Sax on the Web Forum banner

All my Selmers play sharp, none of my others do. Why is this?

7K views 47 replies 22 participants last post by  notes_norton 
#1 ·
First of all, I know this happens to others, but not all so I don't feel we need to go there in the discussion.

I just want to know why for some, but not for all Selmer saxes play sharp.

OK here are the facts:
  1. I've owned 3 Selmers in my life time, a Modele 26, a Mark VI and a Mark VII. All of them have played sharp. The mouthpiece sits at the very end of the cork, and with the Mark VI I actually had to wrap a piece of paper around the cork to keep the mouthpiece from wiggling.
  2. I've also owned a Conn (shooting stars), H. Couf Superba II, Pan American (back-up horn), Grassi Prestige, MacSax Classic, and a Yamaha YTS-52. Plus when they used to overhaul and lacquer saxes in Ft. Lauderdale Florida (Broward Band Instruments) I would get Bundy loaners while my sax was in the shop. Every one of these played with the mouthpiece either centered in the cork or pushed in further than center.
  3. I've used different mouthpieces with the same results, including a Link 6 hard rubber, Berg 100/0, Link ToneMaster brass 8 NY and a few that came with the saxes that I tried out of curiosity. Similar results in all the mouthpieces.
So the question is, why do Selmers play sharp for me (and others but not everyone) while the same player with the same mouthpiece in the same climate can play 7 different other bands of saxes and have the intonation center cork or pushed in farther???

To me this defies logic If everyone in warm climates played sharp on their Selmers I would say it's the saxes. The fact that it is only happening on the Selmers I've owned and none of the others point to the saxes. But the fact that other people don't have that problem confuses the issue to me.

I've been playing sax pro since 1964. Before that I was first tenor in the all-state band every year I was eligible, and I even got section leader away from the first alto, so I either know how to play or know how to fool people.

OK, some people are going to say it's me. No need. Been there. If it's me, tell my why it's me or don't bother. If it's me I'd like to know what I'm doing.

Why do the classic Selmers play sharp for me (and others) when no other sax does?

Thanks.

Insights and incites by Notes
 
See less See more
#2 ·
You know, not everyone plays a vintage Selmer and perhaps this is one of the reasons. I'd say it is you, unless you had three Selmers that just happened to be sharp, which is not likely (but not impossible). In my experience, roughly equivalent to yours, I have found that its easier to go sharp on a vintage Selmer Paris than some other saxes but that is different than having the mouthpiece falling off the neck. I play a 1971 MK VI tenor with a DG 'King Curtis' which should be a sharp set-up, and I still have to go on over halfway. My tuning is the same on my other tenor which is a Selmer USA. The only thing I have experienced similar to it is all Chinese saxes I have tried/owned play flat. At least that's preferable to playing sharp which I'm sure is why they do it. You can usually push the mouthpiece on farther but you can't pull it back but so far.
 
#4 ·
I think it is what you are used to and what kind of compensation you use to play in tune. I can play a Meyer perfectly in tune on my Conn 6m and my Yamaha 23 altos but the compensation is different. After playing my Conn for a while and then putting the Meyer on the Yamaha, the Yamaha plays sharp especially in the upper register until I adjust to it. I find it easier to just use different mouthpieces. So I have found that a Selmer soloist on the Yamaha has about the same tuning tendencies for me as a Meyer on the Conn. The Soloist has a smaller chamber volume than the Meyer and has some additional tuning issues for me if I try to use it on the Conn.

I think people who don’t have tuning issues on anything either don’t notice that they do or are good at compensating either consciously or subconsciously. A couple of summers ago, I went into a shop and played every alto on the wall. I think it was about 15 altos. There were variations in tuning but I felt I could adjust to most of them. The only one that was way off for me was a vintage Buffet. I had to have the mouthpiece falling off the neck and it was still sharp. Maybe I could get used to it eventually but it didn’t seem like a good fit for me.
 
