![\"Cavalier](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/bassic-sax.info\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/05\/chicago1931-039.jpg?ssl=1\")
<\/a><\/p>\nCavalier saxophones were made by Pan American<\/a>. According the Conn Loyalist website<\/a>:<\/p>\n Pan American had its own “budget” brand, namely Cavalier. These were labeled along the lines of “Produced by the Pan American company”.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n If you want to play degrees of separation<\/em>, there would be two degrees of separation between Cavalier and Conn. However, those two degrees made a hell of a lot of difference.<\/p>\n Compared to their big-name Conn cousins, Cavalier saxophones were seriously watered down versions of what a saxophone could be. That said, they still did the job. And haters not withstanding, those that own or have owned them, and techs who have worked on them, seem to be of the opinion that they are good vintage saxophones.<\/p>\n According to SOTW member badenia, who for years has been researching the Pan American and Cavalier brands:<\/p>\n The three lines of Conn Ltd, Conn, pan American and Cavalier all shared design similarities in contemporary models. However, since Conn was the premium line, Pan American the moderately priced line, and Cavalier the lowest priced line, there are differences. A main difference is the Conn’s had rolled drawn tone holes, while the Pan American and Cavalier lines had straight drawn tone holes. Additionally,the Pan American’s had missing keys or MOP buttons from their Conn equivalents and Cavalier’s had missing keys from their Pan American equivalents. Also,the Conn’s stamped the Haynes tone hole patent on their instruments, while the Pan Americans after the mid 1920s went to stamping the Hardy tone hole patent. Cavalier started with the Hardy tone hole patent stamp. Later all went to patent applied for, with the Conn line first and Pan American and Cavalier following some years later.. Source: SOTW thread, Cavalier Production Dates? <\/a><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Because the descriptions were seriously lacking, I did some eBay research to see what I could find. Sadly what I found were mostly junky horns that had led anything but a charmed life. I didn’t find any in pristine condition. Not one was what I would call even nice<\/em>…. Sad…<\/p>\n However, at least the photos of these junky horns allowed me to determine what features the Cavaliers saxophones did have, and how they compared to their Pan American and Conn cousins.<\/p>\n Nope, there was no neck with this horn. That didn’t seem to stop people from bidding on this vintage student sax however, since it received a surprising 23 bids!<\/p>\n In case you’re interested, it sold in March of this year for $162.50! WTF???? Hey, I got a neck from a Bundy II alto you can buy that’s left over from my lamp project. Someone what to pay me $300 for it? \ud83d\ude06 <\/p>\n OK, back to reality… Or at least back to this Cavalier alto… Here are a few things to note:<\/p>\n Unfortunately the seller didn’t provide us with a pic of the serial # area of the horn, so we don’t know what the patent information on it might be. That said, the photos are of a good quality, so we can make out the following details:<\/p>\n My goal was and is not to regurgitate all the existing research, but to provide Cavalier, and potential Cavalier saxophone owners, with an overview, and some hints of where to check for further info, as well as pitfalls to watch for when reading stuff on the web.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n Doing research for this article proved to be challenging, since there was very little information about the Cavalier brand available, and what I did find online was in some cases simply wrong. For example, one website refers to the 96M as the stencil version of Conn’s 10M horn. Huh? :scratch:<\/p>\n That said, SOTW did have a fair amount of decent information as people assisted badenia in his quest for Pan American and Cavalier examples.<\/p>\n As badenia was collating his research, in July 2015 he offered up the following determinations based on his findings to date:<\/p>\n 1) The saxes launched in 1931 with a serial number a kin to 001. I have a 048 serial registered. Source: SOTW thread, Cavalier Production Dates?<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\nBased on discussions I have read, I suspect in the pre-WWII models, overall quality was similar between the lines, the price differential coming from the handling of the tone holes and the differences in the keys. <\/strong>[Emphasis added.]<\/p>\n1931 Cavalier saxophones that dealers could order<\/h2>\n
<\/a><\/p>\n92M-2 Alto # 0948<\/h3>\n
<\/a> <\/a> <\/a> <\/a> <\/a> <\/a> <\/a> \n
<\/del>The sax has no front F key.<\/li>\n92M-2 Alto # 9869<\/h3>\n
<\/a> <\/a> <\/a> <\/a> <\/a> <\/a> <\/a> <\/a> <\/a> <\/a> \n
96M-2 Tenor # 03917<\/h3>\n
<\/a> <\/a> <\/a> <\/a> <\/a> <\/a> <\/a> <\/a> <\/a> <\/a> \n
Some concluding thoughts about Cavalier saxophones<\/h2>\n
\n2) Based on the Kingston trademark from Wurlitzer, around 3750 is 1935.
\n3) Based on the Continental Clarion Trademark around 6900 is 1937.
\n4) based on the 1940 catalog, around 9070 is likely 1941. The dividing line between split and left side bell keys.
\n5) The highest sax serial recorded is 16122.
\n6) The Cavalier line as a whole likely ended in 1948 as believed. There is no documentation, but advertising, serial number magnitude and a replacement clarinet model indicate this.
\n7) Other than trombones with a high number of 17952, all other instruments reached into the high 60000’s – low 80000’s range.
\n8) At the moment the above is supporting very low production volumes for the saxes.
\n9) The name Cavalier was used on a Pan American clarinet in 1955\/56
\n10) The name Cavalier was used on a Conn clarinet in 1956\/57.
\n11) Items 9 & 10 explain the trademark renewal in 1951.
\n12) At this point, all I need is something that confirms the saxes made it back into production post WWII.<\/p>\n