Besson "1000" BBb (sorta) tuba

[imperialbari]

The receiver follows the same theme as the intonation...It's roughly halfway between an "American" and an "English" style receiver.

This explains why you could use a small shank mpc without it bottoming out. But I see absolutely no reason why a low end model should attempt to introduce yeat another size of tuba mpc receiver. Only may an attempt to make the receiver dual purpose for small and large mouthpiece shanks.

Klaus

[Mike-ICR]

I tried it briefly with an old King #24 (which was a "true" Eb tuba mouthpiece - "English"/bass trombone-size shank as well)...

What would you consider to be the main characteristics of a "true" Eb tuba mouthpiece? Just curious.

Nice work on the slide!

[iiipopes]

The implication of at least bloke’s last posting is that this Besson 1000 has the old English receiver.

This puzzless me, as Besson otherwise abandoned this old narrow receiver for tubas after circa 1982. My understanding was that the 1000-series was a recent one named after Besson, whomever it might be right now, started production in India, which happened after 2000.

Klaus

The receiver follows the same theme as the intonation...It's roughly halfway between an "American" and an "English" style receiver.

Oh, well then -- Mike Finn did a run of MF4 mouthpieces with a .500 tip shank. One of those should work really well then!

[Mike Finn]

Oh, well then -- Mike Finn did a run of MF4 mouthpieces with a .500 tip shank. One of those should work really well then!

After reading Bloke's description of the tuba in question, I would change "work really well" to "FIT really well".

I do have a couple of these left if anyone is interested. Not as small as the "true Eb" mouthpiece that Bloke refers to (a la Conn Giant) but a shallow tuba cup/rim with a bass trombone shank on it, good for those English tubas or medium-large old American tubas with small receivers.

[Paul Scott]

I have a 1961 Besson catalogue that lists a "Stratford" tuba, model 588 with a (more or less) 13 inch bell and 590 with a 15 inch bell-bore for both is listed at .689. The instrument pictured is a dead ringer for the "1000" photo on your post, (aside from the pull ring on the 2nd valve slide of the 1000). I'm pretty sure that I played one of these when I did my student teaching. I don't recall the specific pitch problem that you mention but it was a pretty bad horn! Never played it with a group so I'm not sure if it was also a "B" tuba.

[imperialbari]

All British tubas up to the 19" era brought into serial production on the 3+1P compensating Eb and BBb tubas (marked Besson or Besson Imperial until the Sovereigns came up around 4 years later in 1982) had bells with very little flare. Some called that bore profile exponential.

The Indian 1000 series may have the same valve section wrap as the old student models made in the UK, but the bell shown has much more flare.



When I was the director of a very poor youth band we were happy to loan one of the tiny Eb Besson Westminster’s. It was considered hopelessly out of tune. I very soon found out that the design of the 3rd slide was not about having the correct length of tubing, but about making it possible to stuuf the instrument into a case. When we pulled that 3rd slide well beyond the safery provided by the main frame, it was as reasonable as may be expected from a 3 valve instrument.

Once and only once I saw that little Eb model for sale in a 3+1p non-compensating version. Regretably I didn’t buy it.

Klaus

[Tuba Guy]

I have an Eb mouthpiece in my (gasp) Eb right now. It's a hereco, and the shank is way too small (I guess my horn has an american size reciever?), so it's been wrapped with tape ever since I got it. It's always responded great, and sounds awesome (4 octave range, 3 octave usable, can nail bydlo and the high Bb in Symphonie Fantastique). Occasionally it's a little annoying having to be careful of the tape, but it works.