#15 ·
Only thing I can think of is that your key heights might have been a bit too high.
7) You didn't have a technician set the key heights on the Selmers higher in hopes of getting more projection, or something like that, that you've forgotten about? I mean, one has to ask the question.
Yes, one does.

In horn comparisons, we always have to use a baseline where the horns are set up correctly. Not saying this is the 'answer' to your question...because others here have brought up other germane issues.

But that has to be a starting point. Apples to apples and all....

So, expanding on this theme, I would ask....have you ever brought the French horns to a tech and played it there for him/her, and asked if the keyheights could be adjusted so as to better the situation ?

Techs use their own 'default' sorta height settings based upon their experience, which is fine. But as Sax Bum illustrates...default doesn't mean cure-all...it is just a center-average-likely success sorta thing. Mileage may vary due to driver...

So in what one could characterize as a relatively 'extreme' situation like this...this step needs to be taken, IMHO. And that means playing for the tech, having tech adjust, playing the new adjustment, and if necessary having the tech adjust again. So it's a more personal process than just dropping the sax off and letting tech go at it.

The followup Q would then be: IF you have gone to a tech - and IF this was done (in this case dropping the key heights)....did the resulting keyheights then start to choke/muffle the tonality of the horn(s), or were they still able to speak nicely ?
 
#6 ·
2 Notes:

1). There is the mouthpiece/reed/horn fit issue. Sometimes you just get a bad combo. The style in what you like in a mouthpiece and reed could be causing resonance problems in the Selmers.

2). Try something else out. On one of your Selmers, shove your mouthpiece onto your cork as far as possible so that very little cork is showing. Play for 5 minutes and then check your tuning. (Please do not check tuning immediately). There is a conversation that sometimes because of the way we automatically compensate with our mouth and ears and the way things resonate in the horn, one needs to move the mouthpiece in the opposite direction from what one would expect. I play both a Conn Shooting Star and a Mark VII. I always have the mouthpiece further in on the Mark VII. Based on the body of knowledge I have seen in this forum, my experience is typical. Yours is opposite. If you have been a professional since ‘64, your mouth can probably compensate for just about anything.....even a Selmer set-up that is possibly a half step off.

Good Luck.
 
#7 ·
I usually hear of people complaining about Selmers being flat so they have to push the mouthpiece on all the way. I suggest they don't judge the mouthpiece position by the amount of cork they can see, but by the position of the mouthpiece that is in tune.

Some people get used to vintage horns where the C# for example needs lipping up. If you put them on a Selmer or modern sax based on a Selmer, they can find the C# sharp as they are trying to tune like they do on their vintage horn.

Older Selmers do tend to have a few quirks but should be basically in tune. Some liked to open them up with high key settings so check the key openings. If they haven't been messed with then they shouldn't be sharp.
 
#8 ·
A few thoughts:

1) I like the idea of shoving the MP on further first, then playing a while and adjusting to the horn. You might find that it's an issue of familiarization - except that your description implies that all these instruments got significant playing time.

2) Except for the Yamaha and maybe the Macsax, all the other horns listed are, I believe, quite different in design than Selmers (Bundys are descended from Bueschers usually). So for those, there may be some difference in the acoustical design that causes this when they interact with you. The Yamaha should be very much like a Selmer and the MacSax is probably a Taiwanese Selmer copy, so I don't know about that.

3) The physical length of the sax neck may be in play here. If I were to investigate this issue in depth, I would pick a registration point other than the tip of the neck, and use that. I wouldn't use octave vent location as I've seen a lot of variation between manufacturers, nor would I use the distance to the tenon joint as that's a purely mechanical location. Although I have no idea how one would go about measuring the length, I would probably try to use the distance from the tip of the mouthpiece to - say - the top of the A-emitting tone hole (the pad you close when you play G). See if that distance is dramatically different between a Selmer sax and one of the others. If it is, then something acoustic is happening. If it's not, then it's related to the mechanical dimensions of the horn.

