[turf3]

Well gee, I think the title pretty much says it all.

Down the road I'd like to add a curvie to my sopranos (currently have a Holton C, "Holton" (actually Couturier) Bb, Buescher Bb).

Would anyone care to compare/contrast? Mostly on tone and intonation, but also any comments on mechanical.

I would only be interested in one keyed to high F.

 

[Grumps]

If you're used to a Buescher curvie, a Conn is going to feel really weird in your hands as the angle of the neck as attached to the horn is about a 45 degree difference. When I first held the Conn, I had to bend back my right wrist so much that I thought I'd have to unsolder the neck and reset it. Got used to it though in no time.

My Buescher is only keyed to Eb3. Intonation is probably more challenging on the Buescher, but I use a very open Super Session which gives me some flexibility in that regard. When I first got the Conn, it didn't seem to have the focus and projection of my Buescher, but it had leaks and needed some new pads. Haven't A/B'd them since i first got the Conn, but I probably sound like me on both.

Here are some clips:
The Buescher, just a snippet from just over a year ago jamming with our bari player who's on piano, in a house our band stayed in while down in New Orleans: https://www.amazon.com/photos/shared/pMVxj_4uT9C2K-3zmE9_HA.pWSd-H0_0M3g2K97jNde1h

The Conn last Mardi Gras at the Ramshead in Annapolis (at the 2:28 mark):

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10221920511824912

 

[bruce bailey]

I prefer the response and sound of the Conn but many like the Buescher. It is hard to find a Buescher keyed to high F whereas almost all Conns go to F. Pricewise, they are about the same. Martins only go up to Eb. I find the best of the curvies is the King also only to high Eb but really a nice playing horn and much better than the King straight models.

 

[zxcvbnm]

If you're used to a Buescher curvie, a Conn is going to feel really weird in your hands as the angle of the neck as attached to the horn is about a 45 degree difference. When I first held the Conn, I had to bend back my right wrist so much that I thought I'd have to unsolder the neck and reset it. Got used to it though in no time.

My Buescher is only keyed to Eb3. Intonation is probably more challenging on the Buescher, but I use a very open Super Session which gives me some flexibility in that regard. When I first got the Conn, it didn't seem to have the focus and projection of my Buescher, but it had leaks and needed some new pads. Haven't A/B'd them since i first got the Conn, but I probably sound like me on both.

Here are some clips:
The Buescher, just a snippet from just over a year ago jamming with our bari player who's on piano, in a house our band stayed in while down in New Orleans: https://www.amazon.com/photos/shared/pMVxj_4uT9C2K-3zmE9_HA.pWSd-H0_0M3g2K97jNde1h

The Conn last Mardi Gras at the Ramshead in Annapolis (at the 2:28 mark):

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10221920511824912

Sounds great on both!

 

[LiAm84]

I have a high Eb Buescher (108xxx) and a high F Conn (141xxx). Both are quite different voices. I personally prefer the Conn. It is louder and has a more spread sound. It is also brighter and projects like crazy. The Buescher has a sweeter, softer sound. I think the intonation is slightly easier on the Buescher. The Conn can be pretty wild and takes a lot of effort to control the pitch above G with the octave key.

 

[paulwl]

My observations are based on unusually late model curvys: a 278k Buescher Aristocrat and a 282k Conn 4M. Differences from earlier instruments seem superficial, but there may be a few tweaks that aren't obvious. Both play in unusually good tune (I used to own a 186k Conn and the 282k is definitely easier to play in tune on the top end), and the necks are fixed at comfortable angles.

The biggest differences I find are of course tonal. The Conn is a Conn...you know at all times you're hearing a saxophone. You can lean into the sound and voice a great deal of projection and "sass" into it. At pp or ppp, OTOH, there's a slight airy resistance that's difficult to voice out. The Buescher is likewise a Buescher...its specialness is on the softer dynamics, where it can be played very delicately, with a flutelike quality. It will project beautifully too when you boot, but without quite so much extra spiciness.*

Differences in feel are interesting to consider. The Buescher is a touch lighter, so it's easier to play unstrapped, and the pivot palm keys handle just like the straight models. For some reason Conn went to stacked palm keys early in the 20s, which have to be very thinly sprung and are easier to open unintentionally. OTOH the Conn keys seem machined to closer tolerances and feel firm, where the Buescher keyboard can feel a little loose at times. The LH pinkie plates are also a little bit more of a reach on Buescher.

Bueschers to F are rare at any vintage. Serious barrel-chamber classical players have to have this exact horn. Straights, Conns, Bueschers to Eb, even the comparatively rare stencils to F such as Elkhart, are all considered inadequate. Don't go looking for a Martin branded soprano piece either - they are now standard for these players.

*It's funny because when I play the straight Bb horns, the Buescher and Conn kind of change places tonally. The straight Conn is more delicate in tone, in fact actually a little harder to voice for color. (Conn eventually created the stretch model 18M, which I find plays with a lot more character.) The straight Buescher is capable of a tangy, electric quality, which Sidney Bechet exploited to great effect.

 

[turf3]

My observations are based on unusually late model curvys: a 278k Buescher Aristocrat and a 282k Conn 4M. Differences from earlier instruments seem superficial, but there may be a few tweaks that aren't obvious. Both play in unusually good tune and the necks are fixed at comfortable angles.

