TubeNet

What do you guess think about the Besson 983 being an all around horn? I mean I know it's a great solo and quintet/quartet horn but what about a wind ensemble or even an orchestra?

Thanks!!!

My 983 is my only horn and it has served me well from solos, quintet, misc sized chamber groups, and a 50 member concert band (as the only tuba). I haven't done any orchestral work so I can't speak to that, but otherwise I have been very happy with my 983 and have no plans to purchase another horn in the near future.

While the Besson 983 is a fine instrument, it simply is not big enough to play professionally in a large ensemble. The tubist in one of the major American orchestras said he liked my 4/4 Nirschl but that it just couldn't "make enough noise" to be heard in his orchestra. The Besson 983 is notably smaller than the Nirschl CC so you can draw your own conclusion.

IMO the Besson wouldn't add enough bottom to a band or orchestra and would be more "bass trombon-ish" below the staff where a tuba works, and is needed, most often.

However, that's not to say you couldn't "make it work" but you will be limiting yourself it it's your only horn and unless you're the next Pat Sheridan.

I disagree with the previous remarks. BATs sound different, but they are not necessarily louder. A smaller horn can, in fact, cut better often compared to them.

This is a great all-around horn. If you're most often playing in a 110 piece orchestra for a living, then I would reconsider. But most of us aren't playing with professional orchestras of that size and volume. Your conductors will never mind your use of an Eb, and your quintet will love you.

Seriously - EVERYONE should think twice before bringing in a BAT for their work. Balance and blend are not so easy with BATs in any setting save the largest ensembles.

Off my soap box...

J.c.S.

Depends on the player, primarily. That said, however, for Berlioz, Mendelssohn or most operatic stuff (other than Wagner or Strauss, say) I think a 983 would do fine. Another potentially effective use would be in tandem with a BAT in wind ensemble or band. One cuts, the other gives breadth.

J.c. Sherman wrote:I disagree with the previous remarks. BATs sound different, but they are not necessarily louder. A smaller horn can, in fact, cut better often compared to them.

Your conductors will never mind your use of an Eb, and your quintet will love you.

Seriously - EVERYONE should think twice before bringing in a BAT for their work.

Your reply indicates that you disagree with all of my remarks about the 983 which is a broad brush to paint with considering my praise of that model.

You should remember that ASUTuba06 was specifically asking if the 983 would be suitable for "wind ensemble or even an orchestra." The response implies that it would work just fine in a performance of Ride of the Valkyries as long as the orchestra wasn't too big or professional.

It has been my experience that many pieces would require a larger tuba for a more "correct" sound and many semi-professional orchestras have fine brass players who demand a large tuba for proper balance.

It is probable that the Besson 983 will NOT be an acceptable sound for the Ride. It can work in a French piece or an early Romantic piece or even contemporary pieces, but it simply isn't an "all round" tuba, which is what he was aking. The 981/2 with their 19" bells and larger throat can be made to work but the 17" bell of the 983 is just not enough.

In response to "conductors will never mind your use of an Eb," I talked to someone, less than three weeks ago, who had auditioned for the Grant Park Orchestra. One of the committee members saw him in the hallway and asked, "Isn't that an Eb tuba?" Yes. (patronizingly) "Well, you know that's just not suitable for an orchestra, don't you?" He did not advance, of course. There is a prejudice, in this country, against BBb and EEb tubas in orchestras, just as there is prejudice in other countries against CC tubas.

I would hazard a guess that there would be a concensus that the Besson 983 is a fine instrument but not, as the original poster asked, entirely suitable for wind ensemble and orchestra. You can find situations where this instrument will work but that's not what he was asking.

I'm guessing that ASUTuba06 is attending Arizona State (ASU). If so, I suggest you ask the fine teachers there what their opinion is. A 983 would be a great instrument to start your arsenal, you can buy something bigger later when you need it.

Most of us do.

Alex C wrote:

J.c. Sherman wrote:I disagree with the previous remarks. BATs sound different, but they are not necessarily louder. A smaller horn can, in fact, cut better often compared to them.

Your conductors will never mind your use of an Eb, and your quintet will love you.

Seriously - EVERYONE should think twice before bringing in a BAT for their work.

Your reply indicates that you disagree with all of my remarks about the 983 which is a broad brush to paint with considering my praise of that model.

Not at all.

Most of us haven't tried to play ride on an Eb - mine has a smaller bell than the 983. But it is easy to play on the Eb. And you certainly don't TELL the conductor about which horn you're using - I would never think of it, because most of them haven't a clue, and listen with their eyes and things they've heard from others.

Also, I was perhaps unclear - "professional" was an unneeded adjective. I merely was commenting on size of ensemble.

Look, no ONE instrument is ideal for absolutely everything, but the English Eb's are - for me - the closest, and can WORK for everything. If I could only keep one instrument running out of my burning house, it would be my Imperial Eb. No question. With it, I can do my job.

I have played plenty with my Eb, many things which most wouldn't attempt, both in Bands and in Orchestras, without a BAT. But it works. You simply have to enjoy that sound concept, and learn to make a big sound with what you have. Learn to play with a variety of timbres and a variety of dynamics.

Try the ride on a compensating Eb sometime - piece of cake, and you'll be heard - believe me!

I can't praise these types of instruments enough.

J.c.S.

BTW - if a conductor asks what key your tuba is in, answer C. You read concert pitch, usually enough to get off the topic, and not really untrue...

J.c.S.

Hey Guys Thanks! I do attend Appalachian State University home of the 3 time National Champions and Owners of the "Big House"

tubashaman wrote:I took serious advice, buy a good CC, and wait on the F. I was just so happen struck with a good deal on my F tuba that i didnt wanna pass up. I was in the market for one less than $2500, waiting one day to get a reall real real good one,....though the high range on mine now is kickbutt

But you want to have your wisdom teeth pulled for $30 a tooth because you "don't have the money" for a dentist?

