Professional Horns

[pete]

A couple of CEs were discussing this in the s00per sekrit staff forum (yes, we're talking about you, there).

What makes a horn "professional"? Well, I think there's at least three ways of looking at it:

* It's called "professional" by the company that makes it. I think this is fairly weak. A Monique professional saxophone doesn't play anywhere near as good as a Yamaha 23 student saxophone.

* It's the best horn made by a particular company. This is a little less weak of an argument, if you think about it, but it's not that strong of an argument, either: is your DC Pro professional model any better than my YAS-23? Nope.

* It's "professional quality". Let's run with this. Also take a look at the discussion of vintage vs. old at http://woodwindforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=12921#post12921

Again, using the Monique professional horns from a few years back (I can pick on them because they're out of business under that name), you had a horn that had poor intonation, poor mechanics and poor build quality. However, "poor build quality" needs definition.

In the case of the Monique, you had a very fragile instrument made with very soft brass, as reported by a repair tech who tried adjusting a rod and ended up bending the entire lower stack, toneholes that weren't level, bits o' metal left from punching things out of molds and not sanding them down, pieces that wouldn't fit right, etc., etc. However, it's rare that you'll find a horn with all -- or even most -- of these flaws.

What some people do is try to compare a horn from one company to a horn from another company and that's really not fair. A Martin Magna is every bit of a professional saxophone as a Selmer Mark VI; a Yamaha YCL-71 is every bit of a professional clarinet as a Buffet R-13. You're comparing apples to grapes and some people prefer grapes to apples and vice-versa. I think you can say the same thing about comparing eras: a 1952 Selmer Centered Tone is as professional as a 2010 Selmer Privilege. Is a 1926 Conn New Wonder sax as good as a 2010 Yamaha YAS-23? Not in my opinion, but the New Wonder isn't any less professional for being made 90 years earlier!

Other people say that horns from a particular country aren't professional. That's also weak: a 1926 Keilwerth Soloist sax made in Czechoslovakia is as much a pro horn as a 1926 Selmer Modele 26. I'm hearing a LOT about this in regard to Taiwanese and Chinese horns.

Other people say that a professional horn is one that's played by professional players or endorsed by a certain person. If that's true, than my Yamaha YCL-34 clarinet is professional, as I used it in professional settings for years. Same with my YAS-23 and YBS-52. HOWEVER, I can say that, while I used these horns in a professional setting, I knew that Yamaha did have other clarinets and saxophones that DID play better, thus those were "pro quality" and mine weren't -- even though they were very, very good.

So, what's the true meaning of "professional horn"? If it's just "has a good tone" and "has good intonation", you're saying that every Yamaha model clarinet and sax they currently produce is professional quality. Same if you include "good keywork".

So, what do you think? How do you define "professional horn"?

 

[Gandalfe]

For saxophones and to seed the topic I would hope the pro instrument might have most of the following:

• Has the keyworks low Bb (or A for bari) to palm key high F# (G on some sopranos)
• Fit and finish is clean without blemishes
• Has no rough edges on keyworks/rests (one student horn required the user to wear a bandaid because of a rough cut plastic thumbrest
• Has no more that plus or minus 10 cents adjustment necessary on more than two notes (this effectively knocks out the Selmer Mark VI?)
• Adjustment screws for many of the common adjustments need to be make on a horn
• Adjustable right thumb rest
• Ergonomical keyworks

For clarinets I would hope some of the following would be included on a professional quality horn:

• Two barrels
• Alternate Eb pinky key
• Fit and finish is clean without blemishes
• Has no rough edges on keyworks/rests
• Has no more that plus or minus 10 cents adjustment necessary on more than two notes
• Adjustment screws for many of the common adjustments need to be make on a horn
• Adjustable right thumb rest
• Ergonomical keyworks

 

[MartinMods]

A good percentage of known professionals use/used them.

 

[Carl H.]

For clarinets I would hope some of the following would be included on a professional quality horn:

• Two barrels
• Alternate Eb pinky key
• Fit and finish is clean without blemishes
• Has no rough edges on keyworks/rests
• Has no more that plus or minus 10 cents adjustment necessary on more than two notes
• Adjustment screws for many of the common adjustments need to be make on a horn
• Adjustable right thumb rest
• Ergonomical keyworks

Hmm, my SML and Marigaux each have one barrel, one Eb, few adjustment screws and a fixed thumbrest. Come to think of it my Buffet A clarinet has those same features too. My asian made student A clarinet has most of those features from the pro list other than the Eb.

