What Buescher really claimed for the 400!

[Pinnman]

Some time ago, a catalogue for the (then brand new - but see also below) Buescher 400 went up for sale on eBay. It seems to me that this is an important document which may answer some significant questions about the 400.

I have kept the original eBay page, and can make out some of the claims being made. Unfortunately, I can't read the rest and wonder whether any sharper-eyed SOTWebber can do any better. If anyone would like to give it a go, please let me know - PM or post - and I will e-mail the info.

Meanwhile, this is what I can make out:

New super brass keys: intensified hardness assures you of permanently fine, fast feather-touch action.
Snap on pad with tone resonating centres: brilliance when you want it .... tone all the time.
Wider bow-bell keys on the back: makes low register more brilliant: tone quality uniform.
Key post higher to increase tone space! Greatly improves tone quality yet action is shorter.
New type bell - new proportions. Brings clarity to low register tones.

The models shown are the tenor B-11 and the alto B-7.

The catalogue is claimed to be from 1953 and refer to 'The New Super "400" Bueschers'. The engraving is TH&C, however, not the later model Super 400. I do wonder about the date, but, as only 9 of the 20 pages are shown, the page with the date is missing. My guess is that it is probably repeating claims made when the 400 was first introduced, but there could have been some improvements included also.

As I say, I have taken what little I can make out, but there is a listing of 17 key points which it really would be useful to decipher. I hope someone (or more) is willing to give it a go.

Of course, someone may have a copy of this. The winner of the auction lives in Germany.

[SAXISMYAXE]

PM sent.

[Pinnman]

Thanks, Mike, e-mail sent. Good luck!

[Pinnman]

.... and thanks to two others also. Fingers crossed. Anyone else interested?

[SAXISMYAXE]

Hi Pinnman,
I'm still trying to decipher bits and pieces, but I'm not putting much faith in the results. That print is pretty blurred and sketchy at best. I'll keep everyone updated with my progress. Cheers.

[Pinnman]

Mike,

I quite agree abou it being blurred. It may be that the eBay seller was a bit cunning and deliberately photo'd out of focus. I think some of the points can probably be made out, but I am beginning to lose the sharpness of short focus vision (the curse of middle age) and think a younger person's eyes may yet handle it.

We're up to four now - all well known regular posters, so I will keep hoping. A little from one and a bit from another may could add up to quite a lot.

[Pete]

Page one. Words that I'm not sure of are in parentheses (). I retained the given spelling, punctuation and capitalization:

Buescher craftsmen have long dreamed of creating and developing superlative saxophones that would transcend the modern conception of playing excellence. It meant breaking with tradition -- grinding out on new paths of research to blaze the trail to the stars.

Right away -- from the first test you make of a Buescher "400" you'll recognize the supreme playing qualities that mark the "elite" of the saxophone world. See and try the new Super "400s" by Buescher -- the saxophones musical America is talking about.

"Our Greatest New Model Announcement"

For more than a half a century, Buescher True Tone has been a (spearhead) of supremacy in band and orchestra instruments. Buescher Saxophones are world famous for beauty of tone -- same of playing. This lends significance to the announcement of two new Saxophones -- the finest ever created by Buescher -- the new "400" Alto and Tenor.

... For many years the goal of the Buescher Company has been to (create) the perfect Saxophone. In the Super "400" models, we believe we have achieved that goal. After you are (ready), try a new "400" we are confident you will agree that here at last has been create the perfect Saxophone.

Without hesitation -- and after due reflection on all the great advancements the Buescher Company has made in the past, I say -- the Super "400s" mark the greatest new model announcement in our entire history.

O.E. Beers
President and General Manager,
Buescher Band Instrument Co.,
Elkhart, Indiana

The original JPG's, not embedded in a document, may be helpful, if you have them available.

[SAXISMYAXE]

Hi Pete,
The most interesting (and unfortunately seeming undecipherable) section is the key points of improvement section. I was able to extract the image hoping that processing it through various image enhancing software would make it clearer to read, but the image is just too shoddy.
Here is the jpg:

[Pete]

QFT, saxismyaxe, QFT. The "17 Features" page is close enough to illegible not to make much difference. However, the other text is still of significance and will eventually make its way onto my website.

Heck, I'd buy the original if it was under $25. Got the seller's name?

