The MK7 is just a MK6 with bigger key work designed for fred hemke from my understanding. i when i played an alto the key work was bigger than my tenors.
Selmer will never be what they used to be untilthey redo their quality controll. their current policy is to sell everything that comes out of the factory.
Is a Mark VI generally accepted to be harder to play than a modern horn? I've seen comments to this effect a few times in this thread, but when I pick one up, it blows at least as freely as my Series III, and I might even feel more resonance through my fingertips, which is nice. On tenor, compared to my Martin, I feel like when I pick up a VI, it "just works," as opposed to being forced to get a sound I want and get the action moving cleanly. I've always had really positive experiences playing these, except for one horn which was leaking like a sieve.
P.S. In response to one comment, when it comes to personality, values and especially GAS, guitarists≈sax players.
I think a VI takes some getting used to. This is especially the case if you are coming from modern horns. I dont find mine resistant at all. However, they are flexible to the point of being initially hard to play in tune. I recall being all over the map with pitch when I first got mine. I would venture to say that you can get more variance in pitch from a VI without bending the reed (just using your throat) than you can out of any modern horn. So, Id say they are harder in that respect.
In that respect a remake of the VI would be a tough sell on todays market. You have to keep in mind that they need to sell a lot of horns...many to players that are not accomplished. I can already hear hundreds of band teachers saying, "Go buy a Yamaha".
"there are two means of refuge from the misery of life-music and cats," Dr. Albert Schweitzer
I would not begin to argue your point Thomas. I was strictly speaking to why Selmer would not revive these features. Since its available many people want "Plug and Play". Its not a position I advocate, just one I believe drives a great deal of the market.
It's all a bit of a trade-off, but what Thomas and others are saying about the flexibility in tone and intonation sounds right on to me. I've noticed the same thing with my Bueschers. They can be played in tune easily if you use your ear, but are also very flexible, so you have to use your ear. The bonus comes in being able to use this flexibility well. And there also seems to be a fairly wide 'tonal pallet' with many vintage horns, especially the MKVI.
Then again, this might all be in my mind, and maybe I don't really know what I'm talking about! But it seems to me to be the case. I did own a Yamaha Custom alto for a few years, and that horn just didn't seem to have the flexibility I'm talking about here. Not compared to a couple of Buescher altos I have owned. Same seemed true of some modern tenors I've tried, but I sure haven't tried them all.
What do you mean you wont be able to do more with a VI than another horn? Everyone knows you get more chicks with a VI
It would be fantastic if someone could do an A/B recording (on good audio gear naturally) demonstrating this fact.
I dont have recordings but yes the horn does seem more flexible and its very sensitive. Once you know the horn it doesnt feel that way but (as I mentioned) when you come from a modern horn where the intonation feels more locked in the difference is much like going from driving a chevy sedan to a tight, high performance vehicle. At first it feels hypersensitive and it wants to get away from you. Eventually everything gels and becomes second nature. Im not knocking modern horns but this is the best analogy I can think of at the moment.
Unfortunately I've never had the opportunity to play a "known good Mk VI" so I only get to read about how awesome they are on the internet =(
If someone in the Tampa Bay area has one and wouldn't mind letting me try it let me know =D
Ska Ska Ska Ska Ska
I don't buy all the talk of MKVIs being harder to play, any horn can seem harder to play after getting used to something else, and you can get used to playing any horn. It may be more difficult for people who have only ever played on saxophone for a long time, but adaptability is something that can be acquired quite easily IMO, much of it is psychological.
This same question could be asked of an SBA, which seem to cost twice as much as a MKVI, so if the idea was a good one commercially, they would be better off making an SBA reissue as it wouldn't cost any more but would possibly sell for double. But Selmer probably won't do this either.
Martin "Dick Stabile" Tenor: Barone Jazz 7*/GW7
"The spiritual life is built upon a commitment to truth telling and truth living. As master jazz musicians, [John Coltrane and Miles Davis] presented their spirituality within the reality of cool." --Farah Jasmine Griffen and Salim Washington
Can anyone explain to me why it is that modern horns are 'slotting' and vintage horns are 'flexible"? What's the science behind all that? In other words, how do you achieve various degrees of slotting or flexibility in manufacturing?
That being said, I'm never giving up my MkVI, unless my friend in Maine wants to give up his SBA. That particular horn just spoke to me better. Much better. But I'm willing to bet it was just that particular horn.
So presumably the saxophone is built to react more or less to those parameters. It can only be in the size or conicality of the bore, or something to do with the turbulences of the toneholes or tenon. ???
I drive both modern and vintage sports cars...I also play modern and vintage saxophones.
All are good, but different, & I adore the differences.
There is no "best", simply best for the occasion.
Experience is an excellent school....but the fees are high.