[zxcvbnm]

It seems to me, that ever since the Mark VI, saxophones have changed very little. I mean, back in the heyday of the saxophone (1920-1960), saxes were changing almost every time a manufacturer released a new model. Today, it seems that they're just all slightly different variations of a Selmer. Also, back then you had options. You could choose from the dark and refined tone of a Buescher, the big and boomy sound of a Conn, the lush and rich sound of a Martin, and of course, you could go for the light, french sound of a Selmer or Buffet. Today, all modern saxes (except maybe JK) sound similar to well, a Selmer. What do you guys think?

 

[58tenor]

I think you are over-generalizing.

 

[ShedShark]

The Leblanc System did some alterations of the traditional fingering:

https://junkdude.com/ProductDetail.aspx?id_product=398

 

[crazydaisydoo]

By far the most important, nay, seminal innovation in the last ten years has been the introduction of the "resonance stone" by Cannonball.

I have recreated this effect by supergluing an old marble onto the neck of my '57 Martin. It makes me sound like a jazz genius. Now I don't have to practice anymore.

I have now glued marbles onto all our other instruments, although I find that they keep falling off my daughter's recorder, causing a choking hazard, still.... that's progress!

 

[Martinman]

By far the most important, nay, seminal innovation in the last ten years has been the introduction of the "resonance stone" by Cannonball.

I have recreated this effect by supergluing an old marble onto the neck of my '57 Martin. It makes me sound like a jazz genius. Now I don't have to practice anymore.

I have now glued marbles onto all our other instruments, although I find that they keep falling off my daughter's recorder, causing a choking hazard, still.... that's progress!

Do you think I could achieve even greater results by gluing on my mother's jewelry?

 

[hakukani]

I was thinking that since the player is 80% of the sound, we should modify the player instead. A bit of surgery to open the throat, then embed jewelry and such in the corners of the mouth. Now think what we can do with hands and fingers...

 

[Martinman]

I was thinking that since the player is 80% of the sound, we should modify the player instead. A bit of surgery to open the throat, then embed jewelry and such in the corners of the mouth. Now think what we can do with hands and fingers...

Do tounge piercings enhance resonance of the oral cavity?

You want to get a diamond stud put in to test this Hak?

 

[JCBigler]

I heard that after John faddis started making a bunch of money playing with Diz, that he went and got that gap in his front teeth fixed. He lost ALL of his high range, so he went back to his oral surgeon and had the gap put back in.

Oh yeah, I knew a guy in college who had not one, but TWO tongue rings put in. I don't think his playing changed at all. He sucked just as much before as he did after.

I have known a couple of female flute players who had their tongues pierced though. One of them was quite good--at flute playing.

Oh geez, I can see where this thread is going to degenerate to....

 

[crazydaisydoo]

Do you think I could achieve even greater results by gluing on my mother's jewelry?

Well, I know it seems crazy, but different coloured marbles create different effects. Even the placement of said marble creates dramatically different harmonic resonances. My kazoo now sounds like a bassoon!

Based on my findings, your mother's old opal brooch, when appropriately attached, will make you sound just like Dave Koz.

Sorry.

 

[milandro]

Today, all modern saxes (except maybe JK) sound similar to well, a Selmer. What do you guys think?

I beg to differ on the modern saxophone sound originality matters (this site is full of discussions on how the ...... (put any brand of your choice) saxophone is different from the ......(any other brand)......) if it was so anyone would buy the cheapest sax that has decent mechanics..... but that is not the case!

True, when it comes to general mechanichs and general apearance....MOST (but by no means all) of the modern Saxophones are Selmer inspired, one way or another, but few are very different!

Inderbinen, even though some models use Yamaha parts, are clearly something else soundwise

http://www.inderbinen.com/Page_e/SaxTenor_e.html

Shall we just quote the radical innovations?
Let's start with Jim Schmidt
http://users.gotsky.com/jimschmidt/
probably the most important innovation in the trade
And how about the aulochrome?
http://www.aulochrome.com/

and why not, the vibratosax?
http://www.vibratosax.com/

Paraschos necks? Gloger necks? Aquilasax modern Cmelodies?

There are more things innovative...... but if you want to find innovations you need to follow the developments and I am afraid that, if you just go to visit the main steet shops, you ain't going to find it there!

By the way you seem to be a fan of Benjamin Herman, a very good Dutch sax Player (plays C melody too!)

 

[1saxman]

It seems to me, that ever since the Mark VI, saxophones have changed very little. I mean, back in the heyday of the saxophone (1920-1960), saxes were changing almost every time a manufacturer released a new model. Today, it seems that they're just all slightly different variations of a Selmer. Also, back then you had options. You could choose from the dark and refined tone of a Buescher, the big and boomy sound of a Conn, the lush and rich sound of a Martin, and of course, you could go for the light, french sound of a Selmer or Buffet. Today, all modern saxes (except maybe JK) sound similar to well, a Selmer. What do you guys think?

I agree. 'Improvements' to the post Mk VI saxophone mostly amount to needless tinkering. Except for the horrible Mk VI soprano, of course, and that only amounted to making the action consistent with the other Selmer horns on the Super Action 80. Basically the Super Action and Mk VI was for all practical purposes the perfection of the saxophone. Obviously that's why everything now is a 'Selmer copy'. Even Selmer is now making saxes with the Mk VI tenor neck profile and without high F# (Reference models and Super Action 80 Series III for the neck and the limited editions for no F#). Taiwan is putting out the P. Mauriat tenors with the same treatment. One thing I find interesting at Selmer is the plethora of models, including a solid Sterling silver tenor. P. Mauriat has one too, except it's also gold-plated. Of course, these aren't really 'advances' per se, just going back to what worked before (necks and no F# key) and using many different materials. The basic horn is still just as Selmer pioneered it, with all the features we now take for granted and expect on the cheapest Chinese student model. To me the good in all this is that there are now many different models available that approximate the Mk VI in many ways. I don't even play mine anymore since I started using a late-'80s Selmer USA TS100 (with a Mk VI neck). The horn outplays the VI in many ways, including ease of altissimo. I imagine the Series III and the better Taiwan horns would be similar. Perhaps the mystique of the Mk VI is finally fading. I have noted that the prices have been dropping slowly for several years.

 

[Martinman]

Well, I know it seems crazy, but different coloured marbles create different effects. Even the placement of said marble creates dramatically different harmonic resonances. My kazoo now sounds like a bassoon!

Based on my findings, your mother's old opal brooch, when appropriately attached, will make you sound just like Dave Koz.

Sorry.

I think I will pass:shock:

Maybe I can get a grandma to give me some of her stuff so I can get that 50's sound...

 

[Al Stevens]

The main innovation is found in economics. Prices of Taiwanese horns are closer to reasonable than are those of the big four, and quality is becoming competitive.

 

[zxcvbnm]

I beg to differ on the modern saxophone sound originality matters (this site is full of discussions on how the ...... (put any brand of your choice) saxophone is different from the ......(any other brand)......) if it was so anyone would buy the cheapest sax that has decent mechanics..... but that is not the case!

True, when it comes to general mechanichs and general apearance....MOST (but by no means all) of the modern Saxophones are Selmer inspired, one way or another, but few are very different!

Inderbinen, even though some models use Yamaha parts, are clearly something else soundwise

http://www.inderbinen.com/Page_e/SaxTenor_e.html

Shall we just quote the radical innovations?
Let's start with Jim Schmidt
http://users.gotsky.com/jimschmidt/
probably the most important innovation in the trade
And how about the aulochrome?
http://www.aulochrome.com/

and why not, the vibratosax?
http://www.vibratosax.com/

Paraschos necks? Gloger necks? Aquilasax modern Cmelodies?

There are more things innovative...... but if you want to find innovations you need to follow the developments and I am afraid that, if you just go to visit the main steet shops, you ain't going to find it there!

By the way you seem to be a fan of Benjamin Herman, a very good Dutch sax Player (plays C melody too!)

Yeah, but I really don't think any of those (except maybe the C melody, and that's just a revival of something that was invented before) are really practical. The vibratosax, IMO, seems just like an improvement over the Grafton.

 

[betelsax]

Has anyone played the sax with those marbles in your mouth?
It's an innovation called the Demosthenes Saxophone System.
They have a web page.
You start with two ergonomic, clear crystal marbles and work your way up over a month. When you finally take them out of your mouth, you notice an immediate improvement in your sound and the instrument's general playability.

I have tried lots of modern horns, but they offer nothing that could coax me away from my '20s Handcrafts or TTs.

 

[bruce bailey]

I think you ALL have lost your marbles!

 

[zivley]

Let's not forget the LA Sax Steve Goodson model and it's innovations such as the parabolic bell (I'm still trying to figure out that one...)

 

[milandro]

Yeah, but I really don't think any of those (except maybe the C melody, and that's just a revival of something that was invented before) are really practical. The vibratosax, IMO, seems just like an improvement over the Grafton.

I don't think you took time to see the work of Jim Schmidt....otherwise you wouldn't say this, please do.

http://users.gotsky.com/jimschmidt/

This saxophone is the most inventive and radically different since Adolphe Sax invented the Saxophone (please look at the specifics about finger setting and constuction of the neck), please also look at his pads.....

the Vibratosax is , in my not so huble opinion :twisted: , very different from the Grafton (neck isn't metal, the and octave mechanism is very innovative and it uses synthetic pads, which although not new, are very special) but than again , yes, it is a saxophone.....we are talking of saxophones right?:?
If inorder to be innovative and different you have to invent a new instrument probably only Schmidt qualifies your criteria.

the Aulochrome is a completely different instrument from the standard saxophone altogether, not just two saxophones together, it requires different music be written for it and few composers are doing exactly that.
Read Joe Lovano here
http://aulochrome.com/press/14/JoeLovano

the Alessofono

http://www.hobbysax.com/L'alessofono.html
contains also some radical key design improvements.

And I am sure that there are more improvements and inventions going on as we speak.....

 

[Al Stevens]

The pianoforte is an upgrade of the harpsichord. The electronic keyboard is an upgrade of the pump organ. Those are innovations of the first order.

The only true upgrades to the saxophone since the early 20th century, maybe earlier, have been in the minor repositioning of some keys and the addition of a few keys for convenience. I'd hardly call them innovations.

Production techniques and materials changed as new technologies became available, but the basic instrument is the same.

What it costs and how it is played—there's where you'll find innovations.

 

[martysax]

Oh yeah, I knew a guy in college who had not one, but TWO tongue rings put in. I don't think his playing changed at all. He sucked just as much before as he did after.

I have known a couple of female flute players who had their tongues pierced though. One of them was quite good--at flute playing.

Oh geez, I can see where this thread is going to degenerate to....

Personal Foul, JCB, encroachment, 10 yards, still first down.

OK, I'll bite: Hey JC, are you sure you're not mixing up the two stories?