Template talk:Types of saxophones

Comments

The daggers are unnecessary because this information is explained in the articles themselves.
Where are the conn-o-sax, saxello, C melody saxophone, F mezzo, aulochrome, etc?
It is a judgement call whether the tubaxes are "true saxophones" and I don't believe we should be deciding for our readers in this way. The C melody and F mezzo saxes, for example, do not match at all the bore of regular saxophones, and in fact Sax's original instruments have a bore that is different from all modern-day ones, being more parabolic--this is attested to by Jay C. Easton who has played five of Sax's saxes in one day, finding their bores so different from those of modern saxes that he could not use modern mouthpieces on them. Thus, no saxes produced in the modern day are "true" saxes. I'd propose listing the main ones in one section of the template and the "others" (developed later) in another section. Badagnani 18:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed - who decides what are true and not: nobody; lose it. ¦ Reisio 04:31, 22 March 2007 (UTC

I agree that the Cmel and the Fmez should not be marked as not originally designed by Mr.Sax. Wan't the first saxophone a C bass? Thesamc 01:34, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing proposed by Sax dagger

Since the non-tubax subcontrabass saxophone, as described in image 4 of the 1846 patent, now exists (as of at least 2010). — Jon (talk) 12:07, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]