Sillver York Bari

[champagnebari]

Hi guys and gals. I am new here so pardon me if this has been answered...I was hoping someone could help me identify this York Bari that I just bought. I fell in love with it and it looks like it's in great shape. the seller is giving me a week to play it an evaluate it so i am not out anything. i know it doesnt have a high E or F, but i am ok with that.
!BsK0itQEGk~$(KGrHqUH-CEEvPZTmQgkBL21hZDry!~~_12.jpg!BsK0gJ!CWk~$(KGrHqIH-CwEvCk3gsCeBL21hMde!g~~_12.jpg!BsK0iCQEGk~$(KGrHqUH-DUEvH)(hocnBL21hVm+Sw~~_12.jpg!BsK0gGQCWk~$(KGrHqYH-EQEvG!)H!vvBL21hMNrr!~~_12.jpg

Is it a true York, or a Buescher Stencil or ??
thanks for any help here!

[hgrail]

The keywork - more notably the button G# and the short octave key on the neck say early Buescher to me. The lack of high E says pre-1925 to me also. Are the toneholes thick and bevelled at the edges? If so that would indicate a Martin body - if they are thin and straight it may be all Buescher. High E and F are overrated for bari anyhow. Use of high E and higher on bari scores is fairly rare - and if it is scored you are likely doubled by altos and tenors for the note anyhow.

I'm sure it's a nice sounding horn. What is your impression so far?

[champagnebari]

thanks for your reply! the tone holes are soldered and not thick, so probably Buescher then? Does the bell brace look Buescher as well? Sorry I don't know much about these horns, i have played a bundy student horn that I borrowed from the church for most of my playing days so this is the first bari that i have purchased. I am waiting for it to arrive in the mail and i'll let you know what it sounds like when I get it - if it plays half as good as it looks to me, i'll be happy...

have you ever seen any of these Yorks around here? there arent many webpages that even deal with Yorks and pictures of them are even rarer...

[Pete]

I'm in the process of trying to write a few pages about York on my Blog. Considering this forum is one of my sources, I visit here quite often, but don't post much.

* First, it's a little difficult to answer the question of whether this is a "true" York-made horn or a Buescher-made horn because of the horn's apparent age. As a "for instance", I do not currently have, nor did my old website have, any pictures of a Buescher bari with range to only altissimo Eb: all of them are in the 6-digit serial number range.

* Second, I've seen a grand total of one York-made baritone and that had the distinctive "toneholes on a plate" construction. Your horn doesn't have this.

HOWEVER, I do have a 1920-ish catalog that shows a Buescher True-Tone bass that looks very similar in design to your bari. And, FWIW, there is another bari, very similar to yours, on eBay.

Comments:
* It'd greatly help if you can send a pic of the serial number and/or any patent information (even if it's just "Pat Applied For").
* If you could, please post a picture similar to this one.

Now, regardless of everything I've mentioned above, if you like the horn (it plays in tune, you like the tone, etc.) and it's financially doable for you, buy it! You didn't mention how much cash you're paying for the horn, but if it's in good condition and plays in tune, it's worth at least $1300 -- because that's the base price you'd have to pay for a good overhaul.

[JessicaRose]

I've got a York soprano also pre-1925
just passing some information I got from others, the circle G# is on mine too, but if it says Grand Rapids on it it shouldn't be a stencil.

[Pete]

I've got a York soprano also pre-1925
just passing some information I got from others, the circle G# is on mine too, but if it says Grand Rapids on it it shouldn't be a stencil.

That's a bit too wide of a generalization. As a "for instance", Lyon & Healy horns are stamped "Chicago", but L&H didn't manufacture their own saxophones -- as far as I've been able to determine, at least. They're all stencils.

[JessicaRose]

like I said: just spitting out what's been told to me. and I believe the person I got the information from has been to the museum and told that...

[bandmommy]

Miss JessicaRose,
The 'person' who told you that has seen Original York saxophones at a public museum. NOT a York museum. No one told me anything.
IF your horn was in fact made in the early 1900s', AND it says "Made in Grand Rapids MI" and NOT "Grand Rapids Band Instrument Company" it is an original York.
There is a question as to the actual year of manufacture, and you only admit that Grand Rapids is on the instrument. Not proof positive of its originality.
Unless the trombone player you're dad purchased the instrument from has first hand knowledge of when the horn was originally purchased, proving the actual age is difficult.
The York company/name has been bought and sold a few times by other manufacturers. They may say "York" but unless they were made prior to the original buyout they are NOT original York saxophones.
If you remember I stated that "as far as I can remember it looks exactly like...".

