Ben, I always love seeing your posts! It’s great to have real feedback from a great artisan!
Thanks for posting these fun posts for us to enjoy.

 

I have one in a c* that I want opened up to an F. Do you think you’d be able to do it, Ben? It’s playing really well but I feel like it could be better.

 

He’s the man to go to. 🎷🎷🎷

 

Just curious Ben, how are the vintage soloists different from, or similar to, a current Super Session for soprano?

 

Having now played them both, I think they’re close enough tonally so as not to stress too much about going vintage unless you’re a collector or just have to play really old stuff. I think this one has slightly more mid and low harmonics and is slightly less focused than the Super Session. The slight diffusion tonally just sounds amazing on my Yamaha Custom EX soprano.

Looking online just now, the notoriously overpriced SaxStable on eBay has a worse condition (more fading) C* version of this piece for $1,650. So I’d hate to see where SaxStable would price this one.

 

If the virtues of an old soloist-era oval-on-table soprano mouthpiece are an understood thing and can be replicated, and you want one with a more open facing than one you have, why not buy one of the several modern takeoffs on soloists for less than you could sell a C* for?

If an old soloist-era oval-on-table soprano mouthpiece has some magic that is not fully understood and is not successfully replicated by modern makers, why kill at least half the magic by refacing it?

 

I'm curious, too . . . I have what I THINK is a Selmer-Paris "Airflow" C* (in an oval on the bottom of the table) soprano mouthpiece that I bought new in 1957 from Locke's Music in downtown L.A.. It does not have "Soloist" marked on it. It has the scroll-shank design and a small round chamber opening.

The Selmer name/logo and "Made In France" stamping is a lot smaller than the markings shown in this thread's photos.

SO, why do you think your mouthpiece is a "Soloist" when it is not marked as such? I've been led to believe that Selmer marked their Soloist mouthpieces with that word, and that if the word Soloist was not on the mouthpiece, then it was not a Soloist, but some other model-name (like Airflow).

As far as playability, mine is good, typical of small-tipped Selmer pieces, but my Concepts play better - for me. DAVE

 

Holy cats, $1500?

I bought a Holton soprano with a Meyer and Selmer C* mouthpieces in the case for $125 back in 1981.

 

@Dave Dolson IIRC the orientation of the oval, and maybe the throat/chamber size, are the ways of telling the difference. This thread talks about some differences, but I vaguely recall another thread in which someone described what sounded like an exception?

Selmer soprano. How to ID a Soloist vs. an Air Flow

I think I may have discovered a way to identify a Selmer soprano Soloist as opposed to an Air Flow. Selmer soprano Soloists (and Air Flows) are not marked as such but have just the opening in an oval on the table. Today, I acquired a short shank (scroll) Selmer soprano mpc which has the opening...

www.saxontheweb.net

 

Serafino: The orientation of my oval is like the one in the photo . . . the only difference is that my C* mark within the oval does not have the dashes before and after the C* like the photo shows the "-E-".

Thanks for the offer to dig up old posts - I didn't bother with that because it really doesn't matter to me other than to pique my curiosity. I'm sure I'll soon forget much of the detail. DAVE

 

I have a "soloist-style" mouthpiece in F facing that is similar to this (the difference being that the facing is not marked on the table). My understanding is these mouthpieces are the same as the Soloist, but made later. As a result they are only worth $500, not $1500 . It plays beautifully.

It's amazing to me that these old mouthpieces are worth so much. I actually didn't buy the piece, I got it in trade for a Selmer metal Jazz mouthpiece in an E facing. I don't remember how much I paid for that, but I bought it new in 1974. (I bought that piece because, well, Trane...). I used to jam with a guy and he suggested one time we try each other's mouthpieces. We both said "want to trade?" at the same time. Each of us thought we had got the better end of the deal...

 

I had an Oval F piece about 15 years ago. Amazing piece. I sold it to buy my kids one of those wooden play sets. I think I got $700 which was the more than I ever thought a mouthpiece would be worth.

 

I think $1,500 is a bit of a stretch, but it's still worth a pretty petty. I had an original E in the past that just didn't do it for me, but I currenty have a Ted Klum refaced one that is amazing! If someone were to find one with a little damage and in need of a good reface, I wouldn't hesitate to say go for it.

 

Sometimes wonder if Selmer is to soprano as Meyer is to alto and Link is to tenor.

 

I think that would be about right in a lot of cases. The Selmer Soprano mouthpiece has been a piece that works on many sopranos. It's not for everyone -- some may even rail against it. Although, I've seen people play these pieces on almost every soprano I can think of aside from some Taiwanese horns.

 

I just bought an oval table C* for $200…. Needs reface but very keen to see how it comes out.
Seemed to be a good deal

 

I've had a couple of the more modern Selmer Soloist soprano mouthpieces with the facing stamped on top rather than on the table (are they known as scroll shank or soloist style??). I had an F and recently acquired an E however neither really suited me and I much prefer my standard Vandoren S35.

 

So, is the Super Session the same kind of "horseshoe" chamber as the old Soloists? I'm currently using an S-80 square chamber piece but even on the very non-oboeish Buescher it has more of that oboe bite than I would like. I haven't played the Soloist (or similar) on soprano since I sold it off in about 1984, so my tonal memory is probably NG anyway.

 

I believe the Selmer Soloist soprano never had a horseshoe chamber. They were made with a round chamber and so are the Super Session.

 

Now that you say that, I think I remember asking this question before and getting the same answer.

 

Ben, how does the oval piece compare to a typical round chamber?

I have a short shank original "E",with the small round chamber. It is an unholy mouthpiece, capable of being very warm but also cutting through anything. I love it. I had Theo Wanna open it up to a 6*, which is likely sacrilege and diminishes the value, but he made a good mouthpiece into my "perfect" soprano mouthpiece. It's quite something.

I don't know how that piece plays, but considering how good this "E" played before, I can only imagine...