[supersonic]

I played many Martins in the last 35 Years but never any SML Sax

So I would like to know which of both horns is the darker player ? I guess the SML, because I think Martins are not especially dark ??

(for excample I would say a Buescher New Arsitocrat plays much darker then a 1930's King Zephyr)

 

[ConnorTsax]

I don't have any experience with the Martin Imperial, but I've owned and SML alto (late Rev C year) for a little while now, and honestly, the tone is really flexible. I mainly play classical on alto, and with my AL3 Optimum mp, it has a really lush and sweet sound. However, if I change the reed or the mouthpiece, it can get some solid edge.

 

[JayeLID]

Which version of the Imperials are we talking about ? There were the Handcraft Imperials from the 30's...then the later Imperials from the late 60's, which replaced the Indianas. Very different horns.

On the 'darkness' meter of Vintage horns...almost all of which are dark by today's standards, really... I would not consider the SML D on the dark, dark side of things (like a Conn or, say, an older Keilwerth). It is very 'big toned', however.

 

[supersonic]

I was thinking of a Martin Imperial 1935

Good to know SML are not dark players, so they both should be in the middle of dark and bright ?

 

[Benny]

I would call all Martins darker than a Rev D, due to the selmerish focus and brightness that the Sml’s have.
Think of a Rev D as being the love child of a King Super 20 and Selmer SBA