I haven't yet seen one of those Indian saxophones... so the worst saxophone was probably a Chinese one. Obviously a Selmer copy but repair-oriented ergonomics (e.g. reaching screws etc.) were awful. Here are some problems they had (I've seen several of this model):
- Pearls easily falling.
- Pearl holders falling when keys heated for removing pads (with an alcohol lamp!).
- Poor soldering of posts, neck socket easily desolders (seen several of that model with this issue), so overlal terrible soldering.
- Tiny pieces of some fabric used in pivot screw holes to "remove" play.
- Pivot screw very loose inside their posts.
- Keys bind when pivot screws are tight.
- Rod screws loose inside keys and posts.
- Keys bind when rod screws are tightened.
- Posts and/or post holes in wrong direction (i.e. a pivot screw will point at an angle).
- Terrible front/back alignment of key cups over tone holes, some "sealing" right on the edge.
- Some key parts extremely soft.
- Some key parts too hard.
- Bad design of key arms and other parts so adjustument is difficult (e.g. won't bend where it should but in the weaker part of the key, which shouldn't be weaker).
- Natural cork (at least looked like it) used everywhere for all linkage, which is squishy, can have too much friction, etc.
- Linkage and bumper materials poorly glued, can slide or fall off too easily.
- Linkages (eventhough it was a copy) are poorly designed, too much friction.
- Springs with nowhere near enough spring to them, especially the flat springs. Also bad length and thickness proportions.
- Very non-level and wavy tone holes.
- Bad quality pads, much too springy (especially with those tone holes).
- Terrible intonation, almost 1/4 tone sharp in the top range.
- Harsh and too aggressive tone (which is the least of the problems).
I haven't seen many Chinese saxophones as bad as this. Really terrible ones are mostly older ones or only a few newer ones. Most of the newer ones are much better. Actually another with an identical name to the worst one (no model names or numbers) is one of the better Chinese saxophones I've seen. Just looking at it you can see a compeltely different design.By the way, I recently found some of the problems described above on a $8,500 professional instrument.......
It's also common to find many of these problems on models like Conn 20M/24M and even Bundy II, so they are probably a not-too-far-behind second.
Re the issue mentioned of not enough glue behind the pads to float, I found this is the case with most professional model saxophones too (not I like to float pads so often, prefer not to unless I have to, but the glue does need to hold the pad securely with no air gaps).
The worst clarinet was most likely the old Russian clarinet I turned into a lamp. It wasn't even good enough to use for parts. It didn't have many of the issues this bad saxophone had, but I'm choosing it because it was the worst in terms of value for saving... not worth the slightest, cheapest repair.
The best... hard to say. I remember a Yangisawa 992 soprano that was a dream compared with the Selmer SIII soprano I saw just the day before. I remember a Yanagisawa 991 alto that was also really nice. I guess that's what I'd choose as the best, but even those had some issues. I don't remember any sax without any issues really. Mark VI and some old models (like Conn) have some things that are nicer than Yangisawa. But I guess overall I'd still choose the Yangisawa.
Sometimes you find relatively well made expensive models and then you see the most whacky design flaw or a really terrible choice somewhere...
Some of the old instruments obviously had a lot of thought into them. Working on a Conn Transitional now. In some ways it is better made than many of the better instruments made today. For its time, it's better made. But in many ways it's worse too, including things obvioulsy made this way at the factory. Same for other old companies, really nice for its time, in some ways even better than current made instruments, but too many issues still.
So it's hard to choose.
The best made clarinet is hard to choose too... I guess an Eaton is a contender. This is what I play and it is well made in many ways and has some design features I like, but it does have issues too. I have no idea what Steve is talking about the Eaton using rod screws instead of pivot screws. My Eaton is exactly the same as my Buffet in terms of which keys have rod screws and which have pivot screws. Maybe other Eaton models are different, with more rods, like the old B&H, which I consider a disadvantage in some ways.
Very few clarinets I've seen had a good design of bridge key and linkage keys. I think the best one I've seen was a Selmer, but it had too many other issues...
but with a B extension