,xxx) with nickel plate that's an old US Navy horn. Not as much of a beast as the alto, but still a wonderful BIG sound.
What kind of mouthpeice do you use on your Chu tenors? I've tried ducoffs, rubber Links and a Morgan X-caliber. Still looking for and all-arounder that can play soft, loud, ballsy and schmaltzy. Any ideas? Guess I should be posting this on the mouthpiece thread.[/img]

[CodyW]

Try the morgan L series. Its got a big chamber for the ballads, but it can provide alot of punch. It seems to work well with older horns.

[Bootman]

Runyon Quantums work exceptionally well on these old Conns too, Ponzol M2 and Lawtons as well.

[tomobari]

Does anyone have specific experience with a 'pre-Chu' bari compared to a Chu or even a Ladyface? I tested a Chu next to a Ladyface and I think the Chu 'out sounded' the Ladyface....

Just my EUR 0,02

Marc

[shmuelyosef]

I have a pre-Chu silver tenor that I have been playing with a Morgan 8L mouthpiece...VERY big sound. I have not compared it to a Chu, but it is a much more expressive and exciting horn to play than several 10Ms that have recently passed through here. The sound is definitely less refined (although I prefer the keywork to the Chu...I don't like the knurled G#), as is the keywork, although the keywork is solid and fast.

[birdlegs]

Just checkin in with my chu talk. I'm trying a clear acrylic Ducoff on my Chu tenor, and you know what? The mf wails man. It wails. Has anyone tried a white peice on it? What's that white piece everyone tried in the late fourties was using? Can't think of the name now.

[shmuelyosef]

Brilhart?

[Edo]

I use an SPC Dukoff D8, the silverite one, with my very old pre-Chu alto, s/n: 78k..

And been wailing ever since... 8)

[birdlegs]

To samueljosef,
Yeah Brilhart that's the one I meant. Anyone tried one?
SPF Dukoff? What's the SPF mean?
I played a Dukoff LD8 for a few years. Relly nice round low tones. Not enough bite in the mids and highs for my liking. But, I was playing in a rock band at the time and I needed some edge to cut through the sludge.

[Edo]

SPC is for Dukoff's very own Super Power Chamber... :D

I'm sorry..it's my bad habit to always include the SPC when describing this particular Dukoff, because I have a D8 tenor that doesn't have the words "Super Power Chamber" inscribed....

[hornimus]

No difference that I have been able to detect, the only difference is in better intonation and keywork. I have several of the pre 143K Conns and have owned many of the later models. In "Chu horns", I prefer the post 200K series.

The later the better? I'm intrigued by the comments per intonation and keywork, as I'd prefer to have the best of both. I notice some posters say they like the pre-Chu keywork better.

I'm also curious about the qualitative sound differences between the plain drawn and drawn-and-rolled tonehole versions of the pre-Chu series, notably the tenors.

[Mike Cesati]

A Brillhart Tonalin or Ebolin is killer on a Conn

[OnyxSax]

I have a 1913 Conn Curved without rolled tone holes and played a couple of later ones with the rolled tone holes. I have a hard time discerning a noticeable difference in sound. Also, I own a later 10M (1952) without the rolled tone holes and played some 1930's models with them and have ended up with the same conclusion: Whatever sound difference there is is very slight, and that could be attributed to other factors besides the tone holes. This becomes even more apparent when you realize that some of these horns are pushing 90 years old or more...and so much can happen to a horn in that time period.

[PB]

Mike Cesati,
you are so right. The Brilharts play great on the Chu.
A friend of mine sold his Mk6 and is now looking for a Chu. He is a very good player. In his room he had five Chu horns, 97xxx to 248xxx.
All of them had nearly the same Conn character.
The 97xxx was the lightest horn. It played great. The 248xxx had the best projection with a big tone. But now....
He had the original played Chu from Bobby Jones ( the Mingus Tenor player for some time...... and what a player). It was a 184xxx silver plated model. This horn had that much character....even when you played ppp the sound was already there. Like on a Selmer. Very quick response.
A very dark horn, but so forceful...incredible. This horn was the heaviest, too. Long speech, no sense...........
At the end, try and take the best horn for you. **** on the serial no.

[cuthbert]

Well,I have a Chu C-melody,and I tried it with a pre-Chu C-melody with rolled tones and another one curved neck and straight holes (VERY old,1919,I think).All of them with my ebolin 2* (now I'm waiting for the new hot rodded Mojo-Tonalin 7 8) ).
Well,the sound was almost exactly the same for all the three saxes the '19,the '23 and the '27,the intonation was better for the later instruments (this is probably because of the straight neck,I cannot say it for the tenors...),the keywork changed a little bit,I think the Chu was better but I noticed that the old one had the low C# key with TWO rollers instead of one and because of this the trill bettween C# and B flat was easier,interesting feature...

In conclusion I think that these three saxes are three different phases of the evolution of the same horn,the Conn New Wonder,ad they shouldn't be considered three model apart like,to say, the 10M and the New Wonder...

By the way do you consider the 10M with rolled toneholes a different model from the one without them (afer '47?).And what about the ones with the underslung ocatve key?Another model?

[Mike Cesati]

My favorite tenor is 207xxx Chu,I also have a 238xxx. This one is not anywhere near the other in terms of character and tone. I was going to try a early Conn about 1917-18. Not sure on the ser#. Can I expect intonation trouble on these early models?

[Ol' Mpc Doc]

Mike, I've had a couple of New Wonder tenors with serial numbers of 134xxx only 33 serial numbers apart, sold one, kept one. Also had a 119xxx which I sold after finding a "closet mint" 134xxx. I'd put any of these horns up against any serial number series of the New Wonder series (which includes the "Chu") for tonal power and superb intonation. I don't think you'll have any problems with intonation, especially as well as you play.

[rick reed]

I have just bought (today) a Conn Silver alto pre chu i think, serial no 130xxx and she blows like a dream. The plating is excellent and it has got the original case. I'm just wondering what anyone thinks is a suitable mouthpiece, i know is personal but some guidence would be appreciated.
Rick

[luispa]

Rick,

Congratulations!. I'm using a Pre-Chu (#88.XXX) and I prefer it over my #176.XXX Chu. The Pre has a darker full sound and as somebody told on this thread, I prefer the keywork of the Pre-Chu.

I'm using a Otto Link HR 7 and I really like the way it sounds. No intonation problems. After a few minutes of blowing the Link you could make it sound as bright as you want. Many people says that the HR Links are too dark, I think you can change it blowing a little bit harder. It's a practice matter.

[bruce bailey]

On my 1924 Conn (gold plated) I use a Selmer D or a Meyer 6M but I find almost anything will work on these horns.

[rick reed]

Thanks for the advice. Presently i am using a Otto Link 7* which is ok, my teacher recommend a Meyer 7M, which i might give a try.

As i have been totally bitten buy the "vintage sax" bug, i am looking out for good tenor. I play in a ska band and need something with a deep tone, i have read alot about the Conn Chu tenors or 10m. Do they live up to their reputations???
Rick :?:

[luispa]

I don't know too much about tenors. All my Conn are altos. I only used a pre-Nogales Conn Shooting Stars. Excellent rock saxophone. It's supposed to be a 10M tube with New Wonder keywork, I think I made a mistake selling it.

My tenors now are two Buescher True Tone, a silverplated one (#205.XXX) and a goldplated one (#164.XXX), both in pristine condition.

[Dave dix]

Try a new wonder or chu for the ultimate deep tone experience or an early rolled tone hole 10m
Dave

[bruce bailey]

One of my customers brought in some tenors he has and we compared his Zephyr, Super 20 with my Selmer Super (1933). My Selmer came out on top but when he got out his 1933 Conn tranny, it was about as good as I've heard in my 45 years of playing. Smooth, fluid and not brash like the new horns. I think any Conn tenor from about 1920-50 would be a keeper.
As far as the mouthpieces, I think switching from a Link 7* to a Meyer 7 would be an improvement. I love HR Links for Tenor, Bari and Soprano, but Links for Alto would be one of my last choices.

[rick reed]

I think i''ll give the Meyer 7m a try. As for tenors i have a mk6 serial no 204*** which is lovely (who says earlier ones are better!!)
Guess i will just keep trawli' Ebay, so many scammers just recently though, i've counted 5 in the last month on the UK site!!!!. But thats a different thread!
Rick

[rick reed]

I think i''ll give the Meyer 7m a try. As for tenors i have a mk6 serial no 204*** which is lovely (who says earlier ones are better!!)
Guess i will just keep trawli' Ebay, so many scammers just recently though, i've counted 5 in the last month on the UK site!!!!. But thats a different thread!
p.s if anyone is selling a decent vintage Conn silver Tenor can they let me know, i could be interested
Cheers
Rick

[bruce bailey]

I think there is a Chu Silver tenor on ebay (US) that started yesterday.

[KMR]

Rick, are you in the Uk.

If you are, how can I get in touch

Thanks

[KMR]

Rick, are you in the Uk.

