[raindog]

Just curious. I am aware of five US sax manufacturers of old; Conn, King, Martin, Buescher, Holton. Except maybe for the Holton, all of them very very successfull at least in the sense that each has a significant almost cult like following to this day. Each have a lot of folks that think their saxes are the best thing ever, and saxes of "correct" vintage are highly valued today.

Whereas in europe, there were a huge number of manufacturers that never built up a name or significant following. Orsi, Amati, Grassi, R&C of old, Borgani of old, Santoni, Beaugnier, Luxor Romana or whatever it was called, Weltklang arguably belongs here too, and many many more. Although some may be well known and some may have been financially successfull companies, I don't think one can say their saxes are or were highly regarded - hidden gems or not. I guess I could include the lesser regarded russian ones here too, Leningrad/StPete, and Moscow factories at least.

Then of course there were the few successfull ones Selmer, SML, Keilwerth, possibly others. Then the inbetweeners which I don't know where they sit; Couf, Couesnon, Eppelsheim, Dolnet, Buffet, Kohlert, Malerne and what not.

Just wondering why is it that US manufacturers basically all managed to compete at the top, compared to the wild variety in europe? Was it a cultural thing? Financial? It's curious that there seems to be no small players in US sax manufacturing history. Holton maybe? Were there others? Could it be that being american made by itself inflated the brands with prestige that stays to this day, warranted or not?

Of course this is more about public perceptions than actual quality, since few have the opportunity to actually try many of the more obscure brands to form a substantiated opinion. Not implying anything, just honest curiosity, sax history was pretty interesting until Selmer "took over".

 

[zxcvbnm]

I think Conn and Buescher, and to a lesser extent King and Martin managed to capture the market and push the smaller players out in the 1920s. Like you wouldn't start an airline today because that industry is basically solved. Before the 1920's there must have been other American manufacturers too -- from the top of my head I know that Couturier was one that went out of business.

The European sax manufacturers were much smaller volume (just compare the serial numbers), and each shop probably sold to a local market in their particular country. Thus less chance for one firm to dominate all of the others. Actually, I think saxophone brands being restricted to their country is the main reason. That's my best understanding of the situation.

 

[Hassles]

Amati - the single biggest manufacturer of woodwind instruments in Europe - supply some parts for / construct some instruments for J.Keilwerth. Orsi's soprano saxes are much respected. Ida Maria Grassi's later modes "Professional" - "Prestige" are highly respected. Germany's B&S succumbed to market pressures but were making fantastic instruments. Same thing happened to the fabulous Hohner saxophones. So names were established, reputations established, excellent horns made. The cheap Asian horns and the willingness of consumers to purchase these cheaper instruments killed off more than a few manufacturers. The Americans killed off the excellent line of Buescher saxes so the Conn/Selmer coupling could take a larger piece of the pie.

Couf were Keilwerth made / Kohlert went bankrupt due to a ****** deal with the US. Cousenon and Dolnet fell by the wayside but made excellent horns. etc etc etc

 

[raindog]

I think Conn and Buescher, and to a lesser extent King and Martin managed to capture the market and push the smaller players out in the 1920s. Like you wouldn't start an airline today because that industry is basically solved. Before the 1920's there must have been other American manufacturers too -- from the top of my head I know that Couturier was one that went out of business.

The European sax manufacturers were much smaller volume (just compare the serial numbers), and each shop probably sold to a local market in their particular country. Thus less chance for one firm to dominate all of the others. Actually, I think saxophone brands being restricted to their country is the main reason. That's my best understanding of the situation.

This makes all kinds of sense. And I've never heard of Coutourier, interesting!

Amati - the single biggest manufacturer of woodwind instruments in Europe - supply some parts for / construct some instruments for J.Keilwerth. Orsi's soprano saxes are much respected. Ida Maria Grassi's later modes "Professional" - "Prestige" are highly respected. Germany's B&S succumbed to market pressures but were making fantastic instruments. Same thing happened to the fabulous Hohner saxophones. So names were established, reputations established, excellent horns made. The cheap Asian horns and the willingness of consumers to purchase these cheaper instruments killed off more than a few manufacturers. The Americans killed off the excellent line of Buescher saxes so the Conn/Selmer coupling could take a larger piece of the pie.

