Sax on the Web Forum banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Just wondered if anyone has tried this new model horn and could perhaps draw some comparisons with the earlier Series III soprano saxes.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
14,268 Posts
Antipodes: Welcome to SOTW. I was not aware that Selmer had issued a NEW version of the Serie III soprano (not that I am all knowing, just that I keep up with this kind of thing and have not heard of it).

What is different? DAVE
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,016 Posts
To my knowledge there _are_ two versions. The differences I've seen (and read about) is that the engraving of the model name (Series III) on the body/bell is different, and that the earlier ones did not come with the booster necks. If this qualifies to call it two different versions, I don't know.

However these "changes" were made years ago, and I think you can read about them in other threads here on SOTW.

<EDIT>
If you mean the fact that it says "Model 53" is nothing new. That is, I think, only something used on the American market. All Selmer Paris saxes have a model number, but elsewhere they are usually only referred to as Super Action II/III or Reference 36/54.
</EDIT>
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
1,337 Posts
The 'model' you're referring to is part of a series of catalog numbers that Selmer/Elkhart uses that has nothing to do with Selmer/Paris.

For example, for years the US catalogs have listed the alto as a model 52. 1960's-70's had a '52', '52F'(extra high F# option), '52A'(low 'A' version) and the '52AF'(low A, high F#).

Gets confusing now that Selmer/Paris has issued Ref 36, Ref 54, etc., but they both have nothing to do with each other.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
1,423 Posts
Selmer USA (or Selmer Taiwan) had a model for awhile that was the Model 53 LTD, I think. It was not a Series III but the name was confusing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
My understanding was that this instrument is modelled on some of the characteristics of the MkVI soprano.

http://www.selmer.com/content/sax_soprano_chart.php

Seems like the comparisons ( eg 30% ligher ribs) are actually with the earlier Series II model 51 and this is not a new version of the Series III. Sorry for the confusion and thanks for all the replies.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member, Forum Contributor 2015-
Joined
·
32,943 Posts
The shared characteristics of the Mk VI sop and the Serie III are the name "Selmer". I've had both and consider them VERY different horns.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
14,268 Posts
I agree with Dr G. I've owned a MKVI and a Serie III and they were totally different even though they both sounded like . . . . . . SOPRANOS!

We all make way too much about these things, I fear.

Plus, after reviewing the link provided by Antipodes, I will re-issue my common warning - beware of marketing hype. Reading those comparisons between the Serie II and the III, I had to laugh. The authentic differences are in the necks - one removable, one fixed, and the presence of absence of a hi-G. Big deal.

After that, all the blather about ribbing, etc., etc., is only mildly interesting to me. I'll bet that few if any readers here could play both side-by-side (or listen to any of us play them side-by-side) and tell any difference except within the normal variances experienced among all saxophones. And definitely, few if any would HEAR any difference.

Selmer isn't the only manufacturer who does this . . . read any manufacturer's material and you'd walk away thinking their horn has ALL the whizbang features to set them apart from the others.

The LAST thing I'd do before buying a new saxophone would be to read the manufacturer's drivel. You should play horns yourself, then choose one to buy. DAVE
 

·
SOTW Member
Joined
·
3,394 Posts
I'm very pleased with my III Sop.. It's a work of art in Silver..The thing plays perfect and the G is a freakin' blast.(wish my Tenor had one)..I bought my horn almost 5 yrs ago from ww/bw after A/B'n it with a Sterling Yamigasawa for 8 hrs.. the III was the clear winner.. Somehow it hasn't fallen apart..for all the Selmer rants mine is a flawless example..It needed no mystical "set-up"..It's a real Selmer that will last longer than I will..I sometimes wish mine was a one piece horn but I wanted that useless high G...I played a new VI Sop for several yrs back in the day and I played a lacquered II Sop (stolen) before getting my current Sop...Both were great horns.. My series II Bari has proved to be a real workhorse this past yr as well..100's of shows it never blinked..it has a massive tone.. The Bari came from USA horn and played super out of the box.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member/Logician
Joined
·
25,985 Posts
Yeah, having a VI soprano myself, when I tried out a III, it didn't last long. There was nothing about it I liked. My biggest gripe is probably the detachable neck. Here you have a soprano, which is small enough to be easily handled and stored in one piece, yet to market the horns they had to go ahead and create a potential problematic concern which had been alleviated long ago. They should just make them with or without the curved neck; all in one piece.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
I have played a new Series III and also the Keilwerth (having owned a used Yamaha sop a few years back). I was misled by some references on dealer sites which seemed to imply that this model 53 was a new model arriving last month sometime. Seems it is the same model I have played - perhaps they were simply out of stock for a while.

I agree that the separate necks seem a little flimsy compared with the one piece instrument and the torque required to adjust the mouthpiece on the cork seemed to twist the neck around (although there is a slot mechanism there to fix its position). I preferred the sound of the bent neck but both were pretty agreeable to my ears.

What do people think of the various finishes - I have seen the black lacquer finish and I quite liked it but I wondered if it would tend to show wear and scratches more than clear lacquer.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member/Logician
Joined
·
25,985 Posts
Antipodes said:
What do people think of the various finishes - I have seen the black lacquer finish and I quite liked it but I wondered if it would tend to show wear and scratches more than clear lacquer.
My VI is black lacquered, and since I tend to use it for dixieland when we don't have a clarinet player, it's often mistaken for a clarinet by the non-player (and I don't even correct them anymore when they compliment my clarinet playing). As for showing scratches... well, that can be fixed with a Sharpie.
 

·
SOTW Member
Joined
·
3,394 Posts
Silverplate is good long term.. way more hassle..but, you get a mirror finish and can easily buff out small scuffs and scratches..lacquer no way, you're stuck..black is pretty but same wth lac, no chance to burnish out a blemish..I have all silverplates and have spent many fun hrs keeping my horns like new ones..the payoff..a rack of polished silverplates is a sight to behold..:twisted: ..silver develops a lot of character over time..I think probably selmer used a good blank for silver horns too..My VI Tenor is actually brighter looking than my newer silver horns..the new II & III have stayed so nice I haven't done much polishing on either one yet..:cool:
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top