Is my Mk 6 tenor original?

Looks like a re-laquer... pretty though. Plays great? Awsome dude! You gotta MVI! Play with pride.

looks like a Chinese copy ... just kidding =)

looks like a relaq to me too. anytime the engraving is not "deep" that is a sign of a relacquer - or buffing actually. But don't worry. If it plays great then it is great.

Agreed, looks like a relacquer. It should be noted that relacquers are absolute garbage. I will give you $5 so that I can rid you of this junk, and turn it into a lamp. Uhhh...do you have change for a $10? :twisted:

Seriously, I wouldn't stress out about it. As previously stated, "If it plays great then it is great".

Let's see; a relaquered MarkVI or any other horn? Not a difficult decision.

I have a 107XXX and my engraving is deeper and the patina is different. I think yours has been relacquered.

That aside. My horn blows doors. I love it, I think you have a great one there and you should love it and enjoy it for what it is. I don't think that a relacq is necessarily a bad thing (except for resale). I've played some great Selmers that were relacquered and I sometimes wonder it the buffing helps the vibrance of the horn. Ultimately, it doesn't matter. Enjoy the horn.

Was it advertised as original lacquer? I know it's been a year, but you might still have a case against the seller depending upon the statute of limitations for your jurisdiction. Just curious... why would you think it would be original despite light engraving? Did it come in a replacement case as well?

Grumps said:

Was it advertised as original lacquer? I know it's been a year, but you might still have a case against the seller depending upon the statute of limitations for your jurisdiction. Just curious... why would you think it would be original despite light engraving? Did it come in a replacement case as well?

Click to expand...

The case is non-original--a nice semi-soft contoured Protech. The seller did state the lacquer to be original, and said a well-respected tech in the area, Mike Hammer, looked it over and agreed with him. I didn't call Mike to verify this. The seller and I are both in Philadelphia.

I'll put up a few more pics this evening. The bell engraving doesn't seem sharp enough, but neither can I find anything akin to uneven buffing. I've just chalked it up to someone with a light touch doing the engraving, but would still like to know for sure. The color seems about right, although it's tough to show that in photos.

My 5 digit tenor has a beautiful relaq, and the non stamped engraving is now lighter, and is similar in depth to yours. It still is a great horn.

--Sidepipes

It's a re lacquered horn. I cant believe how many Mark VI's on ebay, say they have original lacquer, and they are far from it.Some say it doesn't make much difference but it hurts the resale price.You should tell the tech seller to pay you the difference.

its a relacquer .. but so is mine ... just worry about how it plays .

I have a nicely relacquered Mk VI tenor. No, I won't trade it, it's a keeper.

It's pretty difficult to tell from photos but for what it's worth it actually looks like original lacquer to me. I think the engraving on horns finished in France ( by that I mean engraved and lacquered) isn't as deep as those done in the USA. The definition around the serial number etc looks pretty convincing.

Here's a question for anyone in the know. How does a chemical de-lacquer effect a horns price? There seems to be a general consensus, whether it is fact or fiction, that horns with little to no lacquer resonate better. Chemical stripping does not require buffing and subsequent loss of metal. Would this mean that horns that have been de-lacquered in this manner are more sought after?

I know some of you guys look for a silver lining and say how it plays is all that matters, but you weren't the ones who might have paid a few extra grand on what may have been a falsely advertised saxophone, now were you?

Grumps said:

I know some of you guys look for a silver lining and say how it plays is all that matters, but you weren't the ones who might have paid a few extra grand on what may have been a falsely advertised saxophone, now were you?

Click to expand...

I can't speak for other parties, but if I were to sell, I'd still get at least my money back, original lacquer or not. I'm a patient buyer... and do not consider my horns a sound financial investment anyway.

More pictures to come - now it is time for beer!

neehaw said:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/sets/72157602382026061/

Just a couple of photos for your expert consideration. I picked up this tenor (my first Mk6 of any sort) last year and although its bell engraving is light, I believe it's original. Plays great in any event, so don't worry about hurting my feelings. ;-)

Click to expand...

Neehaw,

Hey, I think you're in luck: There's a guy in Philly that's an expert on saxes (has been dealing for years, as I understand it), and if there's anyone who would know if it was original lacquer or not, it's him. His name is Pete F.... (probably shouldn't post his last name here without his permission), and I think he uses this board regularly. He may even know the guy that sold it to you, and what kind of reputation he has.

He goes by the name "saxmanpete" on the board here, and glancing through some old posts I see he freely posts his e-mail address, so you shouldn't have any problem getting in contact with him. If he's near where you're located he may be willing to take a look at it for you.

Good luck.

I really don't see how anyone can be sure from those photos. Send some more pics and maybe we can get a better idea.

This guy says this horn IS COMPLETELY ORIGINAL LACQUER AND IS NEAR MINT Unreal...http://cgi.ebay.com/SELMER-MARK-VI-TENOR-SAXOPHONE-FIVE-DIGIT_W0QQitemZ250174008908QQihZ015QQcategoryZ16234QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem