Untitled Document
     
Advertisement Click to advertise with us!
     

General Talk on the SX90, H-Couf and Modell Peter Ponzol

Steve

Steve

Clarinet CE/Moderator
Staff member
CE/Moderator
pete said:
Well, if you're trying vintage horns (you mention the Super 20) and the SX90 was close but not quite, you should try a Peter Ponzol model(l) Keilwerth or an H-Couf Superba (or the Keilwerth Toneking they were stenciled from). These (can) have real rolled tone holes, so its arguable that the construction of the SX90 vs. these models is substantially different.
....
Click to expand...

For altos, a buddy of mine (Ed Z) had a mid 1990s JK SX-90R and I had my Couf Superba 1. Mine had plastic domed resos and his metal domes resos. they weighed the same, looked the same etc (keep in mind, this is 2 techs looking 'em over). Of course there were keywork improvements (or de-improvements in some cases if you ask me) of the newer JK horn. But they were essentially the same. Tonally, they were also essentially the same, with minor differences that I related to the resonators. maybe the S1 was a tad bit more tonally complex, we're talking a small amount. That's for the altos, now the tenors were another story.

The SX-90 was designed to more directly compete with the Selmers of the day, vs the SX90R. They had a more cutting tone vs the SX90R which RTH supposedly stiffen the chimneys and body a bit thus giving it a darker and more spread tone. This info per an old Couf engineer. But decide on your own. either way the only detraction the vintage JKs had for me was the ergonomics. Supposedly now the new JKs have more of a Selmer ergo setup (bari from last year, alto /tenor from this year forward).
 
Re: My 6M-VIII vs Ref 54 vs PB(x2 maybe?)

SteveSklar said:
pete said:
Well, if you're trying vintage horns (you mention the Super 20) and the SX90 was close but not quite, you should try a Peter Ponzol model(l) Keilwerth or an H-Couf Superba (or the Keilwerth Toneking they were stenciled from). These (can) have real rolled tone holes, so its arguable that the construction of the SX90 vs. these models is substantially different.
....
Click to expand...

For altos, a buddy of mine (Ed Z) had a mid 1990s JK SX-90R and I had my Couf Superba 1. Mine had plastic domed resos and his metal domes resos. they weighed the same, looked the same etc (keep in mind, this is 2 techs looking 'em over). Of course there were keywork improvements (or de-improvements in some cases if you ask me) of the newer JK horn. But they were essentially the same. Tonally, they were also essentially the same, with minor differences that I related to the resonators. maybe the S1 was a tad bit more tonally complex, we're talking a small amount. That's for the altos, now the tenors were another story.

The SX-90 was designed to more directly compete with the Selmers of the day, vs the SX90R. They had a more cutting tone vs the SX90R which RTH supposedly stiffen the chimneys and body a bit thus giving it a darker and more spread tone. This info per an old Couf engineer. But decide on your own. either way the only detraction the vintage JKs had for me was the ergonomics. Supposedly now the new JKs have more of a Selmer ergo setup (bari from last year, alto /tenor from this year forward).
Click to expand...
The SX90R doesn't have rolled tone holes -- at least not like earlier Keilwerths or like your "classic" vintage Conn Standard. They have soldered-in tone hole rings. It's a distinct difference that Keilwerth and Peter Ponzol have both pointed out.

BTB, there used to be a "rule of thumb" that the Superba 1 had rolled tone holes and the Superba 2 didn't (or vice-versa; I forget). I've seen too many of each to with and without RTH to say that, particularly in bari and bass.
 
Re: My 6M-VIII vs Ref 54 vs PB(x2 maybe?)

pete said:
The SX90R doesn't have rolled tone holes -- at least not like earlier Keilwerths or like your "classic" vintage Conn Standard. They have soldered-in tone hole rings. It's a distinct difference that Keilwerth and Peter Ponzol have both pointed out.

BTB, there used to be a "rule of thumb" that the Superba 1 had rolled tone holes and the Superba 2 didn't (or vice-versa; I forget). I've seen too many of each to with and without RTH to say that, particularly in bari and bass.
Click to expand...

Yes, that is correct. I think in the early 100k serial numbers (like 103,k or something along that lines) they went to soldered on tone rings. Either way, there's a roll at the top of the chimney, and we could hear no appreciatable tonal variance due to it on the alto.

I still don't understand why they went to the hassle of creating a RTH "ring" then soldering it versus just doing it to the chimney as they already had the tooling ?