I love my Grassi and also play an Amati sop, however the quality of various european brands although interesting is a little beside the point of this topic. I do believe dying of the american sax industry has more to do with Selmer, or at least happened before cheap asian horns became big enough to be significant? Asian production surely has a role in preventing any hopes of re-establishing or new factories in the western world.

 

[milandro]

First of all There were lots of brands in the past, many more than there are today.

American saxophone brands that never really took off were York of Grand Rapids, for example.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/York_Band_Instrument_Company

I am not sure that brands like Couesnon could be classified as " in between" since they were a huge company until the '50 ( when Marcel Mule leaves the advisory capacity there and starts working for Selmer).

There were in France lots and lots of other companies, many of which are forgotten.

True, Selmer had done very well by acquiring the original Adolphe Sax patents but had they not invented the Balanced Action System (I am not talking only of the model but the system which revolutionized the ergonomics in the saxophone world) they would have never reached the status that they did.

Their production makes a huge jump the moment their technological gap grows to make them the first of the modern saxophones.

To this day, most of the modern saxophones ( which the exception of Eppelsheim and Schmidt) have followed the general Selmer layout , at the very least from the '80 onwards.In a sense they are all more or less related to Selmer, because their innovation was so radical.

One of the most recent " failures" to re instate a saxophone production in the US was the Powell attempt to revive and American production by producing the Silver Eagle. They bought B&S tooling which was no longer used after they stopped their production. They were then inspired to produce something that at least in the intentions was the continuation of the King Silversonic. It produced an incredibly expensive saxophone which failed to excite the market when it finally arrived on it. Way too expensive and at a stage of development ( the keywork was based on B&S and wasn't at all as revolutionary as the rest of the saxophone intended to be).

This showed once again that innovating the saxophone in these days of market shrinking and partitioning is mostly a matter of commercial acumen.

One could have the best conceived saxophone in the world (and the Silver Eagle was, but only to an extent) and still, without a well thought commericial plan one would fail miserably .

If you see these videos you'll probably also understand why....

 

[Hassles]

I do believe dying of the american sax industry has more to do with Selmer, or at least happened before cheap asian horns became big enough to be significant? Asian production surely has a role in preventing any hopes of re-establishing or new factories in the western world.

Conn bought Selmer = Selmer did not buy Conn

 

[milandro]

This is incorrect, and surfaces all the time Selmer France was never bought (until very recently) and stayed a family owned company.

Conn Selmer was a completely separate company which originated from ONE of the Selmer brothers.

Yes, you were........these days journalists make their research on internet.........some read something which they don't understand and write accordingly......and yet on the sometimes vituperated (not by me).......wikipedia they could have found several informative things on the fact that the two Selmer brothers started together and got to form two different companies

".....Henri SELMER Paris company is a French-based international family-owned enterprise"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Selmer_Paris

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conn-Selmer

it is not often that I quote saxforte and yet, from his site.........

http://saxforte.com/brand_search/selmer_brand/selmer_brand.html

Only Selmer (Paris) saxophones are made by Henri Selmer et Compagnie in Paris, France. Do not confuse Selmer (Paris) with Selmer USA saxophones. They are made in two different factories by two completely different companies

 

[raindog]

self deleted

 

[milandro]

yes but it is a VERY different SELMER company which has only very far links to Henri Selmer Paris


Henri Selmer Paris is a French family-owned enterprise, manufacturer of musical instruments based at Mantes-la-Ville near Paris. Founded in 1885, it is known as a producer of professional-grade woodwind and brass instruments, especially saxophones, clarinets and trumpets.

Selmer Paris instruments have been played by many well-known saxophonists such as Marcel Mule, Claude Delangle, Frederick Hemke, Charlie Parker,[2] John Coltrane, Paul Desmond, Herschel Evans, Zoot Sims,[3] Michael Brecker, Sonny Rollins, Ornette Coleman and Coleman Hawkins. Among famous Selmer Clarinet players is Benny Goodman in his early career.

