Question:
Did Selmer really kill off Buescher?
I have just come across the following statement made by Ralph Morgan in a presentation given in 1994:
"1963- Selmer purchases the Buescher Band Instrument Company just as it was being closed for good." (Ref: )
I have never gone for the "Selmer ruined Buescher" theory as it has seemed to me that Buescher was on the way down but Selmer built up sales (albeit not of fully professional standard instruments) from 1963 on. (My signature does show my true saxophone allegiance, by the way.) This statement appears to support the picture of Selmer as gallant knight rather than greedy undertaker.

Answer:
Originally Posted by Pinnman Did Selmer really kill off Buescher? No. It was Col. Mustard, in the study, with the lead pipe...

Answer:
Good answer Grumps, lol. Actually, it seems that Buescher was dying of "natural" causes already. But those "natural causes" are what we'd have to focus on to really answer the question. If Selmer had something to do with the death of Buescher prior to buying it out, then you'd have to say they were culpable in some way (not necessarily anything underhanded).
The one part that I find mildly objectionable is that Selmer kept the Buescher name on a line of instruments that didn't meet the true Buescher quality. But then, some would say the latest "true" Bueschers were not of the same quality as the earlier models (I don't know if that's true or not, though).

Answer:
From looking over publicity, literature and such, I'm tempted to conclude that Buescher was playing catch-up with the rest of the market from at least the late 1930s - and that's nearly 25 years before the Selmer buyout. I say this primarily because of the very few big-name artists endorsing Buescher instruments after the '30s.
I suspect more were playing them than advertised – indicating a weak or poorly budgeted advertising department. It's not a good sign when you're 120 miles from Chicago and your catalog is featuring small-time Chicago dance bands and the same national names you were promoting ten years earlier.
You can have a fantastic product, but if you can't or won't promote it – well, why am I even saying this? Except for the heyday at Conn, the instrument industry never has believed in (or been good at) any advertising but word of mouth.
That's the legacy of fine craftsmanship. It's idealistic, deeply opposed to salesmanship, insists that a good product doesn't need promoting. Not always true.

Answer:
IMHO what killed of Buescher wasn't Selmer, it was the simple issue of U.S. manufacturers being unable to produce a high quality hand made sax at anything near a reasonable price, probably due to the complexity of hand fitting the approx. 500 parts that comprise a sax.
I was fooling around with my 6 year old son's Academy---a toy really---this evening and to me it felt more substantial than any of the imports with $800 price tags that I saw at the local music store. Even the Buescher-oid Bundy 2 made in Nogales felt far better if "better" means being made with thicker brass instead of the foil I see on the cheaper new saxes.
While I was looking around for a bari, I tried out a Selmer-Buescheroid-Taiwan model 400 (which was widely regarded as a lot of bari bang for the buck) and the overall quality of my beat up 1920's True Tone I ended up with was IMHO far superior. While the 400 was probably a better horn from a players standpoint(ergonomics, low "A" etc...) I can't imagine one holding together after 20 or 30 years of professional use and maybe far less if marched.
Selmer owns the Buescher name and I'm kind of glad they stopped using it. That last generation of Buescher-oids might be very good saxes, but they just aren't Bueschers.

Answer:
Why would Selmer buy Buescher if it was dying, unless they intended to revive it? Otherwise they'd have just let it die and saved the money.
I think they wanted to get into the student sax business on the cheap, so they bought Buescher at a distressed inventory price and downgraded the product to student-level.

Answer:
Originally Posted by awholley Why would Selmer buy Buescher if it was dying, unless they intended to revive it? Otherwise they'd have just let it die and saved the money.
I think they wanted to get into the student sax business on the cheap, so they bought Buescher at a distressed inventory price and downgraded the product to student-level.
This really makes sense to me. Ask 95% of the local music stores out there where their instrument sales profits are generated. It is not professional instruments. The "student" market drives the business and the ability to hang the cachet of an old and respected brand name on a line of cheap horns makes the kind of twisted sense that marketers like.

Answer:
Marketing. By the late 50s large companies like Conn, King, Leblanc and Selmer had dealers in major markets that sold a complete band instrument line with accessories and all the fixins'. Buescher was basically a saxophone company and had to compete with the large dealer discounts that the biggies gave to the dealers. If a dealer could buy a Conn director with a retail price of $400 for $150 and get to pay for it a year later, he would not be interested in an Aristocrat selling for $400 and costing him $200 with 30 day payment. The big companies strongarmed these dealers into submission by linking other products. A dealer would need Mark VIs, Bach trumpets, etc. so he would take on Bundy saxes as the dealer had to take them.
When Selmer bought Buescher, they got tooling, the name and at the same time eliminated one competitor.
If we are talking about a name being killed, look at all of the Conn, Buescher and Selmer names on asian horns. The day of the US saxophone is over, dead, gone.

Answer:
Originally Posted by bruce bailey The day of the US saxophone is over, dead, gone. Not while they're still available to play... thankfully.

Answer:
I meant NEW.

Answer:
Oh, I know you did. I'm just thinking of the big picture.

Answer:
Originally Posted by Grumps I'm just thinking of the big picture.
Excellent point Grumps. It may be that, in a sense, the day of the vintage U.S. saxophone is here right now. Many of us are discovering these old gems for the first time and the more the word (and sound) gets out, the more of a resurgence we'll see. Unfortunately, that may also drive some of the prices up, but that's reality.
The marketing angle (or lack thereof) for companies like Buescher makes a lot of sense to me. Especially back in the 30s and 40s when communication was nothing remotely like today (not sure exactly when the tv came along, but I'm sure no musicians had them back then, and of course computers were in the realm of science fiction), so if a product wasn't marketed aggressively it would fall right off the radar. That may be true today also, but for different reasons (i.e. we're bombarded with everything in the marketplace, making it difficult for anything to stand out). When Selmer came along with the "greatest new sax in the world," or however they sold it (and of course they were/are great horns), everyone, including the pros, went with it. Only speculation, but this makes sense to me.

Answer:
Originally Posted by bruce bailey Marketing. By the late 50s large companies like Conn, King, Leblanc and Selmer had dealers in major markets that sold a complete band instrument line with accessories and all the fixins'. Buescher was basically a saxophone company and had to compete with the large dealer discounts that the biggies gave to the dealers. If a dealer could buy a Conn director with a retail price of $400 for $150 and get to pay for it a year later, he would not be interested in an Aristocrat selling for $400 and costing him $200 with 30 day payment. The big companies strongarmed these dealers into submission by linking other products. A dealer would need Mark VIs, Bach trumpets, etc. so he would take on Bundy saxes as the dealer had to take them.
If this is true, and I tend to think it is, then we'd better get our Yanis while we still can! After all, aren't they the only current sax company that's solely a sax company?
Whoops! Owned by Leblanc. We're saved!!

Answer:
Saxpic's web site has a theory that Buescher hurt itself by having several saxophone models competing against each other. In the 20's and 30's Buescher sold only one model at a time: True-Tone, then the New Aristocrat (as a transition), and then the Aristocrat. However, starting in the early 40's Buescher marketed both the Aristocrat and the 400. It became more complicated in the 50's with Buescher selling the Big-B and non Big-B Aristocrats (difference only in engraving as I understand it). And then, in 1955 Buescher introduced the Super 400...yet another model. Thus, there were around 4 or 5 models. On the other hand, Selmer was selling one model at a time in the 50's.
But, this isn't the only reason. The entire saxophone market changed in the 50's. Even if Buescher didn't have multiple models being marketed the company would have still been under financial pressure. Thus, it's my feeling that it was a combination of factors that caused Buescher to go into a downward spiral.
Anyway, thank God that great vintage Buescher saxophones are available. I don't know what I'd do if I didn't have mine.
Roger

Answer:
If you read the Buescher stencil page on saxpics.com, it appears that Selmer had a relationship with Buescher going back to the 20s or something. Even back then, Buescher-made Bundy stencils were stamped with the Selmer name. So I don't think they killed them off, as they were already business partners in a sense. Also, the Selmer buyout insured that great horns like the 400 would be made for many more years.

Answer:
We still have the ability to make saxes in the US. I make flutes and have connections for builders of everything in Elkhart. We thought about tooling a sax but to make a horn similar to a Martin Comm or a 6M, it would cost a dealer about $5K. Too big of a risk and now that Selmer owns about everything, the owners (Steinway) are more interested in the bottom line than the future. The only way I could see an independent group could make saxes is if they bought bodys from asia, cut and soldered new tone holes, did a decent key set-up (buy parts from various plants) and get a custom neck maker to fit a good neck. That is what I do with flutes and it CAN be done with saxes if someone is willing to take a chance, not me.