But from what little info I have is that it streamlined production based on supply and demand. All horns bodies were created as a SX - straight tonehole, and when there was demand they would make 'em into an SX-R (tone hole rings). Makes sense I guess, but did they keep unlacquered SX bodies just hanging around then ?
Did they create an inventory for potential demand, or fill orders on demand. makes you wonder about their profitability .... sounds like the old Buffet marketing plan of the 1980s

The Superba 1 had RTH, the Superba 2 did not
 
Re: My 6M-VIII vs Ref 54 vs PB(x2 maybe?)

SteveSklar said:
well the baris and sopranos did not have RTH .. but maybe some did. iwas talking about the altos and tenors above.
Click to expand...
Which begs the question, "Then why not call 'em 'Superba IIs'? There are Superba II baris, sopranos and basses."

FWIW, I do not have a picture of a Superba I bari, soprano or bass with RTH. However, these horns are identical to say, the Bundy Special stencil. And I've gotten e-mails from someone that owns a Bundy Special baritone. Let's see:

H&A Selmer imported an early version of this horn before it became a Couf. These were H&A Selmer Bundy Special horns. Visually identifiable by the RTH (Rolled Tone Holes) and 2 point Bow & Bell Guards with mostly plastic pant leg guards.
Click to expand...
I've no idea where that quote's from, but I've read it on the intarweb :p.

Altos and tenors, I agree with you, tho.

BTB, the Roxy and Voss aren't Keilwerths. They're Dorfler & Jurka. Keilwerth body, D&J keywork. And I have pics (somewhere) of at least one H-Couf Royalist made by ... Grassi.

The fun thing about Keilwerth is that I've asked them, directly, about their horns and they've given me conflicting or flat out incorrect information. However, the accurate information I've gotten from manufacturers has not been very high (hey, can you just say, "I don't know", manufacturer, and not make stuff up?).

My, we've managed to drag this offtopic, haven't we? I'll clean, later.
 
Re: My 6M-VIII vs Ref 54 vs PB(x2 maybe?)

pete said:
Which begs the question, "Then why not call 'em 'Superba IIs'? There are Superba II baris, sopranos and basses."

FWIW, I do not have a picture of a Superba I bari, soprano or bass with RTH. However, these horns are identical to say, the Bundy Special stencil. And I've gotten e-mails from someone that owns a Bundy Special baritone. Let's see:
Click to expand...

Yes but there are other minute differences other than the RTH between the Superba 1 and 2s .... an adjustable thumbrest, more elegant bell brace, MORE engraving AND an integrated neck socket lyre holder versus one just on the body. oh yeah, the neck octave lever is a square brass bar not just round rod ... okay .. i'm stretching now ...... looking around for some help ... :emoji_rolling_eyes:

on the bundy specials look at the bell lip roll. They take the metal and roll it around and then down the bell a bit further. The Superbas actually have a reguar bell lip roll. Also, from the few times i've had a bundy special in my hands and a regular JK/Couf, the JK/Couf felt substantially heavier - thicker gauge bodies ?? But it's been quite a few years, so take that with a grain of salt. I can't recall either what i thought of the keywork of the BS vs the JK/Coufs. was the bell straight of offset - on the the major design diffs between the earlier JK and the Couf/JKs was an offset bell - i can't recall where the BS horn stood.
 
The Bundy/Bundy Special (I really DON'T want to call it a "BS horn". People will get the wrong idea) are earlier horns, so the design is slightly different. And, you have to remember, they were marketed as a student line.

When you're talking about older Keilwerths, you have to look at consistency. They're much more custom than anyone really wants to say. A particular example is probably the DJH Modified horns. It's probable that Daniel J. Henkin didn't do all that much "modification" himself -- but there were a whole lotta DJH Modified models.
 
pete said:
The Bundy/Bundy Special (I really DON'T want to call it a "BS horn". People will get the wrong idea) are earlier horns, so the design is slightly different. And, you have to remember, they were marketed as a student line.

When you're talking about older Keilwerths, you have to look at consistency. They're much more custom than anyone really wants to say. A particular example is probably the DJH Modified horns. It's probable that Daniel J. Henkin didn't do all that much "modification" himself -- but there were a whole lotta DJH Modified models.
Click to expand...

The DJH horns were a bit nicer. they had the Selmer half moon octave lever and octave mechanism instead of the tear-drop though i have found examples of Coufs with that too. And the articulated Bb table key, and a few other minor things that I can't recall.

i wish they shifted the RH stack back then .....
 
The 108M, 110M, and 112M (A,T,B) DJH were much nicer as described (I have an 108M and a 110M...currently both for sale), but the 92M, 94M 96M were much more like the King Tempos.
 
IIRC, I had a few folks e-mail me that Keilwerth was a bit enthusiastic about tinkering with the DJH horns, particularly with the bell and bow. I don't see any reason not to think that they did the same with keywork.

I'm essentially saying that YMMV.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom