[saxmusicguy]

Based on your experience with these horns, are the 6 tones produced here good representations of the tonal characteristics of the 6 different horns?

Caution: I believe videos 1, 3, and 4 use a Florida Link and videos 2, 5, and 6 use a Selmer Air Flow. Nevertheless, please comment on the horns. The playing starts about 2 minutes into each video.

 

[CarlHeanerd]

Isn't it kind of a moot point to compare these horns if he's using completely different mouthpieces on half of them? They're vastly different in design, plus, what about his reeds? Too many variables in my opinion, but the older members of this forum will probably have more to contribute.

 

[saxmusicguy]

Isn't it kind of a moot point to compare these horns if he's using completely different mouthpieces on half of them?

Of course it is. I just used the word "shootout" to get peoples' attention. I'm just seeking an answer to the question I initially posed: Based on your experience with these horns, are the 6 tones produced here good representations of the tonal characteristics of the 6 different horns?

 

[CarlHeanerd]

Of course it is. I just used the word "shootout" to get peoples' attention. I'm just seeking an answer to the question I initially posed: Based on your experience with these horns, are the 6 tones produced here good representations of the tonal characteristics of the 6 different horns?

I can do that. Now, my experiences were only based on the particular examples I tried. For at least the Selmers, there must be better. All of these horns are in comparison to my Barone "Vintage".

Selmer Serie II - Smaller and more introverted sound, especially in the low end. Seems a little too "strictly classical", unlike the alto version, which I find superb. I want to try more of these, I refuse to believe they all sound this small.

Selmer Serie III - Bigger sound than the Serie II but brighter, again, particularly noticeable in the low end. I'd never use this for classical studies, but I could see this sounding great with an Otto Link. Still, there was a certain white noise to the sound I didn't care for, this is my second least favorite modern Selmer, following the Reference 36.

Yanagisawa T901 - Bland and didn't stand out to me at all. Felt like a generic intermediate horn, made me think of the color gray.

Yanagisawa T992 - A bit more special than the 992, but remarkably similar to the Yamaha 875EX in terms of tone. Darker than your typical Japan horn, but with the characteristic "Japanese" core. Not my thing, but very nice. Extremely even response.

P. Mauriat 66RX - Superb presence of a dark "Selmer" core with this horn, particularly in the mid and low end. I preferred my Barone's more homogenous but similar tone, however, this horn would be killer for my jazz concept. I find my Barone to be a more versatile horn, though.

I'm surprised you didn't mention the tenor Reference 54. I find this to be the best modern Selmer, at least the ones I have tried. They're rather similar to my Barone though... sounds like you should just get a Barone

 

[saxmusicguy]

I'm surprised you didn't mention the tenor Reference 54. I find this to be the best modern Selmer, at least the ones I have tried. They're rather similar to my Barone though... sounds like you should just get a Barone

Thanks for your comments. I just picked those clips because the same guy was playing in each of them. Here's the Ref 54:

 

[gary]

Of course it is. I just used the word "shootout" to get peoples' attention.

I'm just seeking an answer to the question I initially posed:
Based on your experience with these horns, are the 6 tones produced here good representations of the tonal characteristics of the 6 different horns?

No.

 

[Dr G]

Isn't it kind of a moot point to compare these horns if he's using completely different mouthpieces on half of them? They're vastly different in design, plus, what about his reeds? Too many variables in my opinion, but the older members of this forum will probably have more to contribute.

What about the effect of wearing his glasses?

That was some pretty mono-dimensional playing - not representative of dynamic capability of any horn.

Why, oh why, do people think that one person's sound is what will come out of the same horn when it is in their own face?

 

[saxmusicguy]

Why, oh why, do people think that one person's sound is what will come out of the same horn when it is in their own face?

Perhaps people think that way if they aren't very familiar with wind instruments. Nothing in this thread indicates that line of thinking, however.

 

[Stretch]

Without prejudice, and I say that because I have no inclinations to purchase any of these horns, I liked the Series II tenor the best by far. I enjoyed this, thanks.

 

[Nefertiti]

Yes, for this guy, those tones are representative of how he sounds on these saxophones with the mouthpieces and reeds he is using.

 

[saxmusicguy]

Yes, for this guy, those tones are representative of how he sounds on these saxophones with the mouthpieces and reeds he is using.

Yes of course, but can you hear characteristics unique to any of the saxophones that you also noticed when you played these horns?

 

[warp x]

None of the horns sounded particularly good to me. If I had to make a choice, the Selmer and the Rampone would be my favorites.

 

[Roger Nordling]

The selmer series II was the best sounding to me. I always tought they have a nice depth and solid "heavy weight" kind of sound. Altough I can agree that it has some kind of introvert sound and not as open sounding as the series III.

 

[Dave Dolson]

I found these clips very interesting. I do not play tenor nor have I played any of these instruments (or even other versions of them . . .), but I was/am a listener and therefore feel free to comment.

The sameness was overwhelming to me. Why, they all sounded like tenors!!! I've said many times that 10 seconds into any good playing saxophone or clarinet and I'm familiar with it - while at the same time, I've ALMOST forgotten the previous horn. Unless there are GLARING differences among them (which I failed to hear here), all are pretty much acceptable.

So it was with these clips. By the time I plowed through the speaker's rhetoric (and oh MY did I hear some cliches), I'd almost forgotten the previous clip and was into the current one. My conclusion is that if I were to consider buying any of these, I'd have to play them first and NOT rely on what I hear someone else doing with them (agreeing with Dr G).

If I had to make a choice, I'd go for the Ref 54 in the added clip, but it was different player and he was facing in a different direction, so still impossible to choose. Again, I enjoyed the exercise. DAVE

 

[magical pig]

I'd have to play them first and NOT rely on what I hear someone else doing with them

Yeah this is how you're supposed to do it.

 

[Dave Dolson]

Well, contrary to conventional wisdom, I HAVE purchased new (and used) saxophones without first playing them and I don't think that I'd made a huge mistake doing it that way. I could afford those errors, if made. I realize others may not be able to do so, but I fail to see how these postings would help anyone in making buying-choices. They were good entertainment, though.

I know I may have been stating the obvious, but what I was trying to get across was that after all the effort in playing, posting, and listening to these different examples, it makes little difference in a buyer's choices. The ONLY way to decide which one is better is to play them. What a listener hears and what a player feels are two entirely different things. DAVE

 

[JL]

Why, oh why, do people think that one person's sound is what will come out of the same horn when it is in their own face?

+1. Yet another reason why these computer sound clips are next to useless in evaluating a horn.