The SML, Marigaux and Buffet are top of the line pro instruments each over 40 years old. The Asian A is a decent intermediate/student instrument less than 10 years old. With an old Buffet barrel the asian plays quite nicely, and even has an ergonomic LH Bb/register key, but it isn't a pro horn by anybody's standards.


I think this question is like the art vs porn discussions. You know what you are looking at, but what is the real difference? Listing attributes is not the best way to make the decision, but what is?

If I had paid $1700 for the student A would that make it more pro than if I got it for $100?

 

[hakukani]

For me, the word 'pro gear' in general means built to last and will continue operate properly in the least desirable environment.

 

[Carl H.]

For me, the word 'pro gear' in general means built to last and will continue operate properly in the least desirable environment.

So no wooden clarinets are pro gear.

I picked up the asian A clarinet (hard rubber) for the climate here, so I didn't have to subject my regular A clarinet to the thermal stresses associated with performing in MN in the winter and summer.

 

[hakukani]

So no wooden clarinets are pro gear.

I picked up the asian A clarinet (hard rubber) for the climate here, so I didn't have to subject my regular A clarinet to the thermal stresses associated with performing in MN in the winter and summer.

You need two of the usual wood instruments. A resin oboe for outside playing, for sure.

 

[Carl H.]

So no wooden clarinets are pro gear.

I picked up the asian A clarinet (hard rubber) for the climate here, so I didn't have to subject my regular A clarinet to the thermal stresses associated with performing in MN in the winter and summer.

You need two of the usual wood instruments. A resin oboe for outside playing, for sure.

I just picked up a cheap electric violin for certain gigs. The whole thing was just over the cost of a set of strings for a professional violin. I will only play this instrument when being paid.

I think maybe a "soloist quality" instrument might be easier to define than a professional instrument, but we still have outdoor concerts to throw into the mix.

 

[tictactux]

"professional" is a marketing buzzword, in my opinion. One usually gets what one pays for, within a certain bandwidth. So-called "pro" instruments have more workman hours in them than a student instrument, which explains the difference in look, feel and price.
And only a "pro" will be able to justify (before the Missus, for example) the cost of a "pro" instrument. For everyone else it'd be "for thy level of playing, any old student instrument is good enough" or thereabouts. :tongue:

I have just two criteria:
- like (tone, feel, looks, ...)
- can afford.
I don't really care what in what "class" my choice is.

 

[clarnibass]

Sorry but Gandalfe's list is random.

MartinMods reason can make sense, but there are some models that I absolutely consider professional but can't think of more than a few if any who play them, other than local players I know. These can be even better players sometimes than known players, but... So "known" is problematic to say.

In addition professional is a problematic term. Think of professional players, there are some that are not very good. There are excellent players that are not really professional in that they don't really work as players or only very little.

Re the Yamaha 23, they can play great and for those who like their specific tone and feel they can be better than some professional models. But they are made with several mechanical problems which IMO prevent them from really being a professional model. Yamaha prove they can make instruments without those problems, so obviously it is a cheaper manufacture process and quality control that make these a student model.

 

[Steve]

A couple of CEs were discussing this in the s00per sekrit staff forum (yes, we're talking about you, there).

as opposed to the s00per-dooper sekrit staff forum ?

I recall several years ago (I think 6) I played a Kessler intermediate tenor sax.
It played flawlessly. The keywork was pretty good .. synthetic bumpers gave the key rebound a weird feel (instead of felt). The horn case looked like an alto and weight felt like an alto but there was a tenor inside? made me wonder if this was a Bb tenor but 1/2 octave higher for decreased size and weight.

Played easily top to bottom but simply didn't have anything special to the tone. It was cheap for a tenor back then and a great learning instrument. Certainly not pro.

But when the asian makers came along they were touting their instruments were copies of Selmer this or that model. they looked it too.

But i'm curious if they were exact copies or not - i'm talking tone holee placement and size etc ..... something i'm not planning on looking into at any time.

But the clarinet world is different from the sax world. (some) Student and intermediate clarinets cater towards players with smaller fingers. not that adults and pros can't play them but there are specification differences other than selection of wood, keywork options, etc.

But Yamaha clarinets seem to have higher manufacturing qualities even for their low instruments - such as smooth polishing and buffing of the underside of the keywork. Which sometimes is lacking in pro instruments.

But I sure do miss my Antigua 582LQ 1 piece soprano sax ..... a Yani copy and a low cost one at that.

 

[Steve]

Again, using the Monique professional horns from a few years back (I can pick on them because they're out of business under that name), you had a horn that had poor intonation, poor mechanics and poor build quality. However, "poor build quality" needs definition.

In the case of the Monique, you had a very fragile instrument made with very soft brass, as reported by a repair tech who tried adjusting a rod and ended up bending the entire lower stack, toneholes that weren't level, bits o' metal left from punching things out of molds and not sanding them down, pieces that wouldn't fit right, etc., etc. However, it's rare that you'll find a horn with all -- or even most -- of these flaws.

The Monique is a fine example of what a "pro" instrument isn't. but then was it marketed to the Pro player or the student player?

would a youngster like to buy a "Pro" instrument that was labeled as such but with a lower price tag ? Did the manufacturing company think it actually was a pro instrument based on their experience, or lack of in the industry ? or were they after gathering as much profits in as little time as possible ?

We shall never know. but the market has told them that it is not a pro instrument and thus they either have disappeared or changed their name and product.

 

[Helen]

A couple of CEs were discussing this in the s00per sekrit staff forum (yes, we're talking about you, there).

What are you talking about? This is the first I heard about this. How come I don't have privileges for it? ;-) Do you talk about me in there too? Nah, you probably talk about me in the "other" one. The s00per-dooper sekrit staff forum Steve mentioned. I can only imagine what you say.

All joking aside, when I mentioned the idea of having a list checklist for pro-horn criteria to the other CE/Admin staff, my reasoning was simply: I thought it could be a handy tool for younger, or less experienced players, to look at when considering a new, or new-to-them (collectively referred to as "new" for the rest of this post) horn purchase. I think that the world of buying a new horn is very murky indeed. One person's/company's intermediate model is another's pro model. One person's/company's intermediate model is another's student model.

Even as a person who has been playing sax for over 20 years, I'm sometimes confused by the current crop of new Asian horns. When I have students show me their horns, I'm scratching my head trying to figure out am I looking at an intermediate level sax, or a pro model? Years ago it was much easier when a student gave me the horn they bought at a yard sale and asked: "So tell me, what did I buy?" Now I often have to say: "I don't know of the top my head." I have to play it; examine it; and finally research it. And even then, I sometimes think the answers I get are pretty subjective.

BTW, I agree with clarnibass when he said that Gandalfe's list is random. (But then Gandalfe was just generating discussion. That's why I'll forgive his Mark VI comment. :tongue: ) For example, a sax doesn't need a high F# key to be a pro horn. The modern Selmer Flamingo Reference series proved that. They have been the best selling limited edition Bird series to date. I also think a bari doesn't need a low A. Keilwerth still makes low Bb baris in their pro-line.

There, you see. There's a sax that can easily be identified as "pro". But why? That's what I was trying to ascertain when I suggested that we take a stab at unravelling what makes a "pro horn" a "pro horn".

 

[SOTSDO]

As far as I can recall, Selmer does not ship its top of the line clarinets with two barrels. If they do now, they didn't in the past. None of my old "professional" (as in custom made by Selmer to fit my Series 9 horns) cases have openings for more than one barrel per horn.

One thing has always puzzled me about creating excellent whatever objects, be they cars or musical instruments. The base patents on (say) the Selmer Mark VI are expired long time passing. What that means is that any schmuck with some metalworking skills and the appropriate materials could go out and purchase one of the things, take down the dimensions on same, and then hammer out a replica that (minus the Selmer logos) was perfectly within the laws of this land.

From my limited knowledge of the "new" brands, this has been attempted in the past with varying degrees of success. However, I would imagine that these "new" Mark VI clones are rough around the edges and still not the equal of a Selmer product. Still, it seems that they could succeed.

Or not. Bear in mind that Toyota and GM entered into a joint venture back in the 1980's, this to make Toyota Corolla clone in a plant in California. What ultimately was produced was a Star Motors Nova, which was nothing more than a Corolla without any of the quality or style of the Japanese product.

Cloth seats? Nah, plastic was good enough for the US market. Tachometers and temperature gauges? Nope, idiot lights are just as good. Clearcoat on the exterior paint? No, three coats of color is all that we'll give you.

Despite these advantages in cost savings, the 'new Nova' sold at the same price point as the imported Japanese product. Any wonder why it was less successful in the US market?

