I am planning to buy (sooner or later) a Delrin flute and I read great reviews of both the Forbes and the Copley & Boegly. They cost more or less the same. Can someone help me with some opinion and possibly underlining the differences in tone and playability, if there are any ?
Also: My current and only flute is a three pieces Tipple with lip plate and wedge. I find it wonderful although, being a real beginner, it’s not easy for me to play it well. I have read that flutes like the Forbes and the Copley,which have a tapered conical bore, are easier to play than cylindrical ones. Is it true ? Thanks !
Hi,
I can’t help you much, since I’m in about the same situation than you (I’m a beginner who has a Tipple flute, and wants to buy one of those delrin flutes soon, but I don’t know which one either).
I only can tell you that when I tried a conical flute (made of wood), I was able to play it much better and much easily than my Tipple. I could get out of it a strong tone almost without effort, and I could reach the 2 octaves easier.
Now I can’t wait for having a conical flute.
Good luck with your buying, I’ll be taking a look to this thread.
Cheers,
Martin
I have played both Forbes and Copley Delrins, and “own” the Copley. Both are excellent flutes, but you know that from what you’ve read here on Chiff.
The Forbes is quite a bit lighter in weight, most likely a little bigger bore diameter (or at least a bigger foot bore exit diameter), with mostly larger holes (though very close to the same hole placement as the Copley), and a more “engineered” tuning slide, with o-rings. Embouchure shape is 2 semi-cirle, or rounded oval, depending on how you may describe it. I don’t remember the weight balance especially, but I think it’s fine.
The Copley is heavier (but not too heavy), feels very solid and balanced, and has a larger outside diameter (fatter) than the Forbes. The finger stretch on both flutes is comfortable for me, and not a long stretch upper or lower, for medium sized hands. A Delrin to Delrin (using a lube) fit for the tuning slide-very simple and reliable. Embouchure shape is rounded rectangle.
I found the Forbes to be easier to play loudly, but harder to play up to pitch for me–I needed very good breath support and a tighter embouchure
to get it there, but that may just be me, and how I play. It seems the best choice for very loud sessions, from reports of other Forbes owners. Big sound-and solid bottom end.
The Copley was much easier for me to play in all respects, and I believe it is because of the rounded rectangle embouchure and how it is undercut, and it seemed to me to be easier to get different shading of tone from it by varying how I blew. This flute certainly has presence as well–it can be played loudly also, but may take more a little more effort to get there if you want full volume, and has a big solid bottom end too. Maybe a little sweeter top end than the Forbes–but that’s subjective to your ears and how you play. I’m really very happy with mine, and I couldn’t ask for more for such a reasonable price, other than it being wood. If you want wood at that price, the man to see is Casey Burns and his excellent Folk Flutes!
So, both are great choices in affordable Delrin flutes, and it just depends on you–how it plays and sounds, and what you want. And there’s only one way to find out. Go get one and play it yourself!
Be well, Barry
I’m fortunate to have one of each, though the Copley is an Eb.
I could write reams of comparison stuff, but bottom line is you can’t go wrong with either. Both are exceptionally well-made, well-tuned, and well-thought out. The Forbes’s thinner walls make it feel a little more “buzzy” and resonant in my hands while the Copley’s thicker walls make it a tiny bit woodier and darker. The Forbes seems to have more of a Prattenish tuning and personality (I compare it to my Olwell Pratten; other Olwell players have had similar responses); the Copley seems to like a bit lighter air and a sweeter approach like my Rudall flute. Also, the Copley’s square blowhole cut might be a wee bit more “accessible” to beginners or players with more relaxed embouchures.
But really, I don’t see how you wouldn’t be very pleased with either.
I’ve said it before, but I’ll say it again – we are so very lucky these days. Thanks to Rob and David (and Casey’s folk flute)(and thanks to Des and Michael Cronnolly for going before) a flute player at any level can get solid, reliable instrument that a professional’s happy to play too for under $500.
Flip a coin, and then happily play the heck out of your decision. 
Thank you for your opinions, they were really useful to me.
Hi - for what it’s worth I am eagerly anticipating arrivial of my Forbes by Christmas. I have been playing my Tipple D 3-piece w/wedge, no plate for 18 months & figured the time was right to upgrade. I choose the Forbes because of the sound clips on his site & his flute includes a tuning slide which I don’t believe the other flutes in this class/price do. Just wanted to point that out in case it matters to you. Again - great choices to have.
Best,
Deisman
I am “resurrecting” this post to ask you a question: I understand that the Copley and Boegly delrin flute has a slightly"squared off" embouchure, while the Forbes has a more traditional elliptical embouchure. Is there any difference between these two embouchures in terms of sound and playability ? Thanks.
It looks as though Cathy Wilde has already pointed out some real differences between the Copley and the Forbes.
As she said, it seems that the Copley could call for “lighter” air, and have more Rudall-like qualities.
On that basis, I’d recommend the Copley, as it could give you a better “flute” education.
Otherwise, they’re both well designed and well made flutes.
The only maker whose modern-cut and Rudall-cut embouchures I’ve played is Peter Noy’s. This was two headjoints sent with the same body for side-by-side comparison. The modern-cut was more powerful, easier at the upper end of the range (top of second and into the third octave) and possibly capable of a purer sound. The Rudall cut definitely had a more traditional, woody sound, and according to both my wife and myself, both playing and listening, was capable of a broader range of tonal qualities.
That’s probably the most direct comparison between the embouchure styles, since they were both made using the same technique and by the same person. OTOH, it’s possible that the differences between two makers is greater than the differences between the two styles of embouchure cuts. Definitely take this post in the context provided by Cathy’s excellent comparison of the two flutes.
My own impressions of modern rectangular cuts vs. traditional oval/elliptical are similar to chas’ impressions.
I’ve found the modern cuts very powerful (or rather, easier to play powerfully, but not necessarily more powerful), very easy to play but in the end less satisfying than the more traditional cuts which are capable of more subtle tonal varieties and a broader tonal range.
I don’t know which would be best to start out on. I started out on an M&E R&R which has the more traditional cut, and that may or may not have something to do with my preferences these days. I find it very handy to keep a more modern cut embouchure flute handy as a backup for the days when my embouchure isn’t the best for one reason or another. I’m of the opinion that it might be better to start out on a traditional cut embouchure and learn from the beginning to play that well, but that will also depend on how dedicated you are. Most people with knowledge in these matters seem to recommend doing it the other way around, learning on the flute which is easiest to play.
I’ve never played eighter Copley or Forbes flutes so take my advice with a finger of
whisky
I finally decided to order a Copley in Delrin with elliptical (not squared off) embouchure.
I believe that a little bit more learning effort is a fair price to pay to get more flexibility and quality in tone.
Thanks everybody for the opinions !
Can you specify the embouchure spec when ordering a copley?
Your objectives seem to be right on target!
Now, it takes a lot of patience, practice, and thoughtful effort to gain ability on the flute.
Plan on practicing, if only a little, every day.
The Forbes is something you might more appreciate after spending some time with the Copley.
I think you’ve made a great choice in the Copley.
So if I’m an experienced boehm flute player, would I be better off with the Forbes?
Essentially, yes.
Your coming from a Boehm background, perhaps you could find conical bore flutes to be somewhat more restricted, in terms of venting.
However, for a conical bore flute, the Forbes flute is near the extreme of open venting, and a Boehm player could adapt to it quite easily.
I’ll add really quickly before I go out to feed the beasties …
David was kind enough to send me two headjoints to try with the Eb he just made me; one with an elliptical blowhole, the other with a square cut. I played both and recorded them side-by-side; all in all I went back and forth for about two weeks. The ellipse was lovely and sweet in the high register especially, and of course took less air and a more “pouty” embouchure. The square gave me a little more room to bear down and really (over 
)fill the flute but still offered a nice flexibility and, combined with the thick walls of the flute, a bit more of a woody sound.
Anyway, I was surprised, but I ended up going with the square cut; that’s what I kept picking in the recordings. Afterward, David wrote me that he likes the square cut on Ebs – he didn’t really know why, either, but it just seems righter for these particular Ebs. Again, I’m perfectly content with the elliptical blowhole on my Olwell and the mildly-country-ham-shaped-ellipse 
on my Murray, but for some reason the square on the Eb is working for me. It’s especially fun for a wilder, rougher “flute and drum” thing I’m indulging in (and enjoying the heck out of) lately.
However, that’s an Eb. So not a perfect comparison … but again, both flutes are dandies. I played my Forbes for about three hours off and on yesterday since we had the woodstove blower going and it was about 25% even with the kettle on … I guiltily thought myself thinking “this really is all I need.” (after which I apologized profusely to the wooden flutes, napping away in their humidity-controlled box) (I don’t think they cared 
)
Cathy - I’m jealous! I’ve been waiting for my Forbes for 4 months now… give your’s a toot for me!
Best,
Deisman