Saxophone Forum


by henschel
(5 posts)
1 year ago

Selmer "NEW YORK" Alto

Can anyone give me an idea  of  what year this alto was made?  One set of numbers are " 9954" under that set is the letter "A" , under that is the serial number? "P10577", under that is a " L".
This sax had what I thought was a bafflethat turned out to be a Martin mouthpiece.
I'd appreciate any help.
Thanks
Ed

Reply To Post [Report Abuse]

Report Abuse

Replies

  1. by GFC
    (332 posts)

    1 year ago

    Re: Selmer "NEW YORK" Alto

    The "L" stands for "low pitch" (or, in your case, "lucky" since you didn't know it was a low pitch horn when you bought it).  If it were marked "H" or "high pitch" it would be worthless.  Horns stopped being labeled with pitch designations some years ago, since no high pitch horns had been produced since before World War II.  So it's a safe bet that your horn is an oldie.


    Selmer USA marketed the famous Selmer Paris horns and some horns produced in the USA by other manufacturers but sold under the Selmer brand, i.e. "stencil" horns.  Stencil horns were inexpensive horns for students and casual players, but they were often pretty decent horns.  They don't have a whole lot of market value, so it is quite easy for repairs to exceed the value of the horn if they need major work.  Enjoy your horn and keep your investment low. 

    Reply To Post


    1. by saxgourmet
      (98 posts)

      1 year ago

      Re: Selmer "NEW YORK" Alto

      That horn was made for Selmer by Conn (it's NOT a Conn! Just manufactured by them) for sale at the Selmer retail store in New York City in the mid 1920's.....

      STEVE GOODSON
      New Orleans
      www.nationofmusic.com

      Reply To Post


      1. by henschel
        (5 posts)

        1 year ago

        Re: Selmer "NEW YORK" Alto

        Hi Steve, Thanks for your reply.
        Ed

        Reply To Post


    2. by henschel
      (5 posts)

      1 year ago

      Re: Selmer "NEW YORK" Alto

      Thank you for your reply and a lot of information.
      Ed

      Reply To Post