4) Have you tried other Selmer saxes? I admit it seems unlikely that 3 different horn of three different models would all be mechanically off, in the same way, but it would be an easy thing to try by swapping horns with another player and seeing if the same thing happens.

5) It may well be something about you; not in the negative sense, but just that something about the way you interact with the sax responds differently to the Selmer bore design than the "classic American" bore design - although that does not explain the Yamaha being dead on for you. I mean, it's typical that Conns and Bueschers require pulling out more than average. Could you have compensated for that by playing with a lower "natural pitch"; then when faced with the different response of the Selmer, somehow unconsciously your "natural pitch" goes up? Still doesn't explain the Yamaha.

6) Another weird item is that the 3 Selmer models you mention are reputed to have different acoustical qualities.

7) You didn't have a technician set the key heights on the Selmers higher in hopes of getting more projection, or something like that, that you've forgotten about? I mean, one has to ask the question.

8) Is this confirmed with an electronic tuner? Differences in timbre can sound like differences in pitch.

It's a head scratcher.
 
#9 · (Edited)
When you own your vintage Selmers, do you play them exclusively,, or switch back and forth with one or more of the other models? I remember when I got my first MarkVi I had the keep the mouthpiece very far to where it would wiggle and I was worried it might even leak some. I thought I would be sending it off to to have the intonation adjusted with keyheights. I now have another Mark Vi and haven’t gotten any of the other saxes (just playing Mark VIs) I own out for at least several weeks. It hadn’t occurred to me until I read your post that I’m not having to put the mouthpiece so far back now on the Mark VIs, most any mouth piece is comfortably in the middle of the cork or more.
 
#10 ·
Very strange that you have to pull the mpc way out on the end of the neck. I've heard of this with vintage Conns when using a small chamber mpc, but not with the Selmers.

On my MKVI tenor, every mpc I have needs to be pushed well onto the neck; there is some variation depending on how long the mpc shank is, but they all go well up on the neck to be in tune. As to vintage American horns, on my Buescher 156 Aristocrat the mpc placement is very close to what it is on the VI (I haven't actually measured it, but going by eye). On the earlier series one Aristo, the mpc is a bit further out, but still halfway up the cork.
 
#11 ·
Might not be the horns. I recently swapped 10M's with a colleague and his was so sharp his mouthpiece was hanging off the end. But when I played it it wasn't sharp at all, and I had my mpc a little more than half way down the cork. But he was playing mine the same way, with the mouthpiece almost at the end. Same thing when he played my Buescher and with one of my mouthpieces. Might be just his chops or the shape of his head, no idea.
 
#13 ·
I think we're touching on something really interesting here (at least to me) - to what extend does each player tune differently? As a result of their unique oral cavity, embouchure etc.

I've often thought that if I have intonation problems on a horn (and a friend doesn't) it's a reflection of deficiencies on my part. Of course, no doubt this could be the case, but interesting to think it could be a reflection of some personal anatomical or technical characteristic.
 
#14 ·
What is it about these horns that makes the OP want to keep them?

Why not get horns that are compatible with the way the player plays?

With this much experience and ability, it would seem like the answer would be give these horns up as a bad job, somehow unsuited. The "why would this happen?" is a good question, but a better one would be "with so many options out there, why fight it?" is the road I would be tempted to take.

These horns would sell well and fund replacements pretty nicely.

Of course, my own theory about tools and gear is that they is there to make things easier and to match my requirements. Get the comfortable tools that can do job. If I had to wrestle with a wobbly mpc on the end of a neck all of the time, I would just throw in the towel.

I am extremely curious about this anomalous result on the OP and Selmers, and with a beginner or a putz, I am sure that there would be a world of suggestions. For a guy with all this ability and experience, the only thing I can conclude is that the question is of abstract interest compared to the need to move on. Choose to be free of this since you can.

Indeed, I wonder if I have misread the OP. Perhaps he does NOT use these horns for his work, but merely keeps them around and is trying to figure them out, while he relies upon horns without these problems when he is performing. That would not make me wonder, and all I could do is wish him the best of luck in pinning down the idiosyncrasy.

In any case, best of luck figuring this out!
 
#17 ·
Years ago I had this complaint with my MkVI when an old friend said that you need to push in and loosen up. In other words the mouthpiece has a certain spot on the neck (usually further up) where the two octaves will be in tune with each other. This along with a looser embouchure helped me play my MkVI in tune. Most other horns seem to tolerate a more firm embouchure without going sharp.
 
#18 ·
The distance a mouthpiece needs to be put on the neck cork to play "in tune" is directly related to the mouthpiece "input pitch" of the player, the volume inside the mouthpiece, and the length of the mouthpiece. Players who play on a lower mouthpiece input pitch typically need to put the mouthpiece farther on the neck to compensate. Players who play higher on the mouthpiece pitch, generally need to pull out. To help diagnose what is happening with the pitch on these Selmer saxes, it would be helpful to know what mouthpiece pitch sounds using a "regular" embouchure, and what pitch sounds using that same embouchure playing the mouthpiece + neck combination.
 
#22 ·
JayeLID and I have discussed this on other forums and we have "agreed to disagree" on this particular topic. It should be noted that another point of view held by many professional saxophone repair techs is that key heights should be adjusted so that each note "vents" with an open and clear sound. From an acoustic standpoint this is the opening which allows the "end correction" of the soundwave which is approximately equal to 30% of the tube diameter at that location to occur unimpeded. Simply put the "end correction" is the distance the soundwave travels past the leading edge of the tonehole before it reverses direction and travels back to the mouthpiece. Each complete soundwave on a conical instrument closed on one end makes a trip to the first opening down and back making the wavelength of the pitch two times the sounding length of the instrument.

Closing key openings beyond this optimal "voicing" position to "tune" a saxophone is a "tonal" compromise that is not the most effective or reasonable choice. When a mouthpiece must be placed precariously close to the end of a saxophone neck in order to bring the overall pitch down to A=440 it suggests that the mouthpiece "effective volume" is too small for the taper of the saxophone and its neck. The better solution then is to find a mouthpiece with a larger interior volume that is a better match for the instrument. If that option is not feasable, adding an extension to the shank of the mouthpiece allows the tuning position on the cork to remain constant while allowing more of the shank to cover the cork for a more stable footing.
 
#23 ·
JayeLID and I have discussed this on other forums and we have "agreed to disagree" on this particular topic. It should be noted that another point of view held by many professional saxophone repair techs is that key heights should be adjusted so that each note "vents" with an open and clear sound. From an acoustic standpoint this is the opening which allows the "end correction" of the soundwave which is approximately equal to 30% of the tube diameter at that location to occur unimpeded. Simply put the "end correction" is the distance the soundwave travels past the leading edge of the tonehole before it reverses direction and travels back to the mouthpiece. Each complete soundwave on a conical instrument closed on one end makes a trip to the first opening down and back making the wavelength of the pitch two times the sounding length of the instrument.

Closing key openings beyond this optimal "voicing" position to "tune" a saxophone is a "tonal" compromise that is not the most effective or reasonable choice. When a mouthpiece must be placed precariously close to the end of a saxophone neck in order to bring the overall pitch down to A=440 it suggests that the mouthpiece "effective volume" is too small for the taper of the saxophone and its neck. The better solution then is to find a mouthpiece with a larger interior volume that is a better match for the instrument. If that option is not feasable, adding an extension to the shank of the mouthpiece allows the tuning position on the cork to remain constant while allowing more of the shank to cover the cork for a more stable footing.
http://saxproshop.com/sax-proshop/customized-modifications/mouthpiece-extension/

http://doctorsaxwoodwinds.com/shop/local-only/accessories/mouthpiece-extensions/

[I got a custom job extending the neck of my Evette Schaffer baritone sax only to learn afterwards that it was High Pitch.]
 