J.c. Sherman wrote:
I can't praise these types of instruments enough.

Obviously.

OK.... I've held my tongue long enough. Every time I hear 'Besson' mentioned these days, I cringe. It's true that they are good horns... but... let it be known that even after a couple of years of reorganization under Buffet-Crampon, they STILL do not have their parts program in order. I placed and order for simple stuff like valve springs, guides, and spring dampeners for the 983 back in January and still have no word on when I might receive them.

I visited the Buffet-Crampon booth at NABBA two weeks ago and the marketing/sales guys actually thought it was 'comical' that I was having so much trouble getting parts!

Anyone else remember British Leyland? There are so many fine Bessons around; the problem is finding them. Nonetheless, no matter what the equipment, if the player isn't getting the job done, the result is not going to be good.

TubaTinker wrote:I visited the Buffet-Crampon booth at NABBA two weeks ago and the marketing/sales guys actually thought it was 'comical' that I was having so much trouble getting parts!

I visited the same booth the year before at NABBA, and the same clowns thought that it was funny that I was interested in a 983. They had NO IDEA when if ever it would be back in production and didn't really care to talk to me about it except to tell me that it wasn't a priority. They also had NO Besson tubas at their display last year. Pretty impressive sales and marketing effort, isn't it?

Has anyone gotten any believable information about new production of the 983, or is this now a dead end?

Bill Anderson

I have heard through well connected sources that the 983 will "definitely" be back in Besson production. This is probably the intention of the reorganized Besson but if you read the previous posts you can determine for yourself when/if it will ever happen.

As an observer, this seems to be a strange time for the brass band market (including the 983 offshoot here). There are now half a dozen manufacturers who are now in the 3+1 tuba/euphonium market (Miraphone, Meinl-Weston, Nirschl, LMI, York, Besson, Willson, and I'm leaving out some) but I have seen precious few products. Lots of advertisements but not many products. I wonder if a shakeout is coming.

Roboslack wrote:..... I repeat, the 983 is a great all around horn and also a great road model too - in the hands of a competent and qualified player. Robo

I totally agree that these are good horns (maybe not 'great'... depending on who you talk to).... but IF parts get damaged it's going to be pretty tough to swallow if your wonderful-playing horn is out of commission because of a bent piston stem or broken valve guide. It's gonna happen. I don't care how attentive to the care of your horn you are.

I think if a 983 makes a suitable all-around tuba depends on where you play and your personal sound concept.

I have only a couple of times tried a 983, but have found it very similar in weight of tone to my M-W 2040/5 Eb. It would be fine in concert band as one of a section with CC/BBb's. In fact from my experience an Eb is ideal for playing the upper part in divisi in a section - it adds definition to the bass line.

However in an orchestra, the use of a 983 would be limited. They do not have the breath of sound of the 981 and would just not provide a broad enough tone for much Russian repertoire, however good the player.

My experience with this horn leads me to believe that it is an ALRIGHT all around horn. It will do a lot...A LOT....HOWEVER...it always depends on the purpose of the player. Yes, it will suffice for the amateur as an all around. But if you are a professional, then you will most likely need a C horn..why?

I find it interesting that so many people commented on needing the C for volume..NO! Believe me...any horn can put out volume. It is the quality of sound. The besson horn just CAN'T put out a sound with the same breadth of a C horn. This is the real issue.

Yes, it is good all around horn. No it is not a good ONLY horn if you are aspiring to be a pro ORCHESTRAL player. In this case you will need a contrabass.

Just my 3,947 cents...(up from last time to keep up with inflation).

BP

I'm not entirely sure EXACTLY what the original poster wanted to know, but as an amateur player the Besson would do fine in small ensembles, solo, etc. windensemble...but use your ears as well. Nothing feels better in a large ensemble, than the penetrating resonance of a contrabass.

I still do not believe the OP said anything about the prospect of becoming a professional Tubist.. He just asked people's opinion on the possibility of using the 983 as an all around horn.

I've been using my Besson 983 with the Marine Band for the last two years or so. It's been great having the Eb in the section. I play the top divisi any time one exists, and let the guys with the big horns handle the low divisi lines.

In the upper registers of the horn, there's plenty of volume and weight, and divisi parts balance nicely with me on an upper divisi by myself. In the lower registers, the 983 doesn't have the weight of the larger horns, but it still contributes to the overall section sound. I sit next to Cameron's Nirschl BAT as often as not, and I'm fully aware of the weight difference. The 983 does have quite a bit of weight to the sound--after all, it's still a tuba. Since there's three of us honking away back there, nobody minds a little less weight, especially the conductors. I just had my annual evaluation/fitness report this morning. Verdict from the top: Eb good.

For the "one-on-a-part" stuff that comes along, I get my share. Low string bass pizzicato stuff, Cameron plays it. High legato crap, he points at me and says, "Enjoy your test." When the section consists of a BAT, a 4/4, and an Eb, there's a ton of flexibility there that we haven't always enjoyed in the past.

For what little freelance orchestra work I get, the 983 is fine. If I get an orchestra call, it's for a pickup group, maybe 40 people total. The 983 has plenty of weight for that. Without the added weight of a BAT, I don't get The Hand, and I can still play loud without worrying about The Hand. If I ever get a call to sub in with a big orchestra, where I've got to balance 70 or more by myself, I'll leave the 983 at home. I don't get those calls, though, so I don't worry about it.

The Besson 983 (like most Eb tubas out there) is not a BAT. You can easily get BAT timbre, and you will never get BAT weight/projection. I've found that both of those traits work to my advantage. YMMV.