ALL INFO AND MANY PICTURES ARE HERE >>> viewtopic.php?f=22&t=1729

Good old Dave. Helping us trombonists play tuba a little better since 1874.bloke wrote: ↑Thu Feb 18, 2021 7:13 pmI would PARTICULARLY do so were I mostly a trombonist or bass trombonist (looking to double on tuba) because a 4th COMPENSATING valve functions just as does an F-attachment rotor...except the "slide positions" (in the "F-attachment range") are auto-adjusted by the Blaikley Compensating System.
What would you say were the limits of that? Did you ever run into major limitations that you wouldn't have encountered on a similarly sized, 4/4 CC?barry grrr-ero wrote: ↑Thu Feb 18, 2021 3:47 pm It was a marvelous, all purpose instrument. I could put a big mouthpiece in it and keep up the with the big boys, with almost no degradation to the intonation. The low "F" was pretty fat on it. Conversely, anyone can solo on one of these with a smaller m.p. just fine. It wasn't the slightest bit 'mouthpiece sensitive' (a euphemism for a crappy horn, in my opinion).
Our buddy Tom H. played one of these in the USMB for a short bit until he got his PT-22. He did feel the PT-22 was better for large ensemble work, and so do I. However, the 983 is no slouch. I wouldn't want to drive by myself in a large group on it, but as part of section it does just fine.bort2.0 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 12, 2021 10:23 pm How tall is it?
For community band playing, would this be good? Bad? So-so? I've always liked the idea of bringing something "smaller" when not expected to be the only tuba player.
I loved the idea of that with my old Cerveny F tuba... But it was too small and too much work and not enough output.
Or rather, compared to a 4/4 CC, what's the output potential of the 983?