Experiences with new Besson Sovereign 967

[marsetbor]

Hi!

I am considering buying myself an euphonium for the first time. At the moment I play on a borrowed but old Willson 2900 (large shank) from 1989 with the SM4X mouthpiece. A brand new Willson 2900 or 2950 is definitely on my short list but they are not easily acquired in Norway. Does anyone know if the only difference between these two are the bell diameter? A larger bell would definitely help since I play almost exclusively in a large wind band. Not much solo and ensemble work.

Most dealers here in Norway sell either Besson or Yamaha. Therefore I have also been looking at a new Besson Sovereign 967 without trigger. As mentioned I mostly play in quite large wind bands and therefore want the bigger bell of the 967 compared to the smaller bell of 968. I wondered if anyone here have some experience with the new Sovereigns? Everything about the instrument is of interest. Build quality, intonation, response etc. I have read different things about the new Bessons, but they can't be that bad if Miss Mead and Bastien Baumet enjoys them?

[davewerden]

Welcome to the forum!

The 2950 has a larger bell than the 2900 and also uses a large-shank receiver. I THINK the bell is about 12" based on a student's 2950 I played. It does indeed have a larger sound than the 2900. Build quality on Willsons has been consistently good over the years.

The newer German 967 is a good instrument, too, although it does not seem to have quite the sound of the British 967's of the past. Build quality is good, just like the Willson, from what I've heard.

[JasonDonnelly]

I've played on a newer 967 for a period of about a month. It is very, very solidly built, and has a very crisp and clear response. The intonation in the higher range is better than most euphs I've played on, but there are some other quirks, such as F3 (in bass clef staff) being about 10 cents sharps, and the G right above it requiring the use of 3rd valve to be in tune.

If you afford it, I would either get a Prestige 2052 (which already has a trigger), or get a 967 and install one afterwards. It isn't absolutely necessary - intonation, even on the "worst" notes, is largely manageable. But it does help.

Also, the high B (B4) is rough to slot. But, what horns isn't that the case?

Overall, I would definitely recommend it, though. It has an awesome sound and performs very well in a wind band setting.

[marsetbor]

JasonDonnelly: I have been considering the Prestige 2052, but I think it is over my budget. The 967T with the trigger from the Prestige delivered by Besson could perhaps be an alternative. That version costs about 5000 NOK (630 dollars) more then the regular 967. I have never played an instrument with a trigger before, so I have not experienced the difference. The problem is that the 967T costs nearly as much as the Prestige.

Thank you both for detailed and insightful feedback about the instrument(s)!

[jkircoff]

I highly recommend waiting for a used instrument to become available if you're looking for a high end Besson. You can potentially save thousands of dollars.

[TD517]

As an owner of a Willson 2950, the bell is at least 12" (their website lists it as 12.20" or 310mm). The 2900 is only about half an inch smaller (290mm) and typically comes with a Medium Shank with option of Large, unless they've changed to strictly Large since 2005. Otherwise, the instruments are essentially the same save for some possible minor differences.

[aroberts781]

This thread hasn't been touched in a while and I'm not sure if the OP has made any decisions, but I did play a new 967 today and I was very impressed with it. For reference, I play on a Yamaha 642 clone (Schiller) and have very little experience with high end horns. In other words, of course I was impressed with the Besson! I played on a Yamaha 642 through college and played a bit back then on a Willson as well, but don't remember if it was a 2900 or 2950. It has been almost 10 years since then, but I do remember being very impressed with the Willson at the time.

Having said that, I found that the new 967 felt very solid and the valves were smooth and quiet. I found it very free blowing and smooth going from the mid/high register into the low and pedal range. For instance, I felt very little change in resistance playing a two octave concert F scale and arpeggio, or any old 2 octave scale for that matter. The move from low to high and back down felt very smooth. I didn't really do anything trickier than scales, arpeggios, and octaves, but my initial impression was that the 967 moved around the registers very easily, something I especially noticed playing 2-octave arpeggios. I guess that is what people call good response?