#24 ·
OP: Has anyone else, in front of you, played one of the three horns that were so sharp in your hands? Have you played any Selmer Paris other than the three vintage horns you mention? Might be three out-of-tolerance builds and you were just unlucky. I have no interest in vintage instruments for that very reason.

I own three Selmer Paris alto less than two years old (Serie II, Axos, Ref54) and for me they are all in tune with the MP about ¾ onto the cork (about 1 cm cork showing), just like I see in all my instructional videos, and my FaceTime university faculty teacher confirms--only been playing six months, certainly do not have your experience or skill.

I live an hour south of you so climate is not the answer. Recency of construction and newly(as in past decade or so)-tightened Selmer factory tolerances and standardization might be.

Be a PITA to get together, but I do wonder if you played any of my modern Selmer horns if you would require an unusual or unplayable MP position.

(Whoops, just sold the SII on Reverb and shipped. Keeping the Ref54, my forever horn. May donate the Axos to HS band program.)
 
#32 ·
Might be three out-of-tolerance builds and you were just unlucky. I have no interest in vintage instruments for that very reason.
Are you suggesting that vintage horns (I guess you're including the MKVI as a vintage horn, which is fine) are likely to have 'out-of-tolerance' builds? If so, I'd strongly disagree. The top quality vintage horns (Buescher, Conn, Selmer, King, Martin, etc) were extremely well built and can be put into top playing condition by a good tech. So if that is your reason for avoiding them, you are missing out on some great horns for no good reason. I guess there are plenty of good modern horns out there, so it doesn't matter that much. But I would strongly question your premise. I have 3 vintage tenors (2 Bueschers & the VI) and none of them suffer from 'out-of-tolerance' builds.

Regarding key heights, when I first had my MKVI tenor overhauled the tech mentioned he could raise the key heights a bit to get a bigger sound and I thought that was a good idea. He must have done it right because the intonation is fine with the mpc pushed well in onto the neck.

It still seems a real mystery why those 3 horns notes had all played so sharp. I don't see how we can solve it, given the horns have been sold and are no longer available to test in any way. In any case, it's an anomaly. So I don't think it's a reason to avoid Selmers. But hey, maybe putting this out there will drive down the demand, and hence the price, of MKVIs. :) Dream on...
 
#26 ·
Thank you all for your replies.

OK as the OP I need to clear some things up:

1) I don't own the Selmers anymore. I bought the VI brand new, played it for about 10 years, and had it overhauled at a reputable sax shop every 2 years. (They overhauled my Conn and Couf too and they never played sharp).

2) I had the Modele 26 overhauled once before trading up to the Selmer

3) I never had the VII overhauled because I really wasn't happy with it.

4) I tuned them up to either a Strobe Tuner in the older days or Electronic Tuner after they became available, and usually warmed them up before tuning

5) Three different mouthpieces that I play or played often produce the same results and the pieces that came with the saxes did the same thing.

6) The saxes I'm talking about are all tenors (I also have a 1925 King silver plated alto that has very challenging intonation but the voice of an angel so I'll never trade that one in. The tone is silky sweet and it's impossible to honk on it, but I can honk on the tenors and use the alto when I want to get as sweet as sugar).

Please don't misunderstand my intention. This is not a Selmer complaint, I loved my 26 and my VI, and although I didn't care for the VII very much, it was a nice horn, just not for me. I recently ran across a guy playing a VI and noticed his mouthpiece was pulled all the way out. In conversation he said his Selmer plays sharp and his other saxes don't.

BTW, The intonation was not the reason I sold any of them. I sold the Conn to upgrade to the 26, sold the 26 to upgrade to the VI, and sold the VI to upgrade to the VII (which was foolish), quickly sold the VII because I tried the Couf and immediately bonded with it.