[Pete]

... not to pile on, Jessica, but even professors and museums make mistakes. Take a look at this, for instance. That page was written by a professor and musicologist (not me, by the way). He says that York horns are sometimes stamped with the patent date of Dec. 8, 1914. That's the Haynes tonehole patent that's on Conn and Buescher-made York stencils. In other words, he's right about that stamp being on York saxophones, but they weren't saxophones actually made by York.

In any event, the "button" G# is also found on Buescher True Tones, as well as several other makes/models. The presence or absence of the "button" doesn't confirm the horn's parentage. Current research in this forum area says that a York-made horn that looks as old as the silver bari in this thead should a) have the plate construction (like Geausax's bari) and b) should have a serial number less than 90,000. I can see it doesn't have plate construction and I don't know the serial number. Additionally, the bari I saw on eBay that looks almost exactly like this silver one says "Imported by Holton". That's why I leave a question as to it being a Buescher or York: if it's American-made, Holton wouldn't be "importing" it from anywhere. Finally, using a serial number chart, the lacquer bari, sn 28955, would have been made in 1910. That's 12 years before Laporte says they started sax production.

Research should always continue. Heck, I've also started research on things like Courturier, which I had never heard of until someone asked me, "Have you ever heard of these guys?" I want to learn.

So, when I say that I think that the bari in this thread might be a Buescher-made instrument, I'll post something like, "I think this way because ...." and then provide a rationale. You might be completely right: there's a good chance you might be and the information that Laporte posted in that other thread is incomplete or incorrect. I just want you to justify your comment and let me cross-check.

When I ran saxpics.com, I just wanted to show people the pretty pictures. Then people started wanting reference materials and the like. If you can't post a source, you can't justify yourself. That doesn't sit well with anyone.

[Nevillesax]

Pete, the seller of the other bari on ebay even suggests Evette & Schaeffer/ Malerne as the maker...this would tie in with other threads here about York horns after the Carl Fischer buyout...weren't the Carl Fischer horns Evette&Schaeffer stencils?
There was a question a couple of days ago about a Buffet (or Evette&Schaeffer)alto that looked very similar to this Bari too.
http://forum.saxontheweb.net/showthr...ghlight=buffet

[Pete]

Carl Fischer was an importer of a whole bunch of instruments, most notably being Evette-Schaeffer Buffet Crampon -- and a lot of these imports were engraved with the Carl Fischer name.

The easiest reason the York bari on this thread isn't an Evette-Schaeffer: the neck crook curves counterclockwise, not clockwise. Pictures worth a thousand words: the York bari and the Evette-Schaeffer bari. If you prefer, there's a somewhat newer Buffet HERE and the neck crook is still counterclockwise.

Now, I have not done research on early Malernes. The primary reason for this is because the earliest one I've seen has been Fred Cicetti's curved soprano. Which Fred dates to 1950. And this horn might not really have been made by Malerne. I don't even remember when they started producing horns.

I'm trying to forward the argument that this is a York bari because Geausax's bari looks virtually identical, EXCEPT it has plate construction and the one on this thread doesn't. I've written a bit about it on my blog, but I'm going to be writing more. I might convince myself it is or it isn't a York .

What this means to the York community:

* Saxophone production probably started near the date that York started, 1903.
* There are at least 4 different models of York and maybe more:

-> The bari on this thread (say, "Original Model"). Possibly up to 1914ish.
-> POSSIBLY another model up until around 1922ish.
-> Plate construction (dates and serial numbers TBD).
-> Non-plate construction, but patented key bumper (dates and serial numbers TBD).
-> Three octave vent models. Rare. Patented. Laporte never listed this one.
-> POSSIBLY a single-side bell key alto/tenor model. Laporte mentions this, but I have not seen evidence there is one.

All my current ramblings regarding York are at http://208.95.77.77/thesaxinfo/?cat=84.

[Ed Geddes]

There's a York tenor for sale on Trade Me Listing #: 300176643. You have to be in New Zealand to buy it. If any-ones real keen.....

[Pete]

That's a Buescher-made horn. Compare and contrast this horn with the Trade Me ad.

You can just barely see the Haynes tonehole patent stamped on the horn in the Trade Me ad -- and the serial number pattern is similar to a non-stencil Buescher True Tone. I also look directly at that chromatic Bb and see that it's not hinged like the York-made beasties.

Yorks look SO close to Bueschers that I can easily understand the confusion.