Saxophone Forum


by Rv6 Russ
(9 posts)
14 years ago

difference between Keilwerth SX 90 & EX 90

Can anyone explain the differences between the Keilwerth SX90 AND EX90? Also do they both have the rolled tone holes? Thickness and alloy of Brass, what finish, resonators, any adjustable keys or rests? Thanks, Russ

Reply To Post [Report Abuse]

Report Abuse

Replies

  1. by STEVE GOODSON
    (291 posts)

    14 years ago

    Re: difference between Keilwerth SX 90 & EX 90

    The SX90 is assembled in Germany using components from several different nations. The parts are NOT all made by Keilwerth! The EX is an entirely different horn, made FOR Keilwerth by another maker, in a different country.

    Reply To Post


  2. by Shai Berkovich
    (12 posts)

    14 years ago

    Re: difference between Keilwerth SX 90 & EX 90

    EX90 III: Keilwerth are one of the four most famous saxophone manufacturers and the EX90 is handmade in their famous German factory. Supplied with case and mouthpiece. The black nickel finish is highly reflective and can change dramatically in the light to appear almost silver. The hand engraving on the bell comes through in gold to compliment the gold lacquer inner bell. The EX90 has everything you would expect from quality German engineering making it a joy to play with excellent tuning and a rich full bodied tone. If you want something with a little more character than a Yamaha 62 and more depth that the Yanagisawa 901 then go for the EX90. SX90 Keilwerth sx90 "What struck me immediately with this horn was the overall darker tonal colour compared to others that I had tried. Also I had to stretch my right hand a little more to feel comfortable with the keys. It feels a big alto and did take a bit of getting used to. However, after 15 minutes or so, I was quite accustomed to the feel and was pleasantly surprised with what came out of the sax. Excellent clarity of sound, superb response with a smooth transition from note to note, especially with legato playing. There was a very good evenness of tone in all registers, which is so difficult to achieve on the saxophone, and this was achieved at all dynamic levels. I will be perfectly honest when I say that before I played this sax I was sceptical about the rolled tone-holes, and I am still not convinced that they do make much difference. However, if they are responsible for the great response and the precision with which I was able to play then they are well worth having on a saxophone. Overall, playing this saxophone was an enjoyable experience."

    Reply To Post


    1. by STEVE GOODSON
      (291 posts)

      14 years ago

      Re: difference between Keilwerth SX 90 & EX 90

      I'm sorry, but the above post is quite inaccurate with regard to the EX series. Believe what you will....

      Reply To Post


      1. by saxplaya81
        (110 posts)

        14 years ago

        Re: difference between Keilwerth SX 90 & EX 90

        I would pretty much call the ex90 a semi-pro horn the sound quality is really not that great, i played an sx90 with a sx90r neck for about ten years before i sold it, it was a good horn rich tone good intonation, really goor for funk, fusion, and gospel, the only difference between the 90r and the 90 is the rolled tone holes, but like i said, i played a sx90 with a 90r neck and it sounded exactly like the whole 90r. Still doesnt compare to my Mark VI though.

        Reply To Post


      2. by johnsonfromwisconsin
        (767 posts)

        14 years ago

        Re: difference between Keilwerth SX 90 & EX 90

        I'm sorry, but the above post is quite inaccurate with regard to the EX series. Believe what you will.... Especially since it certainly was written by someone in marketing. I have long said that advertising is the practice of being deceitfull in a manner for which you can't be held liable.

        Reply To Post


        1. by saxplaya81
          (110 posts)

          14 years ago

          Re: difference between Keilwerth SX 90 & EX 90

          Well I guess you would be an expert on keilwerth saxophones and not my ex teacher/professor who is an authorized keilwerth dealer. Yeah i'll go with what you say, or not.

          Reply To Post


        2. by johnsonfromwisconsin
          (767 posts)

          14 years ago

          Re: difference between Keilwerth SX 90 & EX 90

          I'm assuming you're responding to me instead of Goodson given the time of your post. In that case, you're comments address something that I did not say. Mkay?

          Reply To Post


        3. by STEVE GOODSON
          (291 posts)

          14 years ago

          Re: difference between Keilwerth SX 90 & EX 90

          Since I used to work as a designer for a company that actually built horns for Keilwerth, and interacted with their management regularly, I would say, yes, I'm an expert. You learn more than a few secrets when you work on the production end of things.

          Reply To Post


        4. by ksc
          (3 posts)

          11 months ago

          Re: difference between Keilwerth SX 90 & EX 90

          Would that be Amati? Usually it has been Keilwerth who made horns, horn bodies and parts for other companies to "stencil". I bought a Frankenstein H. Couf sax in 1978 that the salesman (who had years of experience in volume band instrument sales), claimed that he couldn't determine the model of, but it was closest to an "EX80", although he didn't mention the name Keilwerth in the conversation. Keilwerth didn't sell saxophones under their own name in the U.S. in that day and time. W.T Armstrong sold the Keilwerth sax line here, though, under the stencil name of H.(erbert) Couf. The one I bought I have determined to actually have been a Keilwerth Royalist 1 with all brass finish but otherwise the only discernable difference was the distinctive straight rod for a bell brace, and the bell simply said H. Couf. On the back, by the strap ring it said "Made for W.T. Armstrong by the Keilwerth Musical Instrument Factory in W. Germany" or something very similar to that. The Couf bell with no model name designation was puzzling but it really was a close match to an EX80. Let me tell you, I have toured in Paris and 3 other French cities, 3 major Canadian western province cities, played in Las Vegas, on television, I toured all the major U.S. cities in the #2 U.S. showband out of Mus-Art Corp., Studio City, CA, and I always received great respect and admiration from the other musicians I have worked with. Notwithstanding the absence of the haunting and unmatchable sound that the Selmer line is capable of producing, that EX80 was one of the best saxophones I have ever played, & without the problematic rolled toneholes of the SX line. I kicked a lot of serious butt with that horn (Couf Artist 5* mthpc). Performing or recording, a formidable axe in my hands. I personally owned a Mark VI tenor that was a miserable lemon and dumped it.

          Reply To Post