Re: Re: Besson CC at Army Conference?


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by read this too on February 06, 2004 at 13:37:42:

In Reply to: Re: Besson CC at Army Conference? posted by READ THIS! on February 06, 2004 at 12:56:03:

Mr Gregory has some very valid points, and I am sure his tenure working with Boosey gives his opinion far more credibility than many (at least in his perception.)
Unfortunately, either by omission or lack of familiarity, Mr Gregory is not acknowledging past boosey/besson "challenges" in actually bringing to market designs with "great potential." There are more than one or two past examples, like in the 70's there was an 18 month to 2-year wait time for the top-of-the-line Boosey/Besson Euphs. Basically ambitious and overly optimistic commitments found Boosey/Besson shipping practically anything that looked like the instrument, forget about whether they played worth a damn. People who had in many many cases paid in advance for the privledge of the wait were then stuck (in MANY cases) with a real P.O.S. instrument.

I want to be quick to say that of course people and products change, just as even an enterprise with such a checkered history(s) as Besson/Boosey can (theoretically.)
But irregardless of best intentions (which really are not being overtly questioned) there's just been no demonstrated capability to actually do what the public thinks they've been honestly trying to do for years with these Nirschl production copies. Personally, I feel that public opinion is overly optimistic - and borders on a blind-faith based on (perhaps unintentionally) groundless marketing hype. The road to ruin is paved with good intentions. My personal conviction is that I'd rather bet on the likelihood of Herr Nirschl getting his shop back by default, than I would bet on the likelihood of Besson producing even a hundred of those tubas in uniformly playable condition. And I'd not mind losing a buck on either proposition.

DB Phelps
Boulder CO


Follow Ups: