Saxophone Forum


by saabtech
(20 posts)
10 years ago

laquer or unlaquer?

hi guys! looking to buy a new yamaha yas62II or custom z... what's the diff between laq or unlaq??? is it just sound? how about cleaning? sonny d. lancaster, pa

Reply To Post [Report Abuse]

Report Abuse

Replies

  1. by johnsonfromwisconsin
    (767 posts)

    10 years ago

    Re: laquer or unlaquer?

    whether laquered vs unlaquered actually results in a tonal difference is a matter of subjective debate. Personally, I don't like the feel of unlaquered brass that much as it feels grimey to the touch. Bare brass looks bad to me also, with fingerprints and smudges showing easily. Some people like the bare brass as it can patina to a look they find pleasing.

    Reply To Post


    1. by golferguy675
      (600 posts)

      10 years ago

      Re: laquer or unlaquer?

      Also, unlacquered saxes can tend to resonate more than the lacquered ones, because there is nothing dampening the vibrations. They also seem to have a little bit more core to the sound. The lacquered saxes are more centered and are easier to take care of though.

      Reply To Post


      1. by SaxMan
        (559 posts)

        10 years ago

        Re: laquer or unlaquer?

        and unlacquered makes your hands smell REALLLY bad

        Reply To Post


    2. by saabtech
      (20 posts)

      10 years ago

      Re: laquer or unlaquer?

      i am leaning towards laquer mainly cause of maintenance.

      Reply To Post


      1. by sax_maniac
        (984 posts)

        10 years ago

        Re: laquer or unlaquer?

        Alto or tenor? If you're talking alto, quite frankly, there's not enough surface area for the finish to affect the sound very much. The unlacquered horn might play slightly brighter, but barely. On tenor, the brightness may be more pronounced.

        Reply To Post


        1. by saabtech
          (20 posts)

          10 years ago

          Re: laquer or unlaquer?

          looking at altos. i'm assuming that it affects both horns equally...? 62II and z

          Reply To Post


          1. by sax_maniac
            (984 posts)

            10 years ago

            Re: laquer or unlaquer?

            Your choice between a 62II and an 82Z will far more affect your resulting tone than what the finish is. As far as upkeep, that's up to you. Some people really dig a tarnished brass finish, fingerprints and all. I wouldn't bother trying to keep up a polished brass finish, however. I think unlacquered polished brass is gorgeous, but keys on on alto are so crowded that you won't have easy access to a good share of the body anyhow unless you take it apart. I'd say that if you're thinking bare brass, just let it tarnish and go with the flow. Kinda neat to have a modern horn that looks old, I guess. On an unfinished horn or a lacquered horn, I recommend using a microfiber cleaning rag. They can be bought for around $3 at Home Depot and do a great job grabbing dust and water spots while being kind to the finish.

            Reply To Post


          2. by saabtech
            (20 posts)

            10 years ago

            Re: laquer or unlaquer?

            have a student now, a yas23 i believe. cant wait to try out the 62II, 82z, something called an allegro? and ref 54. trying them out tomorrow at a Music & Arts store.

            Reply To Post


          3. by golferguy675
            (600 posts)

            10 years ago

            Re: laquer or unlaquer?

            Ok, I've owned or played just about every Yamaha, so I think I can help you out. The allegro is terrible in the low table keys(C#, B, Bb), I would adivise against buying that. The choice between the 62II is a tough one though. I'll go ahead and let you in on a little secret; they are the exact same horn except for the keys are real mother of pearl, and there is no center reinforcement bow, allowing some improvement in the lower end and all around. Really, if the costs concerns you, save the 650 bucks, and buy the 62II. You can get the spatulas adjusted to play better anyway. The 82z is just a little sturdier.

            Reply To Post


          4. by golferguy675
            (600 posts)

            10 years ago

            Re: laquer or unlaquer?

            And try the 875ex, it's far better than any of them.

            Reply To Post


          5. by saabtech
            (20 posts)

            10 years ago

            Re: laquer or unlaquer?

            golfer guy, i got it on my head, even before playing them, it's between the 62II and z. they dont sound any different than the other? i'm leaning towards the z laquer, though. phil woods endorses the z, an i think koz play the 62II... dont know much about phil but love koz's sound. 875ex, alittle more expensive than the z, too. going to try the ref 54, just to see what all the hype is about. cant afford though.

