Ok, Nerding out on the gear stuff. What can I say? It's a fun thing to do therefore a good thing. Maybe someone curious about these rare gems can decide a bit more clearly if they want to try one out or not by reading this little article.
So first off, what is the purpose of a "B" horn, or backup horn? Well, my "A" horn, which is my well loved '36 Buescher Aristocrat, is in the shop at KB Sax getting a tuneup. It has some leaks and I want to take the best care of it as possible. I hate being without that horn. It inspires me to have ideas whenever I pick it up. Bueschers in general do that, something about the sound makes me hear things and reach for them. But alas, I need the work done and I'm without it.
Those aren't expensive horns. I could buy another one easily but, I can't deal with 2 of the same. Why bother? They would still behave differently and it would create still more confusion.
I had 2 Elkharts from that same era in the last 2 years. Both were great and just similar enough with that small bell flare and nice sound. Not as rich but still nice. Stencil horns can be like that...
And the last 2 pics are of the Elkhart necks: The silver one was wonderfully modern with that comfortable upturned thing going on. The other was your classic Elkhart/Bundy/Buescher stencil. Both were original to the horns, a lot of experimenting at the Elkhart plant apparently.....
The trouble with these Elkhart horns is... well, in a pinch when I need the money, is they sell so easily. Best horn I can ask $800 for period. We're talking about the small bell ones from the 30's, not the later ones. These early ones had nice heavy brass and a better sound. Sold the first one to a great player who needed it for his jump blues gig, the second to another great player who was vintage curious and played on a Yamaha for 20 years.
So a "B" horn should for me be closer in tone to my "A" horn, but one that I can lose my ass on if I sell it? Sounds like a plan mate!
I do have a Conn 10M that is really good. But it's what I call a more "cold toned" horn. It's brash and big, loud as can be and of course can ballad it out beautifully, but the Buescher is just a "Warm toned" horn. 10M is a black and white photo, Buescher is a Cyanotype or Sepia photo. I love my 10M in a section on a mic, but I can hear my Buescher better and I love the way it barks to the back of the room.
So let me introduce to you a horn that is worth no money..... the Holton 213 Revelation:
This was Holton's flagship in 1937. Not much information is available on these gems as they made so few and garnered so little respect it seems. My first saxophone was a Holton Collegiate I bought from a friend for $200. It was a great place to start. There is a record with me playing on it out there, couldn't play well then but the tone I got was pretty damn good.
This tenor popped into my life this week on the cheap. It needs work but plays down to Bb well enough. My initial impressions were this: Nice sound but, oh effing no, right about A2 everything goes wicked sharp. Holton and their reputation for poor intonation and I just lost money on a wall hanger. Idiot!
But then I fixed the octave mechanism (upper stack rod needed cleaning and oiling plus one weak spring) and adjusted the funny tuner neck:
Where the tuner thing meets the neck, everything is skinnier than average. I backed off that bit and voila..... pitch locks right in. Now I can give it a real go.
Gotta say, while I don't think this horn has the power of my other 2, I really find the tone immediately likable. It's so warm. Probably warmer than my Buescher. Definitely sepia toned! My Buescher is more Cyan. This horn just has a beautiful voice. What does it remind me of? Immediate West Coast Cool. I want to play Prez, Giuffre, Getz..... What horn does it remind me of the most? I had a Selmer Super Sax from 1930 that sounded very much like this one. It had this pretty high end to it, great mids. This one is much like that horn but with better pitch and a bigger low end. I sold that horn to the chagrin of my band (they loved it, I didn't) cause I couldn't lock in that low end tuning and I'm addicted to the American bottom. This horn so far has both.
This one will be a project for me to learn how to re-pad a horn. It needs it. It's a decent candidate partly cause it has those brazed on tone holes which appear to be more level than most. And there is no body damage.
So what about Holton's key work? I almost bought a Holton Baritone from the 20's last year cause it was cheap, in tune (believe it or not!) and had a huge, belligerent tone when pushed and a beautiful voice when sub-toned. That would have set me back $550 case and all. But the key work was effing awful. No, I mean really bad. I can't imagine them selling any. Our hands haven't evolved at all in thousands of years. How did they mess that up so badly????
But by this point they got it together. It feels just as good/bad as any American horn. It's more fluid than my Buescher, my 10M is just plain fast. Like I said, the octave key is goofy but we'll see if that can be sorted out. I think it can.
The low Eb and C keys have a nice angle to them, something Buescher didn't get to for another few years and Conn never got to. The right hand is really comfortable.
The G# cluster is much like a Conn New Wonder series 1 from 1921 or so. Nothing offensive. I work better with these types of clusters. G# is not articulated, which I like too. The palm keys are far better than either my Conn or Buescher. They nailed that! No need for risers!!!!
And I love the design of the key guards. Classy high ball styling!
The engraving is lovely. And odd. A carry over from the Jazz Age, more Art Nouveau, less Art Deco:
Where this horn wins it beauty. This is the prettiest horn I think I've ever seen and it may be one of the prettiest horns I've ever heard. The lacquer has a gorgeous copper color to it. The keys appear to be silver plated but with a thin coat of the same lacquer over it, thin enough so that it's see through creating a striking presence. It's hard to tell if that is the color of the lacquer or whether that's the color of the metal. The neck has lost most of it's lacquer revealing the metal which shows it to have a high copper content. Very red brass.
I won't know how it sits with a band until I try it with the group, but that'll have to wait until it's fixed up and my Buescher is back in the shop.
People have referred these as a "Poor man's Conn". No. I don't buy that. And, Conn's aren't expensive at all, not even a good one if you don't need a pretty one. This horn does not have that big Conn sound, it has it's own unique thing going on that is worthy of a try if you like old horns. It's got good guts, which I need, and it's got that warmth that I really need. I think it's a good match to my Buescher. Every bit as inspiring to play. And if I fix it up and try to sell it, I'm likely to lose my ass on this one so that is a plus!!
One thing I'm really starting to like is the high register. On my Buescher it's a chameleon. I can get a close approximation of a wooden flute up there. That's difficult to achieve on my Conn. It's easy on this Holton. Of course some folks are like: "well why would you want that? My sax needs to sound like a sax!!!" to which I say thank God I'm not you and you're not me. We all like different things. The sax is one of the most flexible instruments in this world. I've gotten human voice tones from my Buescher, and of course, when I want to sound like a sax I do, it is after all, a sax right?
One wonders why Holton saxes never caught on the way the "big 4" did. Was it advertising? Or lack of hype? Or was it what Buffet did which was make the best clarinets in the world and let Selmer make the best saxes. Holton made superior trombones and other brass instruments already so why do too much? Really, that makes total sense to me. But I'm glad they did. It makes the world of old saxophones that much more diverse and interesting.
JB
No comments:
Post a Comment