Untitled Document
     
Advertisement Click to advertise with us!
     

The Beauty of Saxophones: Conn M-series Edition

Steve

Clarinet CE/Moderator
Staff member
CE/Moderator
when I saw that G# pic I saw the little arm was laying on top of that rod. and that rod was triangular in shape to lift the arm. Then I saw the rest of it .. quite an interesting solution there.

For me I could never get used to the perpendicular alignment of the table keys to the upper stack and the wide table keys. I do like the Martin's table keys though, the one similar to the mk VI soprano layout. but then I think Selmer got it right in the early 1900s with their layout (and Buffet, JK).
 

pete

Brassica Oleracea
Staff member
Administrator
> but then I think Selmer got it right in the early 1900s with their layout (and Buffet, JK).
In other words, it looked good on a clarinet -- Selmer didn't make saxophones until 1922 ....

:p
 
Thanks, clear now. So it seems they improved the linkage in one way but added other compromises instead. The older type linkage could be improved pretty easily by shaping the linkage arms differently, without adding new compromises.

Where the hinge rods are close together and the mating levers so short, this mechanism provides pretty much optimal energy transfer, if the cams are shaped just right. They work exactly like the teeth of meshing gears, sliding over each other as they rotate. Friction is the biggest problem here.

I have now started mounting LH table key hinge rods on much taller posts, which improves the pinky cluster angle/position to optimal, puts all 4 axii of rotation on the same plane (spatula motion is as evenly "up/down", as possible), and the mating G# levers are longer, and point of contact adjustable, similar to modern mechanisms. Picts in a couple of days.
 
Top Bottom