Olwell vs. Dixon

Not to rehash an old topic but I wanted to purchase a new flute and was stuck between the Dixon 3-piece polymer and the Olwell bamboo. My question concerns the rigidness of the bamboo vs. the abiltiy to twist the 3-piece. I read on previous posts that the ability to rotate parts may help with the embrouchure (sp?) so would this be a significant reason not to get the bamboo flute? My other question concerns the hole size, since I also read on previous reviews that the bamboo flute has slightly larger holes compared to the polymer. Is this also a good reason to stick with the polymer?

Thanks for your help.

Mark

I own the Dixon 3 piece, but I’ve never played an Olwell Bamboo although I’ve made quite a few bamboo flutes and played several others made by people other than Patrick Olwell.

First off, let me say I really like bamboo flutes. I like their look, the smell, and the feel of bamboo. I’m sure Patrick’s are great, and I know they are played by professional musicians. That said, it will not sound like a conical bore Irish flute - it will sound like a bamboo flute, but that’s OK because they sound good with Irish music, too. You’re right that you can’t move the head joint any and have to play the flute as is since it’s one piece of bamboo. This may or may not be a hinderance to you. I had no problem with it on bamboo flutes, but I do like to roll the head in on my Dixon. The bamboo flute will have a slightly more difficult second octave because it’s basically cylindrical bore (there is slight natural tapering with bamboo though) as compared to the conical bore Dixon. Bamboo can break, and it’s one piece, so it’s not as easy to toss in a backpack or something.

As for the Dixon, I really, really like it. It is a true conical bore flute. You can tune to others around you which can’t be done with the Olwell Bamboo (although I’ve heard his tuning is spot on, people you play with may not be so well in tune). It’s indestructible. When my embouchure is right, it’s a great sounding flute. If my embouchure is off, it still sounds pretty good, so I think it’s a great flute to learn on and grow with. Some folks with smaller hands like to twist the bottom section of the Dixon for easier reach. For me, I have no problem with bamboo or the Dixon on finger reach, but this is something you can do with the Dixon that you can’t with the Olwell bamboo flute.

I went through this same issue (Olwell bamboo vs. Dixon 3 piece) myself about 6 months ago, so I know what you’re going through. You won’t go wrong either way. Both Patrick Olwell and Tony Dixon are craftsmen, and they make fine instruments. I think Tony’s a bit of an up and comer, whereas Patrick is flat out a master of his craft (both in wood and bamboo).

I can’t say that I recommend a Dixon, but the Dixon is designed like a conical bore “Irish” flute with the typical hole spacings and parts of a conical, while the Olwell cane flute is a particularly good cane flute. The latter is a great sounding instrument for little money, but it’s not a conical bore Irish flute. Its finger spacing is more difficult unless you go for a higher-pitched one, so you may have troubles there as well, and as you say, you can’t adjust the head position with the holes (although I believe Patrick has the embouchure off-set). So, if you’re a beginner worried about developing a good embouchure on a conical bore Irish flute, I’d say choose the Dixon for that reason over the Olwell, although I have personal reservations about developing good tone on a bargain polymer.

I’ve owned them both. The Olwell’s embouchure
is rotated forward. As a consequence, I think,
I have considerable trouble playing it in
tune–goes flat. I can’t believe it’s the
flute. Of the two, I think the Dixon is
the clear choice for people wanting to
learn celtic flute–it’s a lot closer to the
sort of flute you will end up playing.
The holes on the Olwell bamboo are
certainly bigger, also the Olwell is louder.
It’s beautifully finished…

Hi Gordon,
could you be more specfic regarding your reservations about developing a good tone on a “bargain polymer flute”. Is this a problem with polymer flutes in general or is it specific to Tony Dixon’s polymer flute given that it’s apparently easy to play ( not that I think any flute is easy)

Cheers, Mac

Mac,

there’s nothing wrong with polymer flutes in general or the Dixon 3 piece polymer. I do think there are strong feelings about polymer in general - some folks simply like wood better. I like both. Tom Doorley of Danu fame played a Seery polymer flute for years, and he played it so well I couldn’t tell it from the Olwells and other fancy flutes on the CD Wooden Flute Obsession (and I’d be willing to bet in a blind testing 95% of the folks on this board couldn’t tell either). David Migoya on this board has raved about Seery’s polymer flutes in the past and actually compared one to an Olwell.

As for Tony, he’s the new kid on the block compared to Seery and M&E (the other leading conical bore polymer flute makers). His flute is definitely more of a small hole Rudall and Rose style (although it’s his own design), and I’ve yet to see a bad review on this board of his flutes. It is easy to get a decent sound on the flute, but it can really sing if you have a good, focused embouchure which many flutes 10 times its cost also require for a good tone. I think it’s a great flute to start out on, and sold used it also retains it’s value so you can sell it for the same price you bought it for if you want a diffent flute later on.

Eric

Second that. I don’t think polymer
flutes are as good as good blackwood
flutes, but they can be plenty good.
I found the Dixon involved some work
on getting the focused embouchure.
But it was no problem, really.

What was a problem was that I
couldn’t transfer easily to
my Copley–if I played the
Dixon for a few days I couldn’t
play the Copley for awhile,
and vice versa. Not so
the Seery–I move back
and forth between it and
the Copley easily.

But playing the Dixon certainly
helps develop the chops to
play a better flute.

I don’t really want to start a big discussion over this; it’s a matter of opinion, really, and no one – including me – is completely right, as there are exceptions in both players and flutes and what happens when those two elements get together. There are many Dixon and other polymer supporters on this forum, and lord knows I don’t want to tick anyone off…

My feelings on this, though, voiced in earlier threads, is basically that the better the flute you start with the better and faster you get where you’re going. A good wooden flute actually has an easier embrouchure to play than most if not all polymers, and they also will grow as you do, unlike, IMO, most polymers. My experience with most of the polymer flutes (and some cheaper wooden ones) is that the tone you really want is elusive at best, therefore harder to work toward and virtually impossible to achieve. In other words, more frustrating for a beginner, just when you least want to be frustrated.

The cost of a good wooden flute is considerbly more, of course, but a good flute doesn’t need to be replaced, necessarily, and most starter-flutes do (unless you really do go camping or the like, in which case they’re nice to own and virtually indestructable). So, when buying a beginner flute, consider how long you think you’ll have it before you grow restless or come to a learning plateau and then need to move on and spend the big bucks anyway.

That said, playing any in-tune and playable flute is better than no flute at all, and the Dixon is playable. So, if you are interested in an eventual great wooden flute but understandably can’t foot the bill for one, I think the Dixon is a better choice than the cane flute in that it is more similar in design. If you are more interested in nice tone now and don’t care much about a great wooden flute later, the Olwell cane flute actually sounds better than the Dixon. IMHO, of course. :roll:

Hey Mark I think the reason that Gordon might be tip toeing around a little bit is because of the discussion that took place here a while before you joined in. Some would say it got out of hand but I can tell you that I read the many day long battle with great interest. At the time I was trying to decide what to do as far as getting my first flute. The discussion was at times intense but very educational as far as I was concerned. I don`t want to dredge up any bad memories nor do I remember what the subject of the thread was but you could do a search in the Archives for it. I in the end went for a Dixon 3 piece wooden flute. For no other reason then I am an old wooden boat guy and I just like wood. I also have a Lehart on order. I have learned that most of the members of this little flute place have very strong opinions and are deserving of respect. IMHO that is :slight_smile:

Tom

The idea of a tough but rewarding flute for travel is appealing. I slept out in Nevada recently and a flute tolerant of what would be abuse to my blackwood instrument would have been nice under the stars.
-Seery and M & E flutes have both tempted, but its so easy to lurk and watch the rest of you hash it out that it’ll be a while before a decision is made. Oh, the curse of indecision!
-Besides, there’s a Kawai digital stage piano out there somewhere hoping I can support it in proper style. I can see it now: “Mr. Kawai, I want to take your keyboard home and support it for the rest of its life, playing it frequently. I don’t have much money, but I know we’ll be happy living on music alone.” :smiley:

Hi Gordon,
thanks for the reply. I know the topic you refer to, one of the most interesting discussions I’ve seen. I had to change my views a few times due to good points being made. It would be interesting to try Tony Dixon’s flutes in the different materials. I suppose the only thing that matter’s is if you’re happy with what you have, quite a few people are more than happy with Dixon flutes and they sound fine to me although I haven’t played one. The great thing about the availability of so many good flutes is that there’s something to suit everyone. Can you imagine how long you’d have to wait if there was only one flutemaker worth buying from :boggle:

Cheers, Mac

Trekking in the artic, etc. aside,
it’s really helpful to have a flute
you can just pick up and play
anytime day or night, always there,
ready, never needing to be swabbed,
oiled, humidified, put away…
Some of the polymers
really are worth playing for
their own sake. .

Mac,

several folks above have touched on why I prefer a polymer flute at this point in my life - I really don’t have the time right now to properly care for a nice wooden flute. A lot of my playing comes in 15 minute batches with limited time for cleaning, etc (one of the joys of having a 4 year old around my feet all the time)…Also, unlike Gordon apparently :smiley: , I do camp with my flute. I canoe also, and I’m not sure I want to imagine a LeHart, Grinter or Olwell getting dunked in the river (which has happened once or twice) especially since in Missouri many of those Ozark streams start out in caves and are about 55 degrees when the ambient air temp may be 100 - talk about shock to the wood!

I’ll get a wooden flute someday, but when my life circumstances & finances can support one! Plus, I agree with Jim’s last statement that many of the polymers are worth playing in their own right. For example, the Dixon having small holes may not be the best flute for a large session (although I’ve heard it holds its own in a small/medium session which is all I’m likely to see in Kansas City), but the small holes allow for very good cross fingering of incidentals so it plays classical music very, very well which I enjoy immensely.

No matter what you buy, be sure and buy a flute from a known maker that retains its value in case you ever want to sell it again.

Eric

Actually, Eric, my feeling is that a well-made wooden flute, particularly a blackwood keyless, while certainly taking a bit more care than a polymer, is far, far less fragile than polymer-philes seem to imagine. I have played it in most climates, cold pubs and damp subway tunnels, as well as in pubs with fireplaces and cranked up heat. All this using common sense, of course, re warming it up and wiping it out!
Now, I wouldn’t take my good flute camping, more because of accidents than temperature problems (and, also, I haven’t camped in years :cry:) but I’d have no problem taking my German flute, fully keyed, which is wood and seems to have survived about a century unscathed.
Taking care of an instrument can also be viewed as fun, really, and I often feel like playing knowing that the wood needs to be humidified; she needs me, unlike the plastics which can be left for weeks. But I have a fish and two dogs, and I actually like the care it takes to keep them happy, too.
As for how quickly it takes to pick it up and play a wooden flute? C’mon, guys – how long does it take to put together a three or four piece instrument? A little cork grease, a few twists and you’re done. Oh, yeah, the wiping afterwards; must take a good minute off my playing time. I say this with affection, but, seriously, how lazy can you get?
Best,
Gordon

<<seriously, how lazy can you get?>>

Gordon - you have no idea how lazy I can be! :slight_smile:

I also agree taking care of animals is great (current count 2 dogs, 1 fish tank - I sold off my second tank secondary to time issues, a rat, a cat, and a horse). But along with the care of those animals, comes the expense. I simply couldn’t afford more than one good flute, and unless my flute can deal with getting dunked on a canoe trip, staying submerged while wading through an underground river for 20 minutes on a spelunking trip (it’s really cool to have the Ozarks just two hours away), and then sit in a locked car on a 100 degree day for several hours, I don’t want it right now. Blackwood may be tough, very tough, but I can’t afford to take a chance that it would survive those situations, and I just don’t like to travel anywhere without my flute.

So, maybe some day when I can afford a nice wooden flute and a polymer at the same time I’ll get a Hammy or something, but right now, I’m just not at a point where one makes any sense.

Best,

Eric

Gordon, a question. I play flute about 15 times a day.
that is, I’'m working, studying or writing usually,
and I pick up the flute and play it for a few
minutes, then go back to work.

(Retirement, you know. Never fear, I paid my
dues.)

I don’t see taking apart and swabbing a flute
15 times a day, of course.

Well, I’m nervous about treating the
blackwood flute this way. Basically it
will go unswabbed except at night.
Is this unrealistic? (Not a rhetorical question.)

How about traveling in the summer?
I’m scared of what will happen to
a flute left in a parked car.
Heat and aridity. I’m often on the road for
weeks on end.

Also I was interested about the
subway tunnels. I’m playing on the
street a lot–well, what’s your experience
been. Generally whatever I take out
there sooner or later makes
unexpected contact with
the pavement. How do you
protect a good flute?

How do you (you, personally) go
about humidifying flutes?
I find the whole thing a nuisance.

What are you using for
a case? Tips welcome
I’ve been playing flute
since December. Thanks

