Sax on the Web Forum banner

1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
TENOR, soprano, alto, baritone
Joined
·
7,431 Posts
Very cute, but lose the F# if you want a 'vintage look'. Horn sounds like all the rest of them to me. I think my MK VI/no F# just went up another $500. :)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,844 Posts
There is as much difference in a horn without an F# as there is in the myth that removing the lacquer makes a difference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,589 Posts
There is as much difference in a horn without an F# as there is in the myth that removing the lacquer makes a difference.
Exactly! The F# key is the best invention added to the saxophone design. I'm yet to find a Selmer with or without F# key that outplays my 1955 Mark VI that has the F# key (and I've played quite a few in the past 20 years).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,325 Posts
Vintage - Shmintage, it's all in one's head. SOTW is steeped in sax folklore, which gives everyone here something to jaw about, but the end result is often undecided because of all the varying opinions. From my own experience I've found that all the "good" horns I've had, new and vintage, have all sounded the same to me, with the exception of different nuances. I really don't care what equipment you play, eventually you will sound like you, on any horn you're using. That's what I got out of watching the demo as well, this cat had pretty much the same sound on each horn. If you don't like your sound or you really haven't fully developed it yet then the only way to adjust it is from the brain first, hearing that sound concept and playing it out.

As far as these modern vintage horns go, that's just another marketing scheme. They could finish all of those horns in bright gold lacquer and it wouldn't make a significant difference in their sound. However, visually it would put them in the same category with the Yamaha's, Yanagisawa's, Selmer's and other top of the line manufactures that they're already in competition with. So, basically if you think your buying a modern sax with a vintage sound maybe you are or maybe you're not. Or, you're just buying a modern horn that's made to look old.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
I liked this McVouty from apparently Rochester...has he/she gone to Eastman school? Whatever, I agree. It's not the axe, it's the cat playing it. Though I must say I got a kick recently out of playing a student-level Eastman 251 alto I was able to take home for $100 rent-to-own with a 540 credit score. What I liked about it was its "vintage" sound...kinda warm, soft, eerily like a poorman's Desmond. And I'm more in the style of Bird (psychiatrically, not the chops). I don't have much sax life, only a gig here and there over the years, most recently 1st tenor last year in a community college jazz band with NO tenor band experience on a yamaha 62III-it wasn't the sax's fault I couldn't do a quality performance-it was the mouthpiece-reed set up. I think here that issue is WAY overlooked. You can have a $15,000 VI whatever and if the mouthpiece-reed-lig thing ain't set up right-and you don't have the chops...you're going to sound as good a cheap student model. A real pro can be selective with what he/she has, if he/she has the bread. I read a bit about what 'Trane played...Desmond...Bird...but I can't remember off the top of my head. I just pick up the 251 with a Selmer S80 C/plastic #3 reed from time to time and noodle off recordings now, like with Bitches Brew or whatever. Mostly a clarinetist in my life, all kinds of different stuff. Sax is fun, especially alto. Tenor is too bulky for me. I played a Martin Bari a million years ago briefly, speaking of vintage, that was OK. I got to taste a little of big band late in life but no big solos (except for a little clarinet thing in front of the director of NYC's New School who was visiting my community college last year) and too much of a jerk to play in bands. So now thanks to "new school" computer technology I can just play with computer recordings in the middle of California nowhere. Still got to work on less bite on that mouthpiece...maybe then I'll be more "vintage"...whatever...have fun y'all.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Coffee Guru
Joined
·
38,865 Posts
GO BACK TO THE PAST (a distant booming echoing voice) :Rant::soapbox::evil:



Of course the saxophone is one the first modern "involution instruments “.


The explanation is the fact that in 1969 we reached for the stars and we were punished, precisely as when humanity started building high risers with the tower of Babylon.

EVERYBODY knows that!

An involution instrument is an instrument which was created , yes, out of the technical evolution (which made possible for them to be technically made and produced as opposed to what was produced before) but the saxophone quickly and briefly reached evolutionary perfection (around 1940 to 1970) then, they started to recede into involution in other words negating the very first thing that made possible their creation.

TECHNOLOGICAL EVOLUTION.

Everything else kept evolving : Bicycles, typewriters, cars, trains, medicines, only saxophones devolved. peculiar isn’t it?

Industry was purposely trying to leave the very core of any research behind. Any drawings were lost, any wisdom too, all it was left were the bare shadows (just an involuntary pun Keilwerth too devolved) of what once was perfection.

Throughout the ’80 to day we had to make do with inferior things and were left to just desire those, less than a million (including all brands) , instruments made in the golden era, when mankind had reached the stars and was punished loosing the ability to make excellent saxophones forever!


Sad destiny.

Abolish the F# ( perish the thought of a high G!).
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top