TubeNet

Hi, I've been playing EEb for two years more or less from scratch in a mixed ability amateur band, I still think of myself as a beginner but I can play most of the band's stuff at sight now, have performed a solo that's supposed to be about Grade 4 and can play three octaves D-D after warmup, so maybe I'm an 'improver' I've no teacher as I live in a rural area and there aren't any
I currently play a rather battered Besson 700 4-valve non-comp but although I haven't by any means outplayed this instrument in terms of technique I'm getting a lot of pain in my right hand from the heavy, clunky valves and I'm starting to suspect that some of the big dents are affecting my tone and perhaps intonation (ha ha, I know beginners always say that and the answer is 'more practice', but anyway...)
I tried a visiting player's Yamaha and the valves were light as feathers compared to mine, but that sort of thing is well out of my price range, however I'm considering buying my own 'improver's' instrument and would be really grateful for any advice or for pointers to any previous relevant threads on here or reviews elsewhere.
The choice seems to be between a Packer 277 and a Wessex. The Packer 377 is more than I have to spend.
I'm also a bit concerned about whether I'll find a compensating instrument a harder blow. Should I instead at my stage be still looking at a much cheaper non-comp?
I would really appreciate any advice or suggestions, many thanks indeed.

I'm happy with my Wessex "Symphonic" that I've had for about three years now and use in a community band. The valves are great (I put Yamaha springs in them), and the intonation is as well. It can cover the contra bass range when needed, and at times I end up as the only tuba and that needs to be done. It's not the best tool for that job, but it works. Luckily there is now a very competent BBb player beside me.

It did take me a while to find the best mouthpiece for it and me, but the Wick 2XL has turned out to be absolutely the best (for me).

I love the 3+1 valve arrangement and would have to think long and hard before going back to anything else. In no circumstance would I use a top-action 4-inline horn again.

Given your location and other considerations, I would think Wessex would be the obvious choice (unless you could happen on a good used horn in your price range). Wessex has at least a couple of models that bear looking at.

Thanks Gary for this kind advice.
Mouthpiecewise I'm using an Alliance Les Neish, which I bought unseen for no better reasons than I liked Les's playing and he is friendly and funny on Twitter
The mouthpiece that came with the Besson is a Wick 4L, when I went on a county band association training day I noticed that seemed to be much smaller than everybody else's mouthpieces, no wonder I was having trouble with low register.

I own a Besson New Standard (same as a BH Imperial) and a Wessex 700 and have access to a Besson 700 and a Besson 981.

The Besson 700 that I play has some horrible intonation. The valves are clunky and heavy. I think it most likely that you could benefit from a better horn.

If you want new and shiny with a case and warranty then Wessex tubas are the way to go. If nothing else a visit to their showroom will help you decide if your tuba is holding you back.

Used 4 valve Imperials and New Standards turn up on ebay in the UK regularly and can be had for around £1000 or less.

Out of the stable that I can pick from my Besson and my Wessex get the most play.

Have fun looking you should have in the UK a choice of shops within the range of a day trip.

Many thanks for this great advice, I'm reassured it's not just me that finds the 700 valves clunky.

Mouthpiece choice is very personal. It's more important that it "fits you". I think that in terms of "feel" I prefer a 3XL, but I just don't get the right sound and response with it. I used a 2L for over a year, and that was good as well, but the XL is more comfortable (the Denis Wick rims tend to be a bit narrow, even for me, and a bit more rounded on the inner rim, which gives a feel of being just a bit bigger as well). I don't like a very wide mouthpiece (32mm is pretty much my upper limit). I use the Schilke 66 now and then when I want a somewhat brighter sound and know that I won't need to be mucking about much an octave below the bass clef staff. One of the things we played this year was "Galop" (Shostakovich). I found it (the lower line) barely playable, but exhausting, with the Schilke 66. On the 2XL it was reasonable. The 2XL (or 2L) also gives me excellent intonation on that horn, which a couple of other mouthpieces I otherwise like do not.

I think Wessex now supplies a 2L clone with the EEb tubas. A primary reason I got the Wessex is the raised leadpipe, which for me is essential.

The price being asked for that Besson appears to be not much more than the new price of a Wessex. One issue with it is the "small british receiver" which will, unless replaced, severely constrain mouthpiece choices. But replacing it would not be a huge expense.

Bloke: In terms of John Packer, do you have any hands-on experience with the John Packer "Rath" trombones (being sold in the US by Tuba Exchange)? They're about twice the price of the various Jin Bao clones in most cases, and often seem to be about the same price (or a bit more) as a good used Yamaha or old Conn of the same sort. I'm eyeing the single-rotor bass they have, but haven't been up there yet to lay hands on it. Just wondered if you've seen any of these.

Wessex and Packer are both made by Jinbao but sold at different price points. I reccomebd Wessex because they have a good reputation on this site.

I would recommend a Wessex solo. The smaller bell makes them easier to handle and a little lighter. My student has one and I am thinking about getting one myself. The tone is nice. I agree that the Yamaha valves are fantastic, I play my bands Yamaha Neo Bb and the valves are the best piston valves I have used, in my limited experience. You could visit the Wessex showroom or 'mr tuba' (Google) to test some tubas out. If they are fair drive don't be put off, better to take your time, test them out and get the one you are happiest with. Travelling to buy the tuba adds to the whole experience and makes a tuba purchase even more memorable!

ghmerrill wrote:I think Wessex now supplies a 2L clone with the EEb tubas. A primary reason I got the Wessex is the raised leadpipe, which for me is essential.

Wessex now supplies a Helleberg style mouthpiece, gold plated as standard, although will change for another if that does not suit the buyer.

The latest Wessex EEb now has floating leadpipe like the Dolce euphonium which we find enhances their playing further still. I would happily compare the latest Wessex EEb against a hand-picked Sovereign, they play so well.

For quality, in the last year since Wessex has started checking and play testing every instrument at factory before accepting - quality has shot up. It is now common for customers who come to try Wessex to say they have never seen horns from China of such high quality before. That is because the factory knowing I will reject if not up to Wessex high standards (I rejected 25 tubas in January) make very special effort to get everything right.

Thanks everyone for this kind advice.
No votes for the Packer so far, interesting!

If I were in the UK my first call would be to Mark Carter at Mr. Tuba to see what he can offer you.

http://www.mrtuba.com/

-F

Neptune wrote: That is because the factory knowing I will reject if not up to Wessex high standards (I rejected 25 tubas in January) make very special effort to get everything right.

Even without knowing the total number of products inspected, I find this number of failures to be alarming.

My immediate response to this is that if the factory KNOWS that you have high standards and will reject sub-standard products, I wouldn't expect to see them providing you with 25 unacceptable products in a month (or two months, or six months, or a year). This means that 25 products (apparently in a given month, or "batch", or shipment, or whatever) are making it past the MANUFACTURER's quality control process, and so that in fact they really aren't making much of a special effort to get everything right. They're throwing it all on you to weed out products they know are inferior. And of course, in one way or another, this increases your own effort and expense, and risks your own reputation.

To some degree the failure rate from the manufacturer doesn't matter -- so long as the bad apples are weeded out by the vendor and sent back, and so long as this doesn't add to the expense passed on to the customer. But the higher the manufacturing failure rate, the higher the probability that things will slip by the vendor's secondary quality assurance processes. And it also tends to erode buyer confidence in the overall quality of products, even if they've made it through whatever QA process is in place.

I see this as THE biggest weakness of the Chinese manufacturers at the moment. (Decades ago it was the biggest weakness of the Japanese manufacturers.) I am deterred in purchasing a Chinese product as compared to, say, a used American or European or Japanese product, at least in part because of the knowledge of this QA problem and the consequent knowledge that what I buy may turn out (despite my best efforts and the honest intentions of the vendor) to be a lemon that will -- at best -- involve me in returning the instrument or coming to some compromise on price and repair with the vendor. And remember that this is coming from someone who already owns two Chinese instruments and is considering purchasing a third. About the only thing that can overcome this concern is if a vendor will warranty for ALL return/repair/exchange costs. And even then, there may be (substantial) time lost in the process.

This is something that the Chinese really need to address if they want a larger share of the market. By itself, "inexpensive and probably okay" will work only for a certain (and non-risk-averse) demographic.

Gary, those 25 rejects were all for the same fairly minor cosmetic problem. I was just illustrating Wessex is strict in enforcing standards we have specified.

The main problem is in fact lack of understanding of what is acceptable to western musicians, but bit by bit we are educating them of expectations. There is a high commitment from the factory to improve and get things right. I keep on raising the benchmark aiming for German standards.

Going back to the reason for the previous 25 rejections, in the next batch there was not a single problem, so that requirement has now been learnt.

ghmerrill wrote:I'm eyeing the single-rotor bass they have, but haven't been up there yet to lay hands on it. Just wondered if you've seen any of these.

Just for your information, Wessex does now have a single valve bass, although not yet up on website.

It is not a clone, but original design by Professional trombonist, Chip Hoehler - who is developing and perfecting Wessex trombone range

Re valves, a 700 series has lighter valves than a comp model (like a Sovereign) since it doesn't have the added length for the compensating ports.
If your valves feel heavy, something is probably up with them.
Your 700 should also have similarly predictable intonation to a Sovereign except when using the 4th valve WITH other valves. I suppose you could be doing that quite a lot of course...

I have Besson 784 Eb 4-valve non-compensating tuba. I have heard that it should have been made just like Sovereign with the exceptions that it has not compensating loops and bell is made from a bit thinner material. In my tuba the valves are working completely all right – they are fast, easy and accurate – so not all 700 serie tubas have bad valves. I feel that its sound production is not as sensitive as could so you must blow just a tiny bit “harder” to get a nice response (regarding pp dynamics). But these horns have been meant primarily to US market to be used as out-door instruments if I have understood right. So if you blow with a pp-mp dynamics a sensitive part in concert band situation then you might wish a more responsible and resonating instrument. One can feel it. I suppose this is because of different kind of brass used in bell and maybe also in other tubes.
What I miss is a good solid FF and maybe also EE in contra bass range (contra octave) - false tones (fingerings 12 and 23) are not good while still sound in tune.

I have not have had a chance to play a Sovereign horn but instead other premium quality horns (so that way I have a touch to this comparement). Further I own an old Boosey Solbron compensating Eb made in 1930 (have had valves replated and still have compression) and there I can feel that compensating valves are a little harder to press than non-compensating. This would be logical because simply valves are longer and there are more surface (while also holes so don’t know a total effective surface area difference to non-compensatings). Conclusion: Been happy to my 784 but maybe hoping a better feeling (resonating) horn in some future.

Many thanks everyone!

For an economic, solid, great sounding instrument, I cannot recommend a Besson/Boosey & Hawkes Imperial enough. I've built my career on it.

I've tried the Wessex, and it's exemplary... a great value for an "Improver".

I played a Miraphone C4 for 2 decades on my Imperial. However, I switched first to a Yamaha "Self" and then a Yamaha CB... but I would recommend those only to a very strong player.

But try instruments... lots! get to know what you prefer, not just what is recommended!

J.c.S.

Many thanks again, yes I've just been advised elsewhere that I should consider a used Imperial which ought to be about the same price as a new JP277 or Wessex.
From other posts on here I'm now confused and worried about the Parker/Fletcher cut (I have enough trouble not dropping flat above the stave as it is) and I certainly wouldn't want a ball on the bottom. Not sure I want to spend more than the price of my car on a tuba then have to get the hacksaw out !)