I spent a couple of hours looking through Google Patents this morning. It never ceases to amaze me what kinds of things receive patents, and how many of those things never seem to get picked up by financial backers. A whole lotta’ money gets spent on patent applications with little return.
Then there of course those things, such as the following bell to body brace, which were invented by employees of companies. Those investments generally tend to pay off.
In this particular case the US Patent office received an application for a Design Patent from inventor Earl J. Ghlespie. At the time Ghlespie worked for The Martin Band Instrument Company. Martin applied for the patent in February 1945, and it was awarded in November 1946.
Source: Google Patents
In his patent application, Ghlespie wrote the following about his unique design:
This famous design was of course used in Martin’s Committee III, AKA The Martin, saxophones. According to The Martin Story, the Committee III production began in 1945.
Committee III Tenor Serial # 160XXX Photography by H. Kahlke
It’s interesting how something so basic as a bell brace can be so distinctive. Although these bell to body braces started out very utilitarian, over time they have become one of the features that allow us to identify brands of horns.
Take for example, the famous Selmer bell to body brace. Although Selmer has made minor changes to their design, the circle has remained a constant. Sadly, like the rest of Selmer’s innovations, it’s been copied by almost every other saxophone manufacturer out there.
To my knowledge the patented Martin bell brace design was never copied. Having said that, I can’t think of any other Martin characteristics that have been copied by other companies either. Certainly the unique tonal qualities of the brand have never been duplicated.
You can also see that Keilwerth did a simular combined neck back in the 50’s.
The neck to the left is a Keilwerth altoneck (a Keilwerth stencil from -56) and the neck to the right is a “The Martin Alto” (from -57).
The dimensions are differnt on the Keilwerth neck. The Martin neck is longer and bigger. So the saxes are not playing in the same style. But but saxes are nice.
Thanks for both the photo and patent. They are both very interesting Thomas.
Yes, I’ve wondered about the JK/Martin neck issue myself. They are very close in design. (With regards to the fastening portion I mean.) I wonder who copied who? Or if it was just a happy coincidence, but that seems a bit unlikely.
Another sample of saxophone related patents: The Combined Saxophone Neck by Earl J Giliespie. E.J. Giliespie was one of the person in the Martin Committee (the other were N.C. Bates, L.Bowen, S. Broadus, V. Hauprich, S. Mansfield, O. Thomas and J. Usifer).
Keilwerths necks (screws/joint) are closed to Martins necks!! They couldn’t copy them. Patent.
Martins bell&body brace is good. To keep the bell in place, and not to rotate, I think the keygaurds on Martins also helps up. Two screwpoints at the bell and one on the body. Most older American saxes were constructed that way. Martin, King, Conn …. IMO the low tones and these saxes are far better than Selmer and other modern saxes.
Thomas
Helen,
Such an elegant solution for keeping the parts in alignment and providing force absorption under impact is certainly patent-worthy and deserving of special recognition.
But that is what patents, at least in the modern age, are for: to provide encouragement to innovators by granting them a limited time to recoup their development costs with exclusive licensing.
It isn’t sad that Selmer is copied. It is inevitable. It is the point of having a published patent and not keeping something a proprietary secret.
I don’t see how you could keep ANY design element of a saxophone a secret and still sell them. All it takes is a skilled reverse engineering job. It’s not like we’re talking about encrypted Blu-Ray movies here (though those don’t hold up for long in the face of dedicated crackers), or the formula for Coca-Cola. Everything is out there for the world to see. A patent helps, but it eventually expires. Trade secrets supposedly last forever… if you can guard them. It doesn’t seem possible to both sell a physical item and guard its secrets, unless it’s so expensive and/or dangerous as to be impractical to reverse engineer — or you buy yourself a law saying nobody is allowed to. (Not that this will stop someone in another country.)