If you are, how can I get in touch

Thanks

[rick reed]

KMR,
I do live in the UK, (Coventry). You can call me on 07832199013 or 02476 414046 my email is hotsax16@hotmail.com
Look forward to hearing from you!
Rick

[rick reed]

Going back to Roger's question, i have also got a Conn 143XXX Alto with nail file G sharp key (does this mean its a chu??). When i compared it to the 135XXX silver alto i bought i found the latter to have a deeper more rounded tone. IMHO i prefer the later, but its horses for courses.
Rick

[bsmith]

I had a long discussion with Ralph Morgan (the mouthpiece craftsman, recently deceased) several years ago in regards to my New Wonder alto and tenor. Ralph's Dad was the head saxophone engineer at Conn through the 1920s and '30s and Ralph apprenticed under him. So I consider Ralph's take on this to be believable.

Ralph said, as others have mentioned, that there really was no "Chu" model. It was nicknamed after Chu Berry, a popular but mediocre (according to Ralph) saxophonist at the time. The "Chu" is a New Wonder with a changed G# key. Ralph says there were constant minor changes during the New Wonder years and even extreme customization.

I had my alto completely overhauled by Naldo Monaco of Columbus, OH, who I consider to be the BEST. Over the past 40 years I've played everything from Selmer Mark VI to later models, Yamaha models, etc. and my 1924 Conn is the sweetest and most versatile alto I've ever played. Yes, the keywork is archaic and, no, you cannot use most modern mouthpieces. I use the Morgan 6L and the Excalibur. The intonation is FAR better than any Mark VI ever was. The overall bore design is superior to the Mark VI. I've adapted to the keywork.

On my tenor I use an original, low serial no. Bobby Dukoff 1945 model.

So New Wonder vs. Chu Berry? They's the same.

[bruce bailey]

I agree. I have 3 NW altos and a Chu alto, soprano and Tenor. I actually like the keywork on the earlier ones where the bis is closer to the B and the G# on the tenor is not so far away and not so rough feeling. I just pick the horn that plays best and I don't care if it is 110,000 or 230,000. I am using a super session on alto and soprano and a Brilhart Tonalite or Link HR on tenor.

[Hornlip]

I had a long discussion with Ralph Morgan (the mouthpiece craftsman, recently deceased) several years ago in regards to my New Wonder alto and tenor . . . Ralph said. . . The "Chu" is a New Wonder with a changed G# key. Ralph says there were constant minor changes during the New Wonder years and even extreme customization.

First of all, I did not know Ralph Morgan had died, and I am sorry to hear it.

As for the New Wonder horns, I've owned two pre "Chu" altos and currently own two "Chu" altos. The pre-Chu horns were a a burnished gold-plate horn in the 92xxx range, a nickel plated one in the 130xxx (I think -- it might have been later) range. There were minor keywork differences between them; for one thing the gold horn did not have set screws and the nickel plated horn did. Further, on each stack there was at least one spring that didn't sit behind a little hook on a key, but actually had to be threaded through a hole punched in a part of a key that was perpendicular to the spring. If I remember correctly, the palm keys are a bit different from horn to horn, too. The keywork on each of these horns were precise and had a light touch.

The "Chu" altos are another nickel plated horn in the 200xxx and another almost at 237xxx, where the Tranny horns are supposed to start. The keywork on both these horns seems to be more rugged than on the earlier horns, and maybe a bit bulkier. (Also, I'm pretty sure that the 200xxx had more pairs of set screws than the 130xxx horn had, but I could be misremembering that.) The palm keys are much improved (for me) compared to the earlier horns. And for me the crosshatch G# key is way way easier to deal with than on the earlier horns -- my pinky would either miss the key altogether or slide off. The later horn is a monster -- one of the best altos I've ever played. Though it's not technically a "transitional" horn, it does have the curved side-F key, and I wonder if other more subtle changes were made in the keywork that I haven't noticed. Mechanically, it just feels substantially different from the other altos. Of course, it also came to me in almost pristine condition, and the other horns had seen more use.

To summarize, I think all four horns were mechanically different in one respect or another. As for the body tube / bore, I can't say; but the earlier horns did seem to have a "rounder" tone and the later ones -- especially the latest one -- have a "growlier" tone.

For what it's worth!!

[bruce bailey]

I tend to agree on the last tone statement. My gold plated 1923 Alto has the best transition of registers of any of my altos. Fluid going around fifths.

[HUTMO]

The "Chu" is a New Wonder with a changed G# key. Ralph says there were constant minor changes during the New Wonder years and even extreme customization...

...So New Wonder vs. Chu Berry? They's the same.

I have a Chu 153XXXand New Wonder 78XXX here and there are differences.

The New Wonder is a touch shorter with a larger bore and the G key has two tone holes side by side instead of one tone hole. The necks are different in length, pip placement and bore on the tenon side. The micro tuner and pipe opening are the same. I guess they did not want to re engineer the micro tuner.

The side keys are a bit different too.

HUTMO