purpose of lining a wooden head-joint

Irish Flute
1

[this question has also been posted on thesession]
There are two aspects to this issue:
(1) why fully-lined headjoints became popular in the early 19th century. They were mentioned and condemned as

shrill

in the baroque flute era (Quantz 1752), but in 1889 were described by Rockstro (A Treatise on the Flute) as having

been adopted by all the English flute-manufacturers, and most of the performers, for the last seventy or eighty years

[i.e. since 1810-20]. Rockstro writes that the lining

augments the brilliancy and the power of the tone of a wooden flute, but it causes some slight diminution of sweetness and flexibility. Its chief advantage lies in its endurance, an unlined wooden head-joint being liable to crack and to change its calibre more than any other part of the flute, on account of the heat and moisture to which it is subjected.

It was about this time, I believe, that Charles Nicholson became very popular. He advocated a reedy tone and used flutes with enlarged tone-holes and fully-lined headjoints (Rockstro, para. 536). However, I don’t think that brilliant and powerful necessarily equate to reedy, although they may facilitate this. Rockstro himself thinks that the lining prevents cracking and change of bore dimension.

(2) why fully-lined head-joints are still popular. Is it simply a carry-over of 19th century practice or it is the increased volume and brilliancy? I don’t think it is likely to be for the prevention of cracking as many present-day makers think the exact opposite and Terry McGee has noted that virtually all 19th c. flutes with fully-lined head-joints have had cracks in these.

(3) (Addendum) (just noticed on Terry McGee’s website) from Thomas Lindsay’s (1829) The Elements of Flute Playing:
‘

The slide:
The great advantage of the METAL TUBE in the head joint, for regulating the pitch of the instrument, is so well known, that no flute should be made without it. The old- fashioned prejudice of its inducing a hard, metallic tone, instead of a soft and mellow one, is nearly exploded, and it is high time that it was quite so.

(Lindsay was a flute-maker in London. He seems to be referring to the fully-lined head-joint in his reference to a metallic tone, but his reason is the tuning-slide (which only requires a partially-lined head-joint).)

2

I don’t know if this explains (or wholly explains) the continued popularity of the fully lined headjoint, and it has been remarked here over the years, that, all other things being equal, the fully line head joint projects, ‘cuts through’ the sound of an ensemble or a crowd of talking people. better. This is my experience as well. It is the volume and the brilliance that Rockstro mentions.

3

That’s my take on it as well. My Watson is non-lined and at session I swapped with a friend who has a Copley which is lined. I noted a bit more volume and brightness from the Copley but I liked the sound I got from my Watson better.

Kirk

4

Thank you for sharing your experience. There was some diversity of opinion express in the replies to thesession posting which you might enjoy reading (there was also a secondary discussion concerning the alleged propensity of lined head-joints to crack):

https://thesession.org/discussions/39166

Chet

5

I can’t discern any significant tonal/response/power difference between fully lined and part-lined heads.

6

I don’t think a fully lined head really changes the sound of a flute significantly, at least not compared to an unlined head with a very smooth bore.

From a manufacturing standpoint, it is more expensive to fully line the head, but it might be a little easier to construct. First, you only have to drill/ream a uniform size bore all the way through the head, rather than three different size bores that match precisely. Also the glue is more likely to hold the lining of a fully lined head in place reliably, due to the larger contact area. However, fully lining the head complicates the cutting of the embouchure hole and introduces the possibility of irregularities and leaks where the lining meets the embouchure chimney. So its difficult to see any advantage or disadvantage being really decisive with respect to manufacturing.

There is the possibility that people believed that a full lining would protect the head from moisture. But again, this is really a bit of a misconception, because the chances of cracking the head are increased with a fully lined head. Its not so much the moisture that does the damage, but rather the lack of moisture combined with the fact that the lining prevents the wood from contracting when dry. But you’d think people would have discovered this problem fairly early on.

So, the most significant difference I can think of has to do with balancing the weight of foot keys on eight key flutes. A heavier foot needs a heavier head in order for the flute to stay in balance. This observation may help to explain why so many French flutes have partially lined heads, while often having 5 or 6 keys, with no C and C# foot keys, whereas English flutes are often fully lined with 8-keys, and German flutes are often fully lined with even more keys.