[milandro]

I was discussing with someone whom frequently sells on ebay and he told me that he has offered a number of secondhand, pretty ordinary in size ( C* C**) Selmer S80 mouthpieces which incredibly ( to me) have fetched more than they cost new.

What’s going on? Is there a S80 mouthpiece revival? And if so, why? Do people think that a new S80 is different in any way from one previously played?

 

[KennyZ]

Just a few days ago I came across a S80 mouthpiece sale described as
"nothing to do with the current production."
Personally I don't think so, I recently had the opportunity to try an S80 F mouthpiece for soprano sax and found it excellent.
A few years ago I bought a Concept mouthpiece for bass clarinet and I found it excellent as well
But someone say that the first batch were better... :dontknow:

 

[musekatcher]

I was discussing with someone whom frequently sells on ebay and he told me that he has offered a number of secondhand, pretty ordinary in size ( C* C**) Selmer S80 mouthpieces which incredibly ( to me) have fetched more than they cost new.

What's going on? Is there a S80 mouthpiece revival? And if so, why? Do people think that a new S80 is different in any way from one previously played?

Probably just association. We all chucked when solid body guitars started adopting collectable points borrowed from acoustics, like finish/varnish materials, "tonewood", aging, no sandpaper used, hide glue, etc. Then we realized all of those were borrowed from violins...

Somebody is just cashing in on the "they don't make them like they used too" theory that fuels a lot of vintage market value. They don't of course

I've got an old CS80 F for alto that is a fine piece. It has aged, dull and brownish now. Maybe I should list it?

 

[milandro]

the saxophone and its peripherals are the only things that are always born perfect, I said it very often.

They devolved rather then evolve from the ’60 onwards.

The instrument was certainly a product of the industrial revolution (or thereabouts).

YET, unlike cars, bicycles, electric appliances ( you name it) which all got better in time, the narrative is that the Saxophone evolved only until the ’60 . From then on it stopped evolving and started devolvin

Of course people say it was because we entered another industrial mindset.... well IF that was true ( and I don’t believe it ever was) the S80 was introduced in the late ’70 so, we were there already , why would an older S80 be better than a current one?

But again some folks are prepared to pay crazy money for a Brillhart ligature or some old mouthpiece purely because they believe that these were born perfect.

 

[jman1977]

One factor that should be considered is that as industry has evolved, production has moved from customized (with more attention to detail, etc.) to mass production and lower QC. The pressure to cut costs -- and cut corners to do so -- has become more and more pronounced as competition has become fiercer. That accounts for some real dip in the quality of the products being put out today compared to back in the day (not always the case, but true enough in many instances when it comes to things like mouthpieces).

the saxophone and its peripherals are the only things that are always born perfect, I said it very often.

They devolved rather then evolve from the '60 onwards.

The instrument was certainly a product of the industrial revolution (or thereabouts).

YET, unlike cars, bicycles, electric appliances ( you name it) which all got better in time, the narrative is that the Saxophone evolved only until the '60 . From then on it stopped evolving and started devolvin

Of course people say it was because we entered another industrial mindset.... well IF that was true ( and I don't believe it ever was) the S80 was introduced in the late '70 so, we were there already , why would an older S80 be better than a current one?

But again some folks are prepared to pay crazy money for a Brillhart ligature or some old mouthpiece purely because they believe that these were born perfect.

 

[turf3]

One factor that should be considered is that as industry has evolved, production has moved from customized (with more attention to detail, etc.) to mass production and lower QC. The pressure to cut costs -- and cut corners to do so -- has become more and more pronounced as competition has become fiercer. That accounts for some real dip in the quality of the products being put out today compared to back in the day (not always the case, but true enough in many instances when it comes to things like mouthpieces).

Hah!

Have you looked at the mechanical construction details of a 20s Holton or Conn vs. a current production Yamaha?

 

[jman1977]

Hah!

Have you looked at the mechanical construction details of a 20s Holton or Conn vs. a current production Yamaha?

Read my comment again and see if I made a blanket statement that applied universally.

 

[turf3]

Read my comment again and see if I made a blanket statement that applied universally.

"...as industry has evolved, production has moved from customized (with more attention to detail, etc.) to mass production and lower QC..."

Yep, blanket statement right there. What I am telling you, as someone who has worked in the manufacturing industry for 35+ years, is that the trend of industry over the last 100 years has been toward increased attention on quality control, reduced operator-dependent variation, and increased application of the scientific principles of statistical quality control. Across all industries, variability is down.

 

[jman1977]

So production has not moved to mass production, particularly when it comes to mouthpieces? That's news to me... Also, did you miss the part where I wrote that's not always the case? Selective quoting... very nice.

"...as industry has evolved, production has moved from customized (with more attention to detail, etc.) to mass production and lower QC..."

Yep, blanket statement right there. What I am telling you, as someone who has worked in the manufacturing industry for 35+ years, is that the trend of industry over the last 100 years has been toward increased attention on quality control, reduced operator-dependent variation, and increased application of the scientific principles of statistical quality control. Across all industries, variability is down.

 

[turf3]

Yes, I would say that the manufacturing of sax mouthpieces has moved to mass production.

...About 1925.

 

[milandro]

I don't think that an S80 was ever "handmade "( touched up maybe not handmade)

Yes, I would say that the manufacturing of sax mouthpieces has moved to mass production.

...About 1925.

Certainly tru! Companies that are now making few hundreds of saxophones a year were making many thousands in the '60!

The saxophone in the era of its greater diffusion was produced at a rhythm that nowadays would be impossible. The super " rare" Mark VI was made in 200,000 pieces!

 

[jman1977]

Yes, I would say that the manufacturing of sax mouthpieces has moved to mass production.

...About 1925.

Haha. Read again... I wrote that as industry has evolved, production has moved from customized to mass production. That indicates a continuous evolution. If your argument is that production levels today are the same as in the 1920's... just no. It's just a mathematical certainty that the more units of output there are, the greater the chances of putting out defective products, decreased defect percentages notwithstanding. 5% of 1,000,000 is going to be more than 5% of 10,000.

 

[turf3]

Yes, I'm pretty sure that total saxophone production was higher in 1925 than it is today. Same with pianos.

 

[milandro]

Yes, I'm pretty sure that total saxophone production was higher in 1925 than it is today. Same with pianos.

absolutely! see video above they talk of 5000 a month......

Lateely someone ordered 11 curved sopraninos to Rampone & Cazzani, they make one a year, the order didn't go though....

For some Yanagisawas now the waiting time is 6 months , some Keilwerth get to a couple of years

 

[turf3]

Well, anyway, getting back to the point, I suspect there is very little difference between the Selmer S80 that was shipped with the Super Action 80 horns in 1980 and the one that's shipped today. However, as with anything that's been in production for 40 years, you can probably find someone who believes the old ones are different (and thus, it'll be inferred, "better"). My guess would be that there's a rumor going round.

Since I never liked them back then, it's largely irrelevant to me.

 

[jman1977]

It's tough to have a meaningful discussion when the goal posts keep moving and people are cherry picking. Why don't we compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges? Not to demean Bueschers, but if you are going to use that as an example of mass production, why don't we compare it to the Chinese makers and not to a smaller company like R&C?

Also, I thought we were specifically talking about mouthpieces in this thread?

 

[Alain Gen]

I don't think that an S80 was ever "handmade "( touched up maybe not handmade)

Certainly tru! Companies that are now making few hundreds of saxophones a year were making many thousands in the '60!

The saxophone in the era of its greater diffusion was produced at a rhythm that nowadays would be impossible. The super " rare" Mark VI was made in 200,000 pieces!

Well, at least for Selmer it is demonstrably false:
https://www.getasax.com/new-improved-selmer-saxophone-serial-numbers-list/
(the chart stops in 1999 but around 1999 they were producing more saxophones/year than they were doing before 1974). The super action 80 (original, series 2, series 3) is almost 40 years old, but more than 400000 have been produced (to be compared to 180000 mark VI's in 20 years); in the period 1980-1999 Selmer has produced around 200000 saxophones.

 

[jman1977]

Well, at least for Selmer it is demonstrably false:
https://www.getasax.com/new-improved-selmer-saxophone-serial-numbers-list/
(the chart stops in 1999 but in 1999 they were producing twice the number of saxophones than they were doing before 1974).

Thank you for providing facts.

 

[KennyZ]

Selmer changed the tip openings and lenght of facing from 2013 but I think that mouthpieces geometry are the same
(here is the soprano chart just for example)
Maybe they were better for this reason? :mrgreen:

 

[milandro]

It's tough to have a meaningful discussion when the goal posts keep moving and people are cherry picking. Why don't we compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges? Not to demean Bueschers, but if you are going to use that as an example of mass production, why don't we compare it to the Chinese makers and not to a smaller company like R&C?

Also, I thought we were specifically talking about mouthpieces in this thread?

Threads live their own life.

I opened the thread about this particular rumor but I don't mid enlarging the scope if it serves making a point.