New Mark VI

Eye candy.

It's good to see one of these horns that doesn't have the enormous amount of wear that's normal for a 60 to 40 year old professionally used saxophone. My tenor is slightly older than this vintage and is in near mint condition ( I don't play much tenor) but is nowhere as fresh as this one. And it's easy to see the quality that Selmer built into the horns back then in this pristine example.

A friend of mine is playing an early mk6 tenor that he's owned for about 40 years. He's a professional player who gigs just about everyday. He's in the process of locating a thumb octave lever....he's just about worn through his, it's wafer thin where his thumb presses on it! Another friend, who's owned his mk6 tenor since it was new back in '56 has just put his horn in the shop for replacement of the pearls and the cups they're set in. This has to be the third or fourth set he's had to replace in the 40 or so years that I've known him. I replaced pearls and cups on a mk6 alto I bought new in 1974. I played on that horn A LOT! The cups wore so thin that the pearls, being set in without glue, fell out and I was playing on what was left of the cups alone. But the horn itself still played great. So this is a pretty common repair for very high mileage saxophones.

I think that's one of the main reasons why so many professional players still play the mk6. They seem to be overbuilt to the extent that they hold up to years and years of constant use.

Julian
 
Those are some great pictures of a very nice Mark VI Nitai. I am always impressed with the detail in your closeups. Since I have the SBA equivalent of the silver plated sax that came un engraved (at least until Jason Dumars had his way with it), I thought it would be interesting to post some pictures highlighting which features had changed from the SBA to the Mark VI. Since there are those with more expertise in this area on this forum, I'm sure other differences that I've missed will be pointed out as well.

Some of the improvements are just cosmetic, but those such as putting the G#-Bb adjusting mechanism on a separate arm extending from the hinge tube are very important from a technical standpoint. Making the low Bb fully tilting was an important improvement to the playability of the bell notes.

SBAfeatures008-1.jpg


SBAfeatures007.jpg


SBAfeatures006.jpg


SBAfeatures005.jpg


SBAfeatures004.jpg


SBAfeatures003.jpg


SBAfeatures001.jpg
 
John, thanks for showing all those differences, it's interesting to see!

For the photos I'm using a macro lens which is usually very sharp, so that's why. Actually I want to upgrade my camera. I'm looking at the Nikon D600 which isn't real yet but maybe it will be released in the next couple of months.

Silver plating with no engraving is my favorite finish!

Looks like your sax is an alto? This is a tenor so maybe there are some differences between alto and tenor.

I think some of those changes were done gradually. This Mark VI is from 1965. I've seen Mark VIs from the 50s with some of the features of your BA. At least the G# adjusting bar that is on the F# key cup and the two screw low C key guard (which apparently are sometimes soldered solid).

I prefer the seperate linkage arm for both C# and G# but one of the main problems is when it is soldered to the side of the key cup, putting pressure on the side of it only in some situations. Of course that also depends on how flexible each of the metal parts of the mechanism is. When it's in the middle (like on your sax) at least this issue is solved.

BTW the operaing linkage arm on the C# linakge is very flimsy on the Mark VI. I think this, along with the key cup arm of the G# key, are my two main design issues with it (which is next to nothing in comparison with many other models).

Re the right side Bb and C linkages, I think they changed them throughout the Mark VI's life. I've seen several different ones. Actually I think the best design is the fork and pin that you have on your sax. The ball (which this sax has) is worse IMO.

By the way, is it the photo making it look this way or is there a lot of free play on the side Bb linkage on your sax (i.e. the lever moves quite a bit before is starts to open the Bb key)?

The neck key is definitely an improvement and pretty much the same on current Selmer Paris models. I also by far prefer the Mark VI left thumb rest and octave lever, not only the shape but also that it's on the opposite side of the hinge. At least for me that feels more natural for the thumb. But I'm not crazy about the Mark VI octave mech linkage with the rouch piece going into the semi round cut part. The modern design is much better (but for its time it was very nice).

The new pinky keys are also nice but actually there is something I like about the simpler version that your older sax has.
 
jbtsax said:
........ Making the low Bb fully tilting was an important improvement to the playability of the bell notes.
Click to expand...

I'm curious on this statement. how does the tiling mechanism make it an improvement for the playability. I always thought it was for the player's feel and ability to move the pinky across the table keys by sliding versus lifting and moving.

I've actually have always preferred not to have a tilting mechanism as I was taught on a couf instrument back in the day. One of the reasons that I would prefer a SBA tenor versus a mk VI or newer. But then I could always disable the mechanism anyways.
 
clarnibass said:
By the way, is it the photo making it look this way or is there a lot of free play on the side Bb linkage on your sax (i.e. the lever moves quite a bit before is starts to open the Bb key)?
Click to expand...

Damn, you're good! I checked my side Bb linkage and you are right. The teflon tube I installed has fallen off. Note to self: Check all personal instruments carefully before posting photos of same on forums where Nitai might see them.

clarnibass said:
The neck key is definitely an improvement and pretty much the same on current Selmer Paris models. I also by far prefer the Mark VI left thumb rest and octave lever, not only the shape but also that it's on the opposite side of the hinge. At least for me that feels more natural for the thumb.
Click to expand...

I agree completely.
 
SteveSklar said:
I'm curious on this statement. how does the tiling mechanism make it an improvement for the playability. I always thought it was for the player's feel and ability to move the pinky across the table keys by sliding versus lifting and moving.

I've actually have always preferred not to have a tilting mechanism as I was taught on a couf instrument back in the day. One of the reasons that I would prefer a SBA tenor versus a mk VI or newer. But then I could always disable the mechanism anyways.
Click to expand...

In my experience the ability of the low Bb touch to tilt on two planes rather than just one vastly improves the ability to transfer from low C# to low Bb and back. On both versions fingering low B to Bb and back is quite comfortable, but on the SBA C# to Bb is a real problem.
 
jbtsax said:
I checked my side Bb linkage and you are right. The teflon tube I installed has fallen off.
Click to expand...
That's why I don't always like teflon on these type of linkages. I know some places thread those pins but I'm not crazy about that option (it's ok though).

For teflon heat shrink sleeves I've tried many types and found that for some reason, unlike regular heat shrink, they don't get very close to the thing you are shrinking them on. They get almost to the shape but not exactly and would very easily slide off. So I sometimes shape those pins to have a sort of eliptical shape (with the imaginary non-existing ends "cut"). Sometimes only at the inner end since only that is the important one. This way the sleeve has something to "climb" over to fall out and can't usually.

For regular teflon sleeves (not heat shrink) it is possible to put it tight, but these can also fall and much more likely to fall than other types of sleeves. For this I sometimes also shape the pins the same way. Though it's not always possible to shape it this way for various reasons. In those cases I prefer not to use teflon sleeves.

By the way, since we're on the subject of these linkage pins, just in general anyone can notice that at rest, the fork and pin are more or less parallel (shown in jbtsax's photo). When pressing the key the angle changes. Usually the inside surface of the fork is relatively flat and the pin has a cylindrical shape. This means that to get low friction when pressed, there is some free play at rest which can be annoying and/or noisy, while to have a close fit (no play) at rest there can be friction when pressing the key. So I sometimes change the shape of the fork by bending and/or shaping when possible os there is no play and no friction.
 
That is just weird. I don't mean your image in the plastic reso, but the green goop on the foot of the key. What in the world would that be? I can't imagine that material being installed at the factory. Again great photos. I can count the pores in the leather pad.
 
That is... cork! This only happened where the cork was constantly pressed against like on the open keys. The rest is just hardered old cork. There are a couple of places where only part of the cork looks like this but some of it looks like old cork (hard and brittle now but obvious it is cork). You can actually see the transition of the piece of cork from old but still looking like cork to whatever this is... :)
 
I don't really know, it's hard to say, but I can't imagine it's anything other than whatever was originally on this saxophone, which I think was natural cork, no? Or did Selmer use synthetic corks? Some of those hardened corks still have a bit of texture like natural cork does.
 
Were these perhaps some form of plastic wedge, placed beneath key to keep them shut during shipment? Old thermoplastic can sometimes deteriorate in strange ways, and being wedged shut would have provided for a reason for the stuff to be there.
 
SOTSDO said:
Were these perhaps some form of plastic wedge, placed beneath key to keep them shut during shipment? Old thermoplastic can sometimes deteriorate in strange ways, and being wedged shut would have provided for a reason for the stuff to be there.
Click to expand...
You've definitely got a point there.
 
What a beautiful sax. I so want to remove the keys and springs and hand polish it with Haggerty's spray polish. I guess that I have OCD when it comes to vintage silver saxes.
 
clarnibass said:
I don't really know, it's hard to say, but I can't imagine it's anything other than whatever was originally on this saxophone, which I think was natural cork, no? Or did Selmer use synthetic corks? Some of those hardened corks still have a bit of texture like natural cork does.
Click to expand...

I just can't imagine natural cork, which is tree bark, transforming into a green liquid that looks brittle in the pictures. That looks like an adhesive to me. But then ... I'm not an expert on decomposition of natural cork.

A long time ago I came across something like that but it was an adhesive. Some players tend to do all the repairs on their instruments and end up using some interesting solutions over the years. I had one use solely french cement for the adhesive for everything on their SBA.
 
Like I said, I don't know, it could be synthetic cork. It looks like natural cork in some places but it doesn't mean it is. All I know is that whatever it is, it's what Selmer put on the saxophone. BTW another possiblity is that whoever bought it new imediately changed every single key and bumper cork (or had a repairer set it up and that was part of it).

I'm trying to attach a better photo 1500 x 1000 and see if it will keep the size (looks better than the reduced size). Edit: OK, if you click on the photo a few times until it is opened in its own page it will get to the original size.

Re the silver tarnish, I kind of prefer this look as opposed to completely polished. In this case the owner can decide and he (like about 99% of people) chose not to have it polished.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom