6M VII vs regular 6M

[Dauri]

How do these two almost identical looking models compare with one another. I've read on saxpics that the 6M VII models are better than the 6M. Is intonation an equally freequent promblem with both. Just curios because I have a 6M with some intonation problems

Thanks lady's and gentlman for your help please.

Dauri

[paulwl]

They're really pretty close in a lot of ways. The VIII neck doesn't fit on older 6Ms, so it's probably a re-tapered design. (Conn design plans, records, etc. were destroyed years ago.)

I find the VIII to be a little more "booting" and powerful, with a bit more edge, and more reliable in tuning - although the earlier (Transitional) horns are not at all bad for me! Maybe your horn isn't adjusted right, or you're not using a mouthpiece that suits you with it...what are some of your tuning problems?

[morgan]

On top of that - - they dropped the VIII designation in the mid 40s, so you have your pre-VIIIs and your post VIII

[paulwl]

I swapped necks on a 6MVIII and post-VIII one day in a music store - in fact I think I posted about it to alt.music.saxophone. (Remember usenet? How quaint. :wink:)

The VIII neck fit the post-VIII, leading me to "hypotheorize" that Conn simply de-branded the VIII neck, which it had already adopted as standard.

[paulwl]

The relevant alt.music.saxophone post (from 1998) is here: http://tinyurl.com/7jf5

[Hornlip]

That would make sense -- if it made the horn play better, why would they ever drop it? Of course, why would they ever stop making fantastic-sounding saxophones. . . . :x

[paulwl]

Fashion changes, economics, quality control problems...Still in all, the 6M in its basic form stayed in production for over 35 years. Not too shabby!

[Hornlip]

Oh, I know. Just griping. :roll:

On the other hand, though styles may change, style never changes to favor a worser-playing horn, so I wouldn't be surprised if your theory is correct!!

It is pretty amazing how long the 6M stayed in production. I've got two, a '34 and a '53. Pretty much the same horn, but very different eras. Actually, handling either of them, it's amazing how "modern" they feel, even taking the Mark VI into consideration -- to me the VI & the 6M feel similiar, in terms of having a farily heavy but quick, tight & precise action. I would bet Selmer looked very closely at the 6M in the early 30's before they started up the Balanced Action line.

In terms of a modern feel, there's certainly more difference between the Chu and the 6M than there is between a 6M and a Mark VI!!

[Hornlip]

Ahh, insomnia. :x I've just been comparing the necks on my '34 6M & my '53 6M. Some observations:

(1) The '53 neck (w/o micro-tuner) fits onto the '34 body snugly, but the octave mechanism on the '34 horn just barely touches the key-bar on the '53 neck.

(2) Looking inside the socket portion of the '53 neck, the inner sleeve is recessed maybe 1/8" deeper than the '34 neck. However, on each horn, the outer housing for the socket is exactly the same in depth and diameter.

(3) On each horn's body, the distance between the end of the body-tube and the ledge where the outside portion of the neck's socket sleeve comes to rest is 7/8".

(4) There is a line (formed by wear) on the inside of each horn body that shows exactly the extent to which the inner sleeve in the neck extends when inserted on the horn. On the '53 body, the line is 5/8" from the tip of the horn's body; on the '34 it is 4/8".

(5) The key bar on the '53 neck does not extend as far below the bottom of the neck-socket as it does on the '34 neck.

(6) When mounted, the angle in the '53 neck is much sharper relative to the body tube than on the '34. Further, the '53 neck seems to be 1/4" to 3/8" longer than the '34 neck (maybe more). Probably the lack of the micro-tuner on the '53 neck accounts for this.

Just adding to the info pool. . . .

[paulwl]

(1) The '53 neck (w/o micro-tuner) fits onto the '34 body snugly, but the octave mechanism on the '34 horn just barely touches the key-bar on the '53 neck.

(2) Looking inside the socket portion of the '53 neck, the inner sleeve is recessed maybe 1/8" deeper than the '34 neck. However, on each horn, the outer housing for the socket is exactly the same in depth and diameter.
Aaaarggg. Another beautiful theory slain by an ugly fact. Suppose they went back to the pre-VIII neck after all? Or somewhere in between? :?

[Hornlip]

Aaaarggg. Another beautiful theory slain by an ugly fact. Suppose they went back to the pre-VIII neck after all? Or somewhere in between?

Actually, I was hoping your theory was correct -- now I know for sure I'll have to seek out a VIII horn, just to check it out. And if I like it, I just might break down and buy it :?.

I don't know how they could have dropped the micro-tuner w/o making somewhat significant changes in the neck, & as I said earlier the two necks are substantially different in their angles relative to the body (I find the microtuner neck much more comforable to play). It could be that later 40's & early 50's 6M necks with the micro-tuner neck (and w/o the VIII stamp) were identical to the VIII necks, at least until Conn dropped the mirco-tuner in '53 or so. So your theory may be salvaged in part, with more research. Further, I didn't play either horn with the necks swapped, because it was 3:00 AM. So with the necks swapped they may sound like sonic mud.

[conn26m]

I have a Conn 26M alto, serial 270 xxx that has an unmarked (ie no stamps/ signs of alteration) underslung neck. It has no tuner fitted, and I am wondering if this is the original neck - does anyone know if 26m was offered with a non tunable underslung neck? I used to have a 6m alto, with a similar neck, and I cannot see much difference. Do you think this is the original? No signs of modification, plays in tune, laquer matches body - very dark laquer compared to modern saxes.

Appreciate advice/ info.

Frazer

[bruce bailey]

Mine has the underslung with no tuner. I know it is the original and the lacquer is lighter than most. It was only used about 1 year and I got it from the original owner.