Sax on the Web Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Forum Contributor 2007-2012, Distinguished SOTW Te
Joined
·
3,314 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hey all, just finished up an overhaul on a horn of mine to put up for sale on my site, and thought I'd share a few pictures. Hope you've got a big screen.


IMHO, the Conn M-series horns are some of the most beautiful saxophones ever made. The shape of the pearls, the engraving, the mechanism, the horn itself- its just so gorgeous. While its hard to pick favorites, a few parts of the M series horns stand out to me.



The engraving. What a design. These horns are famous for their engraving, and with good reason. The design is clean, stylistic, memorable, and beautiful.



The left hand stack keywork. The shapes here just light up my reward centers. The pearls, when in good shape, are thick and super comfortable and the spacing is among the most comfortable found on any saxophone.




The left hand pinky table. When properly spaced and set up correctly, this design is comfortable, light, slick, and incredibly facile. If you think Conn M series pinky tables are hard to use, you've never used one that was set up right.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
1,552 Posts
My '48 10M is back from overhaul and on the road to replacing my beloved Chu as my main horn. Beautiful to behold and absolutely a joy to play!
 

·
Forum Contributor 2007-2012, Distinguished SOTW Te
Joined
·
3,314 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Can't believe I left the vintage out! This one is a 1940.

Yeah man, M-series horns are so good. Its nice because there are a lot of them with price points at several levels.

I've got a 1932 baritone that I am slowly working over in my spare (ha!) time, that one will be mine. I'm sorely tempted to keep this 10M- it plays amazing, and it would match! But I've got a Buffet SDA tenor that I've had a long relationship with, and I always go back.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,027 Posts
The one I had was an ugly beast and never like the way it felt, but it did have a great sound. I've always felt that the little brother, a 6M, is "the tenor player's alto".
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member/Sax Historian
Joined
·
7,107 Posts
That's not necessarily a good thing. The 6M suffers from a reputation that it is all power and no refinement. But my experience has been mostly the other way. (Note: I am primarily a tenor player, so YMMV!)

The Transitionals, especially, are capable of a highly refined tone and reliable intonation when you drop things down a notch. Yes, I always do hear a delicate edge to what is basically a round and limpid sound. It is never quite the primal, woody quality of a 1930s Buescher. But what is?

Conn's goal with the 6M, as they put it in their 1938 sax catalog, was a horn with "'sock' and reserve power, which responds with little effort when big volume is called for, or which can be throttled down to a whisper without losing its rich quality of tone."

Opinions 80 years out are going to differ on the success of any product or design. But I wonder how many criticizing 6Ms ever seriously played one.

They're pretty damn good looking, too.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
184 Posts
Your lady has bigger tits than mine does. She also looks unpleasantly surprised. Mine looks like she's high.

You're right about the pinky table getting a bad rap. Too many techs slop through the adjustments and overspring them to compensate.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
743 Posts
I have owned a 1968 10M that played superbly. I have also owned 1955 and 1957 6Ms, and they were great horns, too. I finally decided that too many great horns lay slumbering in my collection, rarely played. I sold them on to players who needed them, and though I miss them, they are now getting the play time they deserve. Suffice it to say that, if a late 6M and 10M were my only horns, I would be satisfied.
Sax Magic
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top