            Reply To Post


          6. by sax_maniac
            (984 posts)

            10 years ago

            Re: laquer or unlaquer?

            Hey, Golfer... Tell me about the 875 vs. the Z. If I ever decide to get back into a pro horn once I leave my Selmer III behind, I'm thinking Yamaha is the way I want to go. Is the 875 easier to control as a classical instrument?

            Reply To Post


          7. by golferguy675
            (600 posts)

            10 years ago

            Re: laquer or unlaquer?

            Phil woods endorses an Unlacquered Z. He's rich, if he wasn't he would've settled with an unlacquered 62II. Unlacquered is just the way strict jazz players seem to go. Yes maniac, the 875 has a lot better setup and more features for the classical player; but it also can play jazz exceptionally well. The Z just may seem a touch brighter than the 62II, because of the missing reinforcement plate, but other than that, the only difference is the playablitly level, which only a little better. The only one that stands out at way better than the other is the 875.

            Reply To Post


          8. by saabtech
            (20 posts)

            10 years ago

            Re: laquer or unlaquer?

            other than the touch brighter sound, is the z really any better then the 62?

            Reply To Post


          9. by golferguy675
            (600 posts)

            10 years ago

            Re: laquer or unlaquer?

            Maybe a little better of a response on the Z, but not much. And you probably don't care what the hell the buttons are made out of(pearl, or nylon), they both feel fine. You'll have to hold each on in your hands, because the positioning is slightly different, but you can have most of that adjusted to your specifications by a tech.

            Reply To Post


          10. by saabtech
            (20 posts)

            10 years ago

            Re: laquer or unlaquer?

            what about intonation and pitch? by the way, what's the difference between intonation and pitch? when i read that i only think of how well does it play in tune...

            Reply To Post


          11. by YanagisawA-901
            (312 posts)

            10 years ago

            Re: laquer or unlaquer?

            i tried a yamaha 62 in the matte finish or "unlaquer" u ppl are caling it... when i bought my yani, and i didnt like it, it was very free blowing and sounded good..but thats it, it sounded good, its tone didnt take my breath away or anything..maybe a lil thin and brittle..maybe it was because of the matte finish?? intonation is being able to keep "in tune" and still have is sound like..in tune..not ugly pitch is the way it sounds... "oooooo" "eeeeee" aaaaaaahhh" that kinda thing, u can change pitch pretty much on a dime just my moving emboucher, haha i think thats how u spell it, and intonation is the sound that comes out of ur horn that makes u say "that sounds good" or.."shit! that sounds horrible"

            Reply To Post Yahoo! AIM ICQ


          12. by saabtech
            (20 posts)

            10 years ago

            Re: laquer or unlaquer?

            well the 62 i played definitely sounded better and warmer than my student 23... better in tune than my 23. i'm assuming all saxes have a flat open c#??? the 62 when tuned to g, was alittle flat below, and gradually went sharp above. except c# was always alittle flat, had to work it in tune. altissimo was sharp, bet very easy to play. will be testing the z and the 54 on saturday! cant wait!!!!

            Reply To Post


          13. by SaxMan
            (559 posts)

            10 years ago

            Re: laquer or unlaquer?

            No, the series III's C# is hardly off at all, if at all. Altissimo cant really be sharp or flat because they arent real fingerings, and the pitch has nothing to do with the sax. BTW, dont let them charge your for anything more than 1500 on that 62, if you go that way.

            Reply To Post


          14. by saabtech
            (20 posts)

            10 years ago

            Re: laquer or unlaquer?

            played a silver z, not what i ordered. didnt like the looks or the sound! felt the 62 was a nicer horn. the ref 54 on the other hand... i loved it! played in tune, even open c#, has a real nice dark, sweet sound! yamahas seem too bright to me. got another z coming in, unlaquered this time. will play the z and the 54 side by side, then i'll make a decision... got this feeling the z is still going to be bright, though.

            Reply To Post