2009 must be the year of the Phoenix

[tjontheroad]

Oh the tough choices...

Do I go with the Yamaha "Black Phoenix" YAS-82Z



Or, the Selmer limited edition "Firebird Phoenix" Ref 54?



I'm wondering who stole the idea of the Phoenix sax from who? Yamaha or Selmer?

[Carl H.]

Just buy yourself a bundy, then get a mullet and a Pontiac and "live the life". Oh, sorry. you didn't say Firebird. Here you go.



I like the looks of the Yam. Reminds me of a Couf Bari I played 20+ years ago. Sweet horn.

[tjontheroad]

Originally Posted by Carl H.

Just buy yourself a bundy, then get a mullet and a Pontiac and "live the life". Oh, sorry. you didn't say Firebird. Here you go.



I like the looks of the Yam. Reminds me of a Couf Bari I played 20+ years ago. Sweet horn.

The Pontiac link says "Forbidden". Is that some kinda super secret sax from one of the other makers?

[Dave Dolson]

Every Ref 54 alto I've played had that certain depth of tone that I don't hear in any other modern saxophone. This is the ONE model that shows some consistency among the same models. When I put mine in my hands I can feel the quality on my fingertips. I can't say that about any other modern alto I've owned or played.

I bought my Ref 54 alto at Kessler's. It was the best of the best when I visited and made my selection. But even the lesser examples of the Ref 54's had that same tone and quality about them (all they needed was some fine-tuning, in my opinion; the one I bought was perfect).

I subsequently played a few more - all were terrific - and, heads above all the new Yamahas I tried (and owned).

Just my opinion, though. DAVE

[Carl H.]

pontiac

[tjontheroad]

Originally Posted by Dave Dolson

Every Ref 54 alto I've played had that certain depth of tone that I don't hear in any other modern saxophone. This is the ONE model that shows some consistency among the same models. When I put mine in my hands I can feel the quality on my fingertips. I can't say that about any other modern alto I've owned or played.

I bought my Ref 54 alto at Kessler's. It was the best of the best when I visited and made my selection. But even the lesser examples of the Ref 54's had that same tone and quality about them (all they needed was some fine-tuning, in my opinion; the one I bought was perfect).

I subsequently played a few more - all were terrific - and, heads above all the new Yamahas I tried (and owned).

Just my opinion, though. DAVE

I also have had the chance to play a number of Ref 54 and 82Z alto variants side-by-side and at different times. I'd say all were very consistant with their respective model. Agreed the 54 has more core. The 82Z is more vibrant and lively. I'd be happy with either if I wasn't already happy with my SDA.

As for these two Phoenix editions, I never liked black lacquer. So that'll save me some GAS money on a Yamaha right away. I like the Flamingo engraving on the Selmer better. Must be the Italian in me. If only it was pink!!!

[willbjammin]

The Yamaha looks like it would give a darker, soul-less sound.

Could they offer the Selmer without the F#?

[retread]

The Phoenix rose from the ashes. Are they both trying to tell us something about the condition of their company? And wouldn't it be appropriate for GM to introduce another Phoenix?

[Dave Dolson]

I've posted this before (and on SOTW a while back), but I think it bears repeating. I tested several Yamahas (various models, too) a while back and ended up buying a used 82Z from Rob Fleming. It was pristine and in perfect playing condition. He'd bought it from a store in Orange County, CA that did a complete set-up on it before selling it to Rob. This 82Z was the best Yamaha alto I'd played.

I owned it at the same time I owned the Ref 54 (I still have the Ref 54). Side-by-side, there was no contest - the Ref 54 was better in every aspect. And I had the best 82Z I'd played. DAVE

[Gandalfe]

I've owned both the Yas 82Z and the Selmer Ref 54. Hands down no contest, the Selmer wins. And this from a guy that until the Ref 54 came out hated Selmer saxes. Can you play both of them locally and see what you prefer?

[Ed Svoboda]

I'm the odd one on this but I really like Yamaha altos.

[willbjammin]

I recently had a chance to play the non-commemorative versions of these horns side by side. Playing through a Meyer 5 with a V16 #3, the Yamaha was relatively stuffy, yet responsive. The Selmer rang like a bell and gave me the feel I was yearning for.

I can see how classical players could prefer the Yamaha, but not for combo use.

[pete]

Originally Posted by tjontheroad

I'm wondering who stole the idea of the Phoenix sax from who? Yamaha or Selmer?

Me, actually.

