… your explanation doesn’t add up that ‘paranoia’ was
Pat O’s motivation in wishing me not to have Maurice R make keys for my
Olwell Pratten. As you describe him (and I agree) this isn’t a paranoid guy
and, as you point out, the measurements have been taken many times already.
As I said, Olwell did not make a negative comment when he saw that keys had been added to a flute he made. He didn’t think his flute had been desecrated and he is not a paranoid person; but he is paranoid in this instance. He is afraid that another maker might copy his measurements. I don’t think his fear is justified. His flutes have been sufficiently circulated now that other makers could have copied if they wished. And there is much more than just the measurements that go into an Olwell flute.
But that isn’t the point, is it? The question is “To what extent should a maker determine what becomes of a flute he made after he sells it on.” You (Stone) think the maker’s feeling should be determinative. And I don’t. How about polishing a bore? Is that allowed by your standards? Bending a key to fall under your fingers more comfortably?
The flute makers have been copying each other since day one. Look at the Hawkes & Sons, that was a hybrid Pratten Perfected flute. or all the R&R copies by other makers, up until the present. I have measured modern flute makers flutes, not to copy.
But , I agree with Terry, once the flute is sold, the buyer can do whatever he wants with it. I think it would be better to go to the original maker if he can, especially if it is a “high end” model, if it is a low end flute, why not repair it, or even improve it? I have cleaned up other makers flutes, that should have been done when they were made!
The sad thing about this Pratten, is that it looks like it was never used, except by the guy with the pocket knife!!!
I working on a Rudall & Carte where the fellow had whittled around the key seats with his pocket knife, I guess he felt the keys where rubbing, and didn’t think to put a thicker pad on it. Once they start whittling, they seem to have trouble stopping!
See, that Pat O didn’t say anything negative to you about the
keys added to his flute doesn’t, so far, mean much. Most
of us think lots of things we don’t say. If he said to you:
‘My concern is that other makers will copy my measurements,
I don’t care about the work they do’
that would tell me that that is on his mind. But you’re not (so far
as I can tell)
reporting such an utterance or any utterance,
though perhaps you heard one.
Maybe I misunderstood what Pat was thinking. I know he’s
obsessed with the flutes (he says so and it’s pretty obvious
from the flutes), that he cares passionately about
what becomes of them, I know that he is quick to think he sees
people abusing his instruments, unskillful treatment by
folks who don’t know what they’re doing. My Pratten’s
barrel cracked three months in and, when I called Pat,
he accused me of ‘flute abuse,’ without any info other
than that the crack had happened. Later, when he
received the barrel he told me that I had not caused
the crack–the wood was flawed.
So I put all this together and figured, when he told me
he ‘preferred’ I didn’t have M. Reviol make keys for
the flute, that he doesn’t want other makers monkeying
with his instruments and that he is passionate that the
integrity of his instrument, the aesthetic he labored
to create, be respected–whatever else is on his mind.
But I agree I don’t have access to Pat 0’s mental states
and he didn’t tell me why he didn’t want this done.
I figured I understood but maybe I didn’t.
I think that sometimes
a handmade craft piece made by a genuine master,
manifests an aesthetic vision and
a kind of integrity that
deserves respect. Before I would do anything
that might change or compromise that vision,
I would check with the maker, whom I figure
comprehends that vision better than I do.
That’s part of the respect.
But where to draw that line I don’t know.
Bending a key to fit my finger is OK without
that consent. Having Maurice place post mounted
keys of his distinctive design on the body
of Pat’s Pratten, without Pat’s consent,
seems to me plainly over the line.
Emphatically I’m not talking about what I can or
cannot do. Sure I CAN do these things.
I CAN burn my flute for firewood or make it
into a lamp or… We all agree I CAN
do these things. Nobody can prevent me from
doing what I want with my property.
I’m talking about what I should do, which is different.
There are plenty of things I can do that I shouldn’t do.
As to whether the maker’s wishes should be determinative,
I sure wasn’t going to go ahead with my plan of
having Maurice make the keys after Pat said no.
But I CAN do that if I wish. I just respect the
maker and the flute too much to do it.
I also agree. However some changes could significantly alter tone and playability–embouchure adjustments for example. Will these be disclosed when the flute changes hands again? Say I get a poorly modified flute and then announce on this forum that so-and-so maker sucks because I had assumed that this was his original work?
what do you think- does introducing six new toneholes to an existing bore (like for new keys) have an effect how the flute will respond afterwards, or it doesn’t make any difference?
It does diminish the response slightly (that’s assuming you do it properly. If you don’t and the pads leak, it will diminish the repsonse very considerably!).
Fortunately, the loss is not high; indeed I suspect most players would be unaware of it, or perhaps given a side-by-side comparison of a keyed and a keyless flute by the same maker, would be just aware of it. Obsessives like me wonder about it. Indeed, some have gone on to patent fiendish schemes to try to get around it. I guess the fact that no-one has taken up manufacture of such schemes suggests that no-one figures it’s worth worrying about. The cure could be worse than the disease.
It’s pretty obvious why it happens when you think about it. Every closed hole is an inconvenience to pressure waves trying to whiz back and forward past it. If you imagine (or examine) a drain with water rushing along it, smooth sections will have smooth water flow, but sections containing side branches will have vorteces at the junction. Vorteces are a waste of energy. Double the number of vorteces (play low D on an 6-key flute) and you double the waste compared to a 6-hole flute.
(There’s probably a little loss in the compliance of the pad material too, and even rocking of the keys on their springs! I think I mentioned obsessive.)
It’s pretty obvious why it happens when you think about it. Every closed hole is an inconvenience to pressure waves trying to whiz back and forward past it. If you imagine (or examine) a drain with water rushing along it, smooth sections will have smooth water flow, but sections containing side branches will have vorteces at the junction. Vorteces are a waste of energy. Double the number of vorteces (play low D on an 6-key flute) and you double the waste compared to a 6-hole flute.
True, but this isn’t necessarily a bad thing.
In the Boehm flute world, flutes with soldered tone holes are typically considered superior to those with drawn and rolled tone holes, even though a drawn tone hole provides for a smoother transition to the bore.
Soldered tone holes are considered to add a “resistance” to the flute which advanced players value, even though it makes the flute more difficult to play, particularly on the lowest notes, for a learner.
I have played flutes by a couple of different makers which started life keyless and wound up as a 6-key, my original model M&E and my Hamilton. In both cases I prefer the feel of the 6-key version even for tunes which don’t need the keys.
Indeed, James, contrary to what we might have read in the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Universe, resistance is not useless!
A lot of things have lead me to the conclusion that some of us prefer - even depend upon - high efficiency, low loss flutes, while some of us don’t seem to notice, and some of us definitely prefer a heightened degree of resistance. Things that lead to this conclusion include the very obvious one - elliptical versus modern forms of embouchure cut; but also feet designed to optimise D rather than C; preference (or indifference) for a fully-worked craftsman-made flute over a mass-produced one; and this one, keyed versus keyless. I wonder if there are more issues over which we might be separated?
I can’t, though, fully agree with your assertion in this sentence:
“Soldered tone holes are considered to add a “resistance” to the flute which advanced players value, even though it makes the flute more difficult to play, particularly on the lowest notes, for a learner.”
I would happily accept “… which some players value, even though it makes the flute more difficult to play… for others”. The bit I disagree with is whether the increased resistance is valued only by advanced players and only disliked by learners. My thirtytwo odd years of playing and making tell me it’s some players, not any particular grade of players who prefer certain kinds of flutes. I have supplied flutes to professional and semi-professional players (clearly advanced) who almost sobbed for joy to find a flute whose free-flowing characteristics perfectly suited their embouchure style. And I’ve provided flutes with an elliptical embouchure, C foot and a full compliment of keys to beginners who lapped 'em up. So, my assertion is that we do require very different things from flutes, and part of the challenge is to a) find out what, and b) get one.
But with that minor quibble, agreed. Resistance is not useless. Indeed, most of us faced with a Boehm flute would be appalled at the lack of resistance, just as a Boehm player is surprised to find so much in our flutes. It does seem though that we vary in our preference for the amount of resistance. It probably goes some way to explain why some of us regard ourselves as Rudalls, and others Prattens, and why Rudall & Carte were able to continue selling a high resistance but not that well tuned flute for over 50 years after Mr Pratten brought out his lower resistance, better tuned, dare I say, “Perfected” flute.
To get back to the original question that started this thread, which IIRC was something like “I have a keyless flute by maker X. Maker X can’t add keys to it because (a) he doesn’t do retrofits, (b) he’d do it, but his waiting list is too long, or (c) he’s gone to the great flute workshop in the sky. Is there a Maker Y who would add keys to my flute, and if so would it be a good idea to let him do that?” Note how I have changed all names of actual flute makers here to protect the innocent, but really because it doesn’t matter. If you’re asking yourself if this is a good idea, it doesn’t matter who the flute makers in question are, because the only time it makes any sense at all to do a key retrofit by another maker is if the original maker is dead - and even then it’s a dumb idea. Why? Because you’re putting the original flute at risk. Each key you add is not only a post-mounted key on the outside of the flute, it’s a new hole drilled into the flute. Aside from Terry’s concerns about changes in resistance after the hole is drilled, let’s consider first just the drilling of the new hole. Where exactly to put it, and how big to make it? This is dependent on the inside bore profile of the flute, the location and size of all the other holes on the flute, and the embouchure size and cut. Who is the only person who fully understands all of that, and can best determine where and how to place the new hole? The original maker. Anyone else is just guessing. True, they may be a good maker in their own right and may make a very intelligent guess - but it’s still just a guess, and they could guess wrong. And if they do, there’s no going back. You now have a flute that’s not as good as it was before. Do you really want to roll the dice even once on this, let alone six times?
If you find yourself in this situation, and have found a Maker Y who is willing to add six keys to your keyless Maker X flute, this presumes that Maker Y has the bandwidth available to add six keys to a flute. Why not then just go the next step, and have Maker Y make you a keyed flute of his own design? Okay, it would take longer, but not that much longer than it would to make six keys and retrofit them to a flute with which you are not familiar. And okay, it would cost more, but not that much more since much of the cost of keyed flutes is bound up in the keywork. And if you do it this way, you have your keyless flute to play while the new flute is being made, and if the added cost of a new keyed flute is too high for you to absorb, when you get the new flute you can sell the keyless one to recoup the difference. And most importantly, you run no risk of ruining a perfectly good keyless flute.
This situation is in no way comparable to having a different maker do some embouchure tweaking or bore polishing on a flute to improve its sound. There, you are fixing known problems with a flute. There is some risk, as there always is when wood is removed from a flute, but there is also the potential of a much greater reward. But when you are talking about taking a perfectly good flute and putting it at risk just so you can have the benefit of keys, the old adage applies. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
I would happily accept “… which some players value, even though it makes the flute more difficult to play… for others”. The bit I disagree with is whether the increased resistance is valued only by advanced players and only disliked by learners. My thirtytwo odd years of playing and making tell me it’s some players, not any particular grade of players who prefer certain kinds of flutes. I have supplied flutes to professional and semi-professional players (clearly advanced) who almost sobbed for joy to find a flute whose free-flowing characteristics perfectly suited their embouchure style. And I’ve provided flutes with an elliptical embouchure, C foot and a full compliment of keys to beginners who lapped 'em up. So, my assertion is that we do require very different things from flutes, and part of the challenge is to a) find out what, and b) get one.
Terry, I don’t think we disagree.
Most of my knowledge of flute as far as their construction, maintenance, and repair is on the metal Boehm-system flute.
I tend to associate soldered tone holes and higher resistance flutes in general with advanced players simply because these flutes are the very expensive flutes in the Boehm-system world, and advanced players are usually the ones willing to shell out $6000+ to get these features.
That said, there are probably plenty of really advanced players out there who play on “intermediate” flutes simply to get a freer-blowing instrument, and I have known a few learners who started on very high end flutes. (As an interesting aside, they rarely did very well, and usually the flute took some damage from improper care. I think this happens because a lot of folks have it stuck in their head that a more expensive instrument = better instrument to learn on = easier to play, and that’s not only not true, it’s backwards, in my experience.)
Speaking for myself only, I think one reason I enjoy playing simple-system flutes is their higher resistance which really allows you to drive the sound hard. My silver flute, though because of the headjoint and embouchure cut has a lot more resistance than a beginner flute, still doesn’t have the resistance of either a high-end silver flute or or an Irish flute.
I hardly think Pat Olwell is worried that other makers will copy his flute designs. I am not worried about my flutes either. Its hard to copy a reputation built on decades of excellence. And remember we all started copying the work of the great 19th century makers.
My main feeling about working on some other living maker’s flutes is that it is taboo. Period. If someone purchases a flute from a maker, they should expect the “baggage” that comes with it - that particular maker’s waiting time for additions and modifications, etc.
The main danger to working on some other maker’s instrument is what happens if something goes wrong? Who is then responsible and who will fix it?
I run into this when my flute clients take their flutes to someone else to be corked. Mine are designed to be thread wrapped only and I state in the care instructions that corking voids any warranty. Invariably the headjoints then crack at the socket.
So does the person who corked it provide a new headjoint? Is so it will then be a hybrid flute and I’d rather my flutes have my headjoints on them, not someone else’s. So then I have to replace or fix the headjoint but then inform the client the sour grapes news that this was their error, not mine, and charge for this. Not to mention find time to fit this in my queue. I’d rather not have to do such repairs. Its sorry business.
