Sax on the Web Forum

Sax on the Web Forum Archive / Selmer saxes / MK VI - stripped?

Paul S
User ID: 8715613 Dec 24th 12:58 AM
A friend has offered me a MKVI alto 61xxx that seems to play well and is in good working order. It seems however to have been stripped - with an acid perhaps?. It has a very clean bright yellow appearance. This obviously reduces the value - my question is by how much does this affect the playability and value of the horn?

many thanks :)

dink
User ID: 2163744 Dec 24th 1:43 AM
I have a friend that, in his young stupid college days, took his VI apart and put the body in a warm soapy bathtub to clean it. He didn't realize it would remove ALL of the laquer. He says the horn sounded louder and more vibrant than before as a result of the stripping. It is a good sounding horn, and it looks kinda cool. The body is stripped but the keys still have that dark honey colour laquer.

If you like it and think that it's a good players horn, you might want to jump on it. If your friend is offering it to you at todays fair market value, it is doubtfull that it will ever loose any of its value because it's an ugly horn. Even the ugly VI's seem to hold thier value and slowly increase in value over the years. Plus, that was a good era for Mark VI's.

ryanmoffett
User ID: 1307164 Dec 24th 9:44 AM
Here are my opinions after years of owning, selling and coveting horns. These are just my opinions and it is likely someone will tell you different, though none of this is going to spark debate. Horns that have lost their lacquer either naturally or through a stripping process usually go for a little less than horns in good to excellent original finish. That being said, I would personally go for a horn that played well regardless of the finish unless there was a requirement to have a nice, shiny horn. An horn with little to no lacquer will still go for a litte more than a re-laq horn in many instances, unless the relaq job was done by the manufacturer or a very reputable craftsman.

A stripped horn usually does not lose anything in playability or sound and it probably doesn't gain anything either. There is a perception, that I buy into a little, that a lacquer-free horn plays better, but that is so subjective it isn't worth debating. The horn will, over time, develop a green/brown/orange patina and will make your hands smell metallic after playing it. The patina is a surface oxidization, isn't rust, and will not destroy the integrity of the metal, though it will look ugly (or perfectly fine, depending on your opinion) over time.

beezer
User ID: 8798943 Dec 24th 3:52 PM
Paul S . A horn in this condition is virtually worthless, but out of the goodness of my heart, I would be prepared to give you say $500!
Cheers, Dave

Fredie
User ID: 9739563 Dec 30th 12:37 PM
I played a lot of Mark VI alto and tenor that lost artificially or naturally their lacquer and allways, they sound very beautiful, vibrant and loud. Also, I have noticed that great players have Mark VI horns with no lacquer or just a little (J.Redman, Joe Henderson, Rosario Giuliani, ...). So, in my opinion, the value depends of beeing a player who looks for a great sounding horn or just a collector or dealer.

BlockAM
User ID: 0554384 Dec 30th 5:40 PM
I have a 72xxx tenor with virtually no laquer. I recently bought it- the seller told me that it was played on a cruise ship for 15 years, so it naturally lost its laquer. It is an absolute monster- a joy to play! The sound is simply huge! An interesting sidenote: I recently read somewhere that selmer believed that MK VI's play their best with no laquer, and that is why it released the reference 54 with the matte finish. Don't know if it's true, but it is interesting.

Steve Cars
User ID: 2386864 Dec 30th 6:31 PM
Any real damage IMHO usu. comes from the polishing AFTER the stripping in prep for another coat of lacquer. The stripping itself, if done with care or gentle solution does not alter the horn itself in any meaningful way...
Cars

Fredie
User ID: 9739563 Dec 31st 6:00 AM
I do agree BlockAM and Steve Cars in their opinion.
But I know some people, that really don't know saxes and have a lot of critics of the sound qualities of a horn because they were striped (carefully as says Blok AM) and without playing it ... I know some of these people (?).
I saw a tenor sax on Saxquest several months ago (a tenor Mark VI) that was artificially striped but that was described as having a great sound (I suppose it was bought by a real player and sax lover ...).
Happy New Year for all.

jd
User ID: 8185963 Jan 4th 8:24 AM
ok i know something about this subject. ive played tons of 6s and own 5 . 3 tenors and 2 altos.ive compared originals with laq to orig with no laq to relaqs and im totally convinced the orig laqs play better theory is total bull.cars is right. the damadge to a relaq comes when the toneholes are buffed and other heavy buffing goes on. if the relaq was done by a master they will play as awesome as any original laq mark 6 out there. i know this. ive done plenty of testing.my close friend george borodi who is a master craftsmen has me test everything that comes in his shop. over the years ive tested hundreds of mark 6.just recently i tested some. among those i tested were an original 125***,198**,a relaq 152**AND A RELAQ 214***. I HAVE A ORIGINAL 103 THAT I consider to be the best ive ever played and a 155** orig that ive had for 25 years. the relaq 214*** beat every one of these horns. it was an equal to my 103*** in every way. wound up buying it over the other originals i tested against it. so this whole relaq theory is total bs providing that a real craftsmen did the work. if your a collector thats a different story but if your a player you can find fabulous relaqs that will play every bit as good or better as some original horns out there. dnt believe the hype about original laquer unless your buying it to resell. my 2 cents..

