It has sometimes been said on these pages that fully lined headjoints ‘cut through’ sound in
ensembles better than do unlined or partly lined ones. The latter have a more ‘woody’ sound.
It isn’t supposed to be a question of volume–that is, the unlined or partly lined one develop
as much (or sometimes perhaps more) volume–but that the sound of the fully lined
hjs has an ‘edge’ such that the sound projects/cuts through better.
Also it isn’t necessarily the idea that every unlined hj cuts through less well than every
fully lined hj. Rather it’s the idea that, all other things being equal, the unlined flute
would cut through better with a fully lined hj.
Wonder what folks think of this? What’s your experience? Everyone’s welcome but I’m most interested
in the thoughts of the experienced players. Thanks
I probably don’t qualify as an experienced player (only been at this for a few decades and I still consider myself a student of the instrument). I personally do not think there is that much to be said of lined versus unlined heads across a variety of flutes offered from different makers. My simplistic view is that it’s the player’s skill that cuts through and not necessarily the flute. Too many flutes with differing designs and too many players with different embouchures for me to think such a generalization holds. I’ve seen quite a few instances where a flute that sounds demure in one player’s hands can sound like a fog horn in the hands of another player. Granted the flute has to be made well enough in any case in order to allow the volume and harmonic content but if we’re just talking about good flutes, it’s about the player. Heck, a good player can make most any flute project well. What about lined versus unlined delrin flutes from good makers?
I’m just wondering what you mean by “cutting through”, Jim. All flutes are heard best from a distance, as anyone who’s taken a leg-stretcher at a session will have discovered. That’s cutting though, to me. If however you mean being heard at an immediate remove down in the trenches, not everyone can, or will, be able to do that. As Feadoggie said - and I agree - it’s down to the player.
From a makers perspective - I can make both unlined and lined headjoints cut through. It’s really not the material, only the player and the bore of the instrument, since the latter defines if a certain note is stable enough to accept a lot of “air input” or not. Old german flutes often are bad not because of the headjoint, but because of the bore. A good bore will work just nicely with the raw, round and unworked embouchure from the start. A few notes need a finished embouchure to really come to life (low E, low F# for example on some bores).
I find lined headjoints easier to make though, especially in blackwood, because I see more when cutting. When making unlined heads I insert some paper into the joint for contrast.
‘flute used to be mine.
has fully lined head indeed though tom and I had discussed when I placed order whether that was what I wanted.
he thinks fully lined is more suited for ITM and louder too.
opinions of course vary. ’ Berti66, reporting about tom aebi.
Tom and myself have been in touch just recently, we played a session together last saturday. He showed me a new boxwood Rudall he just made, with a partially lined headjoint (insofar my comment on the other thread seems to be void now). That flute certainly had power and I noticed no difference at all to his other, fully lined flutes. Well, it was lighter…but I could play it just as loud or subtly as his other flutes or my own.
Technically, there is not a single reason why the presence of a metal tube inside the headjoint should do anything for or against its performance, or tone, as both parameters are not at all influenced by material, but only by shape. The air really doesn’t care if there is a metal edge inside the flute or a wooden one. Of course a wooden inner edge is easily dulled if not handled properly while cutting the embouchure. That of course influences the tone and response. But it’s not a matter of the fact that the headjoint it unlined, it’s a matter of the maker not paying attention…so let’s say, ideally, their response is the same, but if mucked up, it’s not.
Any idea then why Tom Aebi disagrees with you strongly? Is he just mistaken?
Another post from the thread I linked to above:
‘I’ve been in contact with Tom quite frequently as my flute is up for delivery fairly soon, and as far as I know he is willing to do partially lined head joints. He has sent me clips of him playing his flute with partially lined heads, and indicated that this was a possibility but that he does not recommend it.’
Here’s a more tentative view from an experienced player:
‘This could just be me, just a subjective personal thought based on some personal experience, but I think a non-lined head tends to produce a mellower tone while a lined head can be more edgy.’
You asked for opinions. You got mine. Why are you trying to disprove my points?
First: Tom doesn’t disagree strongly. Have you ever talked to him directly? Did he tell you that he disagrees? If you knew him you would know that he’s not a man who strongly talks against any thoughts that don’t match up with his own. Tom and myself are exchanging thoughts about flutes and flutemaking quite regularly. If he thinks an unlined headjoint sounds not as loud as a lined one, then be it so. I don’t think so and I tried to explain why in my prevous posting, that doesn’t mean that he has to believe the same. Which leads me to…
Second: It is perfectly normal that each maker has his or her own opinions about things. Almost every maker uses cast keys, however Chris Wilkes considers them to be sh°te and only mounts handforged ones. That’s fine. Hammy Hamilton thinks the Pratten ist the best flute for irish music, as Eamonn Cotter does. Tom and myself strongly prefer the Rudallish models. Thats fine, too. Tom doesn’t like Mopane wood at all, but many other makers use it and like it a lot. And if Tom says he recommends the fully lined headjoint for the sake of tone and volume, he can! Why not?
Third: Tom never told me that he thinks a fully lined head produces a louder/fuller/whatever tone. We talked about many aspects and he once told me that he thinks (!) boxwood produces a mellower tone, due to more wood fibres standing up inside the bore. I can’t prove him neither right nor wrong (since I didn’t make a boxwood flute so far) and I don’t want to anyway - but I think that sounds reasonable.
You are free to believe whatever you want to - but I really ask myself why you ask for other people’s opinions when you already have your own, that you seek to defend as soon as someone says something that goes against your believing.
(I considered commenting the “experienced player” side blow, but decided not to…)
Now I know why my flute’s still not here. People like you keep dragging the man away for sessions! (Just kidding of course). (Also, if it weren’t for you I wouldn’t be playing a flute at all, so I’ll restrain my anger. )
Also, to clarify, here is exactly what Tom said to me (I don’t think he’d mind me quoting him):
“I definitely prefer the lined head in all cases only the one in boxwood I played does not suit me too well.
The half lined head is too light. Yes it has nice timbre and it is intimate. And for some reason
it seems to go particularly well with the 2012, but it hasn’t got the body and midrange and is
a little too woody and dry to me.”
So it seems he’s more talking about tone character and physical weight balance rather than tone loudness or projection.
Personally I’m not necessarily moved by technical arguments about the physical impossibility of
this or that on the flute making an acoustic difference.
This wasn’t about you in particular. Five or so people posted that the lined head makes no difference. It’s entirely
up to the player. I had said earlier that a different view has been expressed on these pages, and I cited
Tom A’s opinion, as confirmed by two of us, that the lined head is better suited to Irish music and louder.
Also that he recommends it, presumably for these reasons. This to show that there is some significant
diversity from very good people, e.g. one of the world’s best makers. By saying he disagrees strongly I don’t mean
vehemently. But that he and those preceding have opposite views.
You think (and others who precede you) that the lined headjoint
makes no difference to sound; he thinks it makes such a big difference to sound that he recommends against buying
one of his flutes without it. That’s a strong difference.
I think the matter is more controversial than it has appeared in this thread, so I posted the info about TA.
In the interest of a real discussion, not to disprove you or to defend. Note the quote from another fine fluter here.
There are others. Personally I’m not necessarily persuaded by arguments about the impossibility of this or that physical
difference in flutes making an acoustic difference. These are interesting but they seldom settle things, at least not
for me.
I asked because I want to know
what you and others think. I’m thinking of buying a flute with a partly lined headjoint but actually concerned
about this.
Thanks for your opinion.
OK, if its not tech, it must be magic…and fairy dust has a considerable influence on tone. I build these things from scratch, but what could I know…by the way, where’s my wand?
I’m out here. There’s a reason why I’m mostly lurking these days.
Right. A louder flute may not project as well, IMO. I am, in fact, playing a Murray with a loud, woody sound,
but (it seems to me subjectively, at any rate), that it doesn’t cut through ensemble sound as well
as when I replace the headjoint with a fully lined one. I have two of those from other flutes that fit the Murray body
and it seems to cut through better with them, there seems to be an added edge to the sound. I think
the hardness of the metal may in some way provide the acoustical edge.
This is no proof of anything, but it’s suggestive that there is something
to the view that the lined headjoint projects better, all other things being equal.
Have you tried having another (decent to good) flute player play your flute while you listen?
My Breandan De Faoite bodhrán has loads of bass, but i don’t hear much of it myself when playing it. Perhaps irrelevant, but it would be an interesting experiment imo.
Let’s say there is a difference.
All things being equal, the fact that it’s up to debate seems to point to their not being much difference.
Things like individual craftsmanship and body style have more of an effect on the over all harmonics and volume than other factors like materials. Even then the flute difference will be subjective, and what I hear will be different than that of an older person, and a kid will be able to hear something different, so even an objective measure like decibels may not hold up subjectively. With such variability, I’d say listen to what the maker says. They have the chance to compare apples to apples, and if they say they cannot make an unlined flute that plays the same as its counterpart, then it seems best to defer opinion to them. Even then their views are probably filled with expectation bias and other perception filters.
The clear options to me (for cutting through) seem to be, change embouchure, kick the tune up an octave, get a Böhm, get a piccolo, find a session with fewer instruments, or get an amp. From the few flutes I’ve blown across the color of the wood, the metal in the rings, and other material choices have been way overshadowed by the player and design parameters to the point that the other factors would drop out even when played solo.
An ox might worry about a fea of ordinary size–a small creature of the first order of smallness. But he would probably not trouble himself about a fea’s fea; being of the second order of smallness, it would be negligible. Even a gross of feas’ feas would not be of much account to the ox.
There’s nothing in my experience that says an unlined Murray does not project well.
And how are you assessing the projection when you are the player? And keep in mind that as we get older, some frequencies and harmonics can become hared to distinguish from other sounds. (Not that I, as a young man, didn’t spend too much time in front of a stack of Fender Twins.)
What’s “edge” anyway? Is it higher freequency harmonic content? Is it hiss?
As I pointed out earlier, that’s no evidence of the effect of lined vs un-lined heads. They are different heads altogether with different embouchure holes. And you might blow them differently too.
As for the hardness, I’d ask the same question, “How do you feel about delrin?”. What’s hard got to do with it and how hard is hard?
Would you think the same about polish and smoothness of the bore?
I’m still reminded that many good players sound quite similar going from flute to flute no matter the maker or the configuration of the head joint.
I’m afraid that significant differences, even big ones, have been debated, here and elsewhere. (For instance, there was
a long and serious debate on this board several years ago, as to whether differences in bore size, embouchure cut,
hole size, and so on, in well made flutes, made any difference whatsoever to the flute’s sound in the hands of a
skilled player.) That the significance of a difference gets debated doesn’t show the difference is insignificant.
I agree with you that embouchure cut, bore size, tone hole size (and, I think you will agree) the player, make more difference
to a flute’s projection than whether the headjoint is fully or partly lined. But it doesn’t follow that, because these
other features make more difference, whether the headjoint is fully or partly lined doesn’t make a significant difference,
e.g. one it might be prudent to take into account in buying a flute. That a feature is less significant than a number of
other features doesn’t mean it’s insignificant, even if it’s at the bottom of the totem pole.
I think I feel as Akiba did–the tentative sense that the lining makes a difference that can actually be helpful in some
venues, buoyed considerably by the fact that it is shared by a number of people better than myself
but somewhat undercut by my concern that we seem to be relying on subjective impressions.
It is widely said that the headjoint makes a major (if not the major) contribution to a flute’s sound. I suggest
that the harder surface of a fully lined head adds an acoustic edge that can make a significant contribution
to projection. I don’t know this, however; still it seems not implausible and it explains the impressions
of a number of people, for what those impressions are worth. The view that a difference is being made (though
not necessarily my explanation of it) has surfaced a number of times over the last six or seven years.
Jim, you still haven’t defined what you mean by “cutting through”. Do you mean loudness? Or is it projection? Or do you mean close-proximity audibility?
This last, BTW, can have little if anything necessarily to do with volume, but can very much be entirely about tonal color. I had been playing a so-called Pratten configuration for a time, but when I switched to a so-called Rudall, all of a sudden my céilí bandmate (boxplayer, so I had my work cut out for me ) complained that he couldn’t hear me any more. Yet, on checking, we discovered that I was getting close enough to the same volume out of either flute, so volume had to be written off as a non-issue. Also, both had lined heads. Next then we compared tone via the ear test: the Pratten had obviously broader harmonics while the Rudall’s harmonics were compressed, more focused. Both reedy in different ways. We concluded that the more laser-like quality of the Rudall must be the reason he was less able to hear it sitting next to me, because broader harmonics seemed to have more “sideways” projection, to be completely subjective and unscientific about it. Yet, folks out on the dance floor heard both flutes just fine.
(Just kidding of course). (Also, if it weren’t for you I wouldn’t be playing a flute at all, so I’ll restrain my anger. 
)