Sounds like a great, great deal on the horn. I have a 55xxx curved-neck Conn from 1919 - got it about two years ago, and finally had it put into playing condition a few months ago. What serial number range is your Conn?

Ralph Morgan makes a very nice C-melody mouthpiece. He just has one model advertised, the one I bought, but he's been known to make special orders from time to time. His C-mel mouthpieces run about twice as much as you paid for your whole horn, but I'm very pleased with mine.

I've never played my C-melody or any other sax professionally, so I can't offer any advice on that.

 

I have a '28 Buescher that plays great. I called Runyon and they fixed me up with a #7 CMel mouthpiece with a spoiler that brightens up the sound to where I like it. It was at a decent price too. I use #2 Tenor Fibercells reeds with it. I stashed the Runyon lig though and now use a Rovner. Traditional metal ligs wont work, you need a cloth lig with this piece.

 

The serial # on my new aquisition is 51xxx. That should be early 1919. I have another one that is older, mid 1918 but is is at this point not an easy restoration as the rods and screws are frozen solid almost everyone. They are identical in design and engraving, except the 1918 model has pearl buttons on the keytouches, the 1919 model has all metal keytouches. I can only assume that this was a less expensive entry level sax. Play-wise they should be the same as the bodytube and keywork are identical.

My main Cmel before was a Buescher. Don't know the serial # but it was a TT with the round G# key. My second was an American Standard that I swear was a Martin not a King stencil as it had bevelled tone holes. The Buescher was the better of the two.

 

Interesting that your 51xxx has all metal key touches. My 55xxx has pearls, just as you say your 1918 does. Very funky, those seemingly random changes...

My only gripe with my Conn is the awful discomfort of trying to get the neckstrap, my arms, etc, in the right position to play it - it is a literal pain in the neck!

I was very fortunate that NONE of the screws or rods were stuck on my 1919, and all of the springs were even intact. The horn still had its original pads, but had evidently just been locked away for many, many years, rather than being actively abused. That made the pseudo-overhaul much simpler (but still beyond my pitiful abilities).

Good luck, and welcome back!

 

my 1918 Conn is in great shape as far as dent etc goes. but it was probably store a LONG time in a damp enviroment so there's a very thick black tarnish al over it. The worst I've ever seen. The silver finish is moderately pitted underneath the tarnish and of course the rods are rusted. I may attempt it at some point when I have the time. Right now I just keep oiling the screws ocassionally in the hope that when I do get to it maybe they will miraculously come loose. Why did I buy such a horn? Things never look quite so bad when you looking at a "good deal" on Ebay. You win some you lose some.

 

Spider, Stacey - I was also surprised at the metal key touches, I've seen (and have) a Conn stencils without pearl, but never seen an 'actual Conn' with that low spec. ( bad choice of words - it's not actually 'low spec' !) Even their 'PanAmerican' stencils all seem to have pearl.

Maybe they went thro' a poor sales patch and produced a few 'bargain specials' to get sales figures up ? As this is a 'curved neck' it's quite normal for it not to have the rolled tone holes, and I've just looked at mechanisms on mine, and it's quite possible that they used up some 'stencil' bits they had in stock (they seem to be interchangeable) and engraved the bells with 'Conn'. In fact. except for the lack of aux-front-f and curved neck-brace (and pearl touches), my Conn 'Masterbilt' stencil is very similar indeed to a real 56xxx curved-neck Conn.

I have to say that I almost prefer dished metal touches, when playing - it doesn't matter at all, I'll swear I could feel the sound vibrations better thro' my fingertips without the pearl in the way.... My one concern was that the odd finger would get wet and slip off, but it didn't ever happen because of the subtly concave surface.

You may well have a potential classic on your hands there, Spider. On the subject of mouthpieces, high baffle metal/ebonite tenor ones that seem to play well in tune on C-Mels are - Lawton, Berg larsen 0 or 1 chamber, Couf 'Artist' Jazz (stonking great high baffle), Runyon, ebonite Otto Link Tone Edge, in fact I haven't found a really bad one yet - if you have a reasonable lip.... You may have guessed that I like my C-Mel to have a little bite left in reserve.

