Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 24 of 24

Thread: Different Approaches for British-style Baritone playing

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by coolguy684 View Post
    I think David Childs might have just said "15 years" as a way of saying "older." There seems to be a pretty good consensus that pre 1993 955's are the safest to buy, QC wise.
    Are the Globe Stamp 955's as highly regarded as the Globe Stamp 967's?
    I've seen some love for globe stamp 955s on themouthpiece.com. I don't really get the fascination with globe stamp 967s, though, they've got some of the worst tuning around; so I don't know why anyone would prefer one over a new one!

    Pre-1993 being the safest to buy is an oft-repeated mantra, but I don't buy it at all. My own anecdotal experience does not back that up. My school got two brand new 967s in 1991, they both had numerous problems and were just dogs. Leaks, poor alignment of the leadpipe into the receiver, tuning slides that were not aligned properly and would get jammed, terrible (and noisy) valves.I was studying with Bowman at the time and he tried them, made a disgusted face, pointed out some of the problems, and suggested I might try to find a different instrument!

    I then got a 1994 968 for my high school graduation. Flawless instrument. Loved it. I didn't audition another besson (and I went to the trade shows every year) that I liked as much as mine until the buffet bessons came out in 2007 -- which I felt were the best euphoniums I'd tried.

    Heck, the UK national lottery didn't start until november 1993. How long did it take for any of that money to be given out in grants to brass bands? ONly a small percentage of the money gets given out to arts organizations. How long did it take before enough brass bands got money that they spent on instruments until besson supposedly started cutting corners on making instruments to keep up? If it happened at all it probably took years, certainly didn't happen overnight.

    My point is that there were plenty of problems pre-1993. I don't think it's anywhere near as safe, QC-wise, as buying a new one. And that's not even considering the fact that you are buying an instrument that is at least 20 years old and who knows how it's been treated in the meantime!

    The new bessons are incredibly consistent, and there are NO chronic quality issues. Sure, a problem sneaks by now and then, but they've got some of the best and most experienced brass instrument craftsmen in the world making them now

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by bbocaner View Post
    ...I don't really get the fascination with globe stamp 967s, though, they've got some of the worst tuning around; so I don't know why anyone would prefer one over a new one!...
    967's were interesting. Great sound, pretty much unmatched by other horns at the time. Average response (not as good as Willson, Yamaha, and Hirsbrunner of the same era). But intonation was really only awful on the 6th partial. Go to my intonation charts and compare the Yamaha 641 with the Sovereign 967. If you do as I did, use alternate fingerings for the 6th partial, the intonation over the rest of the range holds up very well by comparison.
    Dave Werden (ASCAP)
    Euphonium Soloist, U.S. Coast Guard Band, retired
    Adams Artist (Adams E3)
    Alliance Mouthpiece (DC3)
    YouTube: dwerden
    Facebook: davewerden
    Twitter: davewerden
    Instagram: davewerdeneuphonium

  3. Replying re:Globe Stamp Sovereign euphoniums, The horns produced a wonderful sound. The horns with soldered lead pipes generally were a bit darker than the early floating lead pipe horns. Further, the build quality of the 1974 - 1985 or so horns was also quite good. Response was not as good as modern horns and 6th partial was VERY sharp as Dave says, but I loved my 1980 Sovereign 967 and kept it for over 25 years. I regret selling it in 2007 to one of Dave's students.

    As regards Dave Childs comments about "buy a 15 year old Sovereign baritone", it was answered in the following context:

    1. He had been a York artist and just had switched to Besson. (2 years ago)

    2. I told him I was playing a York 3056 owned by the NEBB and didn't like the "956" style 4 valve horns for all of the reasons Barry has discussed above. Plus, in comparison with old or new Besson, the valves on the York are not very good (still are not).

    3. I asked him what he thought of the new Prestige 2056. He replied, "buy a 15 year old Sovereign 955". His answer was not a reflection on the quality of the Prestige, but knowing that I am primarily a euphonium player, he felt an older (not a late model English Besson of the early 2000's) Sovereign 955 would be a more cost effective choice. Of course, it is very hard to find a 3 valve 955 here in the US on the used market., They rarely come up for sale on eBay. And the 2056 is VERY expensive. (well over $5K).

    Now, I have been playing the York 3056 for over 4 years as 1st baritone with the NEBB. The horn belongs to NEBB, purchased 5 years ago for the previous 1st baritone player. I believe that it was chosen with the belief that a 4 valve horn was "better" than a 3 valve. This horn has a sound and response VERY similar to an older 3 valve 955 (since it was made using the same dies), but has more pitch issues in the 3 valve fingerings since it doesn't have 3rd valve compensation. The 4th valve is VERY stuffy due to the U-turn tubing. And the compensation on the 4th valve is poor since the loops on the back are not long enough. But I do get a few more useful notes than I would with a 3 valve horn.

    In the 4 years I have been playing the horn, I have learned to live with its vagaries. I have learned that the 1st valve will start to stick if it becomes the least bit dirty, dry, or acquires any "plaque" from long use. I make sure I thoroughly clean valves and lead pipe often and I oil frequently. I have also stayed on top of maintenance, rinsing the entire horn and purchasing new felts and dampers from England once a year. All in all, it clearly is a professional quality horn that can produce a great sound, but requires a lot of work and attention to precise detail to play well. Alternate fingerings for correct intonation and attention to embouchure for centered and relaxed tone is a must.
    Last edited by daruby; 05-03-2013 at 09:41 PM.
    Adams E3 0.60 Sterling bell - Prototype top sprung valves
    Concord Band
    Winchendon Winds
    Townsend Military Band

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by daruby View Post
    ...I regret selling it in 2007 to one of Dave's students.
    Well, yeah, but he's really a nice guy and appreciates having it!
    Dave Werden (ASCAP)
    Euphonium Soloist, U.S. Coast Guard Band, retired
    Adams Artist (Adams E3)
    Alliance Mouthpiece (DC3)
    YouTube: dwerden
    Facebook: davewerden
    Twitter: davewerden
    Instagram: davewerdeneuphonium

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •