Often when a flute is up people place an MP3 of the instrument up. Outside the contributions of how the player makes the instrument sound, and how useful those clips are, what would be the most useful format for a test sample? I remember one site that had 20 or more instruments all playing the same tune, and have seen flutes where a scale is played throughout its range, arpeggios, and then a tune that covers most of that range.
I don’t really have much of an opinion on the matter, just curious.
I think a clip to demonstrate a flute is just this side of useless. There are far too many variables in the recording of an instrument. At best, you can compare instruments recorded under identical circumstances, but you are still stuck with the variables of the performer. You can’t really know much about a flute you have not played, yourself, IMHO.
You are probably right… more a demonstration of the player, than of the flute. Been there, done that (more than once!).
Arbo
While I want to to say it all depends on what you’re trying to spotlight (Intonation? Performance throughout its range? Responsiveness? Timbre(s)?), I have to agree w/ Cubitt and Arbo. No matter what you do, all you’re getting is a recording of how a flute CAN sound and perform in the hands of a particular player. You don’t get real perspective from that. But maybe I’m missing the question.
It just occurred to me that it would be more useful to have recordings of the same flute and tune (or scale, whatever) being played by two, maybe three different players. Now there’s a chance of having room for perspective. It also occurrs to me that I don’t recall ever having come across that sort of thing except maybe once, if I have come across it. Might be revealing. Personally, I’d like to see more of that on makers’ audio demos, because it would definitely pique my curiosity.
For the most part I was not going for the validity of the sound clip, but rather assuming value is possible what would make the sound clip valuable and perhaps more standard.
Right. I wasn’t really on about validity - that’s what I get for not stipulating the highest fidelity possible aforehand (and good, competent players in case I need to do that too) - but about how even if what you hear is a superb delight, while it might make the gamble sweeter, discernment cannot really be served by one player’s example. Not if you’re trying to assess flutes hands-free.
So, I’m coming back to my multi-player comparative format as a jumping-off point. It just seems to me that comparison would have to be a building block in the whole idea because I think that it would function as a/the standardising element you’re looking for in the bigger picture; without it you just have one example, and so whatever you do at the mixing board with one example almost doesn’t matter; but with comparison, now we may hear something more deeply given a particular fidelity. I realise it’s probably not as technical as what I’m guessing you’re after, but if you want standardisation, I don’t think one can ignore comparison as one way to contribute to that.
Am I starting to get your point?
As a perpetrator of both audio and video clips intended to demonstrate instruments, both ones I’m trying to sell and others for interest’s sake, I pretty much concur with most of the above, but whilst those limitations are certainly true, I don’t think they make such things useless or invalid. Much the same applies to clips where the purpose is to demonstrate a piece of music (as performed by that player at that time on that instrument), including technical aspects of performing it, and ditto if the player is trying to show what s/he can do… and of course most clips serve all those functions even if one is primary. When I try to demonstrate a particular flute, for sure I can’t show on it things my own skills don’t extend to! But I can show a potential vendor what the flute is capable of up to my limits of proficiency and subject to available recording technology. Where hands-on try-outs aren’t feasible, that is certainly useful. That’s why I provide full 3 8ve chromatic scales etc. Moreover, we had a case here a while back of the buyer of a flute I’d sold having difficulties with pitch and intonation on it, and by referring him and observers back to my demo clips, were able to reassure him that the flute was not at fault and to help him address his own technical problems.
It won’t surprise anyone when I say that demo clips, especially ones selling an instrument, ought to eschew any techno-trickery of sound “enhancement” for both practical and ethical reasons. I’m known to be allergic to big reverb anyway, but it annoys the heck out of me when otherwise well-played demo clips on instrument-makers’ websites are heavily larded with it. That smacks to me of misrepresentation, as well as being downright unhelpful in assessing the instrument and indulging in a bloody irritating cliche.
But of course, we should also all be aware of the (well known) limitations of fidelity in audio recording and reproduction and of the choices which inevitably have to be made in even the “purest” and “most natural” recordings, at whatever level of operation. At the commercial recording end of things, think how Tom McElvogue struggled, by his own account (cf his website), to be able to get through technology what he felt was the nearest to perfect recorded representation of his sound he could achieve on his recent CD - in the end hardly a “natural”, unadulterated sound, yet that was what he wanted to represent and the result is certainly very lovely to listen to - but is not what might have been achieved by a live recording in a good acoustic, like Calum Stewart’s latest. Very different approaches, but rather similar quality results!
As for Nano’s point about multiple demonstrators - of course that’s a good idea, but rarely practicable!
I know. Shame, really…it’s such a lovely stroke of genius and common sense. 
I agree with Jem that electronic trickery is not welcome in this sort of
clip. What I’m looking for – all other things being equal – is a focused
powerful low register. That seems to be difficult for flutemakers
(or players) to achieve. So I don’t want to hear ‘greensleeves’ - I want some honking.
Sellers should try to get somebody else to honk a few notes if they aren’t
up to it themselves.
Thanks for the comments. I don’t really know if I completely knew where to go when starting this thread. Perhaps a “guide to posting useful sound clips” would have been closer. I see the things and have always wondered if there was a way of making them more useful. Multiple players would be interesting (actually a touring flute and recorder would be very interesting), and it makes sense to have the raw recording without auto-tune, reverb, etc. but outside of that there doesn’t seem like there is much that could make the clips more than just another flute MP3.
That’s pretty much it.
There can good reason for applying equalising tech to the sound, though; depending on the physical environment recorded in, the quality of the technology you’re using, and things like your proximity to it, the volume recorded at, etc., the raw untouched result may not sound really like you and your flute. I’ve been in situations like that where we had to tweak the recorded product until other listeners were able to say, “There. That’s what you sound like.” Other ears are the crucial element for that sort of task; obviously the fluter’s own ears can’t be counted on if it’s fidelity you’re after. BUT: no matter how faithful the end result may be at one remove, there’s still too much variation in how things will sound to you if you compare the systems of home entertainment, car, computer, iPod, cheap session recording device, what have you. You can try to equalise things to meet the characteristics of a limited target group of sound delivery systems, but that’s as good as it gets and is never entirely perfect.
I’d like hearing clips of a flute played by any ol’ person in any ol’ setting with any ol’ microphone rather than have none at all. Scales and arpeggios … hmm. I definitely don’t play those much anymore 
There was one flute shop where I used to live, which allowed demo’g and testing of their flutes - that was great. Realistically, most of us probably end up buying a flute unseen. Otherwise, clips are great - the more the merrier.
I’ve been thinking about the “clips of flutes” concept since this post. I think they definitely have a place and a purpose, kind of a “proof of concept/product”. Irish flutes are not easy to play. So having a good player play the flute well proves that the flute is fine and it’s up to the player to get it to work. I also think that some flutes, whether because of neglect or inevitable variability in quality from flute to flute by any maker, aren’t that great. So hearing a flute played well or endorsed by a good player also allays fears of buying a clunker.
In regards to what makes a clip good, I think the player should demonstrate, as much as possible, the full normal range of the flute (low D to middle b, an octave and a half), featuring the low range of the flute as well as the middle/high range. Grey Larsen plays the tune “Torn Jacket” to demonstrate the GLP on Terry McGee’s site–a good choice since all notes are played and one can hear how responsive the flute can be by his use of many rolls, cuts, etc. I think jigs that feature the low end, e.g. Rolling Wave, are helpful in capturing the critical low-end potential. Jigs I’ve played demos are Blarney Pilgrim and Tobin’s Favorite–each meets most of the above criteria.
^^^ Fox Reel
Nice tune. I’ll take it!
I think I’ll call it Jason’s Fox 
Well played BTW!
Thanks, Aanvil.
Proof of Concept that Casey Burns flutes are pretty good, I guess as good as the player can make it .
Aanvil’s post made me click the link. I’m not sorry I did. That’s some very tasty playing, Akiba. A+ 
Mighty stuff, there Akiba! Good on ya. I’ll have to get a lesson from you when I’m in Northern California one of these days.