Wondering if anyone has come across a flute like I have in for repair. No markings. Keyless, Prattens style. Except that the normally one piece body is in two sections. The top part has holes 1 and 2. The lower part has holes 3, 4, 5 and 6.
But maybe that is because of a repair or modification, so is of no help in identifying the maker?
But the rings might be enough to identify the maker. They are brass, boldly D shaped in cross section. Formerly silver plated though that is wearing off.
But what stands them apart from most flutes in my experience is that they are not simply press-fitted on, they and the timber they attach to are screw-threaded. Rotating the rings counterclockwise and they unscrew, like nuts off bolts. Rotate them clockwise and they screw up, stopping when they reach the end of the threaded section of wood.
The owner picked the flute up in Ireland 10 years or so back, but that might not be a clue to its origin.
I have no thoughts on the origin, but I’m intrigued by the threaded rings. That’s an interesting idea, presumably reducing the chance of shrinkage causing the rings to come loose. I don’t know what potential shrinkage might do to the fit of the threaded rings, but probably not much if the threads are deep enough. I would think that cutting the threads themselves would present challenges, both on the wood and the metal.
I’m puzzled by the foot socket. It’s very noticeably tapered, but in the reverse way to what you’d want. 18.9mm diameter at the opening, but swelling to 19.3mm at the bottom of the socket.
The tenon that goes into it currently corked, although the cork is rather chewed up. When you try inserting it, it resists at first, then pops in all the way, but the foot then wobbles hopelessly and leaks badly.
The barrel socket shows the same effect, though not as prominently, 23.4mm at the opening, 23.6mm at bottom of socket. Again, this compromises the fit of the tenon.
So, how did they become reverse tapered? Did the threaded ring compress the open end? Would a press-fitted ring have produced the same result? Or perhaps have come loose before getting that far?
Does this suggest the sockets were cut cylindrically, and have shrunk to this shape? My sockets are cut mildly tapered the other way.
I guess I’ll need to recut them to make them at least cylindrical!
Weird! It sounds like the sockets just shrunk that way–I can’t imagine anyone cutting them that way deliberately! Having a socket wider at the bottom would be stark madness :-). Like yourself, I try to err in the other direction.
I suspect you’re on the mark, Terry. I imagine a maker (or repairer, more likely) was concerned about rings coming loose and hammered on an overly tight ring. I’ve found myself having to trim out the sockets of some flutes after applying the rings when the taper I wanted got pinched too tight.
Presumably if the rings are threaded, then they were not hammered on I would imagine. And being threaded then I don’t know how they would squeeze the flute very hard. Meaning they would not compress the wood via a press fit.
True, though I can imagine if they are indeed threaded one could screw on even a fairly snug ring if they were able to get sufficient grip on it, and I can’t imagine the material left after cutting the relief and threading would allow too much in the way of resistance to squeezing. 0.4mm does seem like quite a large difference though. I too would like to see photos. I’ve seen some instances where an instruments ring reliefs were combed and an adhesive was applied, but I can’t imagine going through the trouble of actually threading both the relief and the ring…