Some of you may be interested in this! The F# is fingered like a simple system flute, making it easily fingerable for simple system flute players. I guess it’s a hybrid, so not technically a Radcliff, but it seems to be fingered the same way.
Oops! i meant tenon, the tenon where you screw the foot joint. I still don’t see that. Interesting flute, though, seems in good shape, and deltaminusone has been selling all sorts of interesting sticks.
Isn’t it part of the solution for the quadractic equation?
g
P.S.: i’m pretty sure that’s not a Radcliffe. It’s a “hybrid” flute of the transition period, as stated by the seller, with a cylindrical bore and a mix of the Bohm and old systems. A Radcliffe looks even more like a modern flute, IMHO.
It is an 1867 patent model .I have one here which seems to play in Eb rather than just high pitch . ( In case anybody should want it for a moderate sum ! )
I have a Rudall Carte next to it which has six open holes of the simple system.These would seem to be pretty rare .I would imagine that it would be suitable for " Irish " use .If anyone should be interested I could send an Emailphoto . I would be interested to learn if anybody plays one of these .
Another Rudall Carte ( Which Mr Wilkes will restore when he can ) is a thinned 1867 model , which has the finger holes standing proud .It is supposed to have been the dearest thing they ever put in the R & C catalogue .Very interesting flute .I suspect it will be a great player .
AAAGH !!! I’ve just made another boob .It is not 1867 like mine ,I have just got mine out and it is more complicated.Pity the illustration of the Radcliff system Rudall Carte being offered by M.Veillon’s father -in -law
has gone from the for sale site .I think that a good Radcliff model would have gone beyond the (unsold )Ebay price .
No, it’s not a 1867 patent system and it’s not a Radcliffe. It’s definitely a hybrid. Not many of these have been made, as the seller says, and they apparently don’t play very well. More interesting to a collector than a player, i think. Think of this kind of flute as taking the idea of the Siccama (keys for the E and A) and taking it to an extreme, putting one key for each fingerhole, moving each hole to their “accoustically correct” position. It should have worked, but the fact that they also have a cilyndrical body may have messed up the concept.
I’ve never seen an 1867 in the flesh (i.e. wood), but many considered it better than the Boehm system.
The Radcliffe is almost a Boehm, but keeping the classical fingerings for F and F# that the Boehm reversed. Some of the keys are different too, but it looks a lot like a Boehm flute.
I’m such a rube; I’ve looked several times but still can’t figure out where you put your LH 3rd finger (couldn’t find an open hole in the photo). Those mysterious keys in the middle near G# – you couldn’t possibly stretch L3 to there, could you?
I’m afraid my knowledge of American spellings is rudimentary ,(as may be my English ), but I am a bit puzzled about where John Radcliff has acquired his “e” from .There was a Radcliff system R,C & Co flute offered on E bay a few months back .Did anybody keep a copy of the photo ?