Sax on the Web Forum banner
41 - 56 of 56 Posts

·
Distinguished SOTW Member.
Joined
·
4,861 Posts
hello everyone, thanks for accepting me in this group. I always dreamed of a conn 10m or a mark vi, but since I discovered the old Bueschers, I forgot about that, not only are the prices more reasonable, but I also like their sound more. I currently have a 1920 true tone tenor, which I love, but I am thinking of acquiring another one, and I am undecided between a Big B or a 400, I have a slight preference towards the 400, but what are your recommendations, preference and experiences, that you can advise. thank you all in advance for your advice.hello everyone, thanks for accepting me in this group. I always dreamed of a conn 10m or a mark vi, but since I discovered the old Bueschers, I forgot about that, not only are the prices more reasonable, but I also like their sound more. I currently have a 1920 true tone tenor, which I love, but I am thinking of acquiring another one, and I am undecided between a Big B or a 400, I have a slight preference towards the 400, but what are your recommendations, preference and experiences, that you can advise. thank you all in advance for your advice.
If you have the budget for it go all out and get the 400 Top Hat and Cane.

That was my first good tenor a 1949 model that my dad gave me when he saw
I was serious about playing jazz when I was about 19. I grew up around that
horn because it was his personal instrument until he gifted it to me as nod
of encouragement .
Had to sell it in an emergency years ago but I wish I still had it .

I wanted a VI in that same period of time I got the 400 TH& C. When I finally got
one I really didn't think it was better - in fact, i was a little disappointed at first
since I was sure the VI would blow the doors off that old Buescher but it really
didn't. I've also compared a 156 tenor a buddy of mine had to the 400 and
I could see the differences but they were both great players, as I remember it.

I've had my current Big B tenor for about 15 years, now and it's a great tenor.
I did buy it thinking of selling it on but I played it and that idea went out the window.
 

·
SOTW Columnist, Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
23,681 Posts
I've had my current Big B tenor for about 15 years, now and it's a great tenor.
I did buy it thinking of selling it on but I played it and that idea went out the window.
Which Big B do you have, Tryptykon? The 156 or one of the earlier models (127 or 155)?

I've thought about selling one of my Bueschers (series one & 156) since I don't really need three tenors (my main horn is the VI), but every time I pick up and play one of the Bueschers I just can't imagine parting with it.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member.
Joined
·
4,861 Posts
Which Big B do you have, Tryptykon? The 156 or one of the earlier models (127 or 155)?

I've thought about selling one of my Bueschers (series one & 156) since I don't really need three tenors (my main horn is the VI), but every time I pick up and play one of the Bueschers I just can't imagine parting with it.
Hey, JL .. it's a 1st year version (mentioned in my earlier post #40) s/n 293,XXX .

Yeah, my intent was to make a coupla bucks on it, but I played it and, whoops ...
I shouldn't have done that . :LOL:
 

·
SOTW Columnist, Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
23,681 Posts
Hey, JL .. it's a 1st year version (mentioned in my earlier post #40) s/n 293,XXX .
Got it (I should've noticed that). Anyway, that horn is what I've heard referred to as a "127" (not sure where that number comes from) and from what I understand it's basically the same horn as the art-deco engraved 'series one', aside from the engraving & ribbon key guards on your Big B.

Strangely enough my art deco series one Aristocrat (the horn on the left in the photo in post #32) is also s/n 293,xxx. So mine is one of the latest art deco horns and yours is one of the earliest Big B horns. These are great horns; as I said at some point, even after quite a few years I still can't choose one over the other between this one and my 156, which makes it very difficult to part with either one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
88 Posts
THC400s are great but pricey. And speaking of forgetting about MK. VIs, I think those two horns sound similar anyway. I haven't liked the later 400s as much, and agree that a Big B would be a nicer instrument. I think the range just above the Big B is about the same horn without that famous B engraving. That might be the bargain.
 

·
SOTW Columnist, Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
23,681 Posts
THC400s are great but pricey. And speaking of forgetting about MK. VIs, I think those two horns sound similar anyway. I haven't liked the later 400s as much, and agree that a Big B would be a nicer instrument. I think the range just above the Big B is about the same horn without that famous B engraving. That might be the bargain.
Yeah, the 'range just above the Big B' is the script engraved 156; given it's the same horn as the Big B 156, it is definitely the bargain. But all the Aristocrat tenors from the series one, through the Big B, and up to and including the script 156s are a great bargain, imo.

