{"id":39482,"date":"2013-10-30T09:46:22","date_gmt":"2013-10-30T17:46:22","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/bassic-sax.info\/blog\/?p=39482"},"modified":"2024-06-09T09:37:56","modified_gmt":"2024-06-09T16:37:56","slug":"selmer-mark-vis-began-53727","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/bassic-sax.info\/blog\/2013\/selmer-mark-vis-began-53727\/","title":{"rendered":"Selmer Mark VIs Began At # 53727"},"content":{"rendered":"

Introductory Remarks<\/strong> <\/span><\/p>\n

For as many years as I’ve been participating in online sax forums (since ’98) people have complained that Selmer’s official serial number chart is wrong. With this particular print ad from 1962, we have categorical proof that Selmer Paris’ Sax Legend<\/em> is inaccurate.<\/span><\/p>\n

When it comes to corporate history, it has been proven time and time again that companies are less than reliable sources of their own. Point in fact: this interesting Selmer Mark VI print ad<\/a> currently up for sale on eBay by vintage paper seller ANTIQUE~GRAPHIQUE, which contradicts Selmer’s official serial number chart.<\/p>\n

Now you would think that Selmer Paris would have a pretty good grasp of its own history, but obviously not. According to this 1962 print ad, the Mark VI started with serial number 53727.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Source: ANTIQUE~GRAPHIQUE on eBay.com<\/span><\/p>\n

In this ad, Selmer seems pretty adamant about when their saxophones got better: it was horn number 53727. Now there’s no mention if the horn was an alto, tenor, baritone, or soprano\u2014and many people would argue that the Mark VI soprano never got better at all anyway, but I digress… That said, it doesn’t matter. Mark VI’s started at # 53727.<\/p>\n

OK, I get it. 53727 was the first Mark VI, but what does Selmer say today?<\/h2>\n

Fast forward five decades, and what does Selmer Paris have on its website? A serial number list that they call the Sax Legend<\/del>. With Selmer’s permission, Pete Hales has captured this serial number chart in an image format and included it on his website. <\/del><\/p>\n

Selmer Paris’ own serial number chart indicate that the Mark VI saxophones began in 1954 with horn # 59000. <\/p>\n

Now if I had compiled this serial number chart, I could see this type of error. But Selmer Paris? Really?<\/p>\n

Oh, what’s this? At the bottom of the 1962 print ad there’s a coupon that can be sent to Selmer for a brochure called none other than: 53727.<\/p>\n

\"vintage<\/a><\/p>\n

Source: ANTIQUE~GRAPHIQUE on eBay.com<\/span><\/p>\n

Perhaps someone should buy this ad from ANTIQUE~GRAPHIQUE, and send a copy of the coupon to Selmer Paris. Maybe if they looked for a copy of the their old brochure, they might notice that their Saxophone Legend<\/em> chart is incorrect. Because let’s face it, if you’re going to use the word “legend” in your serial number chart, wouldn’t you want it to be correct?  \"\"<\/a>  Hey, I’m just saying…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Introductory Remarks For as many years as I’ve been participating in online sax forums (since ’98) people have complained that Selmer’s official serial number chart …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"ngg_post_thumbnail":0,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[272],"tags":[660,149,633,644,629,29,38,643,31,136],"class_list":["post-39482","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-saxophone-collectible","tag-ebay","tag-french-saxophones","tag-musings","tag-photos","tag-selmer","tag-selmer-mark-vi","tag-vintage-ads","tag-vintage-horns","tag-vintage-sax","tag-vintage-sax-resources"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t