I was playing the 967 side by side with a used Sterling (not sure what model or year), and for me I preferred the tone of the Besson. I felt like I could get a fuller tone, particularly in the high and low registers with the Besson. I felt that I could make the sound wider with the Besson, as opposed to narrower with the Sterling? Not sure if that is a good or bad thing, or if I'm even describing it correctly, but to my ear in a small room (not ideal), I preferred hearing myself on the 967.

I was in a bit of a rush so I didn't take the time to warmup or tune any of the slides (they were pushed all the way in), but I could definitely hear the sharp 6th partial on the Besson. Again, I didn't take the time to really spend time with a tuner but my first impression was that the Besson was sharper in the 6th partial than the Sterling I was comparing it to. That seems to match with the intonation comparison charts on this website.

Sorry for the rambling post, I was excited to have played such a nice horn and wanted to share the experience. If the original question was should you consider a new 967, my answer would be yes! And jkircoff's suggestion to look used is probably a good one, although I don't have any personal experience with sampling 967's of different years to know if my impressions of the new one I played would apply to older ones, or at least ones in the last 5-10 years or so.

[Cameron J.]

I have played a few of the new German 967s. They are very well built and the response is probably one of the best I found out of any euphonium model on the market (possibly due to the thinner metal gauge). Intonation wasn't the best on it (if you do go with a new Sovereign, I highly suggest investing a bigt extra to get the model with the trigger) and the tone was quite bright. You will find most people will just pay a bit extra for the Prestige.

In saying that, have you ever considered the Yamaha Neo? You said that most dealers in Norway sell either Besson or Yamaha. If you are able to, I suggest giving a Neo a try. Very very good instrument and will probably do everything the Sovereign will for only 75% of the cost. Just my two cents worth.

[eivfar]

Had the chance to try out the new German 967T just recently. Just as Cameron (above) I was impressed by the responce. Everything feels easy and well centered right out of the box, but when trying it in a wind band, the intonation was quite different from what I was used to (the old 967-GS from UK). MUCH better on the well nown Besson problem-notes, but a little different on others. Guess you will get used to that.

Personally, I prefer the feeling of playing the souvereign over the prestige (which I tried as well). However, the valves of the souvereign I tried was quite horrible when playing really fast, and nowhere near the Yamahas which I believe has the best valves of them all. Also when comparing the new german souvereign to an older 967-GS from UK (which I play currently), I suspect thet the sound is slightly more open on the older ones.

Can anyone fill in on how (or if?) the valves of the german 976 will improve over some time? Other experiences also appreciated, as I am considering to upgrade from my 20 years old souvereign to a new one.

[Cameron J.]

However there are a few people who play the new Sovereigns over the Prestige, but not too many. Everyone is different.

[Cameron J.]

Had the chance to try out the new German 967T just recently. Just as Cameron (above) I was impressed by the responce. Everything feels easy and well centered right out of the box, but when trying it in a wind band, the intonation was quite different from what I was used to (the old 967-GS from UK). MUCH better on the well nown Besson problem-notes, but a little different on others. Guess you will get used to that.

Personally, I prefer the feeling of playing the souvereign over the prestige (which I tried as well). However, the valves of the souvereign I tried was quite horrible when playing really fast, and nowhere near the Yamahas which I believe has the best valves of them all. Also when comparing the new german souvereign to an older 967-GS from UK (which I play currently), I suspect thet the sound is slightly more open on the older ones.

Can anyone fill in on how (or if?) the valves of the german 976 will improve over some time? Other experiences also appreciated, as I am considering to upgrade from my 20 years old souvereign to a new one.

I have always found the valves on German Sovereigns to be very good. Some rate Besson valves as the best on the market. But Besson still seem to lack the overall consistency compared to Yamaha (even though they have imporved dramatically since the late 90's).