I don't really care who makes my horns, as long as they suit me. What I'd really like to have is full Boehm Recitals and a modern keywork bass clarinet done in the Recital mould. Whoever produces that lineup will get my money, regardless of the name on the upper joint.

 

[pete]

A couple of CEs were discussing this in the s00per sekrit staff forum (yes, we're talking about you, there).

as opposed to the s00per-dooper sekrit staff forum?

What are you talking about? This is the first I heard about this. How come I don't have privileges for it? :wink: Do you talk about me in there too? Nah, you probably talk about me in the "other" one. The s00per-dooper sekrit staff forum Steve mentioned. I can only imagine what you say.

The s00per-d00per sekrit one is exactly as you mention, Helen, and you don't have privs because your name isn't Jim, Ed or Pete .

Considering that I have more rights than anyone except Ed, I know Jim and Ed don't have one that talks about ME, but Jim doesn't know if there's one that Ed and I have to talk about HIM .

-------------

Anyhow, I'm definitely glad to see all the posts in this thread, because trying to determine what is a "professional" instrument is really iis a problem for a lot of players. There are a lot of folks in high school, for instance, that talk about "upgrading" their horns for college or professional gigs and ... a lot of them don't NEED an upgrade.

Using the Yamaha saxophone example, the 52/34/32 series is just slightly different than the 62 professional series -- and I have seen a lot of students with 52/34/32 horns. You don't need to upgrade to a 62; your horn is more than good enough for college. If you really, really want to ignore what I said, skip the 62 and go to the 875 or 82z Custom lines or try a pro horn from a different company because you aren't going to gain much by going to that 62.

===========

While not trying to pile on Jim, I do think his list is a bit off, as many folks have mentioned (sorry!). I can definitely accept that if you're looking for a professional modern sax or clarinet, it should have some, if not all, of the features that Jim mentions, just because. However, some of those features I've never needed or even desired. Two barrels? Nope. I played in good tune with just one on my Centered Tone. Adjustment screws? Didn't need 'em on my Buffet Dynaction and that horn played great. F#/G? Well, I think that soprano sax players might need/want them, but if you have to pay an inordinate premium for those, why bother? (Also, us bari players rarely get that high, anyhow.) Etc.

Using a car analogy, if you've determined that a Mercedes is the best car out there, but it doesn't have a Zune dock, that doesn't mean that the 1972 Pinto I'm selling that DOES have a Zune dock is a more "professional quality" car?

 

[Steve]

I think one area that we have ignored is what do the long lived manufacturers think is pro quality ?

Apparently Yamaha has their own definitions.
They have student, intermediate and pro instruments (flutes, clarinets, saxophones, trumpets, french horns, etc)
Can we disseminate the differences in the horn (ignoring if we think they are important, because they apparently do think it's an important quality)

Why does Selmer Paris only make pro instruments ?
Why does Selmer USA (we're talking the "Selmer" label only, make beginner and intermediate instruments with the Paris being the pro. But, on the other end have their Bach trumpets competing against Selmer Paris trumpets ?

Keilwerth (Pro and intermediate), Yanigasawa (with Entry Pro and Pro), Buffet (beg, int, pro), etc


and is there a s00per-double-dooper sekrit staff forum ?

 

[Carl H.]

and is there a s00per-double-dooper sekrit staff forum ?

Yes, but no staff, CE's, or founders allowed!
It's where we talk about you in secret!

 

[jbtsax]

My definition of a professional player is one who makes a living by playing their instrument. They may have supplementary income from teaching and product endorsements, but the vast majority of their gross income comes from performing. Someone who plays gigs occasionally for money does not fit into this category.

That said, a "professional" instrument to me is one that is designed and built to satisfy the requirements of the most demanding professional players---the ones who earn a living by playing that instrument. Cost is often a determining factor as in the case of orchestral stringed instruments, flutes, oboes, bassoons, and tubas.

There are other instruments such as clarinets, saxophones, and trumpets that come in professional quality for under $3000. I am always chagrined when I hear someone complaining that $2400 is too much to pay for a top quality saxophone made in Taiwan, when the top of the line flute equivalent can be 5 times that amount.

John

 

[pete]

Why does Selmer USA (we're talking the "Selmer" label only, make beginner and intermediate instruments with the Paris being the pro. But, on the other end have their Bach trumpets competing against Selmer Paris trumpets ?

