Sax on the Web Forum banner
41 - 60 of 154 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
525 Posts
If a Chinese horn was made that rivals my horns, I'd buy it and sell my horns. It's not like I'm actively trying them all out, I figure if one appears folks here would say so, and I'd give it a try. I get to feel a little stupid taking our horns that some would pay a small fortune for out to a gig that pays $150. Kind of a big risk. But that's what they're for, right?
 

·
Moderator
Grafton + TH & C alto || Naked Lady 10M || TT soprano || Martin Comm III
Joined
·
30,100 Posts
If a Chinese horn was made that rivals my horns, I'd buy it and sell my horns.
I've already done that in regard to my baritone. This year I imagine I will be using Chinese made alto and tenor in preference to my Conn 10M, Buecher 400 TH&C and Rampone & Cazzani Two Voices.

There are now Chinese instruments that are as good as any from anywhere. The main ones I know of are marketed as made elsewhere (so I'm not going to ruffle feathers by naming them), and this is the big problem - getting over the prejudice that just because there are so many crap instruments from China, that the Chinese manufacturers are incapable of making good ones. obviously this cannot be true.




I get to feel a little stupid taking our horns that some would pay a small fortune for out to a gig that pays $150. Kind of a big risk.
That's what insurance is for. Then there can be no risk, unless the horn in question is more than a tool of the trade and has some emotional value, family heirloom or whatever.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
4,690 Posts
There are now Chinese instruments that are as good as any from anywhere.
So why not have some pride and brand a name on it instead of coming off as a cheesy fake? The prejudice will go away when the presentation is legitimate and with a little pride. A well-made product will always sell no matter where it was made.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
14,430 Posts
What a pile of manure! The original post in this thread was about a FAKE Selmer saxophone. The whole issue is not about how a Chinese instrument may play, it is about COUNTERFEITING . . . trademark infringements . . . criminal conduct.

Granted, if a Chinese-made saxophone plays great, fine. If it has similar attributes in design and keywork, fine (notwithstanding any patent infringements, which as I understand it is a more murky area than trademarks).

But if some thief puts a false mark on it for whatever reason (and most likely to fool prospective buyers), that changes the whole situation. Why can't some of you (like Don G) get it through your heads that knowingly buying/selling/possessing a falsely-marked (with a registered trademark) saxophone is a crime in most countries, especially in the USA?

And does it matter where the whole idea of trademarks originated? No. That argument is way behind us. I think we all know what a trademark means - to the person who made it, to the person who sells it, and to the person who buys it. If you knowingly buy something like this, you need to re-visit ethics training - and throw yourselves on the mercy of the court.

I am sickened by the vapid claims that "I just wanted to know (paraphrased) . . ." Or, "I only paid $350 for a nice looking saxophone and it plays great," when it has a false marking on it. When you pay anyone money for such an item, you are enabling the whole process of counterfeiting. You bear equal guilt. If you do that (buying for research) you'd better have a P.I. license and a contract from the trademark owner.

And I am NOT talking about SEL MER, or SELMAN, I am taking about saxophones marked with the faux Selmer or Yanagisawa (or whatever) trademarks, marketed as real Selmers or Yanagisawas.

There is NO excuse for doing business with fake products, period. DAVE
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,574 Posts
A related problem is the increasing energy of the counterfeiters in promoting their wares, almost to the point of crowding out information about the genuine articles. The crooks at DHgate, a Chinese online store, are particularly aggressive. If you do a generic Google search for Selmer or Yanagisawa saxophones, you'll be inundated with ads from DHgate for their bogus, $350 horns. They will sell you any monstrosity you want. Looking for a cheap sax that is both an A992 and a WO20 at the same time? Miraculously, DHgate has it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
525 Posts
What a pile of manure! The original post in this thread was about a FAKE Selmer saxophone. The whole issue is not about how a Chinese instrument may play, it is about COUNTERFEITING . . . trademark infringements . . . criminal conduct.

Granted, if a Chinese-made saxophone plays great, fine. If it has similar attributes in design and keywork, fine (notwithstanding any patent infringements, which as I understand it is a more murky area than trademarks).

But if some thief puts a false mark on it for whatever reason (and most likely to fool prospective buyers), that changes the whole situation. Why can't some of you (like Don G) get it through your heads that knowingly buying/selling/possessing a falsely-marked (with a registered trademark) saxophone is a crime in most countries, especially in the USA?

And does it matter where the whole idea of trademarks originated? No. That argument is way behind us. I think we all know what a trademark means - to the person who made it, to the person who sells it, and to the person who buys it. If you knowingly buy something like this, you need to re-visit ethics training - and throw yourselves on the mercy of the court.

I am sickened by the vapid claims that "I just wanted to know (paraphrased) . . ." Or, "I only paid $350 for a nice looking saxophone and it plays great," when it has a false marking on it. When you pay anyone money for such an item, you are enabling the whole process of counterfeiting. You bear equal guilt. If you do that (buying for research) you'd better have a P.I. license and a contract from the trademark owner.

And I am NOT talking about SEL MER, or SELMAN, I am taking about saxophones marked with the faux Selmer or Yanagisawa (or whatever) trademarks, marketed as real Selmers or Yanagisawas.

There is NO excuse for doing business with fake products, period. DAVE
I agree with you. But if it was THE horn, and it had some cheesy brand name on it, I think I'd re-brand it Bokagee, buy 10 and keep 2. Kind of dumb, but I'd pay extra for it. Bokagee, BTW, is a euphemism for men in Turkey that sweep up after horse-drawn carts and carriages, literally Keeper of the Dung. Cheesy enough as it is I guess.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
14,430 Posts
Bokagee: Now that's funny!

I've posted this before, but I once played with a superb trombone player who owned a music store in SoCal. He bought a bunch of those cheap Chinese altos (Monique?), went through each one of them and re-did the pad-work, springs, corks, etc., and turned them into real players. I played one. He was able to sell them for more than he'd put into them, too.

This was a while back. From what I've read here on SOTW, many Chinese manufacturers have improved their QC since my friend did that. But . . . no way would I ever consider one with a fake trademark on it, regardless of how well it played. DAVE
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
4,690 Posts
I agree with you. But if it was THE horn, and it had some cheesy brand name on it, I think I'd re-brand it Bokagee, buy 10 and keep 2. Kind of dumb, but I'd pay extra for it. Bokagee, BTW, is a euphemism for men in Turkey that sweep up after horse-drawn carts and carriages, literally Keeper of the Dung. Cheesy enough as it is I guess.
Wow ! A real name that stands for something. I would buy that ....
 

·
SOTW Columnist, Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
23,642 Posts
I get to feel a little stupid taking our horns that some would pay a small fortune for out to a gig that pays $150. Kind of a big risk. But that's what they're for, right?
Your last sentence is correct. However I strongly disagree that it's a stupid idea to take a top quality horn out for a gig that pays $150. You can buy a lot of reeds with that $150! And as you say that's what the horn is for; to be played. I've taken my VI out on countless gigs, never once felt stupid doing so, and it's never been stolen or damaged on the job. I dropped it on the carpet at home once and that cost some money in repairs! And that was stupid. But when I take the horn on a gig, I am vigilant about protecting it and never let it out of my sight.

Back to the main topic, I want to second everything Dave Dolson said. I agree completely. It's a travesty to put the exact Selmer logo on a copy of a VI; that makes it a fake and is fraudulent. And I'd consider anyone who buys such a thing just because they want everyone to think they have a real Selmer (not that anyone gives a ^&*%), is also a fraud.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
589 Posts
Bokagee: Now that's funny!

I've posted this before, but I once played with a superb trombone player who owned a music store in SoCal. He bought a bunch of those cheap Chinese altos (Monique?), went through each one of them and re-did the pad-work, springs, corks, etc., and turned them into real players. I played one. He was able to sell them for more than he'd put into them, too.

