Okay, so finally I’ve gotten to play a Seery keyless polymer flute. Sooner or later, they all come through my hands! (hee, hee)
Anyway, I wanted to place a couple of notes on the instrument.
In a word: Wow.
I actually had to take the flute and put it under the magnifier to ensure it was plastic. He does something to make them look wood-grained.
Anyway, the sound is incredible. For the thin body and the feel, it’s powerful, receptive and clean. It’s not wood, but I could nearly do everything to it intonation-wise that I can with a wood flute.
Downside, some of the tone hole edges are a tad sharp-edged, including the inner embouchure (player side) edge. And the plastic body does vibrate a little more in the hands as you play the harder notes as opposed to wood. But overall – WOW. Easily up there with an Olwell and McGee in my opinion. Tuning is spot on. Very nice slide action. I don’t like the very thin thread he uses, but that can always be altered.
So…there are my 2-cents for what I feel is a terrific, terrific flute.
Frankly, I’m inclined not to sell this and keep it for myself, even though my hands don’t like Pratten-style bodies – despite the nicely done Rudall bore.
That’s quite the recommendation! I too have a Seery, and many of the characteristics you note are true from my experience as well. But I wouldn’t say it is in a class of an Olwell or a McGee, etc. But then again, that could be one the issues: The Generation Syndrome could be at work–there is variability among the flutes.
Mine has a nice woody sound, which surprises me, and it has a flexibility of tone that also reminds me of wood. But it does not have the volume, or responsiveness to be one’s primary flute. The joints are also not flush as they fit together.
But travelling with the thing is great, and the quieter volume of mine works well in hotel rooms. And at home, it just sits around already assembled, and I can pick it up and run a few tunes before I go to buy “baozi” on the way to work in the morning.
Thus, it’s good. Maybe good for the money, but I do not have a Seery that is as good as the one you are playing. Perhaps I should.
You know, I’d like to think that a maker such as Desi does a uniform job from flute to flute.
then again, makers such as Rudall&Rose were notorious for their flutes being different from one to the next, so I suppose the same would be true today.
Perhaps this Seery is top of its class? I don’t know as this is the first and only Delrin flute of Desi’s that I’ve played. Volume? Tremendous. Woody sound? Awesome. Response time of notes to blow? Pristine.
The perfect Seery? Perhaps, but I’d hate to think so.
Either way, I still stand by placing this Seery in the mix with the best Olwell and McGee flutes I’ve played on, and those were several that were tooted for long periods.
Again, I’m not saying they’re better than the best made flutes out there. No, I’m not. I am saying that for the money, it’s likely the best buy out there save for the top-of-the-heap flutes that so many covet, but can’t have.
Would I trade an Olwell for it? Or put aside my Rudall? Absolutely not. But in bad weather, very nasty dry weather or frigid cold – or even a gig at the drunken-rowdy scene of St. Pat’s Day, I’d gladly use the Seery. Won’t break, won’t snap, won’t need break-in, and won’t make me cry too hard if it gets swiped or stepped on.
David, I have a Seery flute and it pretty well fits your description (though I can’t compare it to an Olwell!). It certainly plays lovely, with a hard, reedy tone, and has plenty of volume.
However, a couple of weeks ago I got a chance to check it against another Seery. They looked completely alike, but the other Seery played somewhat differently, and certainly not as loud. I would probably explain this by the two flutes possibly having minute differences in the embouchure hole - differences to which I was unaccustomed. With time, I might be able to get the same volume from the other Seery…
Cheers,
Jens
[ This Message was edited by: Jens_Hoppe on 2001-11-15 08:39 ]
The Seery flutes I’ve played have been mediocre, cloudy in tone with a very thin inner bore and a rather thick outer bore to go with it, heavy to lift. I had one and traded it away.
Tom Doorley of Danu plays one, and I heard him, in a flute workshop with no other sound, play his Seery flute and other people’s other flutes (Olwell and Copley, to be precise), and if it weren’t for the fact that he says he doesn’t want to take care of a flute (his has tape all over his and it might be used as a protection device sometimes in noisy pubs), I would wholeheartedly suggest that he switch makers.
Too bad your experience wasn’t a good one, Jessie. Honestly, I’m rather impressed still with this flute. I took it to session tonight to give it a good run and it met the challenge. Next to me was a Donegal flute player who was tooting a wooden Seery. We mused at how close they were in sound, though the Delrin Seery had a much harder D. I guess there is variation in the making of the Delrins, which shouldn’t surprise me.
Anyway, if this is the anomaly of Seery flutes, then so be it.
By the way, recently purchased two more Rudall flutes, so it shows you where my heart really is!
Wipe your lips, Greg!
A third is on the way
Test drove one last night…mighty player in supreme condition. As an early Rudall (#810) it’s wonderfully interesting to see the schematic changes R&R were making as the flute evolved. The other is #1477 and are very close in design to each other. However, the latter has a barrel of about 20mm longer, ergo bringing pitch to about A=430, either an intentional move to accommodate the fluctuation of standard pitch in Europe, or a custom-made model (of which I believe to be more likely). But, with shorter barrel (of which I’m havingone made) pitch is right at 440, so that one should be a nice player, too.
The third is a much later model (#7007), but one which runs very close in age to my personal Rudall (#6206) that in my opinion is very difficult to beat in sound, tone, etc etc. (That’s why it’s MINE!)
Ah, good to relive those halcion days when Dave started revue threads about the lesser known makers, and Jessie used to pull out her enormous flute collection…
Crap… this is an old thread!!!
Back to the present…
i recently finally got to try a seery as well. i would have thought they would be uniform between models, as well, but apparently not. i was at a session where there were two seery’s, and the owners of the flutes told me that their flutes were not comparable and that one was indeed significantly better than the other.
i really liked the sound of the seery, especially when hearing someone else play it. i did NOT like the c natural, at all, but that could just be me. i play an english flute from 1864 and a silver flute with a copley headjoint, so i guess i must not be used to the c on modern, irish flutes.
i wouldnt go so far as to say that it was as good as an olwell, because i dont think it is trying to go for the same characteristics. there are those out there who do not like olwells (i am not among them), because of the way that they play in comparison to the antiques that they are based on. sometimes it is nice to have a flute that is like a loose cannon in your hands (an olwell, or my copley headjoint w/silver flute), and sometimes it is nice to have a flute which holds you in check, has a lot of back pressure, and makes you spend more time thinking about the melody than anything else (such as a seery or other flutes i have played).
How many different antiques and how many different Olwells have you played? His small-holed model plays quite similarly to the flute it was based on, with a slightly different embouchure cut and modern tuning, but the same bore profile. I’ve played a copy of the flute it was based on, and my (occasional) teacher, who owns the original, has played my Olwell and we both agree.
It’s way past bedtime for Bonzo out here in the sticks, but thought I’d chime in real quick here.
I bought a Seery last week from Doc Jones on a lark. The finish is awful. I’m sure whoever had it before me just beat the hell out of it. Big ol’ chip on the lower tenon, nasty ding near the end of the bore in the footjoint, all that stuff, even a ding on the far side of the embouchure. But, it don’t sound half bad.
I’m still wrestling with the stopper to get it in tune and it’s still a bit sharp, but it has a pretty firm low end.
I’ve played a good few Seery polymers (large & small whole versions). I have Serry Eb which is a great little instrument. Some I have played have been better than others, although all were of a reasonable quality.
I wouldn’t class them in the same league as a keyless wooden Hammy, Wilkes, Murray etc. But the price (last time I checked), was about 40% less than a top-class Keyless wooden flute. So the bang for the buck is quite good.
when i say they do not play the same i mean that an olwell flute would play (by most standards) better than an antique. an olwell will generally play more easily with more tonal possibilities than the antiques they are based on. as far as i understand, this is due to his embouchure cut, which has been tweaked (undercutting, chimney depth, etc), in comparison to the antiques they are based on, whose embouchure holes can be very simple in comparison. in short, i am saying a positive thing about olwell’s.
the point i was trying to make is that some people do not prefer the olwells precisely for that reason. it is hard to explain, but some people prefer the older style of embouchure cuts, which are harder to play and do not give you as much leeway. i have played flutes that were more restrictive than the seery, which i very much liked, but i would not say that they were better or worse than an olwell, because i do not think that they are trying to play like an olwell.
case and point, i play a dave copley headjoint for my silver flute (in my avatar). in certain situations it can be harder to play than other handmade silver headjoints i have tried. i prefer this, even though it is harder, because the headjoint has a larger range of tone colors and dynamics than any other headjoint i have played. i can get it to play with a sweet, french style sound, or even go so far as to make my silver flute to sound like a wooden flute. it would be unfair of me to say that my copley headjoint is better than say a branner cooper or a haynes headjoint, because these other headjoints were not designed for an irish flute player in mind, like my copley was, but were designed to be the most accessible and easiest to play.
i hope that explains the distinction that i was trying to make.
I can’t say that I can gush like Dave but it was a nice flute.
Much better than I expected. Which was not a lot.
I too would prefer a real “good” Rudall.
Now, of course, let us not forget the most important fact that Mr. Migoya could probably get really good sound out of a soggy parsnip so in regards to how good a Seery is… your mileage may vary.
gee… i like mine. i bought mine new from doc jones. i think it sounds great. it plays well. it plays strong through well over 2 1/2 octaves. intonation is good. not much more to say.
if you own a seery and are extremely displeased with your seery, you are welcome to drop it in the post to me. i promise to take good care of it until you want it back… if you played somebody else’s seery and are very unhappy with it… feel free to send it, too!
