Sax on the Web Forum banner

1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
3,331 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I will soon put up my alto old Selmer Soloist refaced by Ted Klum to a .82 and also signed by him on it.
Just don t need it any more since i sold my last alto saxe about a month ago.
Any idea on the market today in US dollars?
From left to right the fourth one.
Tips and rail in great condition,and plays marvelous..
Thanks Saxobari
IMG_0079.jpg
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
3,331 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
What?
A Soloist Style.
No,it s real Selmer Soloist Scroll shank refaced by Klum.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,038 Posts
What?
A Soloist Style.
No,it s real Selmer Soloist Scroll shank refaced by Klum.
The fourth one from the left? The third one from the right? Correct?
From the pictures, I can see a “C” or a “G” engraved on the back. If there is a letter there and there is no script on the table, then it is a soloist style from the 70s. Also the Selmer script is a much different font.
Maybe it’s my eyes or the picture - could you post a closer picture?
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member, Forum Contributor 2015-
Joined
·
33,588 Posts
The fourth one from the left? The third one from the right? Correct?
From the pictures, I can see a “C” or a “G” engraved on the back. If there is a letter there and there is no script on the table, then it is a soloist style from the 70s. Also the Selmer script is a much different font.
Maybe it’s my eyes or the picture - could you post a closer picture?
Your math is good, but the clue in post #1 says “alto”.

Look closer... and slightly to the right. :bluewink:
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
3,331 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
The fourth one from the left? The third one from the right? Correct?
From the pictures, I can see a “C” or a “G” engraved on the back. If there is a letter there and there is no script on the table, then it is a soloist style from the 70s. Also the Selmer script is a much different font.
Maybe it’s my eyes or the picture - could you post a closer picture?
I see your point.
Yes you are right there is no small triangle on that table,,etc.
Though ,i remembered trading a tenor EB STM Link for it many years ago,and plus just Ted Klum's work on it is worth more then what you claimed the mpc is worth,,I don t know,maybe i am woring,but i would never let go for 150 or 200 US,,lol no way.
I ll just keep it and use it as a door stoper before giving it away.
Thanks anyways
All the best
Mario
 

·
Moderator
Grafton alto | Martin Comm III tenor
Joined
·
29,360 Posts
I see your point.
Yes you are right there is no small triangle on that table,,etc.
Though ,i remembered trading a tenor EB STM Link for it many years ago,and plus just Ted Klum's work on it is worth more then what you claimed the mpc is worth,,I don t know,maybe i am woring,but i would never let go for 150 or 200 US,,lol no way.
I ll just keep it and use it as a door stoper before giving it away.
Thanks anyways
All the best
Mario
Generally original facings are worth more, as is the actual Soloist as opposed to the soloist style (without the table logo). Pity because IMO they are just as good. I have had ans sold a few of these and I agree with the value being up to about $150 so if it's worth more than that to you then you should hang on to it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
921 Posts
Im with jazzmancan on this, im afraid to say.

There are two versions of the actual soloist. the short and long shank. the short shank is the earlier version. the long shank soloist is the version just before yours. which is often called soloist, in error.
yours is from the 70s and is the version up to the introduction of the S80 pieces

The actual soloists have the word SOLOIST on the table, written at an angle. then the lay is written just below that. no triangle.

the new tip opening of yours is somewhere between an e and an f. so, desireable. and the Klum name will help.

but these are not as sought after as Soloists.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,914 Posts
saxobari;3702170i remembered trading a tenor EB STM Link for it many years ago said:
From strictly an investment standpoint, that seems like not-so-great of a trade. No doubt it was probably a perfectly good move for you at the time for practical reasons, and maybe that trade was before the price of vintage links was pumped through the roof by the Ebay dealer/dealers. Did you trade with a well known mouthpiece dealer/collector? We're you led to believe it was an even trade? It has happened to me before.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,914 Posts
Here are 3 of mine, to let you see
From left...long shank, short shank. Final one on right is the version just before the short shank . Issued in SBA era. Round throat instead of the horseshoe in the soloists.
The third one is what people refer to as the "airflow". How does that compare to the Soloists?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
921 Posts
The third one is what people refer to as the "airflow". How does that compare to the Soloists?
Yes, folks do refer to these are "airflow"

but strictly speaking.... they shouldnt!!!!

there was an earlier version which had AIRFLOW stamped on the table. I used to have a few. may still have some, im not sure!!

depends how pedantic we are going to be.

I really like these. they are darker than soloists, and possibly a bit more resistant. this one was a D . I had Morgan Fry open it to an E. .78. It plays fantastic now. has that short shank ring, but darker.

I have an original e in tenor, which I also love.

on alto I like this version and the short shank. hard to choose. ( I also had Morgan open a short shank to .78, E. love them both )

on tenor, I much prefer this version over the later Soloist versions
 

·
Distinguished Member, Forum Contributor 2013-2016
Joined
·
7,890 Posts
Yes, folks do refer to these are "airflow"

but strictly speaking.... they shouldnt!!!!

there was an earlier version which had AIRFLOW stamped on the table. I used to have a few. may still have some, im not sure!!

depends how pedantic we are going to be.

I really like these. they are darker than soloists, and possibly a bit more resistant. this one was a D . I had Morgan Fry open it to an E. .78. It plays fantastic now. has that short shank ring, but darker.