Of the saxes I've owned, the VI, Couf and Yamaha are my favorites. I liked the Couf better than the VI, but it's been too many years since the VI and Couf for me to make a comparative judgment on the Yamaha.

I am still confused. With the same player, the same mouthpieces, the same playing conditions, the same climate, and the same sax shop, why the Selmers played at the end of the cork, and all the others pushed in half way or more.

I doesn't make sense to me, and I'm hoping for an answer, which it looks like I might not get.

But I do appreciate all the attempts.

Insights and incites by Notes
 
#27 ·
I am still confused. With the same player, the same mouthpieces, the same playing conditions, the same climate, and the same sax shop, why the Selmers played at the end of the cork, and all the others pushed in half way or more.

I doesn't make sense to me, and I'm hoping for an answer, which it looks like I might not get.
OK, so you have provided useful info here, First thing that jumped out at me:

I bought the VI brand new, played it for about 10 years, and had it overhauled at a reputable sax shop every 2 years. (They overhauled my Conn and Couf too and they never played sharp).
Keep in mind, the fact that horn may have been 'overhauled', even by a very reputable tech...does not 'automatically' mean the keyheights would have been set FOR a particular player with particular propensities. So you assume "overhaul" means no further adjustments are necessary....but in your particular instance I would say indeed, they were necessary.

next:

5) Three different mouthpieces that I play or played often produce the same results and the pieces that came with the saxes did the same thing.
Referring back to the info Saxoclese provided in his post above...I would say:

3 mouthpieces wasn't enough. Or, THOSE particular 3 weren't enough. Perhaps they shared certain specifications (which might be why you liked them all) which needed to be deviated from in the instance of the Selmers (?)
Again, no need to have gone on a wild mouthpiece search, but I would think 5 or 6 different 'pieces (with some varying specs to them) would give you a fair determinant as to whether this was a mouthpiece-player thing. 3...notsomuch.

Last thing being a question I do not think you addressed (if so, my apologies - I missed it) which is: did any other players try the horns in question ? Did they, too find them to blow sharp ?
 
#28 ·
Well, if we pursue key heights as a possible cause, is it possible that something about the Selmer design causes them to play sharper when set with "fairly open" key heights? In that case, the tech that did work on 2 of the 3 might have tended to set the key heights more open than average and this affected the Selmers more than the others (the one that was not worked on, could just have been set open as received). I mean, I'm grasping at hypotheses here. Although I am not an expert saxophone technician, I am an expert at analyzing data, test results, and field failures of mechanical devices, which is what we have here.

Honestly, from Bob's description it sounds like most of the usual suspects can be eliminated (which I suppose is why he posted it here; if the explanation were obvious, one would just go with the obvious explanation).

The usual scuttlebutt has been that the horns that do "play sharp" so to speak tend to be the classic American designs, especially in tenor and baritone variations - Martin, Conn are the two I see mentioned most. I have not seen a lot of mention of Buescher (the basis for some of the Bundys as Bob mentioned in the OP) "playing sharp" but I suspect it's possible. Thus if anything I would have expected a complaint that you have to push too far on to play the Selmers in tune.

I don't know enough about Couf/Keilwerth to comment, and the real puzzler is a Yamaha and an off-brand Taiwan or Chinese horn not following the Selmer pattern, when it's my understanding that their bore designs are going to be very close to late model Selmers.

It also seems unlikely, though not impossible, that you had three different Selmer saxes, from widely different periods of production, and three rather different designs, that were all somehow wonky from the factory.
 
#29 ·
Well, if we pursue key heights as a possible cause, is it possible that something about the Selmer design causes them to play sharper when set with "fairly open" key heights? In that case, the tech that did work on 2 of the 3 might have tended to set the key heights more open than average and this affected the Selmers more than the others (the one that was not worked on, could just have been set open as received). I mean, I'm grasping at hypotheses here. Although I am not an expert saxophone technician, I am an expert at analyzing data, test results, and field failures of mechanical devices, which is what we have here.

