![]() |
Tech
Topics:
Interesting Questions . . . |
![]() |
| Q.
Your current feature restoration caught my interest. My first, favorite
and still cherished sax is a similar alto, serial 309xxx. It's simply the
best model of alto I have ever played, and I've tried all I could. I'm
curious about your reference to the "early small bore version". Was there
a later larger bore and, if so, when was the date/serial number break.
I collect such trivia about these beasts but have never come across this
before. Keep up the good work. I really enjoy the site... the tech tips
are fascinating and your photos are referred to a "saxophone porn" around
my house. Regards, Mick.
A. Your 'sax porn' thought gave me a chuckle. I'm going to play off the concept a bit here & see where it goes. I'm not sure when the change in 400 designs occurred. Apparently it came very early. It involves the bell taper & tilt. The lip is expanded & (I believe) tilted slightly more horizontal in the later 400 Top Hats. See for yourself in the attached saxophorn (I'll leave the natural extension of that thought to your nimble wit & ample imagination). It appears that this early 400 design is more of a modified pre war Aristocrat. If you study the pre war Ari & 400 mechanisms you find that much of the keywork is the same. The main changes to the 400 mechanics were the underslung octave mechanism and the left, or back, bell linkage. Of course there are the cosmetic differences and bell reinforcement ring that make the two (Ari & Top Hat) look like completely different saxophones.
Cosmetics aside, these first 'small bore' 400s were not all that different than the pre war Ari. The original Ari bell always appeared to be overly narrow, but that was because it had a sort of 'shrunken' bell rim in relation to its bell bore (the Martin Comm I saxophones suffer from this same optical design quirk). It's apparent from this early 400 that Buescher started with the basic Ari design, added a few bells & whistles, then corrected the optical appeal of the Ari bell by flaring it somewhat. I've always believed that the metal ring was added as much as reinforcement for the wider, flatter bell flare as for sonic influence. I suppose the bell ring performs both functions, but I'll stick to my guns on WHY this design feature came about. A rounded, conical shape is a much stronger structure than a flatter piece of metal. The Buescher designers had to see that some bodacious bell bends were in the cards once their 400 bell was put into service. The ring would obviously serve to mollify a potential source of complaints. It's probably more accurate to call the small bore 400s a prototype (based on the pre war Ari) than accord them a true model distinction. Changes other than the bell that jump out in these comparative pictures are the different angle & shape of the left pinky spatula table, different right thumb rest, ribbon keyguards, and of course, the engraving. Let me know if you spot anything I've missed. Thanks for the though provoking, insight providing question... |
|||
|
While we're revealing Buescher 400 secrets, all of the saxophones Buescher called the '400' were not created equal. The true 'Top Hat' 400 will always have the intricate engraving and raised 'Buescher 400' script in sterling silver (that's unless the horn has suffered extreme buffing or other damage that pried the silver script loose, as in the 320k example pictured above). As you know if you've read our 'Ari' exposé referenced at the link above, though, Buescher also called several of its later model issues '400'. The true Top Hats ceased as a Buescher model in the high 350xxx s/n range (the latest I've personally seen is a 355k tenor that CS handled & sold in 2003), but for a very short time following the last true Top Hats a 400 model was made that is mechanically & structurally identical -- only without the extensive engraving & silver 400 script. I have only seen a couple of these cosmetically down graded 400s, so I suspect they are very few in number. What you are more likely to see is a 400 that appears much the same as a Top Hat, but lacks the underslung octave and silver bell reinforcement ring. There are also very few of these that maintain the 'back' bell tone holes and linkage, the more common 400 of the late 50s-early 60s period bearing little mechanical or cosmetic resemblance to the true Top Hat save the flared (and un-reinforced) bell. In the Buescher tenors of this immediate pre-Selmer period we see the Aristocrats and stencil Bueschers under the 'Aristocrat' moniker with the a bell flare & tilt resembling the famed 400 Top Hat tenors. It's not exactly the same, though -- the flare is not so nearly as wide. So by the time Selmer bought Buescher the 400 remained in name only. All the distinctive 400 featured had been eliminated one-by-one, and the mechanics reduced to the very simple design of the late 1920s (modified slightly to accommodate two left bell holes for low B & Bb) that we mistakenly refer to as 'True Tone'. The actual Buescher model name for these instruments was 'The Buescher' ('True Tone' was a Buescher trademark that appeared for approximately 50 years -- even on the true Top Hats). While this tried & true Buescher mechanical system is rugged & dependable, it lacks the sophistication of the best pre war Aristocrats and the legendary, true 400 'Top Hats'. By the early 1960s there was little difference in the Buescher saxophones, regardless of the names that appeared on them. It's a sad ending for such legendary saxophone names as were the greatest of the Aristocrat and 400 lines. |
|
|
|
email CyberSax |