$60 for a Bundy II Alto

JfW

JfW

I peruse the local pawn shops and such for horns once in awhile, expecting to find nothing worth picking up as it's either too expensive to be worthwhile, too expensive overall, or not what I'm looking for.

I've had a few Bundy II altos come into my posession in the past, and thought them rather unremarkable players. I've found that they have a bright, empty tone, poor response, with keywork that is poorly sprung and unergonomicaly placed spatula. these qualify usually under the "not what I've really looking for" category, but for $60 why not take another look?

Pads are mostly shot, which is why it probably was listed so cheaply, yet that hasn't stopped pawn brokers from listing such things at hundreds of dollars, and somehow selling them. Cosmetics are fairly good, save for a repaired front bell lip. the keywork's dirty, having taken on a dull "german nickle" kinda look, but the rest of the sax's suprisingly clean, along with the case. This is all fairly uncommong. The lacquer is very good at over 95%, and it has taken on a dark honey colour, which I much prefer to the bright yellow stuff of newer horns. some corks and felts are missing.

The most suprising thing, however, is the neck reciever. I don't think I've ever seen an old Bundy like this where the slot hadn't been sqeezed through years of (over)tightening. I remember what JBT recently said about these horns' susceptability to developing a leaky bulge under the slot from the deforming of the socket reciever (also, it seems these horns have no "ledge" for the bottom of the tennon to try to seat against niether).

Anyways, this horn's neck tightens without pressing the slot or the screw retainer halves together. In fact, there's a lot of play left to spare. Since the screw itself's lacquer is much lighter than the rest of the horn, I can only deduce that the original was lost and it went a long while before being replaced, and thus the horn was spared the 'bulge' problem.

so I talk the guy down to $55 (because you can do this), and paid for it.

at home with my C*, it blew quite well, much better than past B2's i've had. It's just as bright, but more full and easier to coax. Anything below low D is impossible given the keywork is a bit messed up, but should be easy to fix.

that was yesterday afternoon, the start of my weekend. a good day, overall.

:)
 
I started out on one of these like most people my age. Served me well through the years. I never noticed them being really bright but I was always impressed with the spot on intonation of the horn. Like you, I never liked the action or placement of the pinky keys on these horns.
 
I agree with your opinion of that model, especially the "Poorly sprung " part. However, I've put hundreds of these into playing condition, and every once in a while, one surprises me. They weren't trying to make bad horns. Sixty bucks is a steal. $55 - even better.
 
A test for Groovekiller to see if he has actually done hundreds of Bundys.

What key do you need to remember to put on before assembling the upper stack? : )
 
The Bundy II was also my first alto, which I also got for a steal because it was a demo unit that had a bent bell lip.

I've found that the Bundys' sound much better if you use a high quality mouthpiece. While this may seem obvious, it makes you wonder how many people have played a Bundy II with a Bundy II plastic mouthpiece and said, "It sucks" -- when it's probable that it's just the mouthpiece that sucked. I'm thinking this might be the majority.

I've also played the immediate predecessor to the Bundy -- and I'm talkin' within a couple serial numbers of the first Bundys from Selmer USA -- the Buescher Aristocrat. I also played the immediate successor, the Selmer USA model. The USA was a bari, the Aristocrat was an alto. Both horns I considered adequate. Not my choice for a killer gig horn, but adequate.
 
A couple of years ago I had written an article for my blog about the Selmer Bundy saxophones. (I wrote it at the time when WWBW started cranking out horns with the Bundy name, after they acquired the rights to use it.) There are some photos in my post of the different types of Bundys, and also some quotes about why Selmer changed to the Bundy II. It might be an interesting read for anyone who is interested in this rather famous student model of days-gone-by.
 
Thanks for that link and that excellent article. The Bundy saxophones and clarinets were the "workhorses" of the school band programs across the country and many are still being played. It was depressing to say the least that the Conn/Selmer Company sold the rights to the Bundy name to WWBW to market their cheap Chinese imports.

It turned out to create quite a problem for them when repair shops started to contact Conn/Selmer for repair parts for the "new" Bundys being sold by WWBW. It serves them right. If the name "Bundy" isn't sacred, then what is?
 
For $60 (or less) why not. But I think the Bundy II has a lot of problems. Poorly sprung is one the minor problems in comparison IMO. The main ones are poor design and build. Every single one I've seen just wasn't worth the repairs it really needed. At best there is a compromise and the instrument plays ok, but not good as it can be. Just one example, the F/F#/G# adjustment, using good quality pads, requires extremely accurate fit of the keys in that area, which I've never seen on a Bundy II (and to achieve it would be a lot of work on the ones I've seen). The mecahnical work to allow a good reliable adjustment was always too much for the owner to invest, even trying to help as much as I can with the cost. In addition I personally really don't like the tone of Bundy II, though objectively I'd say the tone it ok, not great, not terrible. Ergonomics are pretty lousy on this model too IMO.
 
I think you are being too hard on the Bundy II. It was never meant to be anything but a sturdy student model saxophone. Having been a beginning band teacher for many years, I can tell you that the feel of the springs and the ergonomics of the keys is not an issue until the students progress to playing rapid 16th note passages. By that stage of their progress, they have certainly moved up to a more professional instrument. What is important is that the intonation is good---especially the octaves, and that the instrument stays in adjustment.

Having "play conditioned" many Bundy II's I can say that it is no more difficult to regulate this sax once the pads have been seated perfectly and the "slop" has been taken out of the F# key than any other student saxophone. In fact I often spend more time on the YAS 23's than the Bundy II's in this regard.
 
I agree that YAS-23 also has mehcanical problems, mainly unlevel tone holes, loose keys around rod screws and rod screws loose inside posts. This makes this model also problematic in a condition that needs a major repair.

The reasons I prefer student Yamaha over Bundy II are that I personally prefer the tone and keys (ergnomically) much more. Also every good player I know who tried both think this way too. The intonation is also excellent (I agree that it's good on Bundy II). There is a small design issue I don't like with Yamaha 23 tenor only. Bundy IIs I've seen had more severely unlevel tone holes and worse mechanics. But another thing is that IMO they also have much worse design e.g. the key arms.

I'm curious what about the models makes you spend more time on student Yamaha than Bundy II? For me it's the opposite. I'm also wondering, do you ever do full repads on either of these models? By that of course I mean also correcting all the mehcanical problems along with changing the pads and corks. Here, almost no one would pay for that on a model like this, but a few do for Yamaha student, so far none for Bundy II.

The main thing is that some new models available now cost about the same as a good repad (maybe less, depending on many things). These are not the crappy cheap models that get out of adjustment in days and have parts falling. Models with strong body and keys and accurate keys. In the keywork department Yamaha student models actually have stiff competition with these and honestly I don't recommend them as much as I used to (though I haven't seen enough of the newer Chinese Yamahas to compare).
 
Helen said:
A couple of years ago I had written an article for my blog about the Selmer Bundy saxophones. (I wrote it at the time when WWBW started cranking out horns with the Bundy name, after they acquired the rights to use it.) There are some photos in my post of the different types of Bundys, and also some quotes about why Selmer changed to the Bundy II. It might be an interesting read for anyone who is interested in this rather famous student model of days-gone-by.
Click to expand...
Whenever I get a chance, I'll try to get you some more Bundy stuff: the first horns from the 20's (yes, 1920s), George M. Bundy history, Keilwerth stencils, late Aristocrat/Bundy comparison pics, the morphing to the Selmer USA models, etc.

Bundy, of course, was never a pro model, so I never wrote much about 'em. I can say that the elaborately engrave Aristocrat "stencil" on your website is probably the best.
 
Many of the YAS 23's that have come through the shop have excessive key play in the lower stack. I know of one professional tech who will not work on them unless the customer agrees to pay the additional cost of putting a slightly oversized rod in the lower stack keys. This in addition to the fact that the Bb/G# adjusting arm is attached to the F# key itself makes for a time consuming regulation process.

