Excellent demonstration and commentary, as usual. The first thing that occurred to me when I heard your comparison is that the Supreme sounds like a Series III with a dollop of Series II added back in, so I was pleased that you came to essentially the same conclusion. I have to admit that, even as a Series III player myself, I liked the sound of the Supreme a little better in this close-up listening context. The Series III has a tiny bit of edge here and there, whereas the Supreme is uniformly sweet and mellow. They are certainly quite close, however. You're probably right about the III's having a slight advantage for things like concertos (but my problem is that I don't play saxophone concertos, except as reductions ).Hey all, I unexpectedly had the opportunity to borrow a Supreme for a few days this week. Here's a video I made with some comparisons with my normal Series III as well as other thoughts:
The reason that jazz players don't like the Series III alto is that they typically test it with a bright or even brash jazz mouthpiece. Such mouthpieces can "open up" darkish altos, but are usually overkill on something as free-blowing and sensitive as a Series III. The common result is, "Wow, too bright!" Your S90 doesn't create that problem.
I've said from the launch that based on the description of the Supreme, it would be a much bigger advance for a Series II player than for a Series III player, since many of the Supreme's intonational and ergonomic upgrades were pioneered on the III. Your review made that point clear as well. However, I will add that the Supreme's engraving is not as impressive to someone with a Jubilee Series III (or Series II) as to a pre-Jubilee player. I think the Jubilee engraving is more elegant and more coherent than the Supreme's engraving.
Finally, thanks for helping to rebut the recent spate of threads in SOTW about how it's purportedly impossible to sound that good on a synthetic reed.