I have a flute body, eight keyed (but I’ve taken off the bottom two) probably made in the rudall shop
by an apprentice in 1840. I’m using the byrne headjoint, which seems to fit it perfectly. (Bought the flute
from Dave M five years ago or so.) Small holes, narrow bore. Quiet with the original headjoint.
OK, the byrne gives it considerably more volume than the original headjoint, and I figure I
can increase it with practice. Well, this may be an impossible question, but how loud do
the old small-holed rudalls get? I think the headjoint fits the body and the body
does what rudall bodies do (it’s cocus, by the way, with silver keys).
I’d like to play this in sessions, but I don’t know if it will cut it. It sounds very good,
very good low D too. I heard Chris N play his rudall in a workshop and it sounded
like a buzz saw. But that was Chris and it was wholly an old good rudall.
Anyhow educated opinions welcome. How loud are 1840 rudalls with small holes and narrow bores?
Quiet?
This is one of those questions that is hard to answer quantitatively. It’s kind of like asking “how tasty is that banana”… it entirely relies upon subjective “data” or opinion. How loud I can get that small holed Rudall may not be how loud someone else can.
If you decide to scrap/sell it I’m looking for a replacement long F key… feel free to drop me a line should you find yourself so inclined!
Yep. Those instruments are capable of quite a huge sound, I had a smallish-medium-holed Rudall&Rose in my shop yesterday that could be driven just as loud as any large-holed Rudall. It depends on how you blow them (and, quite a bit, on the quality of the embouchure hole).
Thanks to all. The quality of the embouchure hole is very good, IMO. Brian Byrne’s work is something else,
and I expect it’s pretty faithful to Rudalls.
I can already get a moderate volume from the flute. If the rest is up to me, I know what
to do.
There are some small-holed (i call them medium holed, but no matter) Rudalls that are huge in sound…others not so huge.
I’ve flipped head joints on the flutes and there are several that boom as a result…and sometimes it’s actually too much and they don’t handle it well.
I will say, though, that there’s something very intimate about the smaller holed Rudalls. I’m currently playing a boxwood small-holed Rudall (#984) and totally adore it. The smaller toneholes make for easier and crisper ornaments. It’s not a session flute if there are more than 4 or 5 players. But it’s great on stage with a mic.
I wondered this morning what I’d do with this flute when my Olwells suddenly and miraculously show up. It was one of those purchase-to-resell flutes that, like many others, suddenly grows on you and you hate to let it go. This one did that to me when I used it to play a wedding and had to do some religious tunes. Beautiful sound in a cathedral.
anyways…
i think you simply need to rethink what you want of your flute and work within those parameters. Some flutes can do it; others cannot.
Not all Rudalls are the same, as you’ve learned. Blowing the hell out of this boxwood Rudall of mine, while it can be done, doesn’t do it justice. It plays so much nicer toned down. Now…the cocus one…different animal.
I’ve got a cocus small-holed Rudall (#1899) that’s a blaster. Funny thing, though, the “feedback” of tone isn’t the same. It doesn’t sound loud to me – others say it is – because of the feedback to the player. Weird, but that’s how she plays.
Well, I’m glad to have this flute (thanks to you). The byrne headjoint does work well and I have to see
what develops as I play. The keys and cocus body work fine. Very nice sound. Focused, sweet,
strong low D. I may be able to play
in a session soon and see how it does.
Jim!
worked for Ian 