I haven't forgotten the MKVI; mine is still my favorite overall, most of the time. The Bueschers definitely have a sound I like. Which two horns are you saying sound similar?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
Yes, that is what we've been referring to as 'script' engraving. Not sure where that term came from, it could as easily be called 'floral' or something like that. If you look at the silver plated horn on the right in the photo I posted just above your last post, you can see the same 'script' engraving on my 331,xxx 156.

So, as already mentioned (more than once), your script 156 is the exact same horn as the Big B 156, aside from the engraving.
Fwiw, the sn on my horn is 342,xxx and I remember reading somewhere that ii was built in '51.

So the "script" designation has to do with the Buescher name engraved?
 

·
SOTW Columnist, Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
23,681 Posts
So the "script" designation has to do with the Buescher name engraved?
I wasn't sure what it meant, but Tryptykon pointed out that the script designation might refer to font style (script) of the Buescher name in the engraving. That makes sense to me.

It appears that Buescher didn't always change the model horn when it used a new engraving, at least not in the case of the 156 Aristocrat, which had both the Big B and script engraving.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member, Forum Contributor 2015-
Joined
·
34,720 Posts
Regarding differences between Big B and TH&C: In my experience there are two significant differences, the left pinkie table, and the bow radius. The lack of resistance in notes that are affected by the bow is perceptible - the TH&C almost feels like a straight tenor in that regard. Once you play one, you will know just how much resistance exists in horns of the Selmer design with a tighter radius in the bow.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Maurosaxtenor

·
SOTW Columnist, Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
23,681 Posts
The lack of resistance in notes that are affected by the bow is perceptible - the TH&C almost feels like a straight tenor in that regard. Once you play one, you will know just how much resistance exists in horns of the Selmer design with a tighter radius in the bow.
Yeah Dr G, that lack of resistance is also apparent in the 156 Aristocrat; very apparent compared to my VI. I do kind of like the resistance in my VI. It's a 'good' kind of resistance. And the series one Aristocrat also has a bit more to 'push against' than the 156. Again, it's a matter of which Big B.

Maybe the TH&C has even less resistance than the 156? Not sure I'd like that, but many would.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Discussion Starter · #52 ·
I have read in other opinion forums, that the th & c has a shorter neck, and that affects the intonation a bit or makes it less friendly with some mouthpieces, does anyone know or have any experience about that? I have never heard or seen anyone complain about a th & c but I was curious to have read that.
 

·
SOTW Columnist, Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
23,681 Posts
I have read in other opinion forums, that the th & c has a shorter neck, and that affects the intonation a bit or makes it less friendly with some mouthpieces, does anyone know or have any experience about that? I have never heard or seen anyone complain about a th & c but I was curious to have read that.
I'd be very surprised if this were true in terms of the intonation. Bueschers of that vintage have very good intonation (for a saxophone)--at least the Aristocrats do--and are mpc friendly. Hopefully someone with more knowledge about the TH&C can chime in here (where's maddenma?).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,155 Posts
I have read in other opinion forums, that the th & c has a shorter neck, ....
The attached chart has measurements that maddenma and friends took of their 127, 155 and 156 tenors alongside my own measurements of my late '50s 400 TH&C B12. I can't say how the B12 measures up against an earlier B11.
 

Attachments

·
Distinguished SOTW Member, Forum Contributor 2015-
Joined
·
34,720 Posts
I have read in other opinion forums, that the th & c has a shorter neck, and that affects the intonation a bit or makes it less friendly with some mouthpieces, does anyone know or have any experience about that? I have never heard or seen anyone complain about a th & c but I was curious to have read that.
I had no intonation issues with my mouthpieces. As I recall, I was using a Lamberson J6 (0.100") and Phil-Tone Intrepid (0.105") at the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Maurosaxtenor

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Discussion Starter · #56 ·
Hello everyone, I stop by to tell you that I have changed my otto link stm # 9 for a Dukoff miami florida super power chamber D7. I haven't fully mastered it yet, but it's certainly brighter and more powerful, it has a more shrill timbre and crank that I like (so I think I'm on the right track), and it balances well with the sonic character of my Buescher TT which tends to be a sweet and centered dark sound, the bass may not be as smooth as the Otto but I think it is a matter of study, also the opening is smaller, so the emission, air force, and embouchure is more comfortable , I used soft # 2 reeds but it responds much better with # 3, it is not an easy mouthpiece to control, if I compare them, I would say that the Otto link is a ride horse, and the Dukoff is like a wild colt.
 
41 - 56 of 56 Posts
Top