[Anglo]

Any reason to avoid one? I once read they weren't as good after 1965.

 

[whaler]

The worst MarkVI still outplays any other horn, but the people here that don't have one think differently.

 

[stevesklar]

the best ones were made in 1966 (concidentally the same year I was born) =-)

of the early 1970s mk VIs i've played I found them nice (very very nice) players but tonal wise was a bit brighter than earlier VI models. Of course, I didnt' keep any sn# nor were i comparing multiple VIs A/B. But A/Bing normally against my CB, Coufs, VII, 875 or Vito that i had during those time frames and not directly against another VI - just somethime to keep in mind per my opinion ...

 

[hakukani]

Sanborn plays a MkVI from 1972or3.

I play a 199,xxx. I like it.

I remember someone saying 'I play sax, not serial numbers'

 

[Birdman]

I just traded my 68' to a friend for his unused 72' sn:219,xxx He doesn't like that the horn had almost no laquer but I think it plays great.

-Birdman

 

[jmm1713]

The best horn i've EVER played was a 225,xxx mark vi alto .

 

[Birdman]

why don't people ever put the last three digits for serial numbers?

-Birdman

 

[jacobeid]

^^For security reasons.

I love VI's, but give me 6m and i'll be happier.

 

[ShedShark]

You can commit insurance fraud with the full serials.

 

[Birdman]

oh I see now.

thanks,
Birdman

 

[davidk]

I prefer the sound of late tenors to early ones. I find the early models a bit stuffy. Try models from across the production span, and go with the one you prefer.

Of the 7 I A/B'd, I found the two with the post-200xxx numbers were my favourite. You might think otherwise.