Sax on the Web Forum banner

Does this look like a re-lacquer?

5K views 24 replies 14 participants last post by  JayeLID 
#1 ·
#3 ·
What Pete said:
Beware of tone hole leaks on this model. The tone holes are soldered on and after 40-50 years, the solder job from the factory begin to fail on some of these. The other problem is once you repair one tone hole, the heat can make others fail and then you have a really bad day.
 
#5 ·
Point taken Herr Thomas- if the engraving looks pretty healthy, perhaps it was a well done relaq., i.e.,not over buffed. Re solder yep, knocks those around and you have issues. So it could well be a winner despite the horrid, dreaded, flesh-eating relaq monster.?

I have a Martin Indiana from '56 - original laq- and one of the tone holes "gapped" but probably from a knock- not a buff But, now don't get all antsy, for small gaps some well placed, discreetly placed clear epoxy can work wonders. My repair guy did that as an alternative to a very involved soldering operations- its invisible, hidden, and does the job

But my other questions stands for you Martinettes: will the The Martin sound much better/different from my mid 50's Indiana. I find the Indiana to be sort of a paradox of meaty but somehow not well rounded or deep in its tone. With the body reputedly 'the same' as the other Martins, how might this be true? Also, would a neck upgrade matter much?

one last: pad heights>> lower than average on Martins, yes, but how much lower. My technician set them quite low and the "feet" on the keys seem to limit height, cork thicknes aside. I know its verboten, but, is there a typical millimeter height to look for, for say the B , F or D pad?
 
#4 ·
Isn't that equally true of all soldered-hole Martins? - and those early Bueschers too?

(I have owned 5 Martins, all 80+ y/o, and haven't had the problem...yet)
 
#8 ·
it is very likely relacquered, these period Martin have dark and generally badly preserved lacquer. It all comes down to price really and at the level it is now it really shouldn't matter all that much! As for the risk that the horn could have any type of problem, buying on ebay this is part of the game and at this price it is worth taking the risk.
 
#11 ·
I agree, it looks like a well-done relacq job.

Martin really seems to have had problem with their lacquer, especially in the '30's. Bad formula, I guess. Stuff came off fast and didn't really age into anything nice looking, either, like you sometimes see on Buescher horns. But then the attitude of some instrument makers back then seemed to be that lacquer wasn't supposed to be a long-term finish, just something to protect the horn until it was purchased.
 
#12 ·
Relacquer. Martin engraved their horns AFTER lacquering leaving bare metal. However this example looks for all the world like the engraving is lacquered over. A tell tale sign.

Additionally, the original engraving on these is quite crisp and distinct, yet this horn's engraving looks a bit buffed over.
 
#13 ·
Relacquer. Martin engraved their horns AFTER lacquering leaving bare metal. However this example looks for all the world like the engraving is lacquered over. A tell tale sign.
Yes indeed, and to add to that where the lacquer is cut through with the engraving, is almost always where the lacquer disintegrated first.
 
#15 ·
I have an original lacquer alto (blanking on the serial at the moment) and despite it's so-so finish it still has the patent decal near the serial number. Were these decals put on ALL "The Martin" model horns? If so, they could help assess the originality of the finish, no? Sure, I guess some may have worn away over time, but they won't wear off an otherwise "mint" horn... Again, I'm unsure if all horns received the decal so the theory may hold little water. Just a thought.
 
#16 ·
Thanks for all of this great input... yeah, too bad about the "yellow" finish in the eBay item. Unless that's the flash of the photo. That warm brown honey that Ive seen on Olds Ambassadors is nice

But- my other ? still stands... anyone?

But my other questions stands for you Martinettes: will the The Martin sound much better/different from my mid 50's Indiana. I find the Indiana to be sort of a paradox of meaty and growly, but somehow not well rounded or deep/rich. With the body tube reputedly 'the same' as the other Martins, how might this be true? Also, would a neck upgrade matter much? Again, ergonomics and moving parts aside...

PT mentioned "better" all around but in what way? durability, playability? Re the neck, it may be broke as the weak link in the chain of pneumatic and acoustic events- I just made that that term and concept up, if anyone's asking

one last: pad heights>> lower than average on Martins, yes, but how much lower. My technician set them quite low and the "feet" on the keys seem to limit height, cork thicknes aside. I know its verboten, but, is there a typical millimeter height to look for, for say the B , F or D pad?
 
#18 ·
I used to have an Indiana tenor in beautiful shape, near perfect lacquer and a premium setup. I ended up selling it... It was a fine horn, but to my ears seemed to thin out up top and just lacked some of the refinement I got out of my Aristocrat and a '57 10M I stumbled onto. I have never had the opportunity to play a "The Martin" tenor, but I have no doubt they play better than my Indiana did. I'm not 100% sold on the idea that the keywork is the sole difference between the two models, but that is pure speculation on my part. The Indiana was a fine horn, but like you say, lacked something.

Probably the only way you will know is to get your hands on a few "The Martins" to compare... good luck!
 
#19 ·
You about said it. It is pretty much the standard when comparing the classic top-shelf models to their second-shelf siblings. Back then, the top-shelfer just had more darkness and richness to the tone. The second shelfers were a bit brighter, a tad thinner and reedier...just not as refined a sound. This holds true for whichever american company you care to look at...Conn, Martin, Holton, King, Buescher.

The irony being, of course...it all depends on what you compare it to. By today's tonal standards...an Indiana, 16M, Elkhart 30A, Collegiate, or Cleveland is hella darker and richer and sweeter-toned than 95% of contemporary horns.

I like the Indiana tone a lot, actually. It is nice and edgy and it cuts really well, while still maintaining some complexity to it. But I agree it cannot compete with the lushness of the top-shelfers.
 
#20 ·
Relac. The Committee III will be a better player than the Indiana. I have owned well over 50 Martins and only had about 2 tone hole leaks ever. Don't be put off by relacquered Martins as the original finish never holds up. I have a relacquered Comm. one and a Relac Comm. two alto and they are still great horns.
 
#21 ·
I owned a matched pair of Comm 1 alto/tenor, and both were relacquers. Both had dark, complex tones, with a nice edge when pushed. I sold them only because I no longer needed 5 altos and 3 tenors as a retiree. They lacked nothing, and I miss them! Great horns, worthy of your attention.
Sax Magic
 
#22 ·
This is a relaq and Bruce is right. Martin had the formula for the worlds most worthless lacquer. That in conjunction with deep and elaborate engraving led them to shed badly. That horn is buffed....not badly but it is buffed. You can freaking snag clothes on a fresh Martin engraving.

The price is certainly low at this point. I wouldnt let the lacquer put me off either. These have a lot of metal. Its not like over buffing an aristocrat.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top