Question:
What IS it?

And what's with that weird alternate D# key on the bow?

Answer:
The alternate D#/Eb is common to horns of that era, but that neck is truly weird.

Answer:
Originally Posted by Super 20 Player The alternate D#/Eb is common to horns of that era, but that neck is truly weird.
Aside from Martin's Handcraft Standard, I've not seen anything resembling that key on any other model. Do you know of any others?

Answer:
:shock: Looks pretty clear someone got creative with a bass clarinet neck and fashioned themselves a tenor neck from it and another neck.
I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole! I imagine the intonation is ALL over the place.

Answer:
Somebody has actually bid 1G on it :shock: Any of the sax historians out there know the story on this beastie?

Answer:
Originally Posted by wind_mill Originally Posted by Super 20 Player The alternate D#/Eb is common to horns of that era, but that neck is truly weird. Aside from Martin's Handcraft Standard, I've not seen anything resembling that key on any other model. Do you know of any others? Sorry, I didn't look closely enough. You're right - that's not the standard pre-1930 forked-Eb key. Don't know what that is. Sure is an odd duck.

Answer:
I thought the neck looked like something from a bass clarinet too. However, I believe the person who made that neck could have made a standard tenor neck as well, or much more easily modified a standard tenor neck from another horn. This is a work of art, not a hack job at all. It is intentional, not some weird workaround for lack of a standard neck. It is made of brass, it is tapered toward the mouthpiece end and has a different curve, and it has a microtuner and an underslung octave key and a neck screw on the double-socket "tenon". I think this had to have been made at a factory. The SN information the seller provides does suggest the horn was made by Conn, but beyond that, I don't see any resemblance ......

Answer:
It's a 10M from a very desirable vintage. The neck is unidentifiable, probably some kind of home-built. This horn with a legitimate aftermarket neck could probably be a screamer.

Answer:
Onyx, ya gotta look at more than the bell-key guards... definitely not a 10M, this thing.

Answer:
OK, so the neck is either a custom or factory job, well done either way. The real question is, WHY? Different tone? Better response? An experiment gone wrong? Does anybody know this hobbito fellow? Maybe he knows something we don't. I have never heard of something like this, it just might be a good collector's piece. Wonder if Pete has ever seen anything like this in his experience. Anyway, I think it looks cool, and may try contacting the bidder. I'll keep everybody posted.
Bariman

Answer:
I have some experience with custom designed necks of less than conventional shape...and the experiences are not good.
I think this is a repariman's experiment; the work looks like someone who had a horn without a neck and fiddled around with a bass clarinet neck he had laying around, and made it a functional, for-sale item.
I am interested, but no way would I plunk down any sheckels for it until I could play it extensively.

Answer:
The neck looks like a tenor neck that was changed, perhaps to fit the person who originally owned it more ergonomically. Personally, I can't believe that the intonation or at the very least the tone of the instrument wouldn't suffer greatly.
As for hobbito- I have seen him around on ebay, seems to bid on worthwhile stuff, and looking at his feedback seems like he gets stuff at a pretty good price usually. So....
:?:

Answer:
abad,
Sorry, but that is most certainly not a tenor neck. It is a modified bass clarinet neck. It looks like some parts from a sax neck were used on it however....

Answer:
I don't know... I think I have to differ with you on this one. The receiver, the screw, and the microtuner all appear to be the same brass as the neck. the length, taper and look of the brass make it seem to me to be the original neck that was bent. Plus, wouldn't a bass clarinet neck be way too short, and we would be able to see where another piece of tubing was added?

Answer:
The seller doesn't seem to be very knowledgeable of these things, and in this case, I'm not even sure what sort of questions I could pose to help identify this strange horn.
If the neck turns out to be some mutation from a bass clarinet, I will not be that surprised, although there is no reason for anyone to fit a bass clarinet neck to a tenor sax. But, the existence of that unusual alternate D# tonehole on the inside curve of the bow seems to suggest this was all an experimental horn, not just the neck. At first glance, the bell guards screamed 10M. The 16M-style LH spatula begs to differ. These are cosmetic novelties, but the extra D# tonehole is a design slam-dunk.
Hobbito may frequent SOTW, I dunno. He's in Australia, been buying up about every quality Conn or Martin on ebay lately. He must know something about this one, as his first bid immediately topped the reserve, even tho' the starting price was $300. Saxquest (Mark Overton) also seems interested in the horn, judging from his posted query.
In any case, quite a curiosity, this horn.

Answer:
wind_mill...you called it. All I saw was the left hand bell keys and automatically jumped to 10M.
Looking at it a little more, I think M247,xxx would make this a tranny horn...I believe 10Ms as we know them started somewhere in the low 260s. Looking at the horn closer, the pinky cluster looks like it could be a Buescher Aristocrat, but that would not jive with the serial numbers...or would it?

Answer:
Wow, just over 2,000 USD! A real collector's piece I guess.
Bariman

Answer:
I think the neck was re-curved to suit the player. Charles Bay has done this with Bass Clarinet necks so the mouthpiece is tilted down (like a Bb Clarinet) and not straight out. Perhaps the owner of this Tenor was a Clarinet player and wanted and reedier angle or maybe he was 7' tall!
They should make the ad : Shaq's Teenor - $1M.

Answer:
I've been in contact with the high bidder on this mystery beast, and he promised to share some of his initial observations. Following is almost verbatim, with some names changed (omitted) to protect the innocent. Seems fairly clear that the horn was a prototype and that the neck probably wasn't just some retrofitted bass clarinet piece.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have had the horn for about four days and have been studying it, as
well as replacing the neck octave pad and preparing to replace the neck
cork. It really is a fascinating sax.
The marking HUL on the mouthpiece is very lightly, neatly engraved
script. I checked on the history of Conn and found that one of the
designers was named Hugh Loney. If his middle initial was U, that would
account for the mark.
I don't know how to find out. Loney apparently had a large role in the
design of the Connqueror saxes, soon after the introduction of the 6M
and 10M. I looked at pictures of the Connqueror, but it is not very
similar to this horn.
The neck, of course, is really unique for a tenor. It has all the
features of the 6M alto. The reverse, double socket tenon, the
underslung octave key, and the microtuner. The only one of these that I
am aware of on a tenor is the underslung octave key and that didn't
appear until about 1960. The microtuner is slightly different (a single
guide tongue) from those I have examined on altos and C-melodys and is
not marked with a patent number.
Without the neck, the body is about 28.5 inches long. The missing inch
is incorporated into the neck. The case was evidently custom made for
this horn, as it is shorter than a standard tenor case and larger than
a C-melody case.
The body tube was apparently taken from the regular production line in
1931 as it has the standard Conn marking with the patent date for the
drawn tone holes, the T for tenor, the serial number and the L for low
pitch. The marking seems to have been machine stamped when the body
tube was formed. Most, but not all, of the tone holes are soldered on
and none are rolled. Many of them have sleeve inserts. I don't know if
they were soldered in or swaged. I guess they were adjusting the
intonation and/or the quality of the sound. The Bb side key lever is
mounted on the long rod through the upper stack, which I believe is
unusual. The octave key mechanism has to be seen to be believed. It has
a U shaped protective guard like that on my 6M, but I can't compare the
mechanism because my 6M has the over-the-top octave key. The left hand
pinky cluster is standard Chu except the G sharp is not knurled, but
smooth (and flat). Aside from the unusual forked Eb key, the rest of
the keywork looks like standard 10M, although I don't have a 10M or a
Chu tenor to compare it with.
I think all the tone holes on the bow are soldered, which would mean it
wasn't standard production. I will know for sure when I strip the
keywork off, later.
The bell is absolutely blank. Not even the Conn logo. I guess Jason
Dumars would love to get it. Anyway, the rim is 6 1/4 inches diameter.
Again, I don't know if that is standard for a 10M. The pants guard on
the bell keys is very similar to the one on the earliest 10m in saxpics
gallery and is soldered in place.
I think it is very obvious that this was an experimental prototype
leading to the final 10M design. Perhaps it should be called the
Conn-cept sax?
------------------------------------------------
I took a further look at the neck and compared it with my Leblanc bass
clarinet neck. The sax neck has at the tuner end an ID of .680 inch and
at the tenon end an ID of 1.065 inch. This is for the basic tubing. The
clarinet neck tube ID is .945 inch throughout. Also the sax tube is
about 2 inches longer than the clarinet tube (if both were straightened
out). The sax tube has a seam along the side of the entire tube which
is just like the seams found on bell sections (it wasn't obvious in
rinestone's pictures). The sax tube was pretty obviously made by
forming sheet brass on a mandrel of the right shape, etc., but it is
clear they couldn't use a clarinet mandrel because it wouldn't have the
taper. Since the advent of seamless tubing, the clarinet tubes may not
be formed on a mandrel. Anyway, you would have to be seriously
ill-advised to even attempt to make the sax neck out of a bass clarinet
neck. The general shape of the sax neck was probably patterned after
the clarinet neck. We may never know why.
I read somewhere that when MacMillan bought Conn, they disposed of all
the historical stuff with the exception of (I think) a trumpet. This
sax seems to contradict that to some extent. Maybe some other stuff
also survived and will eventually turn up.
Just after I wrote last I saw a late tranny alto on eBay that looked
like the side Bb lever was mounted on the upper stack axle rod so I
looked again at my early 6M and it has the same arrangement. So it is
not an unusual feature. I meant to note that the tenor has the swivel
right thumb rest, like the alto, but I don't see one on the tenors in
saxpics.
----------------------------------------------