* I can only blow up the page by about 33% before I can't read any of the text.
* I can sharpen the text by a factor of about 36%.
* If I de-stripe the page, I sometimes can read text I couldn't before but that, unfortunately, makes other text illegible.
* Using something called a "Convolution Matrix" filter, I can make the text crisper, but it makes everything else really, really dark. I don't want to hurt my eyesight more than it has been.

I'm using the GIMP for all of this. Photoshosp CS 2.3 might be a bit better, but I doubt if it'd be significantly better.

I'd attach a copy of one of the files, but it'd be in *.xcf format. JPEG makes the sharpened text almost unreadable .

More text:

ADDED STRENGTH!

New Buescher Super-Brass Keys
INTENSIFIED HARDNESS ASSURES YOU OF PERMANENTLY FINE, FAST feather-touch ACTION!

Here, (pictured), is a remarkable improvement in saxophone design. All keys which were previously subject to frequent bending and getting out of adjustment are now made of "Buescher Super Brass", relieving you of annoying adjustment difficulties.

This is an outstanding development. It permits (sax) craftsmen to regulate the mechanism to a much finer degree. The strength of these keys is substantially greater than that of an ordinary saxophone mechanism. This makes possible a permanently fine -- fast "Feather Touch" action. Many keys on an ordinary saxophone will bend under slight pressure. (This changes the pad shape and the (seal) below and permits small air leaks to develop.) On the new "Buescher Super Brass" mechanism, these keys are so solid, so tough that the instrument remains in perfect adjustment under the most adverse conditions.

[Sax Magic]

Here are the ones I can decipher easily from the sax photo page. More when I have more time.

"New Improved Octave Key Mechanism (mechanics?) to (give better) High Register"

[7 illegible words] "Won't Leak"

"All Long Rods [3 illegible words] Nickel Silver"

"New Buescher Super-Brass Used On Keys And Key Parts -- Cannot Bend -- [illegible number] % Harder"

"New Corkless Slide Connecting Areas"

"G# B and Bb New (Perfect) Action"

"Longer Bell -- New Proportions -- To Bring a New High In True Tone"

'New Tapered [illegible word] Springs -- Will Not Break -- Faster Action"

"Beautiful Elaborate Handcut Engraving"

"Bell Keys More On Back Instead of Side of Bell"

"Drawn Tonehole Sockets -- Eliminate Leaks"

"Wide Bow -- Entirely New Proportions -- Greatly Improved Low Register"

As I said earlier, these are just the ones I can read easily. I will study upon the rest and see what else I can decipher.

Sax Magic

[luispa]

I'm using the GIMP for all of this. Photoshosp CS 2.3 might be a bit better, but I doubt if it'd be significantly better.

It's good to hear you're a Linux guy, I'm another one.

[Pete]

It's good to hear you're a Linux guy, I'm another one.

I'm platform independent. I finally figured out why I couldn't get Linux to install on my backup computer #2: my video card was waaaaaay too old.

I now have Ubuntu 6.06.1 on both backup #2 and one of my work machines.

But the computer on which I used the GIMP is running Windows XP 64-bit .

[KingHarvest22]

'New Tapered [illegible word] Springs -- Will Not Break -- Faster Action"

i bet the illegitimate word is "norton". that's the brand of springs on the bueschers of this era

[Pete]

How's this. Parentheses now indicate where I've made something up.

1 New improved upper octave key mechanism for better altissimo response.
2 Exclusive (neck-lock design holds the neck in place better so) it can't leak.
3 All Long Rods are made of Nickel Silver.
4 New Buescher Super-Brass Used On Keys And Key Parts -- Cannot Bend -- 99% Harder
5 Key action is higher to promote truer action -- yet (completely illegible and I'm not creative enough to come up with something) -- this greatly improves (something).
6 All cross hinges are (something something; might be talking about plate construction vs. ribbed)
7 New Corkless Slide Connecting Areas
8 G# Low B and Bb New Direct Action
9 (Ergonomic offset altissimo vent key.)
10 Longer Bell -- New Proportions -- To Bring a New High In True Tone
11 New Tapered Norton Springs -- Will Not Break -- Faster Action
12 Beautiful Elaborate Handcut Engraving"
13 Bell Keys Move To Back Instead of Side of Bell
14 Drawn Tonehole Sockets -- Eliminate Leaks
15 (Redesigned G#/C#/B/Bb cluster that makes the C# and B natural more difficult to play. Hey, it's only funny because it's true.)
16 Independent (low B and Bb keys).
17 Wide Bow -- Entirely New Proportions -- Greatly Improved Low Register

[OnyxSax]

Buescher newbie question:

Was the 400 considered a model "over" the Aristocrat...not unlike the relationship between the Conn 30M and the "regular" 10M?