[stefank]

The Kesslers may know saxophones, but they don't know their ornithological mythology. To the best of my knowledge (which isn't exactly extensive in this area), The Firebird is a mythical European bird, whereas the Phoenix is an Asian one. They're two different beasts.

[Dave Dolson]

I don't know that the Kesslers are responsible for those silly marketing names placed on Selmer's wonderful Reference 54 altos. While there may be some interest out there in mythological birds, it makes no difference as to how those horns play . . . does it? DAVE

[hakukani]

I'm wondering who stole the idea of the Phoenix sax from who? Yamaha or Selmer?[/quote]

Harry Potter?

[tictactux]

I still wonder where this enthusiasm (for lack of a better word) for engravings comes from...I don't mind playing a vanilla instrument, as no one's sittin' close enough to discern the, uhm, artistry on the bell.
And why always flowers, or birds (well, okay, I get the clue)? Why not a rhino, a paramecium, or a snail?

Why just saxes but not clarinets?

(Sez he who has a pegasus on his alto's bell...)

[Al Stevens]

Originally Posted by tictactux

And why always flowers, or birds (well, okay, I get the clue)? Why not a rhino, a paramecium, or a snail?

...or a naked lady?

[hakukani]

I'd love a snail or a gecko on mine.

[pete]

Originally Posted by tictactux

I still wonder where this enthusiasm (for lack of a better word) for engravings comes from...I don't mind playing a vanilla instrument, as no one's sittin' close enough to discern the, uhm, artistry on the bell.
And why always flowers, or birds (well, okay, I get the clue)? Why not a rhino, a paramecium, or a snail?

Why just saxes but not clarinets?

(Sez he who has a pegasus on his alto's bell...)

As far as clarinets are concerned, I owned one of the limited edition Buffets that had a clear plastic body and copper keywork. I got more than a few interested stares when I played that horn. (I traded in the horn for a wooden YCL-34. Played better, but didn't look as nice.)

I've also seen some pro-model clarinets (Selmers, Buffet) that have had, for lack of a better word, engraving over their entire body. This looked a lot like wood burning, actually.

There are also the non-engraved Backun clarinets and silver, lacquered brass and other metals. Not to mention boxwood, ebony, ivory inlay, etc. I'd tend to say that saxophones are a little late to the party!

It is, however, true that you can't see the engraving on, well, anything unless you're looking at poster-sized close-up of the horn.

I've seen saxophones with factory engravings of snakes and butterflies, so the flower and/or "naked lady" (or naked lady) engraving isn't the only thing out there ....

Where's bill kasper when you need him?

[SOTSDO]

Well, I have a lady bust engraving on my Conn alto, and it seems that some value that little bit of metalwork quite a bit.

Me? Well, to me ol' Helen Willson's face (ugly as it is) is a curiosity, but not much more. If I had my druthers, I'd prefer a horn without any engraving (it always seems to be the first place that the finish fails, at least in my experience), just a smooth lacquered or plated surface. Go figure.

I've seen the new Selmer horns, and they are attractive enough. But, I'd not pay a penny more for the privilege of having it.

[pete]

Originally Posted by SOTSDO

I've seen the new Selmer horns, and they are attractive enough. But, I'd not pay a penny more for the privilege of having it.

+1. You can't play the engraving!

[SteveSklar]

Originally Posted by pete

It is, however, true that you can't see the engraving on, well, anything unless you're looking at poster-sized close-up of the horn.

I've seen saxophones with factory engravings of snakes and butterflies, so the flower and/or "naked lady" (or naked lady) engraving isn't the only thing out there ....

That gives me an idea. I think i'm going to try some black guilding on one of my lacquered saxophones and "fillin" the engraving just to see what it looks like .. maybe used some waterbased stuff first.



But between the Yamaha and the Selmer .... I'd go with the Selmer

[stefank]

Originally Posted by Dave Dolson

I don't know that the Kesslers are responsible for those silly marketing names placed on Selmer's wonderful Reference 54 altos. While there may be some interest out there in mythological birds, it makes no difference as to how those horns play . . . does it? DAVE

As I understand things, Selmer has designated this model as a "Firebird". Kesslers have decided that the firebird is the same thing as a phoenix. It isn't.

[thebustos]

The reason the engraving on the yamaha is a phoenix is because they are using their original corporate from the 1800's when they started off making reed organs. It might just be a clever marketing strategy for selmer to decide to do a "firebird" the same year that yamaha released the phoenix.... The particular black phoenix i've played, plays better than any 82z I've played and better than most of the series II's i've played. I'd like to try it next to a reference 54. I think it'd be a fair match...