Wow, Jim, lots of questions…

Depending on how long you play, and depending on what kind of flute you have, swabbing won’t always be required. My German flute (narrow bore) tends to get damp quickly, whereas the Pratten-style Hammy – particularly in drier times – will not get too moist, except maybe in the headjoint, for the first fifteen minutes to 1/2 hour or so. The best bet would be building or buying a stand that allows you to safely leave your flute upright between plays. What you don’t want is lots of moisture gathering in the joints, but short plays will not do this. Overnight, definitely put it away.
I wouldn’t leave a wooden flute in a car trunk for a number of reasons. The heat extremes is the most obvious worry (too hot in the sun, too cold in the winter), but if you put your flute, in case, inside a thermal cooler, you can offset all these extremes. So, that’s one way to avoid worry. BUT living in NYC, though, my biggest fear would mostly be the loss of said flute – I wouldn’t leave any instrument (and, for me, any instrument over a hundred dollars is too costly to lose) in a car. I was a working guitarist for the better part of my adulthood, and I never left guitars or amps, etc. in trunks, either, even though temperature was rarely the worry (except for superficial things like the wood finish cracking on an electric.)
NYC apartments get very hot and dry during the winter. I simply put the flute case inside a wooden box with something damp outside the case; lots of air exchange, so no mildew, and – since I play fairly often – the flute is pretty humidified inside it’s own case. Takes awhile for everything to dry out, and by then, I’m playing again. Also, for my own health as well as the piano, the guitars, other assorted instruments and plants, I ran a room humidifier all winter. Man, I’m glad we’re on the summer upswing now…
The Hamilton is in a Cavallaro soft case, which is basically a nylon case lined with artificial (polyester) fleece. So humidity stays inside fairly well without being sealed like a baggy and the fleece keeps the flute from really rapid temp changes. I also carry it inside my coat when going outdoors in the winter. My German flute is in a wooden case I made myself, and I’m much less fussy about it’s care than the Hamilton. It used to be my regular flute, and has been out in all weather, and never cracked on my watch, either.
What else… Oh, subways. Well, I’ve done less busking lately than I used to, but in the fall, winter and spring, the tunnels that link the stations get pretty cold, easily 40deg. or so; the flute drips like a faucet! People stream by in an unceasing flow and you usually have to back up against the tile to avoid being knocked over. The best spots in the system are usually taken by those performers who bothered to apply for a licence, which are free but you have to audition for the MTA, and you can get ticketed if you play those areas without a licence, but you are left alone if you find a less visible spot. Portable amps are allowed everywhere except on the actual train platforms (the MTA claims they interfere with the unintellible garble that passes for important announcements), but in the tunnels a flute carries fairly well without one, anyway.
I’m sure I missed something…
Well, if I did, you let me know.. :stuck_out_tongue:
All the best,
Gordon

That’s really helpful. I have a Cavallaro case, too.
I use it for the Seery and also to transport
my Copley–whcih is my high-end flute.

What sort of wooden box do you put the
Cavallaro case in? Why is there a lot
of air transfer? I’ve got a big plastic
box and I’ve got the Copley
in there taken apart, along with everything
else wooden I own (guitars aside) and
a sponge. I’ve had trouble with
mildew, so I don’t have cases in
there. That’s why I’m interested
in how you manage the air
transfer.

We have no subways–at least nothing
one can play in. Playing
on the street–made 50 bucks
today. My problem–
I sit on a portable folding chair.
I have the Cavallaro case on the
pavement in front of me.
I shift back and forth tween
a D flute and a G fife; also
a G whistle. This to suit
my compadres playing
guitar and banjo, etc. I try real hard to
avoid letting instrument touch the
sidewalk, but it’s tough over
the long term, especially
as our conditions tend
to get crowded. Some scrapes
have ensued.

So my question: when you
play in subways, what do you
do with a flute you aren’t
playing? Of course maybe there
is no flute you aren’t playing.
Much appreciate this info–as you
seem to enjoy something I
rather dislike, I figured you might
know something I don’t. Thanks again, Jim

Eric –
I addressed some of this stuff for Jim, but I agree; there are certain places and temp extremes where a polymer flute has the complete advantage. On a snobby note :wink: , I still think the musical end of things leans heavily in favor of a good wooden flute, and ultimately, I care more about the musical end of things than the instrument’s durability. Try telling a player of a top of the line Martin guitar that the round-back Ovation is a better instrument! Still, on the road, I’d rather bang the Ovation than crush the Martin.
As for money, here I completely sympathize. Money is an issue for most of us; my only reservation on the polymers that I have tried is that they aren’t a really great compromise, IMO, tone-wise and craftwise, to a good flute, and this can be a real detriment, particularly if you’re a beginner.
So, in a perfect world, I’d personally suggest spending a bit more for a better flute than to struggle with a flute that will never sound the way you’d imagine you’d like to sound someday.
But, this isn’t a perfect world, and I certainly respect any person’s decision regarding what they chose based on what they know they can afford, or that better fits their situation.
All the best,
Gordon

gordon wrote -

So, in a perfect world, I’d personally suggest spending a bit more for a better flute than to struggle with a flute that will never sound the way you’d imagine you’d like to sound someday.

That’s a very insightful statement. However in my case I know what I use it for and decided that for starters I’d go with the Dixon 3 piece. I might become discouraged by my crappy tone and blame it on the flute if it weren’t for two things. First, until three weeks ago I hadn’t played my any flute for about 8 months as I was concentrating on the whistle. Of course my tone won’t be as sharp right away. Second, a fellow Chiffer, who is an excellent flute player tried my Dixon and it sounded great. So I know that I can achieve the tone I want with a little work. Granted I think if I had gone for a more expensive wooden flute it might not take as long.

I’ve noticed that I can hit the third octave a lot easier with an Olwell D then I can with the Dixon.