Besson false tones

[funkhoss]

I know there's currently a thread on false tones generally, but I have a more specific question.

I recently picked up (for only $25!) a three-valve compensating Besson B-flat tuba (1974 production date, 17" bell). It has usable false tones, but here's the catch: instead of starting on low E-flat, as they do on many other tubas, the false tones on this instrument start on low D.

So the question is: what do you do about the E-flat?

I can sort-of play an E-flat using 2+3, but it doesn't center and resonate nearly as well as the D-and-down false tones.

I can play a much louder and better sounding E-flat using 1+2+3. Because the alternate harmonic series is based on D, there's also an A-natural false tone just below second partial B-flat, and all of the second partial pitches can be played with a surprisingly good sound and surprisingly close to in-tune using this false harmonic: 2 for A-flat, 1 for G, 12 for G-flat, etc. (either that, or the second partial just has a really wide pitch center). The problem with this is that you really have to concentrate mentally and physically to make the 1+2+3 E-flat happen (and not have an E-natural come out instead), and it responds a lot differently than both the "real" regularly fingered 1+3 F above it and the false tone D below it.

I guess another possibility would be to make an alternate extra-long slide for the third valve that pitches it as a major third (G-flat) instead of a minor third (G), and use that slide in contexts where you need a solid, "real" E-flat (playing it 1+2+3). This would mean that the fingerings for a bunch of other notes would need to be altered while using that slide, though.

Besson owners out there: have you encountered this issue as well, and if so, how have you handled it? (And no, "buy a four-valve model" is not the answer I'm looking for!)

[iiipopes]

I also had a similar era 3-valve comp Besson New Standard some years ago. I tried everything to get a usable privilege tone Eb. The problem is that the compensating valve loops are simply in the wrong place and stifle the anti-node necessary to resonate the pitch. The only thing I thought of is like the rotary valve loop made for a Yamaha euph, but if you're going to do that, you might as well...oh, you said not to say that.

[humBell]

This very intriguing, and i'd like to consider it when i'm supposed to be awake rather than at 2am.

Without trying to figure out why, i'll simply say that almost every 3 valve baritone i try out the false tones, they start at D unless i let my lips get loose enough to compromise the seal sort of thing. The notable exception are Martins baritones which have happy false tones (or at least i am happy with them, not to anthropomorphize sonic phenomena)

I my untested hypothesis was simply there was a design compromise resulting in more resonance at the expense of false tones?

On my end, i think i will try to track down a similar besson and fiddle with the false tones to see if i have insight.

If it is dependent on that era, i don't expect i'll replicate it, and i do feel 3 valve besson comps i've played might have finicky false tones but within my low tolerances* for playing them for myself.

Anyway... yeah. I also can't imagine the besson design changed substantially from old stuff to new, especially with the blaikley system.

[funkhoss]

I'm not convinced that the compensating valve block has anything to do with it--in my experience, false tones are a product of the body and overall taper. I'm confident that if I swapped in a non-compensating valve block it would resonate more or less the same.

I can sort-of force it to resonate the false tones starting on E-flat instead of D (which works better the more valves are pushed down), but it really does seem to prefer starting on D.

bloke, you have detachable bell version of this instrument. Do you notice any difference with the false tones using the 17" upright bell versus the 24" recording bell? I could fairly easily cut this bell, add a King collar, and use a 22" King bell on it. I wonder if a King taper/flare would make any difference.

[Sousaswag]

I’d bet that body taper has a lot to do with it. False tones are best for me on really, really big instruments. Most old American BBb instruments, especially the 6/4’s and sousaphones, have really good false tones.

I cannot get good false tones out of smaller horns, like I can with Conn 2XJ/K, Holton 6/4’s, Martins, etc.

[tofu]

.

[funkhoss]

That's a pretty horn!

The tuba I picked up was at an antiques shop, sold as a wall hanger. As it turns out, the valves aren't worn out and still seal well. I gave it a good cleaning, aligned the valves myself, and rolled out most of the dents (I have a magnet and dent balls). It plays very well, including the false tones--they just start on D, rather than E-flat.

I'm not the only one who has noticed that the false tones start on a D--so has this guy.

[Mary Ann]

That many years ago, I think they really hadn't figured out all that much about bugle design, and perhaps they weren't even thinking about playing them in that range.

And think that tuba in the video looks bigger on him than my Hagen does on me!! Either he's a pretty short guy or that is a Monster tuba!

[bloke]

I have a detachable 24" recording bell 50-60-year-old Besson BB-flat.

E-flat works open - particularly with the recording bell.

I also found a $30 (top 2/3rds of a) early-vintage (17") Yamaha 201 bell, which I cut and fashioned into a detachable UPRIGHT bell for that tuba.

I haven't tested open E-flat with that bell, so...

(...Howze about if I lay a bunch of stupid $h!t on you about air speed and "what J would have us do"...? )

[funkhoss]

Yes, I knew (from previous discussions) that you have such an instrument with both a 17" upright and a 24" recording bell.