I have an original e in tenor, which I also love.

on alto I like this version and the short shank. hard to choose. ( I also had Morgan open a short shank to .78, E. love them both )

on tenor, I much prefer this version over the later Soloist versions
OK. The Airflow is a very, very different mouthpiece than the Soloist. If the piece has a round “squeeze” chamber, a slightly shorter shank like the one you have on the right, it’s an Airflow, regardless of whether it has the stamp on on it or not.

In fact, Theo Wanne has this wrong on his website, BTW, the LATER ones have “Air-flow” stamped on them to distinguish them from short shank Soloists. I have actually found long shank mouthpieces marked Airflow, which actually wouldn’t have happened if the earlier supposition the the early ones were the marked ones.

You have to remember that up until the advent of the Soloist, Selmer only made two mouthpieces: what would come to be known as the Airflow and the metal classics. After they released the first short shank Soloists in 1960, they started stamping the round chambered ones “Air Flow”. When Selmer started to phase out the AirFlow, Larry Teal asked them if they were still going to make a round chambered piece, so they did and named it after him.

The ones that should NOT be called Airflows are the earlier “barrel chambered” ones with either the scroll engraving or the metal rings. These were NEVER marketed as Airflows. They should be called “table” or pre-Airflow.

I have done a silly amount of research on this subject, and my main mouthpieces on alto and soprano are actually Airflow pieces.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Distinguished Member, Forum Contributor 2013-2016
Joined
·
7,890 Posts
It is not pedantic to make this distinction. They are not easy to tell apart in a sales ad if you don’t know any better, and the Soloist and Airflows have very, very different playing characteristics.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
921 Posts
OK. The Airflow is a very, very different mouthpiece than the Soloist. If the piece has a round “squeeze” chamber, a slightly shorter shank like the one you have on the right, it’s an Airflow, regardless of whether it has the stamp on on it or not.

In fact, Ted has this wrong on his website, BTW, the LATER ones have “Air-flow” stamped on them to distinguish them from short shank Soloists. I have actually found long shank mouthpieces marked Airflow, which actually wouldn’t have happened if the earlier supposition the the early ones were the marked ones.

You have to remember that up until the advent of the Soloist, Selmer only made two mouthpieces: what would come to be known as the Airflow and the metal classics. After they released the first short shank Soloists in 1960, they started stamping the round chambered ones “Air Flow”. When Selmer started to phase out the AirFlow, Larry Teal asked them if they were still going to make a round chambered piece, so they did and named it after him.

The ones that should NOT be called Airflows are the earlier “barrel chambered” ones with either the scroll engraving or the metal rings. These were NEVER marketed as Airflows. They should be called “table” or pre-Airflow.

I have done a silly amount of research on this subject, and my main mouthpieces on alto and soprano are actually Airflow pieces.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Some very interesting stuff there, which ive not read before, and which is contrary to what i thought.

Ive always believed that the version i have ran in to the short shank, with nothing in between. This in the mid 50s.
You mention 1960 as being the change over time.

Here is a link to Theo wannes article about these.He says 1956 as the change date, and mentions that the words air flow were on the earlier version.
Some of his statements dont always ring true with me, but it is interesting info anyway.


https://theowanne.com/knowledge/mouthpiece-museum/selmer-mouthpieces/

All very confusing.

You mention someone called Ted, and his website. Could you give a Links to that. It would be very interesting to have some definitive info on these historical pieces.
 

·
Distinguished Member, Forum Contributor 2013-2016
Joined
·
7,890 Posts
I was talking about Theo’s site. (The OP mentioned Ted Klum, so I had his name in my head...) He’s incorrect about when the “Air Flow” stamp was on the mouthpiece. There are a few other things in that article that I’m pretty sure are also incorrect, but I can’t prove them yet.

The Airflow and the Soloist were produced concurrently for at least a little while. I’ll have to check my notes, but I believe that 1960 is correct for the end date of the Airflow. I have to check when the LT came out because the Airflow was “discontinued” shortly before that. I have been researching these for about ten years now, but I’m living in Denmark,my notes are at home and I’m working from memory.

Selmer has a history of using older blanks on “personalized” pieces. There’s a Claude Luter soprano mouthpiece on eBay right now that they based off of the pre-Ariflow blank.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Distinguished Member, Forum Contributor 2013-2016
Joined
·
7,890 Posts
As an aside, I’ve been looking for a tenor original D forever. I have a C right now that I’m trying to sell because the opeining is too small. I refuse to reface these because the facing work on Airflows is generally the most perfect original facing work you’ll ever see. Older Links and Meyers too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
3,331 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Thank you all my Saxontheweb mates.
Hummm,well i think that made a mistake getting that one ,it s worth onky that,,,
It is still a great mpc,but don t need it anymore,but will never sell fir that price...
Well,you win some,,,you loose some,,lol
Only a mouthpiece.
All the best
Mario
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
3,331 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
IMG_4016.JPG Here are a few pictures,
IMG_4018.JPG
IMG_4006.JPG
IMG_4019.JPG
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,146 Posts
h ,i remembered trading a tenor EB STM Link for it many years ago,and plus just Ted Klum's work on it
I’m sure he was happy to make that trade as an EB STM goes for $600 and up and a long shank Soloist maybe $150 on a good day.
You have to watch these mouthpiece guys and their trades for work done.
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top