Sax on the Web Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
656 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I went on jupitermusic.com and looked at the different models of tenors, and the comparison chart.

The individual descriptions and chart does not list very many differences among the various models. Are there substantial differences in the performance and capabilities of the different models? And do the differences, if any, make the extra cost of the higher level models worth it?

Does the sterling silver neck on the 889SG make a real difference? If so, then why do the 989 and 2089 not have a sterling silver neck? It certainly made a difference in the King Super 20.

Are there any significant differences between the STS and JTS horns?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
The general answer to these questions which I have encountered here on the forums is yes to all.

I have not had the opportunity to play all Jupiter models, so cannot comment on the benefits/weaknesses of each. I can comment on what I have read here from other Zeus players.

The neck on the 889G does make a difference. One reviewer stated that putting this neck onto his mid-range model horn made it sound like the more expensive one. That is, the neck is the big difference. Though there are other factors that ease playability.

Also common sentiment is that JTS is better than STS. I disagree with this. I have played both and feel that STS is superior, though this is likely due to the age of the horn. JTSs do have more options and improved upper level models (like the 889G). If you can afford this, get it. But a great value would be a midrange STS like my 787 (an '87). The poor press has caused a huge price drop.
 

·
Distinguished Member, Forum Contributor 2008
Joined
·
3,882 Posts
I have both the 800 and 900 series Jupiter horns. I tried the silver neck from the 800 on the 900 bari, it was just too bright and brittle. The 900 horn is definitely a step above the 800.
 

·
More horns than I'm worthy of . . .
Joined
·
1,751 Posts
I felt there was a BIG step between the 767 up to the 889, both in terms of tone, (richer, fuller) and keywork (smoother.) I'm surprised to hear the last post say "brittle" for the sterling neck sound. But of course I've never swapped the neck on mine with anything.

The 889 is certainly not the loudest horn around, but I just love mine, especially after finding a really good mpc. Mine didn't seem to like metal, but that's probably me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
I felt there was a BIG step between the 767 up to the 889, both in terms of tone, (richer, fuller) and keywork (smoother.) I'm surprised to hear the last post say "brittle" for the sterling neck sound. But of course I've never swapped the neck on mine with anything.

The 889 is certainly not the loudest horn around, but I just love mine, especially after finding a really good mpc. Mine didn't seem to like metal, but that's probably me.
Damn dude, hammond and leslie. I really miss playing one of those. Are you doubling in a band?
 

·
Distinguished Member, Forum Contributor 2008
Joined
·
3,882 Posts
I felt there was a BIG step between the 767 up to the 889, both in terms of tone, (richer, fuller) and keywork (smoother.) I'm surprised to hear the last post say "brittle" for the sterling neck sound. But of course I've never swapped the neck on mine with anything.
I'm not by any means saying the 800 series horns don't sound terrific. What I am saying is that the 900 series is so good, they don't need the solid silver neck, and that swapping that neck onto a 900 series horn doesn't make it better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
656 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
I felt there was a BIG step between the 767 up to the 889, both in terms of tone, (richer, fuller) and keywork (smoother.) I'm surprised to hear the last post say "brittle" for the sterling neck sound. But of course I've never swapped the neck on mine with anything.
I'm not by any means saying the 800 series horns don't sound terrific. What I am saying is that the 900 series is so good, they don't need the solid silver neck, and that swapping that neck onto a 900 series horn doesn't make it better.
Merlin, the descriptions and chart in the Jupiter website indicate that the only differences between the 889SG and the 989 is that the 989 has a hand-hammered brass neck and the 889 has a sterling silver neck and silver-plated body. Is that it?

And the only listed difference between the 787 and 989 is the hand-hammered neck. Again, is that it?

And the 2089 has a hand-hammered bell, rose brass neck, and a partially-ribbed construction.

The info in the website tends to make the 787 appear very similar to the higher, more expensive models. Are there more differences than is set out in the website?
 

·
Distinguished Member, Forum Contributor 2008
Joined
·
3,882 Posts
I felt there was a BIG step between the 767 up to the 889, both in terms of tone, (richer, fuller) and keywork (smoother.) I'm surprised to hear the last post say "brittle" for the sterling neck sound. But of course I've never swapped the neck on mine with anything.
I'm not by any means saying the 800 series horns don't sound terrific. What I am saying is that the 900 series is so good, they don't need the solid silver neck, and that swapping that neck onto a 900 series horn doesn't make it better.
Merlin, the descriptions and chart in the Jupiter website indicate that the only differences between the 889SG and the 989 is that the 989 has a hand-hammered brass neck and the 889 has a sterling silver neck and silver-plated body. Is that it?

And the only listed difference between the 787 and 989 is the hand-hammered neck. Again, is that it?

And the 2089 has a hand-hammered bell, rose brass neck, and a partially-ribbed construction.

The info in the website tends to make the 787 appear very similar to the higher, more expensive models. Are there more differences than is set out in the website?
The short and sweet is that I don't even know what the different attributes are. I just know that the 900 and 2000 series instruments are playing even better than my tried and true 800 series horns.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
656 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
The websites on Jupiter serial numbers indicate that the model designation, "STS", was used from 1986 on when Jupiter started producing saxes, and then "JTS" was used starting in 1990 on.

So, was the STS-787 the top model until at least 1990 or later?

And when did Jupiter first produce an 800 series tenor sax as its new top model? I've never heard of an 800 series STS Jupiter.
 

·
More horns than I'm worthy of . . .
Joined
·
1,751 Posts
Hey TO -

I have not been online much lately and just noticed your question re Hammond/Leslie. Short answer is I got too old to haul the big dogs to gigs so now just use fake Hammond and Les sounds, though the RT3 and 122 still reside in a hallowed place in my living room. Mostly a keyboard guy, but my bandmates let me play a few sax tunes when we gig out, which is getting rarer and rarer.

- - -

Back on thread:

Here's one indisputable diff between the 8's and 9's: You'll spend a LOT less time removing silver tarnish if you choose the 9's.

Just a thought.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
3,156 Posts
Empressdiver: Did you notice Merlin's signature? "Jupiter Artist/Clinician" One of the reasons I bought my Jupiter alto, soprano and baritone was Merlin's endorsement of this brand. Actually, it was the reason I bought the 847SG soprano.

After discovering what a great horn the sop was, I quickly invested in the 869SG alto and 593 baritone. I don't think I'll go for the 889SG tenor at this point since I already have two very fine tenors and don't need a third even though it would complete my Jupiter collection, including a Jupiter 631 student level clarinet.

After reading his responses to your initial query, I'm wondering if I should have held out for 900 series Jupiters. :(
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top