This was a while back. From what I've read here on SOTW, many Chinese manufacturers have improved their QC since my friend did that. But . . . no way would I ever consider one with a fake trademark on it, regardless of how well it played. DAVE
So this tells me that a properly set up horn is waaaay more important than the name engraved on the bell. Correct?
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
14,430 Posts
Airflyte: I think so. I've played plenty of hi-end saxophones that were not given a once-over by retailers and they showed it. I've played plenty of older saxophones after a good overhaul and they were marvelous. All about condition (with a caveat about initial design and manufacturing meeting design specs). DAVE
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
3,324 Posts
What a pile of manure! The original post in this thread was about a FAKE Selmer saxophone. The whole issue is not about how a Chinese instrument may play, it is about COUNTERFEITING . . . trademark infringements . . . criminal conduct.

Granted, if a Chinese-made saxophone plays great, fine. If it has similar attributes in design and keywork, fine (notwithstanding any patent infringements, which as I understand it is a more murky area than trademarks).

But if some thief puts a false mark on it for whatever reason (and most likely to fool prospective buyers), that changes the whole situation. Why can't some of you (like Don G) get it through your heads that knowingly buying/selling/possessing a falsely-marked (with a registered trademark) saxophone is a crime in most countries, especially in the USA?

And does it matter where the whole idea of trademarks originated? No. That argument is way behind us. I think we all know what a trademark means - to the person who made it, to the person who sells it, and to the person who buys it. If you knowingly buy something like this, you need to re-visit ethics training - and throw yourselves on the mercy of the court.

I am sickened by the vapid claims that "I just wanted to know (paraphrased) . . ." Or, "I only paid $350 for a nice looking saxophone and it plays great," when it has a false marking on it. When you pay anyone money for such an item, you are enabling the whole process of counterfeiting. You bear equal guilt. If you do that (buying for research) you'd better have a P.I. license and a contract from the trademark owner.

And I am NOT talking about SEL MER, or SELMAN, I am taking about saxophones marked with the faux Selmer or Yanagisawa (or whatever) trademarks, marketed as real Selmers or Yanagisawas.

There is NO excuse for doing business with fake products, period. DAVE
Amen! It seems that so few care about right or wrong.

If you want to talk about the quality of Chinese horns start a thread ( there are already many) but if you want to sing the praises of counterfeits me thinks you have taken a wrong turn.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
I got the impression that this topic start was about the comparison of the fakes and the real ones. I agree that counterfeiting is bad/wrong/illegal to do - and buy. But I KNEW what I was buying. It was sold as a copy - as are many Rolex copy watches. I don't intend to sell or show off mine as the real ones.

Real counterfeiters make every detail "real" and present their work as such. These instrument sellers have specifically said that these are copies and there are some differences.
So many "experts", even here on SOTW, make opinions and judgements on saxes that they NEVER played - or have even seen... I THINK this thread was asking for real people to give their real opinions on their real experience with a "fake" to a "legit". After all, most sax people admit that Chinese/Asian made saxes have come a long way and many can be just as good as most. So let's try the comparison approach and lay off the judgmental name calling. These are NOT exact or marketed as Selmers, etc., therefore not counterfeit. Nor am I promoting counterfeiting. I'm sure that we can say "boo" to a bad one and also "sing the praises" of a good one.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
14,430 Posts
Don G: No, this thread was about counterfeits, a saxophone not made by Selmer bearing a false Selmer trademark. There is a significant difference among saxophones made by the trademark owner, saxophones based on the design of a certain brand but not marked as such, and a saxophone marked with an unauthorized registered trademark AND offered for sale as being of that brand but actually NOT being of that brand.

You posted that you bought a fake Yamaha and had ordered a fake Yanagisawa. There is another recent thread here on SOTW about fake Yanagisawas. Those are instruments NOT made by Yanagisawa but marked as if they were made by Yanagisawa and intended to be sold as Yanagisawas. The same applies to Selmer and Yamaha infringed trademarks.

If you knowingly bought a fake Yamaha with all the Yamaha markings, as you described in your post, then you committed a crime. That is not name-calling, that is by your own admission. Those are not clones or design-copies, they are counterfeit.