The biggest differences I find are of course tonal. The Conn is a Conn...you know at all times you're hearing a saxophone. You can lean into the sound and voice a great deal of projection and "sass" into it. At pp or ppp, OTOH, there's a slight airy resistance that's difficult to voice out. The Buescher is likewise a Buescher...its specialness is on the softer dynamics, where it can be played very delicately, with a flutelike quality. It will project beautifully too when you boot, but without quite the extra spiciness.

Differences in feel are interesting to consider. The Buescher is a touch lighter, so it's easier to play unstrapped, and the pivot palm keys handle just like the straight models. For some reason Conn went to stacked palm keys early in the 20s, which have to be very thinly sprung and are easier to open unintentionally. OTOH the Conn has slightly better tolerances and the keys feel firm, where the Buescher keyboard can feel a little loose at times. The LH pinkie plates are also a little bit more of a reach on Buescher.

Bueschers to F are rare at any vintage. Serious barrel-chamber classical players have to have this exact horn. Straights, Conns, Bueschers to Eb, even the comparatively rare stencils to F such as Elkhart, are all considered inadequate. Don't go looking for a Martin branded soprano piece either - they are now standard for these players.

Well, I am certainly not a serious barrel-chamber classical player! More like Sidney Bechet without the talent (or the duels). I don't like the oboe-y sound. On a soprano sax with a Selmer C* mouthpiece I'm as loud as a trumpet player, so there aren't going to be issues with projection. If it's not keyed to F I am much less interested as I've been playing saxophones keyed to F my entire life and all my lines and patterns I've been playing for so long, assume the availability of those notes.

So it seems that to the extent there's a consensus, Conn is a little coarser, brighter, hoarser; Buescher a little sweeter, darker, purer. Yes?

 

[Grumps]

My observations are based on unusually late model curvys: a 278k Buescher Aristocrat and a 282k Conn 4M. Differences from earlier instruments seem superficial, but there may be a few tweaks that aren't obvious. Both play in unusually good tune and the necks are fixed at comfortable angles.

Have you ever been able to compare the fixed neck angle of your later model Conn to earlier NW models?

 

[paulwl]

Have you ever been able to compare the fixed neck angle of your later model Conn to earlier NW models?

My 186k had a good angle as well.

I briefly played a 239k Conn and that neck was a bit weird. I don't know if it had been altered, maybe aftermarket, but the neck pointed slightly left. The horn wanted to be played sort of flat across the body, the way Prez held his tenor. It wasn't that awkward, actually. I think it made it easier not to snag the stack palm keys.

 

[turf3]

It seems that a bad neck angle on these fixed neck curvies could be fixed with a torch and half an hour. They all seem to have the same kind of octave key as a detachable neck horn so anything other than an extreme change shouldn't pose a problem to the mechanism. That's what I'd do.

 

[Grumps]

I took some pictures comparing my Buescher (1919, silver) and my Conn (1921,gold lacquer) trying to show the vast difference in neck angle. Don't think the pictures really show how extreme the difference feels, but get a look at the difference in where the neck strap ring sits. That shows it best of all.

Come to think of it, I should have taken a picture with them lined up with both strap rings centered. Then you'd see how different they are to hold in your hands.

 

[paulwl]

The ring height is consistent with the well known Conn Cobra* effect, which is what stabs you in the throat with your own mouthpiece when you let a Conn dangle freely off your neck strap.

The idea was apparently to make the horn rest upright on those early sax stands made of just a tripod and a hook. Those went away but the ring position never changed for some reason.

*To defeat the Cobra, all you need is a left forearm. Grasp the horn from underneath, or put the arm over the horn to keep it in place.

 

[bruce bailey]

I find the thumb ring on the later Conns and Martins to really help balance the horn when not using a neck strap.

 

[turf3]

If you look at the picture of the two from behind, you can see instantly the source of the problem/difference: The Conn's strap ring is set way further to the left (as you're looking at it from behind) and is way out of line to the neck and bell. The Buescher's is more or less perfectly in line with the neck and bell. With that position of the Conn strap ring, and the fixed neck, the mouthpiece is always going to be wanting to enter your mouth at a weird side angle unless you apply a torque to the horn body with your hands, which will adversely affect fluency of technique. If it were an alto or tenor, you'd set the neck at a considerable angle to the bell.

If that were my horn, I'd probably move that strap ring (on the Conn) about 3/8" or 1/2" to the right, and probably down some.

 

[Grumps]

If you look at the picture of the two from behind, you can see instantly the source of the problem/difference: The Conn's strap ring is set way further to the left (as you're looking at it from behind) and is way out of line to the neck and bell.

It's not just the strap ring though. The ring lines up with the left thumb rest/octave key. It's all tilted. The last picture is a straight on shot of the keys. Look where the Conn neck is pointing. The Conn neck angle is at about a 45 degree difference when compared to the Buescher. Even if you moved the strap ring, it would still be awkward in your hands as compared to the Buescher. Where I feel it is how far back I have to tilt my right wrist to play. I'm used to it though... so I'm probably not going to have the neck taken off and re-soldered at a better angle. But that would be the only cure.

 

[blaine hoopes]

I have an old curved Conn and I heated the solder joint and twisted the neck to the left (I did that about 50 years ago) and then I had to modify the case a little to allow the horn to fit with the new neck angle. It was very easy to do and completely transformed the play-ability of the horn. Before doing that, the right hand just couldn't comfortably work the keys at all.

I also had a curved Buescher. That was a sweet horn too but I preferred the Conn and sold the Buescher. The bell was so much smaller on the Buescher which seemed interesting to me.

There are (or there were when I sold mine) a lot of people into Buescher Tru Tone because of the taper of the bore and the whole Rascher overtone thing.