TubaForum.net

cross-posted:

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

Joe, I had one of these (silver) before owning the Neptune. I had to sell it for funds at that time. 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). Sometimes my right hand would get a bit tired. Therefore, on longer gigs such as an Oktoberfest, I'd put my left hand through the horn and play the fourth valve that way. I sure miss that tuba.

Thanks for the comments.

I'm always tempted to keep really good instruments - such as this one, when acquired - for myself...
I tend to use an E-flat tuba as mostly a "fake B-flat" (when playing jazz).
The 17" bell on this model (as well as the front-action thing) push this more into the "fake F tuba" (except without any of the F tuba problems) category.

When playing a compensating instrument (whether euphonium or E-flat), my left hand has become "automatic", so a pinky compensating range would be a re-learn for me.

If I had NO F tuba - and was disappointed with most of the currently-offered models encountered (as I tend to be), I would look long and hard at the 983 E-flat, and - in particular - a UK-built one, such as this one.
I 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.

I carefully partially disassembled the 4th valve lower slide today (outside slide tube and brace) to precision-align it.
Factory alignment was "fair", but now it's spot-on. I just don't want some buyer asking to return this instrument for any "reasonable" reason.

Everyone recognizes my spot where I like to take pictures of tubas...

I was not able to take pictures there, today, because of the BIG THAW...nearly 60 degrees today, with melted snow and ice flying off the metal roof, right there at that corner.

When I take am able to take pictures, I'll try to identify every cosmetic flaw - because they typically don't show up very well in pictures of tubas that are nice and shiny and in really good shape.

I also tooted around on this thing, today. I'm remarkably "out of practice" (practice...for what...??) but will also attempt to put up a couple of decent demos...perhaps a "using an E-flat tuba as an F-tuba" demo, and a "using an E-flat tuba as a B-flat tuba" demo...(??)

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.

Good old Dave. Helping us trombonists play tuba a little better since 1874.

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).

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?

UPDATED, and link in the FIRST POST ABOVE...to the MAIN posting (in the "Retail & Repair Marketplace" forum)...

...or here >>> viewtopic.php?f=22&t=1729

Shipping overseas - with all of the draconian fees they would’ve paid - defined a pending sale as impractical.

How about a decent offer from someone within the adjacent 48 states?
These are really remarkable instruments.

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?

I am fond of the idea of having at least one bass tuba in a wind band section. It creates a sort of bridge between the sounds of the big tubas and the euphoniums, especially on divisi tuba parts. I've used the 983 in a community band situation. It worked 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?

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.

Thanks! And how compared to the Willson 3400?

People talk about old guy tubas, and smaller/lighter blah blah. I'm no old guy, but for infrequent and non serious playing, maybe smaller and more fun would be ... more fun?

Not "one tuba does all" actually "does all" as well as particularly-good specialty tubas do SOME of "all" particularly well...

...but this tuba can do anything from F tuba to B-flat tuba stuff quite convincingly, and (when covering contrabass tubas parts) I believe it "yells out" a bit better than the Olds/Conn so-called "7/8ths" size tubas (5J, 2J, 3J, O-99, etc.)...and the Besson 983 bell diameter is right in the same size range as those tubas, as well as in the same size range the "vintage" 186 bell size. The bore size is subtly larger than the bore size of a King 4/4 B-flat, with the "compensating side" bore creeping up fairly close to the 1-2-3 bore size of a typical German-made piston tuba.

A Bach 36B trombone can cover anything from "lead" to "bass" trombone parts (when using mouthpieces ranging from Bach 12C size all the way up to Schilke 52E2 size) pretty darn well...might not be quite the best for "lead" stuff, and might not be the best for "bass" stuff, but can actually do everything... That's about the best analogy that I can offer.

' don't play E-flat...??
It takes about 2 weeks to get in the "swing" of a new-to-you (whomever "you" might be) length of tuba, and perhaps 1 - 2 months for music-reading/button-mashing (with a tuba in that new length) to become automatic. It makes "getting a new tuba" even more fun, because there are more "new" things to experience other than just a (fantastic) new instrument.

compared to Willson front-action 4+1 non-comp:
Those are very good tubas, and probably the best tuning of any of the non-comp's...but the 983 characteristic sound is more - well... - "interesting", and the Besson @ only 18 lbs. (though not "thinwall") is not "titanic" (tremendously heavy) as is the Willson.
...It's roughly 35 inches tall (less than 90 cm).

Bort, most of the time I played my 983 with the Dillon/Geib that came with the horn. However, when I wanted to keep up with the big boys in the lower octave, I used a G&W original "Baer" in titanium. The titanium kept the sound dark and velvety, like a decent 3/4 size CC or BBb tuba. The low "F" was really good on mine. The low E-natural not so much, but nobody buys an Eb tuba for a great low E-natural. If you don't care about not having the biggest sounding tuba in the room, I think these 983s are a lot of fun in a community band, Dixieland or Oktoberfest band situation. They can really sing in the upper register too.

Ergonomically speaking I prefer 3+1 style Eb tubas, but the 983 is easier for standing while playing. If I were standing for a full gig (which I never did), I would use a strap or something. Pat Sheridan always stood when he soloed with his 983.

I think the 983 front action design would be better if the 4th valve were a thumb activated, large rotary valve. Regardless, these are good tubas and I do miss mine. And by the way, Bort, I HATED the Willson 3400 I briefly owned. There was nothing about it that I liked. For me, it was an ergonomic horror show. I traded it for the 983 and was much, much happier.

SOLD.
thnx

Congrats to the new owner!

Yep! - a great 'out of the box' tuba. You don't need to cut slides and add tuning jiggers, etc. Just aim and go - perfect for quintets, brass choirs, community bands, dixieland, Oktoberfest, etc. If you want the fattest low register on the planet, you've come to the wrong place. If you want to make music and not have to think about yanking slides and knuckle busting valve combinations, you've come to the right place.