[zxcvbnm]

The official history of Buffet saxophones is quite incomplete, and I thought I would start this thread so that we could figure out what's going on. Saxpics lists the Buffet-Powell model as running from 1930-1939, and then the SA 18-20 model from 1940 onwards, which morphs into the Dynaction.

For context, there was apparently a fire at the Buffet plant in 1940 which caused the serial numbers to restart at 1. Saxpics claims that the SA 18-20 model started at serial number 1, and only includes horns that look like this one -- with right side bell keys and a modern SDA-like left pinky spatula design.

However, I've found several SA 18-20 engraved horns that appear to be from the 1930s, with serial numbers in 32xxx range. They also have super interesting features. Check out these two 32447 and 32660. Note that they have right hand bell keys, rods that run down the middle of the horn, and offset lower stacks. If they are really from 1933 as claimed, it would mean Buffet was the first to introduce these modern features and not Selmer!. Also note the double tone hole G, and the articulation between the right hand E and F keys (no idea what that does).

Next look at this horn. It has a later serial of 32898, but it has far simpler features and looks more like a typical 30's sax. Anyways, it's clear that Buffet was producing SA 18-20 engraved horns through the 30's along with the Buffet-Powell ones.

A few questions:

• Why are all the horns in 32xxx serial range? Even the Buffet-Powell saxes on Saxpics only show 32xxx horns.
• Why do the fancier right bell key horns have earlier serials than the simpler left bell key one?
• Why didn't Buffet keep using the fancy features in the two above horns for the Dynaction and Super Dynaction?
• Did Buffet just not produce many saxes in the 30's for some reason?
• How do these things play?

 

[Hassles]

Well I suspect this is going to be an interesting thread. From all accounts the original (made in France) Buffet's were excellent. I would love one myself but these are less than affordable as a rule.

 

[milandro]

I am not quite sure that the positioning of the bell keys on the right side was the only feature that distinguished the balanced action (talking of the mechanical innovation not the model) from previous model.

At the time Selmer (and everyone else ) were very protective of their patents

 

[zxcvbnm]

I am not quite sure that the positioning of the bell keys on the right side was the only feature that distinguished the balanced action (talking of the mechanical innovation not the model) from previous model.

At the time Selmer (and everyone else ) were very protective of their patents

Yes, as I mentioned the other modern innovations in those two 1933? horns are the offset lower stack and rods running down the front of the horn. The offset stack in particular doesn't appear in Selmers until the post-war SBA.

Interestingly, Selmer and Buffet had their factories in the same town. Maybe these two companies had some collaboration going on.

 

[milandro]

actually almost all French factories were in Mantes la ville, very few weren’t ( the reason, I was once told, that it was the closest to Paris that barges with heavy loads could get, I am not sure)

Dolnet, Beaugnier ( and others) were there too

but the constructional elements weren’t only the offset and bell position but more importantly the way the rods were shortened in several pieces which returned a more balnces pressure (action) of the fingers.

The exemplification is that in all the subsequent horns there are the 4 parallel ( 3 long one short) rods running on the left side but the LH table.

I don’t think Buffet did any of that.

By the way on of the features which took the longest to be copied was the seesaw octave , even horns made in the 70 copied everything else but not that!

 

[zxcvbnm]

I found this french site which somewhat resolves the mystery of the 1930's Buffets. See in particular the Series V and Series VI. It however does not account for those two crazy horns with the modern features. Maybe Buffet was doing a lot of experimentation in this time.

 

[T_J_h90000]

As a proponent that the serial numbers are wrong by the Saxpics site and what models they cover, (covered in this post of mine) and that Buffet was not afraid to experiment with their instruments (Powells and S1), I would say that the random sax's that don't fit models and serial number ranges were either experimental models or maybe beyond experimental and were briefly produced but they had to stop because another company (Selmer) filed the patents first.

Edit: It could also be that Buffet decided that some of the new features were too costly or too time-consuming to manufacture at the time and simplified the design.

 

[zxcvbnm]

As a proponent that the serial numbers are wrong by the Saxpics site and what models they cover, (covered in this post of mine) and that Buffet was not afraid to experiment with their instruments (Powells and S1), I would say that the random sax's that don't fit models and serial number ranges were either experimental models or maybe beyond experimental and were briefly produced but they had to stop because another company (Selmer) filed the patents first.

Edit: It could also be that Buffet decided that some of the new features were too costly or too time-consuming to manufacture at the time and simplified the design.

Makes sense! So based off your thread, the Saxpics SA 18-20 horns (with the new pinky spatula) correspond to 1940?

I wonder how these 30's horns play compared to the 40's ones.

 

[Alain Gen]

actually almost all French factories were in Mantes la ville, very few weren't ( the reason, I was once told, that it was the closest to Paris that barges with heavy loads could get, I am not sure)

Dolnet, Beaugnier ( and others) were there too

but the constructional elements weren't only the offset and bell position but more importantly the way the rods were shortened in several pieces which returned a more balnces pressure (action) of the fingers.

The exemplification is that in all the subsequent horns there are the 4 parallel ( 3 long one short) rods running on the left side but the LH table.

I don't think Buffet did any of that.

By the way on of the features which took the longest to be copied was the seesaw octave , even horns made in the 70 copied everything else but not that!

I agree. The "balanced" action of the bell keys is not just the position (LH or RH) of the bell keys. With the balanced action, the pinky table hinges to the right. With a lot of saxes up to the seventies, we have RH bell keys but the pinky table hinges to the left (as it did on saxes with LH bell keys) and the action is transmitted by levers. The levers add friction and are less efficient.

 

[zxcvbnm]

I agree. The "balanced" action of the bell keys is not just the position (LH or RH) of the bell keys. With the balanced action, the pinky table hinges to the right. With a lot of saxes up to the seventies, we have RH bell keys but the pinky table hinges to the left (as it did on saxes with LH bell keys) and the action is transmitted by levers. The levers add friction and are less efficient.

I had mentioned this (rods running down the middle of the horn). If you look at the pictures of the two Buffet horns I posted, they have this exact feature.

 

[Alain Gen]

I had mentioned this (rods running down the middle of the horn). If you look at the pictures of the two Buffet horns I posted, they have this exact feature.

You are right. Sorry! In fact you mentioned the SDA pinky table (and the SDA, before the SDA-S1 transitional model, didn't have the "full" balanced action) so I assumed it was the same and didn't check on the pictures.

For the articulation between the right hand E and F keys, is there a third octave pip (which would be a remnant of the very complicated Buffet-Powell four pips octave mech)?

 

[zxcvbnm]

You are right. Sorry! In fact you mentioned the SDA pinky table (and the SDA, before the SDA-S1 transitional model, didn't have the "full" balanced action) so I assumed it was the same and didn't check on the pictures.

For the articulation between the right hand E and F keys, is there a third octave pip (which would be a remnant of the very complicated Buffet-Powell four pips octave mech)?

No worries . I went back and looked at the photos again, doesn't seem that there is a third octave pip. They are reminiscent of the Buffet-Powell horns though. Would love to get my hands on one of these horns!

 

[cymru97]

Interesting thread! My Powell alto is 328XX. It’s interesting to see how different it is compared to the 328XX horn in the original post.

 

[T_J_h90000]

Makes sense! So based off your thread, the Saxpics SA 18-20 horns (with the new pinky spatula) correspond to 1940?

I wonder how these 30's horns play compared to the 40's ones.

That would be the best assumption, the "18-20" line of horns started after the Powell series finished with a new series of serial numbers, due to said fire(s). After doing measurements and determining that there is physically no difference between the "18-20" models and the Dynacation other than different bell-to-body braces, minor bore changes on the altos in the 1950's, and an evolution in the engraving.

I have always wondered how the Powell's play, and I wonder if the random models that don't fit play like a Powell, earlier models, or the later 18-20/Dynaction.

 

[zxcvbnm]

That would be the best assumption, the "18-20" line of horns started after the Powell series finished with a new series of serial numbers, due to said fire(s). After doing measurements and determining that there is physically no difference between the "18-20" models and the Dynacation other than different bell-to-body braces, minor bore changes on the altos in the 1950's, and an evolution in the engraving.

I have always wondered how the Powell's play, and I wonder if the random models that don't fit play like a Powell, earlier models, or the later 18-20/Dynaction.

