Played an Olwell Nicholson, finally

Irish Flute
1

I managed to find someone in st. Louis with an Olwell nicholson.
My wife and I went to see him this afternoon and
I played it for a good while. Brought the Olwell Pratten too.

The flutes are quite close. The nicholson has slightly
smaller holes and a very slightly shorter span between
them. It’s a little more comfortable
to hold. But, for me anyway, there’s no major
advantage in comfort.

The Pratten has a bigger and more dramatic sound.
The Nicholson has good volume and is more a bit more
focused. Of the two we preferred the Pratten,
though both are good. Go for the gusto!

My impression, then, is that if one is already happy with
the Pratten, the Nicholson doesn’t do anything
different enough to make it terribly desirable,
though it is certainly a lovely flute.

FWIW, YMMV, subjective as all hell, and so on.

2

uh…a nicholson what?
original? copy?

if original, there are discernable differences between the two flutes.

if a copy, such as olwell, then there are mild differences since they are not replicas, but influences on the final output.

3

Sorry, wasn’t being clear.
I’ve been involved in multiple discussions here
about the difference tween the
Pratten and Nicholson Olwells.
I played an Olwell Nicholson and compared
it with an Olwell Pratten.

4

The original Nickolson’s Improved will not be in as good a tuning as the Pratten. Nickolson liked to really lay into it, with a very tight embouchure and would blow it in tune. They came with a shallow embouchure hole that was quite large.

Here is a nice article on Terry’s page about his technique.
http://www.mcgee-flutes.com/Nicholson_on_Tone.htm

5

Thanks for posting your impressions Jim. You’ve been asking a lot of great questions about Olwell flutes, and I for one appreciate it.

All the best,
Jay

6

Glad you got to do the side-by-side Jim.

Fun ain’t it? :slight_smile:

I’ve done the same a few times and prefer the “Nicholson” but I’m always likely to choose a more subtle, focused flute to a Pratten (my own flute is a McGee GLP, which I obviously prefer to either, so you can see my leanings in general).

Be it known though that were I stuck on a desert island with only an Olwell Pratten, I could die a very happy man. I’m on Pat’s list for a keyed flute so I’ll need to make up my mind for sure some time in the next five to seven years. LOL

Doc

7

Have you noticed any difference in the Olwell Pratten and the Olwell Nickolson? My understanding is that they were quite similar.

8

Sorry this is such a confusing thread, Please note
I’m talking about Olwells. Wrote this:

he flutes are quite close. The nicholson has slightly
smaller holes and a very slightly shorter span between
them. It’s a little more comfortable
to hold. But, for me anyway, there’s no major
advantage in comfort.

The Pratten has a bigger and more dramatic sound.
The Nicholson has good volume and is more a bit more
focused. Of the two we preferred the Pratten,
though both are good. Go for the gusto!

My impression, then, is that if one is already happy with
the Pratten, the Nicholson doesn’t do anything
different enough to make it terribly desirable,
though it is certainly a lovely flute.

FWIW, YMMV, subjective as all hell, and so on.

9

…if one is already happy with the Pratten, the Nicholson doesn’t do anything different enough to make it terribly desirable…

Lot of generalizations floating about. Olwell Prattens in the wrong hands present an invitation to over-blow and to go sharp. If the PO Nicholson isn’t loud enough for you then you’re doing something wrong.

What is the obsession with volume? I have my doubts that people for whom volume is the main consideration are accomplished players - or even have an understanding of what the music is all about. It isn’t about being louder. It’s about making lovely sounds. When you’re playing with other people it’s about making lovely sounds with them.

If you need an Olwell Pratten to have enough volume then you’re doing something wrong and the odds are you’ll be over-blowing. In any case, if you have a firm embouchure you will sound loud enough on nearly any flute. Making music is not about volume or about having the loudest flute in the session. Unless perhaps you’re in the wrong session.
My PO Nicholson is very different from my PO Pratten. To me the differences are not subtle. But I’ve been playing for twenty years. My wife has been listening for that long and still can’t tell the difference. My PO Nicholson is quicker to respond. The ornaments are sharper and clearer. There is a punch to it that the PO Pratten doesn’t have. Seamus Tansey is stil playing a Rudall (a real Rudall). So is Migoya, Jimmy Noonan, Christy Barry. If they don’t need the volume of a Pratten why would a relative newcomer?
There is a greater difference between my PO keyed Pratten and my PO slide-less key-less Pratten, than there is between my keyed PO Nicholson and my keyed PO Pratten. But there is a huge difference between me and Garry Shannon and that is the difference that motivates me the most.

10

Your going to really “PO” Jim… :smiley:

11

What obsession with volume? Just describing and comparing
the flutes. You write: ‘If the Nicholson isn’t loud enough for you,
you’re doing something wrong.’ The Nicholson IS plenty
loud enough, Cocus. That’s what the post says. Personally
I find the Pratten’s sound more interesting. I reckon whatever
Olwells are supposed to do, the Pratten does it the most.
Once again here’s what I
wrote:

'I managed to find someone in st. Louis with a nicholson.
My wife and I went to see him this afternoon and
I played it for a good while. Brought the Pratten too.

The flutes are quite close. The nicholson has slightly
smaller holes and a very slightly shorter span between
them. It’s a little more comfortable
to hold. But, for me anyway, there’s no major
advantage in comfort.

The Pratten has a bigger and more dramatic sound.
The Nicholson has good volume and is more a bit more
focused. Of the two we preferred the Pratten,
though both are good. Go for the gusto!

My impression, then, is that if one is already happy with
the Pratten, the Nicholson doesn’t do anything
different enough to make it terribly desirable,
though it is certainly a lovely flute.

FWIW, YMMV, subjective as all hell, and so on.’

12

I don’t think Jim’s the type to go postal. :laughing:

13

I hate licking stamps!

14

FWIW, YMMV, subjective as all hell, and so on

Jim,
I have been following your zillion C & F
posts and you leave me dazed.

I am a newbie reading the C & F trying to learn as much
about flutes and ITM as I can. I am having
difficulty trying to separate the knowledgeable posts from the
what appears to be the pontificators.

The “Posting Clips” Forum has helped me identify the people who can
really play the flute which leads me to believe I can value their
opinions.

So having said that, to support your post number 10,925
“Played an Olwell, finally” post could you graciously post
a clip of you playing the Olwell Pratten and one of you
playing the Olwell Nicholson. Your clips would greatly
help the newbie like myself understand the opinions you stated
in your Olwell evaluation.

Looking forward to hearing your Olwell Pratten Nicholson clips
Tom

15

Hi, Tom, Welcome to the forum. I don’t have an Olwell Nicholson,
sadly. As I mentioned above, I visited somebody who does
have one and played it for awhile. I did try to sneak the Nicholson
out under my coat but that fellow is quick.

By all means be skeptical of my posts. Meant this:

‘FWIW, YMMV, subjective as all hell, and so on.’

Welcome aboard, Jim

16

what does experience, years playing, or big names have to do with jim’s impressions of the flute?

if rudalls were loud enough for everybody, pratten would never have invented his flute in the first place!

17

Re: Chiffers’ quest for volume:

The Pratten has a bigger and more dramatic sound.

Prattens tend (note ‘tend’) to have a more open sound and a powerful low end. Dave Copley says (on his site) Prattens tend to be louder.

Both are exploiting the openness and power of the flutes.

How appreciable is the difference in volume between the three timbers? Let’s not get bogged down in tonal comparisons.

I have a cotter pratten, wonderfully in tune–
but louder n’ hell. Quite up there with the Olwell Pratten.

I’m not sure the material will have any effect at all on the volume.

Lately, I’ve been wondering about Patrick’s Rudall model. How’s it’s volume compared to his Nickolson and Pratten models?

I think the lined headjoint makes more difference to the volume/projection than which Olwell model the flute is.

The pratten is powerful but it also blends well, especially the bottom octave.

My boxwood Olwell with the lined head is a freaking foghorn.

Yes, my Cotter is loud, as mentioned. It’s hard to imagine
one that isn’t, honestly. It has a big open honking
Pratten sound

Speak for yourself, I like my flutes BIG, FAST, and with plenty of BLING. And Supersize my fries with that, baby.

Is there a technique for playing louder by pulling your tuning slide out….

And a moment of sanity:

Once you develop good tone, virtually all the well made flutes will sound far more similar than dissimilar. One’s focus should be on improving one’s tone, not finding the flute with the “right” sound because virtually any flute will have the right sound once you’ve gone to the trouble to develop your sound.

18

About this Rudall & Rose vs Pratten thing, it’s interesting that early on both Cathal McConnel and Matt Molloy could be seen playing Rudall & Rose (or at least that style) flutes, but later on both switched to Pratten (or at least that style). I even saw Cathal playing a Siccama at one point.
I used to play a lovely original Rudall & Rose made between 1827 and 1837, boxwood with ivory rings and cap. This flute had an amazingly flexible tone- you could practically just think of the note, and the colour and pitch of the note- and it would happen. It was the best flute I’ve ever played for airs.
But I sold it when I got a cocus Pratten style flute (a dead ringer for a Pratten but made by Koehler of London c1860). The Pratten-style was clearer and more even in the low register and yes somewhat louder. It had a much better bottom D than the Rudall & Rose. It was fairly flexible tonally but nothing like the boxwood Rudall & Rose. I also had the pleasure to borrow for a while a magnificent original Pratten c1860 which was simply the best Irish flute I’ve ever played. Its low register was incredibly powerful. You could lean on that bottom D as much as you’d like and it never broke, just got louder and louder.
So with the originals the difference was quite dramatic.

19

It does seem like, whatever the volume difference, the Rudall-style flutes have a bit more of the kind of sensitivity that p.c.p. is talking about here. It would appear that the smaller holes, smaller bore, and tighter foot create a different kind of pressure environment inside the flute, easier to bend to the will. Prattens have more of the unruly wild beast about them, assuming they’re truly in the Pratten mould; I’ve played some so-called “Pratten” flutes by modern makers that didn’t seem to have much in common with either the originals or proper reproductions.

If I had my personal druthers, I’d see everyone start on a Rudall. So many folks get a big, hard-to-fill flute, then get their “tone” by leaking small quantities of air into a big bore through an inefficient embouchure. It’s way more instructive to start on a Rudall flute and learn to really fill it, get that column of air excited and humming. I’m still going to maintain that the Pratten-style flutes have more on the top end, for the advanced player with an efficient embouchure, but how many of us is that, really? And even if it’s you, do you need to be playing like that, most of the time? Good questions to ask, I’d say. Cheers,

Rob

20

This is a hodge-podge of things taken out of context,
without a link provided so the reader can check,
some of which are misquoted, several of which
I never said but you attribute
to me anyhow.

You tend
to do a fair amount of misquoting, out of context,
without links and without naming the individual
you’re targeting. A thread you started on the Poli
Board was just deleted because you did this, including
in it personal attacks on the unnamed individuals
on the basis of out of context quotes without citation.
Also you often misread posts and then start a quarrel on that basis.

I find this sort of thing discouraging. Who would
want to converse with somebody who does this?

To everyone:
I have, on several occasions, reached out to Cocus
in private messages, apologizing for anything I’ve done
that might have offended, praising him
and thanking him for what I’ve learned.

Don’t like ignoring people, but it’s time to start.