Please tell me, if anybody can, what the
difference in sound is between Rudalls
and Prattens. I take it that it isn’t
necessarily volume.
By the way, is a Rudall-Rose yet again
another sort of flute?
I am determined to sort this all out, Thanks, Jim
Okay. I’m not by any means an expert on all this. But from what I have read and to a small degree experienced myself, Rudall and Rose flutes are a very big generalization. Rudall and Rose was a company that operated in London during the 19th century. They made a lot of flutes during the years and their designs can vary a great deal. But what we seem to think of as a “normall” Rudall & Rose flute has medium toneholes, and two section middle (where you have the hands). That’s what strikes the eye. I’ve also heard that they tend to have a wider bore than many other flutes. The sound is usually deep, rich, dominating and pleasant, tough it can be driven quite rough and hard edged.
The Prattens usually have larger tone holes, takes more air, I think they have a more narrow bore and the middle section is usually in one part only. The sound is usually dry, harsh, reedy and extremely strong and full bodied. Many pro’s choose Prattens.
Be sure to check out Terry McGee’s site for in depht discussions and research on both Prattens and Rudall & Rose flutes as well as other historic SS flutes http://www.mcgee-flutes.com/
Hopefully, someone with more experience will reply to this as well.
Just like Henke said: Rudall&Rose was a flute maker, and they had a range of models plus many custom-made flutes. Pratten is a model of flute made by Boosey, i think, according to the recommendations of (Robert) Sidney Pratten (a flute player). Pratten went on to make “transition” keyed flutes (not quite Boehm, but not simple-system), but those are rarely talked about these days
In the context of Irish music, “Rudall” = small or medium holed flute made in 4 sections (or 3 if there is no separate foot joint) and “Pratten” = large holed flute made in 3 sections (the body is in one long section, because of the way the keys are arranged). “Prattens” are very popular in Irish music (e.g. Hamilton) and are meant to sound loud. There are also variations, such as keyless "Pratten"s made in 4 sections, and “large hole Rudalls”.
Here are more references:
http://www.oldflutes.com/english.htm
http://www.mcgee-flutes.com/Pratten.htm
http://www.oldflutes.com/articles/oldsys.htm
Old Man McGee is as guilty as anyone else of popularizing this use of “Rudall” and “Pratten” to describe medium and large-holed flutes, so see his models page:
http://www.mcgee-flutes.com/models.html
g
Jim,
Rudall-Rose and Pratton are both flutes I have never played.
The Rudall being the one I wish I had played more than the Pratton. Though this changes from day to day.
I hope this helps. 
Doc
Seriously though, There’s a list on the web of who’s playing what on the Wooden Flute obsession CDs. I think I can hear a difference between the Rudalls and Prattons. Do a google search for Wooden Flute obsession.
Thanks, gang.
dave migoya and andrew are two who could best expound on the differences in sound (if any) of the original flutes. but as far as the actual sounding of the instruments in question i wonder if that is largely due to the player: our command of the instrument and our ability to produce tone. here are some recorded players that come to mind:
seamus egan got a great sound from his pratten before he switched to olwell, early matt molloy played an R&R on some bothy band and planxty recordings, marcus hernon (rudall carte (?)), mike tubridy (wylde/R&R), catherine mceavoy(R&R), jimmy noonan(R&R), joe burke(R&R), and probably some more… listen and decide for yourself.
oops! i almost forgot…chris norman (R&R)
any other (pratten) players(?)
(not olwell, hamilton,mcgee etc.)
An addendum to Rama’s comment: Molloy switched from R&R to Pratten around the Bothy/Planxty era which he played up until the last few years when he went to Olwell.
Cheers,
Aaron
Henke,
The internal dimensions of the Rudall vs Pratten models is more subtle than you suggest. My Hawkes Pratten style flute has a more pronounced taper than my Rudall Carte - it starts off wider but ends up narrower than the Rudall model.
Eamonn Cotter is pictured with what looks like a Rudall Carte on Beal a’ Mhurlaigh but is playing a Hawkes on his solo CD. I’ve seen one example of a flute made by Marcus and it looked very similar to the Hawkes pattern.
I still think the sound is influenced more by the player than the instrument, but I prefer the Pratten to the Rudall.
Ken
I f I were to describe what sound I make on my Pratten’s and Rudalls we would be back on the thread about corncrakes .
As regards sound, power, volume, tone etc. I’d also agree that the most important factor is the flute player. Pat Mahan of Easky, Sligo plays a nonedescript cheap, I think mass produced flute, and creates a sound like you’d never heard. My R&R model Wilkes has a fair volume when I play, but when an experienced flute player has a blow on it, such as Kevin Ryan, or recently piper Mick O’Brien then it can really rattle the windows and crack the walls - some prefer Pratten, some R&R style flutes, but at the end of the week it comes down to the musician
Thanks for your information kenr. I wasn’t too sure about the internal dimensions thing, mabey I shouldn’t have mentioned it at all. But I knew it was going to be alright because someone more experienced was going to correct me if I’m wrong anyway. 
I certainly agree that the player is always the biggest factor in making the flute sound this or that. And Molloy would probably sound almost exactly the same on a R&R as he did on his Pratten. And Kevin Ryan gets a hell of a sound out of probably any decent flute he would try. He is an incredible player.