Honestly, from Bob's description it sounds like most of the usual suspects can be eliminated (which I suppose is why he posted it here; if the explanation were obvious, one would just go with the obvious explanation).

The usual scuttlebutt has been that the horns that do "play sharp" so to speak tend to be the classic American designs, especially in tenor and baritone variations - Martin, Conn are the two I see mentioned most. I have not seen a lot of mention of Buescher (the basis for some of the Bundys as Bob mentioned in the OP) "playing sharp" but I suspect it's possible. Thus if anything I would have expected a complaint that you have to push too far on to play the Selmers in tune.

I don't know enough about Couf/Keilwerth to comment, and the real puzzler is a Yamaha and an off-brand Taiwan or Chinese horn not following the Selmer pattern, when it's my understanding that their bore designs are going to be very close to late model Selmers.

It also seems unlikely, though not impossible, that you had three different Selmer saxes, from widely different periods of production, and three rather different designs, that were all somehow wonky from the factory.
An experienced player with good ears and good tech support. Lots of possibilities are ruled out. What is left? Any event, however unlikely, will eventually occur if the sample is large enough. Coincidence happens all of the time, and that is what we have here. Three wonky horns.
 
#36 ·
Interesting discussions here, but I guess no answer.

I don't think the Link 6 hard rubber, Berg 100/0 and Link Brass 8/NY are that similar. And what about the el-cheapo mouthpieces that came with the sax?

Broward Band Instruments had a fine reputation, they did my Selmers, Conn, Couf and perhaps Grassi (I don't remember) plus they loaned me the Bundys when my horn was in the shop. Could they mess up on the key height of 3 Selmers but not the others? Doubtful but possible

Could I have gotten 3 bad Selmers, one used and two brand new? Doubtful but possible.

Could it have something to do with me as a player? If so, I'd be curious to find out what. Not that it matters, the Selmers are long gone. I did play them in tune enough to sit first tenor sax in the all-state band every year I was eligible to compete, and took section leader away from the default first alto. I never got anything less than a Superior in solo competition. And that was all with the Mark VI.

Again I'm not blaming Selmers for anything, a little paper around the tip of the cork worked fine and held the mpc stable enough. I liked the 26 and VI a lot. Didn't care for the VII. Relative intonation was good, the tone was decent, but it only had one tone, I couldn't overblow it (probably a design feature) and subtones sounded too harsh. I kept it a couple of months and found the Couf which I immediately bonded with.

I don't have the Selmers anymore, but finding another sax player with the same situation renewed my curiosity.

Insights and incites by Notes
 
#37 ·
I
Broward Band Instruments had a fine reputation, they did my Selmers, Conn, Couf and perhaps Grassi (I don't remember) plus they loaned me the Bundys when my horn was in the shop. Could they mess up on the key height of 3 Selmers but not the others? Doubtful but possible
IMHO ...and with utmost respect, I am not being snarky or argumentative here...you perhaps are asking the wrong question.
I am not suggesting that, coincidentally, the tech 'messed up' setting the heights on your 3 Selmers while they did a bang-up job on your German and American horns.

I am suggesting that...in this instance....something about the player-horn combo required a return-trip an discussion, & likely more fine-tuning of the Selmers; more attention beyond a tech simply setting the heights to the industry-standard 'defaults'.

And...(forgive me because I am not a 'mouthpiece guy' - my favorite mouthpiece out of 20 I have here is a 60's white plastic job that has "Revere" stamped on it in brown ink)..... can you briefly describe the chambers of the Link HR, Link Metal, and Berg ? (Shape and size of the chambers more so than specs of tip opening or baffles).
 
#39 ·
Sharp-flat it's all part of being a horn player.
I push the mpc more than half way in and relax the embouchure.
When I get tired I tend to bite at the end of a note or breath and hence go sharp.
My Armstrong alto flute had low key heights and was stuffy and out of tune. Bruce Belo raised them little by little and I tested between each change until it was optimized.
 