I've got a nice collection of vintage Conns, but I'm about to take the Buescher plunge and pick up a Big B Aristocrat. Every Aristocrat I've played, I've loved, so I figured it's time to add one to my collection.

[SAXISMYAXE]

Wonderful job deciphering this catalog gentlemen, your MKII eyeballs must be in better working order than your's truly!

[Pete]

Buescher newbie question:

Was the 400 considered a model "over" the Aristocrat...not unlike the relationship between the Conn 30M and the "regular" 10M?

I've got a nice collection of vintage Conns, but I'm about to take the Buescher plunge and pick up a Big B Aristocrat. Every Aristocrat I've played, I've loved, so I figured it's time to add one to my collection.

No. The promotion was 400 = jazz horn. Aristocrat = classical horn.

I think the only three shared features between the 400 and Aristocrat would be Norton springs, snap-on pads and this "Super Brass" mentioned in the above catalog.

The Connqueror over the Artist (some catalogs say "Standard") was the different neck, slightly changed key placement and all the adjustment stuff. I can find nothing that suggests that the bore, bow or bell were different.

[JL]

No. The promotion was 400 = jazz horn. Aristocrat = classical horn..

Did Buescher actually promote it this way, or is this just something that was assumed, maybe based on Rascher using an early Buescher horn? Or for some other reason......

This is only my take on it, but the idea of a "classical horn" vs "jazz horn" has never made sense to me. They are saxophones and I don't see how they can be separated according to the type of music. To me, the difference between a jazz horn and classical horn is the player. Just my opinion, though. Maybe the good intonation of an Aristocrat has something to do with it? I've heard the intonation is also great on the 400, though.

When I bought my Aristocrat from Gayle at vintagesax, she told me she could barely tell the difference between the 156 and a TH&C she had at the time. OTOH, I see a pretty big difference between the series one and the Big B/156. They all would work well for jazz, assuming the player is a jazz musician. Ike Quebec comes to mind on tenor, and Johnny Hodges on alto.

[Pete]

I believe they did, although I really *haven't* played around with looking into advertisements for the Aristocrat: I've seen a few for that model, but hardly any for the 400. I don't remembering Rascher ever advertising for the 400 -- and I doubt he'd advertise for an intermediate model.

There is some evidence I've found that says that the 400 TH&C, Super 400 and a watered-down 400 without tone-ring were available at the same time. This *may* mean that Buescher positioned these 400's as "intermediate", "inexpensive pro" and "high-end pro".

I mention, elsewhere, that the Aristocrats produced between s/n 294xxx and 351xxx (or close to that) are identical, except that instead of the "Big B" engraving, they just have a kind of cursive script and they don't have a G# trill: I had one of each in my fat, grubby hands and I was able to compare them 1-to-1. Everything was the same and the necks were interchangeable. I don't have calipers, so I didn't measure the bore, but I don't think there's a difference.

While I believe that you're very correct in saying that the difference between a jazz player and a classical player is the player, horns have been designed with a specific purpose in mind (at least, that's what some people think): a Conn 30M Connqueror is supposed to be a horn you can push a lot of air through so you can be heard in a big band. The Selmer Balanced Actioned was designed with the "recording industry in mind" (according to an ad) and thus has a different bore that you can't put as much air into, but you do have much better intonation (arguably) than the Conn: hey, we've got sound amplification. Additionally, most people wouldn't want to play classical music on a Wolf Tayne mouthpiece (or any metal mouthpiece, provided your name isn't "Sal Andolina" ), but would rather use a larger-chamber hard-rubber mouthpiece -- and some horns plain play better with that Sigurd Rascher mouthpiece than that Wolf Tayne.

[Pinnman]

Pete,

I am sure I have seen a Rascher endorsement for a 400. I can't find it now, but, given the jazz/classical question being asked, it has always struck me as incongruous and therefore stuck in the memory.

I'm surprised to see the comment about three concurrent 400 models as I always thought (and am always open to learning something new, of course) that the TH&C went out of production when the back-belled Aristocrat (141/157) was launched. This was then replaced by the S5/S25 model and a cheapened 'Crat with nickle keywork and straight RH F key.

When you say 351K, is this correct or a typo? 357K looks to be the accepted serial number.

But I do agree in your assertion that the 400 was the jazz model and the'Crat the (more) classical one. The problem, as ever, is proving it!