Simple answer: Conn-Selmer isn't Selmer (Paris). If you think of them as two completely separate companies -- which they are -- there's no reason to think that Conn-Selmer instruments will be anywhere near the quality of Selmer (Paris) instruments.

So much more to say! Gotta run, tho!

 

[pete]

I think one area that we have ignored is what do the long lived manufacturers think is pro quality ?

Apparently Yamaha has their own definitions.
They have student, intermediate and pro instruments (flutes, clarinets, saxophones, trumpets, french horns, etc)
Can we disseminate the differences in the horn (ignoring if we think they are important, because they apparently do think it's an important quality)

Keilwerth (Pro and intermediate), Yanigasawa (with Entry Pro and Pro), Buffet (beg, int, pro), etc?

Well, I can tell you about Yamaha and Keilwerth. They're easy, but they have WAY too many models.

I did a Yamaha sax break-down at http://woodwindforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2856. Never bothered with the clarinets (sorry!).

Keilwerth? They have the ST, EX, SX/CX and the SX-R. The ST is their student model made in ROC (Taiwan). The EX is the intermediate model allegedly wholly made by Amati. The SX is the pro model and the CX is an SX with a copper body. The SX-R is an SX with rolled tone holes. As the ST, EX and SX models are made by different companies, they're all very different horns. It's like comparing quartz to pyrite to gold: all different minerals but there's only one you want to put stock in.

Buffet's saxes are now all outsourced to Chinese or Taiwanese companies. Their clarinets are a mess of about a dozen models, but fortunately most are variations on a model (e.g. R13 or R13 Prestige).

The Yani 90x series vs. their 99x series strikes me very much as the Yamaha 52 vs. 62: very slight build differences, but no bore differences (as far as I'm aware, at least: feel free to correct me).

Why I'm mentioning these horns, particularly Yamaha's saxophones and Buffet's clarinets, is that you get to the "pro" levels of horns and there are all these variations on a theme: do you want a YAS-62, YAS-82Z or YAS-875EX? They're all fairly different horns with the common thread of being made by Yamaha (and having fairly similar keywork. They share other components, too, but I'm not going there). However, is a 62 any less a pro horn than the 82Z? Why? Is an R13 Prestige better than the stock R13? How 'bout Greenline?

===========

A good percentage of known professionals use/used them.

Again, if you use this definition, my YAS-23 is a pro horn. I also know pros that pull out Bundy horns for some things, and they have Bundys primarily because they were fairly cheap. You'd have to qualify your statement: "A good percentage of professionals I've heard of play as their main instrument that particular horn." In other words, a professional is defining what a professional horn is. And the folks you've heard of aren't necessarily the folks I've heard of. Hey, I can think of only a half dozen "big name" clarinet players, off the top of my head -- and the clarinet was my main instrument for a long while. Additionally, a couple of really big names (Charlie Parker, for instance) used the Grafton Acrylic Alto and THAT horn was intended as a cheap student instrument.

I think what this argument gets to is that professional horn players say that a particular instrument is a good example of an instrument that they'd want to play -- say, a Selmer Mark VI sax, a Buffet R13 clarinet or a Haynes flute -- and then we compare everything to it. I think that's unfair to vintage horns that ARE professional quality and don't fit that mold or to really new designs that are arguably better.

That brings us to Helen's comment about creating a checklist for what we want in a professional horn. This, however, is flawed because what I want isn't necessarily what you want AND how I play isn't necessarily how YOU play. Using saxophones as an example, a Selmer Mark VI may be perfect for me because it has acceptable intonation, great tone, pretty good keywork and has a low A (bari). It may not be acceptable for you because you're interested in something very sturdy, with great projection and keywork isn't a concern. Or maybe your mouthpiece setup is unique and you have no desire to change it and that setup only works really well with one kind of instrument (hey, I bet my Sigurd Rascher works GREAT on a Buescher).

FWIW, at one point I tried to make a checklist for NEW saxophones. I had to give it up because there were too many variables involved and there was a good bit of subjectiveness: is it good build quality? I dunno. I'd have to hold it and play with it and then give it to a competent tech for his evaluation. What are the sonic differences between the horns? Do I just chart the advertising hype? Does not havening a particular feature mean that we deduct points from its rating?

A lot of people will say that all of this is meaningless: go for a horn with the best tone and decent intonation. That, as we can see with what some other pro players look at in the above posts, is a very weak argument.