#42 ·
One more question for Bob:

It sounds from the story that you had the Selmers when you were younger, it seems like pretty much one after the other?

Have you tried a Selmer sax with your current favored MPs in the last few years? I know that over the last ten years my "input pitch" has dropped significantly, to the point that on my Conn baritone (same horn, 34 years!) I now put the mouthpiece a good half inch further on than I did ten years ago. The fact that I've been playing the exact same horn and mouthpiece over that time tells me it's a change in me.

My theory, then, would be that you yourself have changed and your "natural pitch" has dropped, which incidentally was roughly concurrent with your change from three successive Selmer tenors to other makes.

What do you think, does the timeline support this theory? Have you played a Selmer lately and noted the mouthpiece position versus your regular instrument, when being played by the "you" of today?
 
#44 ·
The time line thing is the key here as turf points out. From what I can piece together, and I've known notes for about 1/4 century or more, there is no way to reasonably conclude that a Couf or Grasssi being used in the 80s through 2010 in a midi duo with ones spouse plays in tune while a mark 6 tuned to the first alto in a band of high school kids in the 60s or a mk7 in a rock band in the 70s played defectively sharp. Notes didn't get the Link NY until the mid 90s as I recall. If you had the Berg at the time, maybe it was the problem.

We didn't have little electronic tuners in our cases in the 60s and 70s. Strobes were a rarity that required specialized knowledge to operate correctly. Many were tube models requiring constant calibration. One can't in good faith believe that this is anything but user error.

I played my mark 6 sharp in the 60s, too. Now it plays in tune.
 
#45 ·
I used the Conn first, then the Selmers 26, VI, VII, Couf in that order. During the 26, VI and Couf eras I had the horns overhauled and got Bundys for a loaner. The Conn, Couf, and Bundys played center cork or further in. (I never had the VII overhauled, I only played it a few months. As soon as I found out I couldn't overblow it, I went back for my VI but it was sold and then as soon as I found the Couf I traded in the VII.)

I had a Pan American as a backup horn during the VI, VII and Couf days. The Pan A played center or further.

So only the Selmers played sharp, the Bundys, Conn, Pan American, and Couf all played in the middle of the cork or farther. So did the later saxes, Grassi, Mac and Yamaha.

It was another good guess though.

As my friend Robert pointed out, I got the Link 8 NY after during the Couf to Grassi years, so let's rule that mouthpiece out except for the fact that it tunes pretty much where the Berg and the hard rubber Link 6 does today. So I would just assume the 8 NY would be in line with the others on the VI and VII.

Another good guess though.

I guess there is no stock, easy answer.

It's a curious mystery to me, and it seems it's going to remain one. It's a not life or death situation, and I doubt I'll own another Selmer at this point. If I were to buy a classic sax now, I'd like to try a Super 20 Silversonic but since I work for musician's wages, I doubt that will happen any time soon as I can buy many more toys with that kind of money.

Besides I'm happy with my MacSax and my Yamaha, so unless something unfortunate happens with one, they should last until I reach the coda. But then, who knows? (Never say never.)

Notes
 
#46 ·
...I doubt I'll own another Selmer at this point. If I were to buy a classic sax now, I'd like to try a Super 20 Silversonic but since I work for musician's wages...
You might consider a Buescher 156 Aristocrat, which you can get for much less $$ than the King. I've played my 156 back-to-back with a few Super 20s and it has a similar sound/feel, but I found the Buescher to play better than most of the Kings with the exception of one Silversonic that I considered about 'equal' to the Buescher. Even though I could have bought the Silversonic from a friend for a pretty good price, I wasn't tempted after playing it next to my 156 (they were so similar there was no need to have both, especially since my VI is the alternate horn).

But going back to the topic, why not take a tuner and go try a few Selmers just to see if they play sharp? Just to satisfy your curiosity?
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top