Hi, I’m totally new to making woodwinds, but I’ve been making bamboo transverse flutes for a while, and am looking forward to making flutes from wood.
I can’t do anything fancy like a tapering bore, or “parabolic”/boehm head, etc, which require tapered drill augers/bits, nor can I make a multi-piece flute, but after doing research I am keen to try something to get the second octave in tune, and I’d like to build a non-tapered keyless D, to sound as much like the irish/tapered variety as possible. My main obstacles are improving the second octave and determining bore diameter. This might seem like an impossible goal, but if it’s not, I’d like to give it a try.
I know about the fajardo wedge, but I’m wondering if there is any other simple alternative?
One thing I think I could pull off is a slightly narrower bore at the head end, but I don’t know if that would work, and if so, how far past the embouchure it should continue to be narrower, and how much narrower it should be relatively, and what specific diameters the two bore sections should be.
There are a variety of tactics that can be used to improve the tuning across the octaves. There are many things that can contribute to a well tuned flute. Reducing the volume of the bore at the head is one method. The Fajardo wedge is one way to do that. I see an original Armstrong head with a Fajardo wedge is for sale on eBay at the moment. Take a look. You might figure out a way to make something similar. It’s not difficult to make one. The Sandner spike, as has been mentioned, is another way to achieve the same thing. And again not difficult to produce. The Boehm taper achieves the same effect. That’s a little more complex to produce.
Others might use bore constrictions in the upper bore - but it sounds like you aren’t tooled for or do not want to do that. But if you think about it enough there are simple methods that can be employed to do this. Think ring inserts in the bore. Choking the foot end of the bore might be employed as well. As I said, lots of things to consider.
Much can be achieved by using a bore size that first off favors the higher notes and then using appropriately large holes for the second octave notes and tuning the upper octave first. As will be the case with any flute design effort, multiple prototypes will be necessary before getting to a good result. Incorporating a simple but proper tuning slide in you prototype can help you determine the position and sizes of the holes faster than making multiple prototypes. If you are patient you can get things quite right.
Yes that is a tactic that has been used. If you understand enough about flute physics you should be able figure things out yourself. You might want to do some reading. Google is your friend. Have a look here. Use the search functions on this forum and on the Yahoo Flutemaker forum.
You may notice I am not into “Do this”. Cookbook flutemaking rarely makes for a tasty recipe. I find the journey of discovery in flute making to be an enjoyable one.
When I made hardwood cylindrical flutes for festivals and ‘rock gatherings’ etc. I used a strategy similar to that used by the bamboo makers.
First, know that the tuning on any flute is a compromise tuning. The classic solutions save a lot of effort on the part of the player to ‘blow the notes in’. The old instrument makers used a tool called a ‘fraise’ to form the finger holes. The name comes from its resemblance to the shape of a strawberry. A doveway cutter could be modified to accomplish the same effect. You use it to undercut the finger holes, leaving a relatively small opening on the surface and a larger opening at the junction with the bore. This allows you to find a compromise location for the fingerhole and still bring the octaves in closer together. I had machine shope experience and some tools so the tooling was not a problem. . .
A simple low tech solution is to use files and rasps, or dremel type tooling, to undercut the holes. Two octaves are do=able. More, not so much.
You also might explore using pre-formed ‘plug inserts’ for the finger holes.
I met Raoul Fajardo, and got a copy of his patent to make my own ‘wedge’ for an experiment. They are easily made and inserted as Doug Tipple does now. (the patent is now expired.) The wedge is actually fairly sophisticated and if made to Raoul’s specs will correct the octaves well up into the third octave.
An Seanduine, thank you, the Sandner Spike sounds interesting and fairly simple.
I found this thread relating to the spike, FtDevillers seemed to get it to work well.
And the undercut holes sounds very simple to do. I’m not quite sure what you mean by “find a compromise location for the fingerholes”.
Simple flutes at festivals and rock gatherings sounds fun.
Feadoggie, thanks, I had considered something that narrowed/cinched the foot end of the head, (inspired by Drelinger’s “Hourglass” headjoint) with a narrower bore in the head, but like the boehm taper, the Hourglass as designed would necessitate using wider hole spacing and overly large holes that need to be keyed, though I just read about much smaller cinching at Sweetheart flutes’ page about design research, (thousandths of an inch)
Partly I abandoned that idea and the traditional tapered bore because I don’t know where to place the holes, because I’ve been following the Flutomat, which seems to be for cylindrical flutes, so any design change means finding where the holes go by trial and error etc. The tuning slide prototype idea sounds like it would help, but it’s still a bit daunting to me, the project would have to get a lot bigger than I had in mind.
Thanks to both of you, I was beginning to think I wouldn’t be able to do it without sacrificing sound quality (the wedge seems to have undesired side effects going by a post of Geoffrey’s).
But I feel confident that with one or more of your suggestions I can get a second octave. I wasn’t thinking of a third, but a functional second would be a huge improvement.
One other idea I haven’t seen used, but could be if applied correctly is a wedge placed in the body (instead of the headjoint) to effectively reduce the ID. The thing about a cylindrical body is that it calls for fairly big holes, but by wedging the body’s ID you could more accurately copy an “Irish flutes” hole size and spacing or copy and prototype other designs for peanuts from PVC pipe or whatever your chosen material. When your satisfied just glue it in place.
Henceforth, body wedges shall be known as “Maloney Wedges”
Henceforth, body wedges shall be known as “Maloney Wedges”
Perhaps Maloney Wedgies?
O course, there is no overwhelming acoustic reason a flute must be ‘round’. any more than an organ pipe. You might look at this article about a square chanter proposed by the Australian pipemaker Craig Fischer http://www.daye1.com/bagpage/makepipe/squint1.html. You will, of course have to do the math yourself to creat the apropriate tapers. Just as with the chanter it may be possible to approximate a round outer profile after building the ‘square’ inner tapered bore box.
My vision would be a normal head joint mated to a tenon in a tapered box. . .not one piece, but potentially acoustically accurate and certainly low tech enough. . . .
