On both Boehm and wooden flutes, I produce a consistently better tone with an oval embouchure hole rather than a round one. I also find that a round hole seems to waste air.
Is this an individual thing? Are either of these embouchure types supposed to be easier to play? By that, I’m wondering if a round hole sacrifices performance for the sake of playability, assuming that this is the goal. If not, then I assume it is simply a matter of personal preference.
What say you?
So you haven’t played on a more rectangular embouchure?
I may have, but I don’t own one.
I’m no expert, but I thought an oval embouchure was easier because the far end of the hole is a larger target than a round embouchure. Same would be true for rectangular.
This is just my own experience, but I tend to associate rounder embouchure holes with a smaller, sweeter sound, oval and rounded rectangle embouchure with a bigger, louder sound that can be driven harder.
My personal preference is the oval; a rectangular embouchure certainly has power but seems like the quality of tone suffers a bit, particularly when playing at lower volumes.
Again, just my $.02; your experiences may well vary.
–James
I think the rounded rectangle is easiest, followed by the oval, then the rounded oval, the most focused would be the round. The oval and rounded oval embouchure holes produce a sweeter sound, in my own opinion.
Embouchure design of course is a highly personal thing. There are some designs that have proven to be easier to play than other designs, but which shape suits a certain player bests ultimatively depends on his/her own preference and, of course, anatomy.
Besides shape (round, rounded-oval, oval, rounded-rectangle, etc.), there are a number of other factors that influence how an embouchure hole will play and sound. For example, a small round hole will take a more-focused embouchure than a larger rounded-rectangle, not only because of the shape of the hole, but because of the area of the hole. The deepness of the embouchure chimney, how much the sides and back of the embouchure hole are undercut, and the angle of the blowing edge are all important factors in addition to the outer shape of the hole. Another factor, perhaps not often thought of, is the actual embouchure of the player. One player will cover a half of the embouchure hole with her lower lip, but another will only cover half that much. Thus, the same embouchure hole will play differently for these two players. I think that it might be easy to be over-simplistic when attemping to evaluate an embouchure hole by outer shape alone, when there are so many other variables. That is not to say that the generalizations thus far presented are to be discounted.
I agree. All I understand about the art and science of embouchure cutting is that all the complexities are beyond my understanding! Here’s a well-know maker who makes Boehm headjoints, but the website is an interesting read and gives a sense of the complexity of the process–both making and selecting a headjoint.
I look forward to reading that - thank you. While I realize that there are a number of factors to consider, I wanted to get feedback on my basic observation, and also (which I did not mention before) I find that with Boehm flutes, so-called student models tend towards the round holes, while upscale flutes tend toward the oval. Is that too much of a generalization?
I think we may have a problem with mutual understanding of descriptive terms here! I don’t really recognise what you mean - or at least, I wouldn’t describe them in those terms.
I think most of us would say (thinking now only of the tube-surface outline as viewed from above, not of undercut etc.) that you will never find a “round” (i.e. circular or close there-to) embouchure hole on any normal Boehm flute. The vast majority have a rectangular embouchure with tightly rounded corners. Earlier English Boehm flutes often have a Rudall style oval (ellipse) pretty much as found on English C19th simple system flutes. Some rare Boehm flutes may be found with true rectangular embouchures, (sharp corners), as may other non-Boehm flutes. The style of hole we associate with Boehm was already developing on Austrian flutes pre-Boehm, I believe, and is certainly not unusual on post-Boehm German and Austrian simple and hybrid system flutes. Amongst mainstream Western flutes, only the Renaissance and Baroque flutes have true circular (or nearly) “round” embouchures, and by the late Baroque this was elongating into an ellipse (“oval”).
There’s some useful, relevant stuff on Terry McGee’s website here. However, note that what Terry calls a “rounded rectangle” is not the same as a standard Boehm embouchure. The latter is a rectangle with four straight sides but curved-off corners; Terry uses the term to describe a rectangle with two straight sides - the long ones lengthways on the flute - and two curved sides, somewhat less than semicircular chord segments, on the short, lateral sides. He also offers a half-way house “two semicircles” cut which is like a fatter oval.
Only because you have a penchant for the pedantic we will indulge ourselves by querying this even though we fully know what you mean even though you have been wanting in precision of expression.
We query your usage of “standard” without qualification. Historically the Boehm embouchures come in various shapes so you need to qualify whether you mean historical standard or comtemporary standard.
Regarding contemporary standard you will need to take care to assess in terms in each of the groups identified in Cubitt’s second post. Otherwise the pervasion of your point may be found wanting.
Yup. Most Boehm embouchures are oval to rounded rectangle. Price doesn’t have much to do with shape of the embouchure hole, but it sure does affect the sound and response.
Dana
I agree with you, Dana, that price does affect the sound and response of a flute. Cheap flutes often sound, well, “cheap”, whereas expensive flutes usually sound better than the cheap ones, but not always. I hope that I understand what you were saying.
I don’t quite agree wtih that. I don’t know that I have ever played a flute with a more pleasing sound than my Folk Flute. And I’ve tried a few of the expensive ones. Not that I can do any of them justice, but man that Folk Flute is an amazing thing.
they were referring to boehm flutes in this case.
there is a lot more variance in price in quality in wooden flutes, as many makers are hobbyists and don’t intend to make a lot of money.
With all respect to everyone, Dana is someone you should listen to.
I do.
–James
So do I, James. I was only joking when I took Dana comments as they were written. I think that what she meant to say was that the shape of the embouchure hole (and not price alone) has a lot to do with the sound and response of a flute.
Awr, shucks. 
I think I meant that yes, the shape of the embouchure hole does affect the sound and response, along with the level (entry vs. artist quality) of flute. However, I wouldn’t say that the actual shape of the embouchure hole (round vs. oval vs. squared) depends on the price level in Boehm flutes.
There’s been a trend toward more squared embouchures in recent years, but I think we’re now headed away from that trend, which is a good thing in my opinion. I’ve never liked extremely squared-off embouchures. (On the other hand, I don’t know how you Baroque flutists play those tiny little round embouchures).
Dana
Hmm, what I heard when
is a challenge to jemtheflute’s assertion that standard Boehm flute embouchure is rectangular only.
Remember jemtheflute? He’s the poster that pointed out to Cubitt that his terminology is wrong if he says (as he did) that he plays an oval embouchure Boehm flute. Jem’s logic seemed to be that, as the standard is rectangular Cubitt’s description was wrong.
From what Dana is saying it is obvious that there are a variety of Boehm flute mouth holes from oval to rounded rectangle. Of course that doesn’t mean that the standard isn’t as jemthflute is proposing BUT it doesn’t mean that everything is covered by the standard. A standard is just that - a predominance that acts as a benchmark. It does not exclude other types.
Therefore if Cubitt talks of an oval mouth hole it is not useful to immediately conclude his terminology is wrong just becuase your perception of the standard is that it is not oval. Even if it does not fit the standard it does not follow that it does not exist. Its best to ask for clarification rather than launching on a regurgitaion of half digested readings of European flute history.