If you play it sometime with the 17" upright bell, I'd be curious to know how the false tones compare to 24" bell. I'm wondering if it would be worth modifying mine to accept King bells.

[bloke]

Yes, I knew (from previous discussions) that you have such an instrument with both a 17" upright and a 24" recording bell.

If you play it sometime with the 17" upright bell, I'd be curious to know how the false tones compare to 24" bell. I'm wondering if it would be worth modifying mine to accept King bells.

OK...yeah...absolutely:

With the 17-inch upright bell, it does the same thing as yours...some nebulous pitch level between E-flat and D.

My eventual solution:

I have a 1970's stainless steel nice-tight-valves 3+1 valveset in a box (to eventually transplant onto this tuba) if I live long enough.

[funkhoss]

Thank you!! This is very helpful information.

It sounds I may be cutting this tuba's bell and adding a King ring set at some point. It won't be a $25 tuba at that point, though. It could still be a less than $500 tuba, even with a couple of King bells...

[2nd tenor]

After reading through the thread the availability of the false tones required of the Besson appears questionable or in some transitory space: they work for some folk on their instruments and not for others on theirs. Was this instrument designed to give false tones? Probably not, its design was focused elsewhere and there were four valve instruments in the Besson range to make the desired additional pitches available.

If the OP can’t live without those false tones then he now has a nice instrument to sell at a good profit. Surely it’s better to sell the Besson now and buy something else that’ll give the false tones required rather than mess with it - maybe to little or no useful effect too - and devalue it.

My eventual solution:

I have a 1970's stainless steel nice-tight-valves 3+1 valveset in a box (to eventually transplant onto this tuba) if I live long enough.

^^ for a determined keeper an eventual way forward as identified by someone with the experience(s), the skills and lots of other instruments.

TLDR: flip it.

[funkhoss]

If the OP can’t live without those false tones then he now has a nice instrument to sell at a good profit. Surely it’s better to sell the Besson now and buy something else that’ll give the false tones required rather than mess with it - maybe to little or no useful effect too - and devalue it.

I appreciate the advice, but I can't say that I agree.

First, these three valve Bessons aren't worth much to begin with. Good playing but ugly looking examples (like mine) usually sell for only a few hundred dollars. If this instrument came with three bells, allowing the user to play it with the original 17" upright bell OR a 19"/22" upright King bell OR a 22" King recording bell, I could easily sell it for significantly more than I could get for it unmodified (and still make a nice profit).

Second, I was already considering this operation for sonic/acoustic reasons before I raised the question about false tones. The 17" bell Bessons have some wonderful qualities, but they can get a bit barky/aggressive when pushed. There's a reason, after all, that B&H eventually made the bells larger from the factory. A larger diameter detachable bell would give the instrument a broader, warmer, more "bass-like" quality of sound, while (again) still allowing it to be played with the original 17" bell if desired.

Third, this isn't my first rodeo when it comes to tuba modification. Several years ago I set up a B&H 4-valve compensating E-flat tuba to accept detachable King bells and also interchangeable leadpipes (you can read about that project here). That tuba turned out incredibly well; it remains one of the best instruments I've ever played, and one of the few that I regret selling. The work I did to it also greatly increased its value; I ended up selling it for more than twice what it would have been worth unmodified.

My eventual solution:

I have a 1970's stainless steel nice-tight-valves 3+1 valveset in a box (to eventually transplant onto this tuba) if I live long enough.

^^ for a determined keeper an eventual way forward as identified by someone with the experience(s), the skills and lots of other instruments.

Sure! If I could get my hands on an inexpensive 4-valve compensating valve set, I'd consider this, too.

[bloke]

The 3+1 features all brass slide tubing, whereas the tubes on th[is] 3-comp are nickel-brass, so (as the nickel-brass tubes are more customary on British and European instruments, where they are expected to be found) this project won't simply involve "slapping" the other valveset on there (though surely this was already known) but will also involve a whole bunch of remounting, and many-times-over eyeballing confirmation.

[tofu]

.

[bloke]

random

You can say that again. It reminds me of some of my posts.

[funkhoss]

So...this week I picked up a third valve slide from a Yamaha YBB-321 tuba. It's of the style that's doubled back to save space.

It fits in the Besson and makes the third valve a major third instead of a minor third (since the factory slide is too short to pull to a major third). The slide tubes are just slightly smaller in outer diameter than the Besson slide tubes, so they're a little loose, but they don't leak.

I played some scales and etudes in the lower octave today, and I picked up the new fingerings surprisingly quickly: G-flat/D-flat=3; F/C=2+3; E/B=1+3; E-flat=1+2+3.

I recorded two B-flat scales descending from low B-flat to pedal B-flat, one slurred and one tongued, and uploaded them here. Obviously the sound quality from my phone's microphone is pretty terrible, but it at least gives an idea of the intonation and evenness from note to note.

The false tone D (open) and C (first valve) sound pretty good!