AustinHing
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2018
- Messages
- 589
- Reaction score
- 7
Before we go further into the serial tagging, I believe that the serial incrementing logic is not always based on the total ukes produced. Or at least true in the case of the S-0 Uke. There is serial 5,402 for a S-0 in year 1998 or 99. In a review of S-1 Uke in 2011, the reviewed S-1's serial is 1100. So how is it possible to have a smaller serial number in 2011 than in 1998? It seems to me that Martin is trying to disown S-0 Uke by rebooting the serial number?
Source for above regarding S-0 serial information:
https://forum.ukuleleunderground.com/showthread.php?21708-Martin-SO-serial-numbers-HELP
Source for above regarding S-1 review in 2011:
https://ukeeku.com/2011/06/17/martin-s1-full-review/
In the case of the backpacker uke, there are very limited sources on its serial information. The backpacker uke had its run from 1997 to 2006 and the only serial that I could find is 56,314. This number is wayyy bigger than the latest S-1 serial (19,xxx) listed in sweetwater! I'm suspecting the backpacker uke serial is lumped together with the Mexico made guitars.
Source for above on the backpacker uke:
https://reverb.com/item/3401533-martin-backpacker-ukulele-w-gig-bag-solid-mahogany-body-rare-37732
Source for above regarding S-0 serial information:
https://forum.ukuleleunderground.com/showthread.php?21708-Martin-SO-serial-numbers-HELP
Source for above regarding S-1 review in 2011:
https://ukeeku.com/2011/06/17/martin-s1-full-review/
In the case of the backpacker uke, there are very limited sources on its serial information. The backpacker uke had its run from 1997 to 2006 and the only serial that I could find is 56,314. This number is wayyy bigger than the latest S-1 serial (19,xxx) listed in sweetwater! I'm suspecting the backpacker uke serial is lumped together with the Mexico made guitars.
Source for above on the backpacker uke:
https://reverb.com/item/3401533-martin-backpacker-ukulele-w-gig-bag-solid-mahogany-body-rare-37732