As far as expertise, I've posted about that before, but I'll write here again for your information. I spent 30 years in law enforcement as a sworn peace officer (in field operations, investigations, supervision, command, and executive-levels) and another 12 years working for the Motion Picture Association of America's U.S. Anti-Piracy Operations. I am a court-qualified expert in identifying questioned copyrighted and trademarked property of the major studios. I've been to numerous U.S. Customs' and law enforcement seminars with trademark representatives of a variety of major manufacturers including Oakley Sunglasses, Harley-Davidson motorcycles, General Motors, Levi Strauss and a host of other manufacturers whose trademarks are constantly infringed.

I know an infringed trademark when I see one. DAVE
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,325 Posts
Discussion Starter · #56 ·
I started the thread just to talk about the state of Chinese fake Selmers, and how they're getting closer to the real thing, at least visually. I have no clue how they play, though I know some Chinese fake Yanagisawas play well. Also I think "Sel mer" was done because of a poor typo rather than shielding from copyright liability, considering the HENRI SELMER stamp at the visually awkward serif "Selmer" have no spacing. They're even feebly copying the serial number stamping at the bottom of the body, though the font is all wrong.

A couple years down the line we may see more "is this a real Selmer" threads as the differences become more subtle. Not close to getting there yet, but closer than say 5 years ago.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
14,430 Posts
Well, a thread about fake anythings certainly opens the issue about counterfeit trademarks and the ethics (or lack of) in doing any kind of business with an item bearing an infringed mark.

One element of the crime requires that the real trademark be registered. To prove the crime, the registration of the mark needs to be proven. If “Selmer” is registered as a trademark, then the court will decide if “Sel mer” is an infringement or merely an error. An expert witness (usually a Selmer representative) or a stipulation by counsel can resolve any questions about authenticty of the trademarks on the item(s) in question.

Whether or not a certain mark is a registered trademark only begs the ethical issues, in my mind. Regardless of fakery being criminal or not, is only mildly interesting to me. The thought of buying a fake anything should be a red flag to anyone. DAVE
 

·
Moderator
Grafton + TH & C alto || Naked Lady 10M || TT soprano || Martin Comm III
Joined
·
30,100 Posts
These are NOT exact or marketed as Selmers, etc., therefore not counterfeit..
I'm under the impression the thread is discussing the instruments that are marketed as Selmer MKVI and will they (or are they already) becoming better and more convincing counterfeits (as opposed to the many copies that have other brand names and are not marketed as Selmer). How exact they are or aren't is less relevant - that is just down to the actual, "quality" of the copying.

As I already said, I don't think think there is much of a market for a good quality MKVI fake, which would by necessity have to cost more than the $200 crap ones which are not aimed at professional players as a customer base but are probably bought by the unsuspecting wannabe. Or (sadly) some parent who heard that the best saxophone is a MKVI, look it up on Ebay and see these and have no idea it may be fake so buy it for their child in complete ignorance of the actual legality or quality.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Dave G.... I see that you are a pro in your field. I apologize for being confused on the defined degree of counterfeiting.
In my feeble mind, a toy obviously fake dollar bill is acceptable if it isn't obviously a real dollar bill - nor presented as a real one.
The Yamaha sop that I referred to did NOT have ALL the markings of a real one and was NOT presented as one - nor will I say that to anyone that it is. Ditto on the Yani that I ordered.
If you say that I'm a criminal, then sic the law on me.

Still, I see your point and highly respect your opinions - and AGREE with you.
Goodbye thread..... I'm off to jail.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
14,430 Posts
Don G: It is "Dave D".

I don't want to beat this to death but what you posted in Post 59 is in conflict with what you posted in your original post . . . "Just fer kicks, I bought a clone/copy/fake Yamaha soprano recently and was AMAZED. The construction seemed identical and it had ALL the Yamaha markings/engravings except the serial number. The bottom line was that it played and sounded better than my other sops (NAME brands). I'm looking to take it to a Yamaha dealer for a better closeup comparison.
The only disagreement with Pete T is that I wouldn't want to get a fake that looks like an piece of red rot, ugly old sax...(my apologies to the "purists"). Heck, get me a fake that looks new and great! …. or a black lacquer version..... copper plate anyone? I just sold a Saxgourmet Model 6 (copper look) that I practically cried when I was packing it to mail.
I've got another copy/clone/fake Yani curved sop ordered . . ."

DAVE
 
41 - 60 of 154 Posts
Top