I saw the part in your thread about the bore changes in the Dynaction. Are you saying that the post-fire 18-20's are the same as the narrow bore Dynactions?

How do your Dynactions play? I assume you must like them quite a bit to own two!

 

[zxcvbnm]

Interesting thread! My Powell alto is 328XX. It's interesting to see how different it is compared to the 328XX horn in the original post.

Wow, another 32XXX horn. Maybe that serial number range was reserved for saxophones. How does your Powell alto play? (And how much do those go for these days?)

 

[cymru97]

Wow, another 32XXX horn. Maybe that serial number range was reserved for saxophones. How does your Powell alto play? (And how much do those go for these days?)

There is something odd about the consistency in the 32k serials. The Powell's action is far beyond any other 30s horn I've played. I wholly admit, that list isn't exhaustive, but certainly most vintage American offerings. I wish I could relate it to other Buffets, but I cannot.

I'd definitely class it as a 'French' vibe if that makes sense. Very sweet and flexible. Intonation is really awesome. Off the top of my head, Jace Dumars or Uwe would have more experience and could probably do a description more justice.

Pricing? I wish I could tell you! I really stumbled into mine and while it plays well, could really use new pads and some attention before I can really get to know it.

 

[zxcvbnm]

There is something odd about the consistency in the 32k serials. The Powell's action is far beyond any other 30s horn I've played. I wholly admit, that list isn't exhaustive, but certainly most vintage American offerings. I wish I could relate it to other Buffets, but I cannot.

I'd definitely class it as a 'French' vibe if that makes sense. Very sweet and flexible. Intonation is really awesome. Off the top of my head, Jace Dumars or Uwe would have more experience and could probably do a description more justice.

Pricing? I wish I could tell you! I really stumbled into mine and while it plays well, could really use new pads and some attention before I can really get to know it.

Awesome, do let us know if you ever get it overhauled (or ever feel like letting it go ).

I wonder, if 32xxx was the only serial range they used for saxes in the 30s, could it mean they only made 1000 saxes in that time? 100 per year?

 

[T_J_h90000]

I saw the part in your thread about the bore changes in the Dynaction. Are you saying that the post-fire 18-20's are the same as the narrow bore Dynactions?

How do your Dynactions play? I assume you must like them quite a bit to own two!

Yes, the narrow bore Dynaction altos and the 18-20 series are, for the most part, the same. I don't think there was any bore change on the tenors from the start of the 18-20 until the start of the SDA horns.

My Dynaction altos play amazingly well, the altos are very mouthpiece friendly and I can't say anything bad about them.

The Tenor Dynactions, however, having a Dynaction, an 18-20, and having owned another Dynaction tenor previously, I am not physically compatible with them, for whatever reason. On all three of them, I get a weird warble in the lower octave from A down to F, tuning them sharp does fix the issue. I have tried multiple mouthpieces new and old. I play Bari in community bands so I know it's not an issue playing larger horns, I do have a smaller mouth, my dentist can attest to that, so I could have weird embouchure issues that affect the tuning on the tenor Dynactions and they could just be more sensitive to that. I have never had issues playing on my S1 or any other Tenor.

The tenors do sound very nice, My current Dynaction can sound downright raunchy when needed and sweet and pretty the rest of the time and I can put a TON of air through it. I just wish I was more compatible with it.

 

[zxcvbnm]

So I actually managed to get one of these early Buffets on a trial. An alto, serial 33xxx. Most interesting thing is, the mechanical design is almost identical to a Selmer Cigar Cutter. The pinky table is basically the same, the octave mechanism is very similar, and the palm keys are mounted on a plate in the same way.

Most of the differences are cosmetic. The keyguards are different, the fork F# key touch is different, and the Buffet has a curved high E. I also think the bore profile looks different -- I don't think they are the same horn, or that Buffet was stenciling from Selmer. But definitely Buffet must have been either copying or sharing saxophone designs with Selmer at this time.

It plays very much like a "French"-style vintage sax. A slightly more brilliant sound than an American horn like my Buescher, but thinner up top. Somewhere between bright and dark, with good projection. Intonation was good for a vintage horn but not great. I have never played a pre-Balanced Action Selmer, but I've heard many clips of other players on them, and I think this Buffet would be similar.