The American company was a different company ( and still is!)

from wikipedia

Origins
In the late nineteenth century, brothers Alexandre and Henri Selmer graduated from the Paris Conservatory as clarinetists. They were the great-grandchildren of French military drum major Johannes Jacobus Zelmer, grandchildren of Jean-Jacques Selmer, the Army Chief of Music, and two of 16 children in this musical family.[1] At the time, musical instruments and accessories were primarily hand made, and professional musicians found it necessary to acquire skills allowing them to make their own accessories and repair and modify their own instruments. Establishing Henri Selmer & Cie. in 1885, Henri began making clarinet reeds and mouthpieces. [1] In 1898 Selmer opened a store and repair shop in Paris and started producing clarinets.[1] Henri Selmer's brother Alexandre joined the Boston Symphony Orchestra that same year. In 1904, Selmer clarinets were presented at the Saint Louis (USA) World's Fair, winning a Gold Medal, and Alexandre Selmer was First Clarinetist with the Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra. Alexandre established himself in New York in 1909, opening a shop that sold Selmer clarinets and mouthpieces. The H&A Selmer (USA) Company grew out of that retail operation.[2]

The H&A Selmer (USA) Company[edit]
In 1910, Alexandre returned to France and the H&A Selmer store was managed by George Bundy. The store expanded its product line, selling "Selmer" branded wind instruments and mouthpieces from manufacturers in the US in addition to Selmer (Paris) products. In 1923, the H&A Selmer Company was incorporated to expand its retail operations. A 49% share was sold to C. G. Conn Ltd while Selmer (Paris) retained a minority interest. In 1927 Bundy gained full ownership, establishing independence of the company. H&A Selmer (USA) remained the sole importer of Selmer (Paris) products, including saxophones and brasswinds once exports of such instruments to the USA commenced. In 1936 Selmer changed its distribution strategy, abandoning most retail and becoming a wholesaler of instruments and supplies.[2] Selmer went on to establish itself as a leading distributor of student-grade instruments under its Artley and Bundy brands. In 1939 Selmer financed the startup Artley Flute Company of Elkhart Indiana, which provided flutes, and later clarinets, exclusively to Selmer until 1953. In response to the unavailability of Selmer (Paris) instruments after the German defeat of France in 1940, Selmer sought alternate sources for wind instruments and distributed them under their new student-line Bundy and intermediate Signet brands.[2] In 1950 George Bundy retired and sold his shares to partners Joseph M. Grolimund, Jack Feddersen, Milt Broadhead, and Charles Bickel.[2] Starting in 1952, the Selmer Artist program offered special deals for musicians who agreed to perform and record exclusively with Selmer (Paris) instruments, boosting the reputation of Selmer (Paris) instruments among aspiring professionals. In 1958 Selmer acquired the Harry Pedler and Sons brasswind plant in Elkhart, starting in-house production of Bundy student-line brasswinds.[2] In 1961 Selmer acquired the brasswind manufacturer Vincent Bach Corporation. Selmer moved production from Bach's Mount Vernon, New York facility to Elkhart in 1965 while retaining the premium line Bach Stradivarius. The services of Mr. Vincent Bach were retained for design of student-line brasswinds.[2] In 1963 Selmer acquired ownership of its main supplier of student saxophones, the Buescher Band Instrument Company. Selmer continued distributing identical Bundy and Buescher instruments until it discontinued the Buescher name in 1983. In 1965 Selmer acquired the rights to the Brilhart line of woodwind mouthpieces, with production contracted to the Runyon Company, and in 1966 it acquired the Lesher Woodwind Company, a manufacturer of oboes and bassoons.[2] In 1970 Selmer acquired additional production facilities from C.G. Conn, who were divesting their Elkhart, Indiana operations. In 1977 Selmer acquired the stringed instrument maker Glaesel. Selmer acquired the Ludwig Drum Company in 1981.[3]

The era of H&A Selmer as an independent company ended in 1970, with its purchase by the British electronics firm Magnavox.[2] It was sold to Philips Electronics in 1975, then to the investment firm Integrated Resources in 1989. With the 1993 bankruptcy of Integrated Resources, Selmer was sold to the investment firm Kirkland Messina and reorganized as Selmer Industries, Inc., with The Selmer Company name used for its instrument manufacturing operations.

 

[raindog]

So to recap the answers to the original question, in addition to the big american names Conn, Martin, King, Buescher there indeed were multiple other, lesser known american enterpreneurs too that didn't gain the status of said brands. At least Holton, Coutourier, York and the very interesting outlier Silver Eagle. The more fragmented market in europe probably meant the few big names were not able to so completely dominate the market whereas in the US attempts to share a piece of the pie with giants were comparatively short-lived.

 

[milandro]

I think that the European market was always very composite and still is, in many ways , past the ’60 , it still houses the largest amount of recognizable “ brands” (I am not talking of the unbranded saxophones made i China or those made in Taiwan and sold by multiple makers)

Buffet, Keilwerth, Rampone & Cazzani, Borgani, Amati, they are still active and meaningful but their market is tiny.

Selmer, is still, despite the crisis the most important saxophone maker in Europe and a name that resonates very highly everywhere. But again, had they not invented the saxophone upon which any other modern saxophone has been based, they wouldn’t be where they are now.

 

[raindog]

I think that the European market was always very composite and still is, in many ways , past the '60 , it still houses the largest amount of recognizable " brands" (I am not talking of the unbranded saxophones made i China or those made in Taiwan and sold by multiple makers)

Buffet, Keilwerth, Rampone & Cazzani, Borgani, Amati, they are still active and meaningful but their market is tiny.

Selmer, is still, despite the crisis the most important saxophone maker in Europe and a name that resonates very highly everywhere. But again, had they not invented the saxophone upon which any other modern saxophone has been based, they wouldn't be where they are now.

Yes. And at the same time, after Selmers influential designs, there appears to have been very few, or only meager attempts at innovation in saxophone world. Would be fun to see for example Amati design and produce a professional horn with something innovative in the design, and be able to market it to compete with Selmer, Keilwerth and the like. I'm sure they have the knowhow and experience at this point to produce as high quality as they want as long as it's financially feasible (I guess the oldroyd walker may be an attempt at that).

 

[lesacks]

Isn't a chunk of the difference the local market?
I have the impression that school bands and marching bands are more wide spread in the US then Europe, the traditions of which instruments are used in schools, college and army bands. Bread and butter markets? At least in the late 1800s too mid 1900s.
No doubt what brands star performers use is important, like which boots football players ware - because they sell the brand to the kids etc.

 

[milandro]

Yes. And at the same time, after Selmers influential designs, there appears to have been very few, or only meager attempts at innovation in saxophone world. Would be fun to see for example Amati design and produce a professional horn with something innovative in the design, and be able to market it to compete with Selmer, Keilwerth and the like. I'm sure they have the knowhow and experience at this point to produce as high quality as they want as long as it's financially feasible (I guess the oldroyd walker may be an attempt at that).

You have probably missed it but I've spoken recently about Amati which is actually producing an innovative saxophone (to some extent innovative, nothing as revolutionary as Schmidt or Eppelsheim innovative... those are far out as far as departing from Adolphe Sax's and later Selmer innovations design ) FOR Dave Walker & Geneva Instruments

https://forum.saxontheweb.net/showt...-Lineage-horns-by-Amati&p=4163636#post4163636

https://www.facebook.com/pg/OWlineage/posts/

Looks like a very interesting horn.

This neck doesn't equip all of their saxophones but it is rather interesting

View attachment 224716 View attachment 224718 View attachment 224720

View attachment 224710 View attachment 224712 View attachment 224714 View attachment 224700 View attachment 224702 View attachment 224704 View attachment 224706 View attachment 224708

 

[JayeLID]

I do believe dying of the american sax industry has more to do with Selmer, or at least happened before cheap asian horns became big enough to be significant? Asian production surely has a role in preventing any hopes of re-establishing or new factories in the western world.

I 'd agree with you, IF the Selmer you mention = Selmer USA - but I am not sure that is what you meant.

Selmer USA was a prime mover in the disintegration of US musical instrument manufacturing. They simply threw their weight around and were able to buy out their competition, starting with Buescher (who's name and rep it quickly ran into the ground), then just as significantly, almost 40 years later, the later iteration of Selmer USA (Selmer Industries) - noted by MIlandro above - "taking out" UMI (which produced Conn, King, Armstrong, Artley)....which was the real death-knell of manufacturing in the US, IMHO.
UMI had been successfully operating factory facilities in the midwest from '84 to the early 2000's.

From what I have read, UMI actually was NOT in financial trouble, and even WITH the Japanese having established themselves in the US market, UMI was managing to compete with them (as well as with Selmer USA) in the student/intermediate level of offerings which is what their focus was.

It was just a matter of Big Daddy making UMI and offer which they couldn't refuse....

So yeah, Selmer USA's/Selmer Company's aggressive buyouts of competitors, then their subsequent offshoring of production....again, death knell there (and probably, as you posit, irreversible at this point. There ARE a few US makers still alive (Kanstul in LA for example), but.....)

 

[datsaxman]

Kanstul is permanently closed, actually. RIP