It's a question of finding which small range of notes on the horn to tune to, so that the extremes become easily 'lipped in' with subtle embouchure changes. Go lower and tighten up a little or flare the sound, and keep from getting too sharp at the top with just a little slack. If you have an alto ebonite Berg Larsen around, they seem to work well also, but further out on the cork and obviously a slightly thinner sound.

As for reflector or coned pads, fine on the heavier 'name' C-Mels that can take it, some of the lighter 'stencil' ones get too 'naturally edgy' almost to the point of distortion when pushed, when then played with one of the above 'edgy' mpcs. It then can be difficult to get right back to the mellower sounds (if you need to).

For example my 8*BB lawton on a Martin with newish 'rivet pads' has enough bite in reserve to cut thro' anything, but maybe a more subdued Link would benefit from reflectors.
It's all down to whatever sound you eventually want, bearing in mind that something that sounds loud & edgy enough at home can still get swamped in a band - and more amplification isn't always the answer, as you have to get a balanced acoustic 'horn section sound' before being amplified. And, with a sax, the acoustic bell sound is often the only foldback you have, unless you have a very kind sound engineer, or lots of money.

Regards, Alan. (Phew - only meant to post a quick comment, not a thesis...)

 

Spider - just seen your latest post - I just got 'caught out' (my own fault) recently with an ebay Buescher silver C-Mel stencil with 'finish problems'.

I guess the previous owner got fed up with cleaning it, so he resprayed it (badly) with siver car paint - which had since worn off quite a bit, so now it has a real mix of finishes......

Regards, Alan.

 

Spiderjames,

I, too, have a 1919 curved neck Conn c-mel. I'm not sure if it's just my particular c-melody but I've had a lot of intonation problems with it. Happily, they were in large measure corrected with some very subtle repair work. My repair tech also worked on the angle of the neck and replaced the original thumb rest with a modern Selmer type to make the horn much more comfortable to play. I use my c-melody on a regular basis in my jazz group. It has a different sound from an alto or a tenor. It's something unique and really interesting. I've also used my c-mel in classical playing.

Over the past 4 or 5 years I've experimented with every c-melody mouthpiece I can lay my hands on. Like Stacey, I settled on a Ralph Morgan c-melody mouthpiece. Morgan c-melody mouthpieces are custom-made by hand. Therefore, one can ask for some special touches in the facing to make it right for you. I currently have 3 Morgan c-melody mouthpieces with different types of facings and each one has it's own distinctive tonal qualities. In addition to Morgan, a lot of folks like the Runyon mouthpiece and it's worth a try.

In trying out various mouthpieces on your c-melody it's extremely important to check out your horn's intonation against a tuner. It's been my experience that some modern c-melody mouthpieces don't have a large enough chamber -- at least, for my horn. The issue of chamber volume is not an urban legend. Some vintage horns really do need a large chamber mouthpiece in order to have correct intonation. I've also experimented with using alto and tenor mouthpieces on my c-mel. Some players are able to get this to work for them. But, on my particular horn intonation went to hell in a handbasket with an alto or tenor mouthpiece. It was absolutely terrible.

It's become my understanding that a "real" c-melody mouthpiece is close in length to an alto sax mouthpiece and it's chamber volume is larger than a comparable tenor mouthpiece. Therefore, a good c-melody mouthpiece needs to have BOTH the right length and the right amount of chamber volume. In this respect, it's important to understand that the c-melody is a different instrument from an alto and a tenor. That is, it has a different bore design and measurements. Personally, I've never understood the concept of using an alto or tenor mouthpiece on a c-melody. Never the less, when it comes to the c-melody we sometimes have to experiment and find something that works for us regardless of how unusual it might be.

Good luck to you! Please let us know how you come out.

Best Wishes, Roger

 

Been staying up late the past couple of days repadding my new C-mel. I decided to go ahead and try the coned resos as I have a set here and I am trying to get a non traditional sound for this horn.

