The Martin Standard
This horn comes from a totally different era – some 80+ years in the past and pre both WW2 and the Martin Committee as most know it. Around the mid to 30′s the Standard and the Imperial (Handcraft) both existed.
The Standard was essentially an ‘all-brass’ version – where the Imperial had nickel slides and trim. (The exception to this is the mid 40′s models which had nickel trim also).
They were very much a pro horn at the time and were built in such a way.
One giveaway to this process to me is the fact that you find hand stamped serial numbers not only on the side of the horn – but also on the bottom caps and the side of the actual valves. (Having said that tolerances of the later Committees were better as machinery improved etc).
Buying Tip:
When considering such a horn always ask if the number stamped on the valves matches the outside number.
The top caps will also have the same number – those are common areas that are consistently swapped out over the years.
Comparison vs a Martin Committee:
- More in tune – the mouthpipe/leadpipe contributes to this as the Committee tapers quite a bit vs, this one which looks like it’s a more ‘traditional’ style setup.
- The valve block is in the more traditonal position vs. the Committee which is actually drawn back towards the player.
- Mouthpiece receiver is different – the Standard has a receiver more like you would find on an oldConnof that Era.
- Waterkeys – are the more traditional setup vs. the Martin ‘Trombone style’ side dumps (Very cool loking but almost impossible
- to replace)
- The Finger Ring is on the top of the valve slide – Committee is off to the left
- Trim is different – the standard has small finger buttons vs the wider and thinner versions on the Committee
- The braces are very different. The Committee has very light style bracing – where the Standard has decidely larger bracing.
- Bellflare – although similar (Bell Diameter is the same) the flare is less drastic as you approach the bell on the Committee.
So how does it play?
That’s a hard one to pin down as it all depends on the player.
I will say that the Standard is easier to lock notes in – so it gives a much more defined scale – hence more in tune.
To me it also plays a little darker than the Committee – as in it has less edge but more power.
I also feel the projection is slightly better on the Standard than the Committee.
For what you will pay for one of these horns (about a third of the price at least vs. a Committee) these horns are real sleepers. Unfortunately as they didn’t hold the same prestige as the Committee there are far less examples that seem to be available. (Mind you at the time of writing there are 2 on Ebay at the moment).
It seems weird to me that so few of these are available when you can readily find a raft of Martin Dasants from 10-20 years prior to these horns coming out.
I suspect that there is a very good reason for why there are so few Standards out there – yet so many Handcraft Imperials and Committees – but that’s for another time to explain 
Happy hunting!
[...] Handcraft Standard from the late 30's vs. a Committee from the late 40's. You can check it out HERE I'd love to hear from other people who collect, appreciate and play these horns. [...]
I have a 1928 Martin Standard Handcraft Trumpet, serial 84556 in raw brass. It is an awesom playing horn. It has a smooth, dark full focused sound. I will try to send pictures. Morris Crow
[...] too – amongst other similarities. If anyone missed it I did a thread earlier about this one on my blog – might be worth checking out if you are considering. I'll be adding more info at a later date as I [...]
I have 2 HCI’s currently a 1937 and 1939. I also have a 1947 Committee. I have owned many different horns probably 5 HCI’s and 6 or 7 Committees. I agree with the above play test. I always seem to acquire a Committee due to the prestige but I always go back to the HCI. I to think that Martin stopped putting the love in the HCI when the Committee came out. They dropped the reverse tuning slide somewhere after 1939. That was the decline of the HCI. Prior to 1939 (ish)They were fantastic horns in their own right. After playing many of these horns since 1985 (ish). I think that on the Committee, you can really scoot around the horn. You can play things on that horn that you will find very difficult on say a ML Bach (another conversation) which can take your improvisations in very interesting directions due to being able to play what you hear. Those partials are pretty close together but you pay for it in the area of intonation. If you get an in tune Committee…keep it and play it. Don’t ever get rid of it. I have not found one yet but I suspect they are out there. I have yet to own a Committee Handcraft though. I have played Mic Gillette’s Custom Large Bore Committee. For me, it was awful but my buddy sounded incredible on it. He has an incredible range and is an amazing lead player. HE sounded like a dark, fluffy jazz player on it. The HCI is SLIGHTLY less nimble than the Committee and I mean very slightly less. The intonation however is so spot on, it’s amazing and for that you can actually use it in a section. I’ve played legit, jazz and lead on it. I noticed that the Committees seemed to play better with smaller mouthpieces, say an Al Cass or Bach 10 1/2 C but don’t seem to sound a whole lot different out front of the horn with a 3C Bach or bigger. Currently there is a guy in a band I play in that has a 1952 Committee. He has a Monette B2 and an Al Cass 4×4. Those two mouthpieces are at the opposite side of the size spectrum and he actually sounds more like Blue Mitchell on the Cass whereas the Monette just sounds unfocused. The HCI however works well with big and small mouthpieces. Again, you can actually use it in a trumpet section (currently, I am using an Al Cass 4×1 or a Mt. Vernon 10 1/2 E on the HCI horn. They blend really well with other trumpets. The Committee should stay on the trumpet stand for a solo instead of your flugelhorn while you play something that blends with the section. If you use the HCI, you only need one horn on the gig. Not that I am the expert on this but these are a few of my observations owning or playing with people on these horns.
Just picked up a ’41 HCI and yes it is an entirely different animal than the pre-committee HCI. Not better or worse but different. They spun the brass on the bell much thinner and the ballusters, braces and much more about the horn is different. The resistance is about the same. the ’41 horn is much lighter, projects farther and easier to play in the upper register. The tone is not as “dark” though. Not really better or worse just different. If you are looking for a darker jazz sound, the pre-committee would be the better way to go.