TubeNet

Hi all!

I want to hear all opinions and thoughts about the prestige, either model will do.

I currently play on a Meinl Weston 451 and I love the horn just not the intonation issues and looking to make a switch to something else...

Let me know what you have to say.

These are both excellent instruments... both having the tuning trigger to correct the sharp 6th partials (Eb, E, and F concert). I don't own either one, but if I were to purchase one, I think I'd prefer the 2051 over the 2052 because of its 11" bell. The tone should be a bit more focused for solo work. But... if you're playing in a large group setting, the larger bell would help your sound carry over the band. I'm pretty sure some others will post their opinion.

Rick's right, you couldn't go wrong with either. Great horns.

I like the soaring sound I get when I play my 2052, I haven't spent much time with a 2051 it sounds to small for me, it would probably be nice for solo work, but I play in wind bands for the most part. FWIW you won't go wrong with either.

Best euphoniums made. With the right mouthpiece on the latest examples I don't detect any sharpness at all on the 6th partial notes, but your mileage may vary. You really can't go wrong with either.

2051 has an 11.25" bell and the 2052 has 12". I wish they'd make one in-between as I find the smaller bell to be a bit too small and the larger to be a bit too big! Large bell tends to be the standard these days with the york 4052/3067, miraphone 5050, willson 2950/2960, geneva, and adams all being slightly larger than the 2052 and the yamahas, meltons, miraphone 5000/1258 and sterling all slightly smaller. The willson 2900 is somewhere in the middle and then a "big" jump down to the besson 2051 which is quite a bit smaller.

Solists like Steven Mead and Demondrae Thurman seem to just fine with the large bells which have a slightly broader sound. And there are people like the section in the President's Own which seem to do just fine with the small bells in a concert band environment despite the more focused and slightly softer sound.

I agree with Rick and Barry. You can't go wrong with either. I own a 2051 (newer German made horn). The quality is superb. The sound is focused, rich, sweet, and soaring when needed. It is not at all bright. However it is not as diffuse or dark as the larger bell horns like 2052. For that reason, I also own a Sterling Virtuoso with 300mm heavy red brass bell that I use for wind band and brass ensemble use. I also use it in the New England Tuba Ensemble, since the 1st player has a York 4052 and I am trying to match sound with him. I like the sound I get with either horn (the Sterling or the 2051). I spoke with Matt Van Emerick at the USABTEC. while he plays a 2052, he was thinking about getting a 2051 for its more focused sound. He played my horn for at least an hour and liked the sound...

Doug

First of all, let me preface this post by saying that the only way to know for sure which horn is right for YOU is to play the two horns against each other.

My ax for the last several years has been a beautiful unlaquered Besson 2052. I have also played it against several examples of the 2051.
In my opinion, due to the smaller bell, the 2051 has a more compact, soloistic sound that I would describe as a more quintessential euph sound. By contrast, the larger bell really does give you a much broader and more easily large sound.
My personal recommendation would be to go with the more classic euphonium sound of the smaller horn, which I think would be more versatile. However, if you are going to be playing exclusively in very large ensembles, the larger horn would suit the setting much better.

Again, your personal experience with the instruments is going to be more valuable than advice from posts online, but that is my $.02.

Hope you find some valuable information!

Luke

xavier687 wrote:First of all, let me preface this post by saying that the only way to know for sure which horn is right for YOU is to play the two horns against each other.

My ax for the last several years has been a beautiful unlaquered Besson 2052. I have also played it against several examples of the 2051.
In my opinion, due to the smaller bell, the 2051 has a more compact, soloistic sound that I would describe as a more quintessential euph sound. By contrast, the larger bell really does give you a much broader and more easily large sound.
My personal recommendation would be to go with the more classic euphonium sound of the smaller horn, which I think would be more versatile. However, if you are going to be playing exclusively in very large ensembles, the larger horn would suit the setting much better.

Again, your personal experience with the instruments is going to be more valuable than advice from posts online, but that is my $.02.

Hope you find some valuable information!

Luke

+1

A couple of points of information:

• The most common Sterling bell sizes are 300mm and 310mm. The default bell size from Custom Tubas is 310mm, i.e., approx. 1/4" LARGER than the 2052 bell (304mm). Sterling also offers 285mm, 305mm, and 320mm bells;

• The standard Adams bell is 305mm, which is nominally larger than the 2052 bell (304mm); 295mm, 300mm, 310mm, and 315mm bells are available by special order.

I own a Great Britain made 2052 and like it a lot.
I have tried a lot of other instruments but liked none of them more than mine
(maybe the Inderbinen instrument, but that's way out of my budget, impressive though...)

W

I recently spoke with Ken Wood — a wonderful euphoniumist — who purchased a Besson Prestige about three years ago. He said he opted for the 2051 over the 2052 because he thought the 2052's bigger bell had a more 'diffused' sound. He does a lot of solo work and is a very accomplished musician and arranger. He also told me his favorite euph is still his B+H Imperial that he's modified with a 'pull-type' trigger. There are several videos of Ken Wood playing solos if interested — some from more than 20 years ago.

Here's one with his Prestige 2051:
The Yellow Rose of Texas