I tried the c-mel mouthpiece that came with the horn with less than acceptable results in sound or intonation. brilhart metal and HR alto pieces wouldn't play well below low C and intonation was worse. My tenor piece, a levelair 7 was OK intonation wise but was hard to control. I may try that runyon. Have you tried a runyon on your Conn and was the intonation good? What tip openings are you guys using. I use metal levelairs on both alto and tenor. primarily a 5* on alto and a 7 on tenor. If I am going to buy a Mpc I want to try to guestimate a tip opening that will give satisfactory results.

Roger,

What did your tech do to change the neck angle. I wouldn't mind pulling mine up a bit to get the horn to sit a tiny bit more away from my body but I'm not sure how to do it without creasing the neck ala neck pull down syndrone.

 

Spiderjames,

My repair tech (Eric Beach) is really good. Many pro players and guys in the DC military bands use him. I wouldn't trust this kind of neck work to anyone. Eric was extremely careful, went slowly, and had a good instinct for when to stop. The neck is still at a lower angle than my tenor. But, it's a definite improvement over what it was.

Yes, a number of years ago I tried a Runyon mouthpiece on my c-mel. Intonation wasn't that good. But, the main thing is that I didn't like the sound I was getting. It seemed a bit on the stuffy side compared with other c-melody mouthpieces I was trying at the time. Generally speaking, I've never had much luck with Runyon mouthpieces on any of my horns. There are lots of folks who really love Runyon but they don't do much for me. It's just a personal preference.

In terms of tip opening..... For what I'm looking for in my sound and level of response & control I found a 5C (.085) facing on a Morgan mouthpiece to work best for me on my c-mel. For the last 4 years I used a 6 (.090) and got a big sound. However, over the past year I've been needing more control -- in particular, when using my c-mel in a sax quartet (transposing alto parts). Going down a notch gave me exactly what I needed. The 5 facing gives more focus to my sound and better control. Plus, it's still a big sound and has enough projection for jazz and big band playing.

You may need to experiment over time with your c-mel set up to find what feels right to you. The c-mel is a unique kind of horn. Thus, for many of us we've had to do some trial & error before the pieces fell into place.

 

"Any C-melody players out there that play their horns professionally on a regular basis? Is the horn more readily accepted now. "

Hi Spider,
I'm a "profi" wwds player ; my favorite horn is the C-melody (a Couesnon year 1908 ; I use 3 mthp : an very old Selmer Soloist, a jazz Meyer 7 and refaced Ottolink - all alto sax mthp).
I play very offen bari + wwds in big-bands but in my group I play exclusively C-melody, bass and Cbass clarinets and flute.
But - as you said - in funk, reggae or rock bands I can't use it because of the sound : tenor or alto are more used and pregnant.
I played yesterday in a small french festival with the trio of a friend (sax/acoustic bass/drums), only one song with alto flute, the 12 others with C-melody ; great !

 

I just used my Conn Comet 7 alto mpc (Runyon blank, about .083") on a semi-loud trad gig with the 1936 Conn C and was quite pleased with the volume, response and tuning. Also using a French Connetable Swing IV tenor mpc (40s vintage, about .070") on this horn with excellent results.

Interestingly, the Connetable violates the short/fat rule completely, being smaller bored than most any tenor mpc I've run across.

 

Spider,

My Morgan is a #6, a .090. I like it a lot, but I haven't done much in the way of comparisons. I played around a little with my alto mpc, but when I got ready to buy a C-mel mpc and get the horn into playable condition, I just read everything I could find, and then ordered the Morgan. I know many people on this forum have an incurable mpc addiction, but I just bought one that I expected would have good all around playability, and was very happy with it.

These days, my "tonal concept" is really just "try not to squeak, try to get all the notes to speak, and try to play more or less in tune". That's my approach to soprano, alto, tenor, and C-mel. I once had higher aspirations, but I'm a little more realistic about my talents now!

Stacey