Paul S
User ID: 8715613 Jan 9th 10:27 AM
thanks guys, seems the only question is whether the laquer strip was done professionally and gently - will try ascertain this. I can probably get it for $1800 or less - which seems pretty good to me? need to give it a good workout too - can do this next weekend. I have not played a mkVI alto, only Yamaha 62's, a SA80 I (horrid IMO) and a the martin (very nice sound and action).

rollen
User ID: 9418933 Jan 9th 10:49 AM
If you can get if for that price, you win!
Even if it needs all new pads, you are way ahead.
That is, if it doesn't have any mechanical damage.

Gregg W. Jackson
User ID: 1181464 Jan 9th 10:58 AM
Paul S, it might be helpful to look at Dr. Rick's Village Flute and Sax Shop site. There's a discussion with photos of how to determine whether a sax has been relacquered at
http://drrick.com/relacquered.html.

rollen
User ID: 9418933 Jan 9th 11:19 AM
Relac or not, a 1955 Mark VI is worth that price if it plays. I'd love to find one at that price.

Balladeer
User ID: 0032624 Jan 11th 9:35 PM
Paul S: I have a Mark VI alto (#61,xxx) that has had the shiny lacquer chemically and hand removed (not buffed) last September. One thin clear coat of lacquer was applied to protect the brass from the humidity. My alto plays very well and I cannot tell that the lack of a shiny, gold lacquer has altered the sound. My alto has always had a big, bright, projecting quality to the sound as long as I have owned it (Dec. 1966 when it as 9.5 yrs old). People who see my alto seem to like the look of the instrument. When I play it I could care less how it looks. It smoked again tonight. As it only cost my Dad $60, I think I will always keep it.

rollen
User ID: 8325843 Jan 11th 11:43 PM
Balladeer,

You're in second place on my all time Mark VI buyers list. First place is a guy who bought a 1962 tenor for $25.00

You better keep it!

Morry
User ID: 2944004 Jan 12th 1:42 AM
I think it's disgraceful for any VI to be sold at such a ridiculously cheap price. From now on, if you hear of anyone trying to damage the value of these great horns by undercutting the market price, please forward their name to me so I can contact them and give them a verbal lashing :-)

Paul S User ID: 8715613	Dec 24th 12:58 AM A friend has offered me a MKVI alto 61xxx that seems to play well and is in good working order. It seems however to have been stripped - with an acid perhaps?. It has a very clean bright yellow appearance. This obviously reduces the value - my question is by how much does this affect the playability and value of the horn? many thanks :)
dink User ID: 2163744	Dec 24th 1:43 AM I have a friend that, in his young stupid college days, took his VI apart and put the body in a warm soapy bathtub to clean it. He didn't realize it would remove ALL of the laquer. He says the horn sounded louder and more vibrant than before as a result of the stripping. It is a good sounding horn, and it looks kinda cool. The body is stripped but the keys still have that dark honey colour laquer. If you like it and think that it's a good players horn, you might want to jump on it. If your friend is offering it to you at todays fair market value, it is doubtfull that it will ever loose any of its value because it's an ugly horn. Even the ugly VI's seem to hold thier value and slowly increase in value over the years. Plus, that was a good era for Mark VI's.
ryanmoffett User ID: 1307164	Dec 24th 9:44 AM Here are my opinions after years of owning, selling and coveting horns. These are just my opinions and it is likely someone will tell you different, though none of this is going to spark debate. Horns that have lost their lacquer either naturally or through a stripping process usually go for a little less than horns in good to excellent original finish. That being said, I would personally go for a horn that played well regardless of the finish unless there was a requirement to have a nice, shiny horn. An horn with little to no lacquer will still go for a litte more than a re-laq horn in many instances, unless the relaq job was done by the manufacturer or a very reputable craftsman. A stripped horn usually does not lose anything in playability or sound and it probably doesn't gain anything either. There is a perception, that I buy into a little, that a lacquer-free horn plays better, but that is so subjective it isn't worth debating. The horn will, over time, develop a green/brown/orange patina and will make your hands smell metallic after playing it. The patina is a surface oxidization, isn't rust, and will not destroy the integrity of the metal, though it will look ugly (or perfectly fine, depending on your opinion) over time.
beezer User ID: 8798943	Dec 24th 3:52 PM Paul S . A horn in this condition is virtually worthless, but out of the goodness of my heart, I would be prepared to give you say $500! Cheers, Dave
Fredie User ID: 9739563	Dec 30th 12:37 PM I played a lot of Mark VI alto and tenor that lost artificially or naturally their lacquer and allways, they sound very beautiful, vibrant and loud. Also, I have noticed that great players have Mark VI horns with no lacquer or just a little (J.Redman, Joe Henderson, Rosario Giuliani, ...). So, in my opinion, the value depends of beeing a player who looks for a great sounding horn or just a collector or dealer.
BlockAM User ID: 0554384	Dec 30th 5:40 PM I have a 72xxx tenor with virtually no laquer. I recently bought it- the seller told me that it was played on a cruise ship for 15 years, so it naturally lost its laquer. It is an absolute monster- a joy to play! The sound is simply huge! An interesting sidenote: I recently read somewhere that selmer believed that MK VI's play their best with no laquer, and that is why it released the reference 54 with the matte finish. Don't know if it's true, but it is interesting.
Steve Cars User ID: 2386864	Dec 30th 6:31 PM Any real damage IMHO usu. comes from the polishing AFTER the stripping in prep for another coat of lacquer. The stripping itself, if done with care or gentle solution does not alter the horn itself in any meaningful way... Cars
Fredie User ID: 9739563	Dec 31st 6:00 AM I do agree BlockAM and Steve Cars in their opinion. But I know some people, that really don't know saxes and have a lot of critics of the sound qualities of a horn because they were striped (carefully as says Blok AM) and without playing it ... I know some of these people (?). I saw a tenor sax on Saxquest several months ago (a tenor Mark VI) that was artificially striped but that was described as having a great sound (I suppose it was bought by a real player and sax lover ...). Happy New Year for all.
jd User ID: 8185963	Jan 4th 8:24 AM ok i know something about this subject. ive played tons of 6s and own 5 . 3 tenors and 2 altos.ive compared originals with laq to orig with no laq to relaqs and im totally convinced the orig laqs play better theory is total bull.cars is right. the damadge to a relaq comes when the toneholes are buffed and other heavy buffing goes on. if the relaq was done by a master they will play as awesome as any original laq mark 6 out there. i know this. ive done plenty of testing.my close friend george borodi who is a master craftsmen has me test everything that comes in his shop. over the years ive tested hundreds of mark 6.just recently i tested some. among those i tested were an original 125*,198,a relaq 152AND A RELAQ 214. I HAVE A ORIGINAL 103 THAT I consider to be the best ive ever played and a 155* orig that ive had for 25 years. the relaq 214* beat every one of these horns. it was an equal to my 103* in every way. wound up buying it over the other originals i tested against it. so this whole relaq theory is total bs providing that a real craftsmen did the work. if your a collector thats a different story but if your a player you can find fabulous relaqs that will play every bit as good or better as some original horns out there. dnt believe the hype about original laquer unless your buying it to resell. my 2 cents..
Paul S User ID: 8715613	Jan 9th 10:27 AM thanks guys, seems the only question is whether the laquer strip was done professionally and gently - will try ascertain this. I can probably get it for $1800 or less - which seems pretty good to me? need to give it a good workout too - can do this next weekend. I have not played a mkVI alto, only Yamaha 62's, a SA80 I (horrid IMO) and a the martin (very nice sound and action).
rollen User ID: 9418933	Jan 9th 10:49 AM If you can get if for that price, you win! Even if it needs all new pads, you are way ahead. That is, if it doesn't have any mechanical damage.
Gregg W. Jackson User ID: 1181464	Jan 9th 10:58 AM Paul S, it might be helpful to look at Dr. Rick's Village Flute and Sax Shop site. There's a discussion with photos of how to determine whether a sax has been relacquered at http://drrick.com/relacquered.html.
rollen User ID: 9418933	Jan 9th 11:19 AM Relac or not, a 1955 Mark VI is worth that price if it plays. I'd love to find one at that price.
Balladeer User ID: 0032624	Jan 11th 9:35 PM Paul S: I have a Mark VI alto (#61,xxx) that has had the shiny lacquer chemically and hand removed (not buffed) last September. One thin clear coat of lacquer was applied to protect the brass from the humidity. My alto plays very well and I cannot tell that the lack of a shiny, gold lacquer has altered the sound. My alto has always had a big, bright, projecting quality to the sound as long as I have owned it (Dec. 1966 when it as 9.5 yrs old). People who see my alto seem to like the look of the instrument. When I play it I could care less how it looks. It smoked again tonight. As it only cost my Dad $60, I think I will always keep it.
rollen User ID: 8325843	Jan 11th 11:43 PM Balladeer, You're in second place on my all time Mark VI buyers list. First place is a guy who bought a 1962 tenor for $25.00 You better keep it!
Morry User ID: 2944004	Jan 12th 1:42 AM I think it's disgraceful for any VI to be sold at such a ridiculously cheap price. From now on, if you hear of anyone trying to damage the value of these great horns by undercutting the market price, please forward their name to me so I can contact them and give them a verbal lashing :-)