The Bundy II in my experience has similar problems, but is somewhat more forgiving when trying to regulate. I agree with your other comments as well about the tone and feel of both. I hope someday you get to play or work on the Cannonball student model called the Alcazar. It is in the same price range as the YAS23, but offers a lot more for the money.
 
jbtsax said:
I hope someday you get to play or work on the Cannonball student model called the Alcazar. It is in the same price range as the YAS23, but offers a lot more for the money.
Click to expand...
If they had it in Musikmesse I probably played it. I thought the Cannonballs and many other Taiwanese and even Chinese saxophones (most presented Chinese/Taiwanese companies/factories) are exactly the reason the Yamaha student models are problematic to recommend for me now. When a model that can probably be sold for about $450-$650 new (depending on some things like tax % in a country, etc. etc.) comes with no free play, tight keys, relatively level tone holes, good intonation and tone, comfortable to play (they usually copy known models), the name brand models are not as strong as they used to be.

By the way, one of the worst saxophones I've ever seen was an old Cannonball model. They seem to forget to do anything to many of the tone holes after drawing. The highest and most wavy chimnys I've seen. But these days are pretty much long gone IMO.
 
well, in the last few weeks I finally got around to fixing this thing. Pads were mostly shot, so i replaced them all. nothing I can do about the bell lip as some previous tech repaired it, but there is scarring in the form of rippled brass.

one thing I don't like is that there's no way i can see to center a few cups over their toneholes, like the low Eb and C as the arms are too long. i figure I have over 20 hours of work into this so far, but then i'm a novice with about a dozen repads worth of experience.

I also need to find a replacement bumper cork for the G# thing

It'll have all new felts and Precision pads, and all the old hardened soft-cork in the regulation is being replaced with new Tech Cork. I have allready cleaned the action.

i will probably attempt to sell this locally.

Then I have a King Cleveland alto to work on too.
 
Okay,

It's almost done. just have go try a couple things to try to silence the mechanism more, give it a final wipedown, and then doublecheck tuning and lube.

It plays down to Bb find now, and since changing out the crusty old pads it's tone has darkened quite a bit. It actually sounds good now with some warmth that I haven't gotten out of previous Bundy2s, though perhaps that was from the bulge issue JBT has illustrated and the fact that it was leaking. It sounds rather dark, round, and warm to play and it's response is okay as well.

Keywork still leaves something to be desired. Keyarms were kind of frustrating. action is still noisy and I don't think i'll be able to correct it without swedging. I used materials almost exclusively from Musicmedic including pads, corks, tech corks, felt, and lubricant.

it's a good player with an s80 C*. I think it's a decent instrument for an amature doubler or student. In build quality and precision, it's not a Yanagisawa.
 
I wouldn't kill myself getting all of the action noise out of a horn. Unless closely miked, the clicks and clacks made by the horn (and very perceptible to us, the player) aren't at all audible to the audience.

Perfect is all well and good (hell, when I shovel a load of dirt onto a truck, I aim for a perfectly cleaned up drive (or wherever the dirt was originally dumped), but if I miss a bit it's not the end of the world). A person likely to purchase a Bundy instrument of any stripe is most likely not going to be playing it for recordings.

Key/other instrumental noise has always fascinated me, simply because I know that it is there to some extent with all instruments (save only the high holy Boehm flute, which (as we know) is perfect in every way, or at least according to my flute playing acquaintances) is present on all horns to some degree. If nothing else, it's evidence that the part was not churned out on some new super-synthesiser.

The worst of all for this sort of thing (save violin playing, where it is both very obvious and very forgiven, along with the constant imperfect tuning that goes with the best of it) is our chuckleheaded friend, the Heckel bassoon. There is so much clacking with the keys on the long joint that you would think a stork was sitting there on the stage.

The worst example of this was on a CD titled "Fagottismo", a German collection of pieces arranged for the bassoon by one of the players. When they did the classic circus march "In Storm and Sunshine", it sounded like the action on a Thompson submachine gun sans the muzzle blast. When they occasionally throw in a contra bassoon, it was like they were performing in a room full of very quiet power presses.

It seems to me (and I'm no expert on the bassoon by any means) that most if not all of this could be eliminated by using Boehm-style axle keys for those four or five notes running down to low Bb. Sure, it's different than what Heckel originally did, but times change.
 
Yeah, I think you're right.

I did put some heavier key oil into the action, and it improved dramatically. a couple more tweaks and it'll go on craigslist or SOTW or something.


Ebay would be pointless. The difference between a Bundy II Alto used as a cat scoop and one just pulled out of it's original packaging is about all of $150 on Ebay, topping out at $150.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom