I’ve been playing on a Copley (which is really easy to play flute) for months now and gathering informations about the Hamilton I will shortly receive, it seems that quite everybody says the Hamilton is harder to play (as harder to blow, harder to handle).
I had this question in my mind for a while: how a hard to play flute can possibly be prefered than an easy to play flute? 
There have been some extended and passionate
discussion which you may find if you Search.
Some maintain that the harder flutes
develop your embouchure better and finally
you can get more out of 'em. Others
respond that the former individuals are misbegotten
weasels. Best
Well, for whatever it’s worth, I find my Hamilton to be a very easy-to-play, even a very forgiving flute.
It’s not a particularly hard flute to fill; conversely, it will take as much air as you care to give it.
–James
It’s by no means universal that one type of flute is harder to play than another. Some people have a difficult time filling a large-holed flute such as a Hammy, while others might have a hard time developing the focused embouchure required for some small-holed flutes.
I was asking Brian Finnegan (of Fluke )this question on Sunday .He finds some flutes produce what they have to offer too easily .Like the big embouchure flutes beloved by some in the States .He finds they make any subtlety of performance harder to achieve ,being " all or nothing " .Of course I am paraphrasing .This may be why people are sometimes thrilled with their new purchases of certain maker’s work ,only to put them back on the market not long afterwards.
Brian considers Jean-Michel Veillon tops for subtle playing .
Chas Said:
“It’s by no means universal that one type of flute is harder to play than another. Some people have a difficult time filling a large-holed flute such as a Hammy, while others might have a hard time developing the focused embouchure required for some small-holed flutes.”
Hear, Hear, I agree. I might add, however that some flutes demand much more “athletic” playing than others.
Dana
I can remember once, having an opinion on this subject, but that was when I was strugling to get a sound, any sound, out of these stupid things. Then, thanks to Alan Mount and his big embouchured tube I was finaly on my way. I now have every imaginable size embouchure and there is now way I could choose between them as to which is easier. I think Brian Finnegan via andrew has actualy hit the nail on the head. At least it sounds right to me. Though the smaller embouchure is more demanding I wouldnt say it was harder to play. Not knowing that many tunes I spend a lot of time just listening to my various flutes to hear the subtalties of the sound. And the smaller embouchure flutes seem more willing to express complex moods. But heck I dont know. I also must agree about Jean-Michel Veillon. He is just unreal.
Tom
Perhaps it’s also a matter of horses for corses (to a certain extent) - Finnegan, and to a greater extent, Veillon play music where there is more of a premium put on subtlety, they also tend to play amplified. Perhaps they would choose a different instruments if they were playing at the local session every night rather than on-stage.
OTH, perhaps its a matter of getting used to a certain type instrument and or embouchure cut and then not really putting enough time in on another type of instrument to bring out the best in it? As I recall John Skelton has said it took him 2 years to really get the best from his Olwell, which is currently his favorite flute.
Or maybe it’s something else? Ach, in the end, we’ll never really know, will we?
Loren
I think what’s “easy” and what’s “hard” changes as you progress, too. Take English, for example. In the first grade you’re over the moon if you get a gold star on your ABCs. By college, if you’re an English major, you’re concerned about pentameter, hexameter and sestets among other weird & arcane things. Highly doubtful you’d thrill to reading the alphabet in quite the same way.
IMO, some of the improved flutes make getting a decent sound a little easier and maybe more quickly gratifying (not a bad thing), but there comes a time when becoming a good player is just plain hard, no matter what kind of stick you’ve got. Low D rolls suck on an Olwell same as on a Hamilton or Murray or Wilkes or LeHart – at least until you can do them right. 
And some flutes, while maybe tougher to figure out at first, are just wonderful once you’ve learned to play them. By the same token, there are flutes that might be better on the front end of your playing – relatively easy to become conversant with, but they don’t seem to have much more to say beyond that. So as long as you don’t want to discuss metempsykosis or astrophysics with them, you’re in for a perfectly pleasant experience.
But that’s the trick. We’ve got to figure out what we want from them, and then we’ve got to learn to play them: on good days, on bad days, on rainy days, with leaky keys and loose tuning slides.
Personally, I would classify my flute (a Hamilton) as “demanding” – but I also want a lot from it, and that devil is making me work for it. It sure doesn’t cover up my weaknesses, but it also gives infinite coolness when I’ve got it right (rare, but ya gotta start somewhere!).
And in those brief moments, all pain is completely forgotten. 
It’s the same problem as with violins .Lesser musicians tend to like violins which are loud under the ear , but these are not the ones which have the pure tone which carries .Players picking up a Stradivari for the first time can think they won’t be heard .How wrong they are !.In a session a flute player may well have as a priority hearing him/her self rather than playing subtly , or even being heard by others , even if the skill is there .Brian would tend , I think to play one of his Olwell bamboo flutes in a session , being a simple soul not needing all these cumbersome clattery key- things us collectors so delight in . ( Or a D or Bb Wilkes keyless ).
My remark is a response to the cumulative effect of the following quoted posts:-
AND
I am curious about Veillon and his love affair with
the Indian bansuri which is a large tone hole instrument.
Chas?
great analogy andrew!
I am curious about Veillon and his love affair with
the Indian bansuri which is a large tone hole instrument.
Chas?
He is using several flutes like wilkies, lehart etc and I know that he is using Harsh Wardhan’s bansuri (cf. “Beo!” ). Harsh has several workshops
in France, Belgium and he has his proper school of Bansuri in India.
http://bansuri-shop.wardhan.com/en/
I recall (my French ability is very limited and I maybe wrong) one interview of Jean-Michel that he participated one festival where he had to prepare some concerts of flutes from all over the world and there, he met Harsh. Of course Jean-Michel and Harsh played together and inspired each other.
But I do not know anything about his techniques on his bansuri…
…He is using several flutes like wilkies, lehart etc and I know that he is using Harsh Wardhan’s bansuri (cf. “Beo!” ). Harsh has several workshops
in France, Belgium and he has his proper school of Bansuri in India.http://bansuri-shop.wardhan.com/en/
…
Exactly. Look at that link (one among many)
and you will see bansuri-s are large tone hole instruments.
Listen to any good bansuri player, Indian or non-Indian,
and you will discern an incredible range of subtlety.
So my question to Chas still stands.
Ta.
I shall ask Jean-Michel about Bansuris this weekend .He is playing in Presteigne , and I believe Olten .Perhaps there is more to the instrument than a big hole ? I shall see if he is partial to a big hole .
Perhaps a fashion for "the small hole Bansuri " will develope , now the Indians have been appraised of the problem/opportunity .
Last time I questioned Jean-Michel on behalf of flutenerds ( on the question of who he likes in Breton fluteplaying ) ,he sent me a great long Email with biographies of many of his favourites ,but asked that I should not publish it as it is in case he has missed someone out .Such a considerate fellow !.( And hardworking unofficial ambassador for red wine producers of France ).
Uhmm . . . since you’ve mentioned me twice, for the record I never commented on him.
Thanks everyone for reply!
I’m getting it: the Hamilton probably offers a bigger range of sound and it makes it more challenging to play, right? But not harder to play…
Well, I’m not afraid of any challenge so that’s nothing but good to hear!