Looking for someone to try this (preferably on a standard D flute)…
If you play your keyed G#, but pull or rock your T3 finger down to let the A hole leak just a tiny bit (the merest chink or hair’s breadth) at its ‘player-side’ edge, what happens? Does it destroy the G# just like the G (as it might well with the A hole still being above the G# hole) or do you still get a reasonable G# (with the increased venting provided by the open G# hole saving the note)?
Would also be helpful to know make and model of flute (on which note, a Copley would be perfect and, yes, I’ll be asking Dave to try the same thing!).
On both my unbranded German flute and Boosey & Hawkes Emperor Boehm flute, I get a clear glissando sliding all the way up from G# to A. Try it from G, and I get toneless fluff immediately on both.
Thanks, guys, sounds promising so far (the main thing being that it’s not instantly killed the note for either of you). So of course I’ll also get Dave to try it on one of his own flutes but, given that any flute might respond differently to different folks’ interpretation of my instructions, the more the merrier…
I haven’t tried the test per say but I wanted to say something that may be of use to you Peter because my experience with G# keys might relate to your situation as generally I can’t use my pinkie to play them certainly not exactly the same situation but with regards to G# keys I understand why you are worried. I have to use my left ring finger to hit the G# key on my J. Gallagher flute because I use a non standard grip with the fingers of my left hand flat but using the first pad (as opposed to piper’s grip) like one would play a whistle because I am holding the flute like this I can’t hit the G# key with my pinkie without moving my ring finger and uncovering the hole. Works O.K for me and I do find that if I am not covering the hole completely the G# still sounds fine and it doesn’t instantly kill the note but it may sharpen it slightly at times which only the most trained ear would be able to pick up.
On the other hand I do have a Boosey & Co. flute in Eb with post mounted keys and the French style G# with the hole on the player’s side and on this flute I can use my pinkie for it no problem.
I don’t have a keyed Copley or any Copleys at the moment (should be getting a delrin one pretty soon though) so I can’t test it on that type of flute.
To be clear about why I’m asking now, my custom Copley with the extra mini joints is about to go back to Dave to get the single-piece left-hand joint I’d now prefer (still with the big L3 offset of course!) and already have on my new Eb body. So I’d just about done an about turn in deciding to go for the standard L2–3 spacing instead of the tighter one I’ve been playing more… till I realised I’d forgotten the G# dilemma affecting my projected keyed flute (where I’ll be wanting to match the keyless D’s hole spacing) and found myself wondering whether that might change my mind again when I’m still hoping for a usable L3 G# alongside the (now almost certainly R1) alternative we’re planning. Hence the question, when knowing that a tiny leak from the A hole (should my control of a marginal movement slip sometimes!) is unlikely to kill the G# like the G could yet make all the difference!
I think for the G# because the key hole is open above the covered hole it is not going to be as big of an issue whether fully covered or a small amount uncovered, a lot of he air moving down the tube probably comes out of the open keyhole. I’m no expert but that seems like a good explanation for why one can get away with some of the hole being uncovered, like I said it tends to sharpen the note but not to the point where it cannot be played in tune.
I just thought up a possible solution to this problem as well, if the hole was drilled on the players side in the French style it may be possible to have a key operated by the RH 1 like the Cnat. I’m no flute maker but it might be something worth looking into and discussing with Dave to see if it was possible if you were interested in that idea.
I have a sense of what your dealing with trying to find a flute that fits your hands, like I said before it is not the same thing, but it makes it easier for me to imagine as I have trouble with keyed flutes that fit my grip. Its one thing to order one with custom keywork and wait for it, it is another to buy one used that may be a fine flute in all regards but the left hand keywork is just not suited to one’s hands and/or grip. At the moment I find myself with two keyed flutes (D and Eb) but if I want to play a Bb (or B nat on the Eb) I have to switch grips. I can’t use a LH thumb operated Bb key using my normal grip and it means I have to switch to standard which I find awkward but luckily it doesn’t happen too much. What I really need is a RH Bb key but while looking for a second hand keyed flute I did not find that many options and none of them were what I was looking for. Good thing we’re not lefties too!
That stopped me short. So I had to go and look at my flute to check I wasn’t going mad. For G#, the hole opened by the key is below the hole covered by your finger (LH 3 fingers down).
An R1 G# on a Pratten-style one-piece body is already under consideration (Dave’s own suggestion), but I’m keen to retain the L3 touch as well (not sure if this opens the same hole or a duplicate). Also no longer sure the French-style L3 G#'s the way to go when close study of my Boehm G# technique suggests that I’m not operating the key exactly how I thought (in terms of the actual movement involved). So we’re most likely now looking at Eb, short F, L3 G#, R1 G# and Bb, with a C natural thumb hole (which I’ve got, custom offset for my grip, on the Eb body and will be getting on the new D joint)…
You’re quite right, Ben, which is why I asked ‘Does it destroy the G# just like the G (as it might well with the A hole still being above the G# hole) or do you still get a reasonable G# (with the increased venting provided by the open G# hole saving the note)?’
I would have answered with a practical test sooner, Peter, but I’m struggling with a heavy cold and I’m not able to play flute at the moment.
However, the thing seems straightforward to me (except insofar as I’m ignoring your digital paucity). Firstly, there’s the note G, produced by placing the LH 3 fingers down, thereby leaving open all holes below the G# key. Then, to produce a G#, you press the G# key, which opens a hole above those previously opened. If you then slide the next finger off the third hole down, all you are doing is making an opening above G# and above all holes previously opened. This just means that the note is going to be sharper than G#, to a greater or lesser extent depending on how much you slide your finger off the next hole. If you slide it off altogether, you will produce an A which is indistinguishable from an A produced without opening the G# key.
After all of which, I’m left wondering what the question is/was …
Look at it another way. If the G# hole was not open you might manage a half-holed G# by leaking that finger (rather than a killed G). Leaking it with G# open may give a better vented and probably sharper, but still useable, G# (rather than a killed G#)
I don’t have a tuner handy and my ear may not be too good but on my small-handed (so small T3 hole) Burns leaking T3 at the bottom makes the G# sharper but still clear; without G# open the sound could be described as a killed G. I am finding leaking it at the player side hard to do under control - it is not so clear but I think still useable.
Leaking the next finger up isn’t the same thing as when we use the term ‘venting’ elsewhere. Venting the Eb key will give better tuning on antique flutes, but it will also give a much clearer tone, particularly for notes close to it. But in this case, everything is vented in any case - leaking on the note above is not the same thing at all. It won’t (or shouldn’t in theory) have an effect on tone;
Leaking LH3 with the G# key closed will produce a G# note but, on a keyed flute, that won’t be vented. Better to use the key, which means you’re producing a note that is already fully vented.
As I say, what’s the question? All that leaking LH3 will do if the key is open will be to produce a sharper note. It doesn’t increase the venting, as all lower keys are already fully vented.
No, I was meaning that opening the G# hole vented a half-holed G# better - why I said ‘looking at it another way’. The leaking is not the venting.
I think the concern may be that the T3 hole can be in the wrong place for partially opening it to allow a useable G#. I edited my post - leaking at the player side spoils the G# more. I think Peter does something with his G# key a bit like getting from D to Fnat on the short-F key - pressing a key without leaking a hole closed by the same finger.
Yes, but if you’re going to open the G# hole anyway (by depressing the key) then why make it too sharp by opening a bit of the next hole as well? Or is it, in Peter’s case, that he’s having to use his ring finger for both the G# key and the hole, and he’s therefore forced to leak the hole a bit, just because of the stretch?
I’m sorry if I’m being thick here, chaps …
However, if I’ve got it anywhere near right, I wonder if a RH G# touch, or using one of the Baroque cross-fingerings might be a better alternative?
I haven’t done any testing - can’t see much point. Any leaking of the A tone-hole while playing a keyed G# has to be detrimental to the G#. Whether unacceptably so… dunno - depends on your ear/criteria of unacceptable. I take it Peter is asking because, due to his unusual L hand fingers, he can only operate a normal(ish) G# key by dipping his L3 onto it, which may cause an inadvertent leak of the A-hole.
I tend to agree with Ben ( ) that maybe tone-hole configuration to support cross-fingerings may be a better way to go if full chromatic accessibility is the prime consideration. However, if a butch, free, open, Prattenish tone across the board is the prime objective and keywork is aimed at supporting that…
Interesting where your current key configuration thoughts are, Peter. FWIW (maybe not much), I’d have thought you’d be better off with something nearer standard multi-keyed set ups - no C-nat thumb hole (not a good option IMO because it probably precludes other uses of the L thumb - a pity when the L hand is the limited one!), normal thumb Bb (maybe with extra R1 touch, normal R1 long C, normal short F and Eb, adapted French type G# to optimise for use with your L3 (which I think could be do-able without leaking the A-hole), but with duplicate L thumb touch could even have a duplicate R1 touch as well… both extra touches working as lifting levers on the normal French G# key). My bigger concern would be finding a usable alternative for the long F: perhaps yet another L thumb lever to lift the short F (rod-axle design would be best) would be feasible on a Pratten-style body.
Only because there’s some chance of doing that by accident.
Or is it, in Peter’s case, that he’s > having > to use his ring finger for both the G# key and the hole
The same finger, yes, but my pinkie rather than my ‘ring’ finger.
and he’s therefore > forced > to leak the hole a bit, just because of the stretch?
Not forced to, no, but at some risk of doing so.
However, if I’ve got it anywhere near right, I wonder if a RH G# touch, or using one of the Baroque cross-fingerings might be a better alternative?
A duplicate RH G# touch is already on the agenda, but I’m not even considering the cross-fingering on the Copley.
What I thought I was saying all along!
I tend to agree with Ben ( > > > > > > ) that maybe tone-hole configuration to support cross-fingerings may be a better way to go if full chromatic accessibility is the prime consideration.
Not on the agenda when I’m already reconsidering the standard L2–3 spacing because I’m now blowing this flute well enough (which I wasn’t when I got it) to be aware of the sonic compromises accompanying the smaller, higher A hole and even that’s still a long way from producing a cross-fingered G# I’d accept.
Interesting where your current key configuration thoughts are, Peter.
All based on real, practical experience with what Dave’s built for me so far, what we’ve discussed as desirable, possible and/or practicable, what I’m looking for in my flute and how I actually expect to use the keywork. So please understand that we’re testing ideas rigorously at every stage and nothing’s changing from our initial discussions on mere whims…
FWIW (maybe not much), I’d have thought you’d be better off with something nearer standard multi-keyed set ups - no C-nat thumb hole (not a good option IMO because it probably precludes other uses of the L thumb - a pity when the L hand is the limited one!), normal thumb Bb (maybe with extra R1 touch, normal R1 long C, normal short F and Eb, adapted French type G# to optimise for use with your L3 (which I think could be do-able without leaking the A-hole), but with duplicate L thumb touch could even have a duplicate R1 touch as well… both extra touches working as lifting levers on the normal French G# key). My bigger concern would be finding a usable alternative for the long F: perhaps yet another L thumb lever to lift the short F (rod-axle design would be best) would be feasible on a Pratten-style body.
Do want something that meets my needs as simply and elegantly as possible.
Don’t want to give more than two jobs to the left thumb and happy if it’s just one.
Do like the C thumb hole.
Don’t want a ‘Frankenflute’ that looks/feels like it’s buried under scaffolding.
Have more-or-less concluded that the long F is out.
So (for anyone who’s interested enough to read it) see the following? It’s mere snippets from my discussions with Dave (but hopefully still enough to show that we’ve considered things in depth), and my question in this thread (which I’m starting to regret asking!) was aimed at establishing some consensus on what might happen with an inadvertent L3 leak on G# and not about what roles anyone else would assign to what fingers if they were me with my hands (sorry if that all sounds a bit gruff when I’m only trying to be clear!)…
Peter Duggan wrote (2012-02-11 13:38):
Anyway, some crystalising thoughts (based on realistic
testing/visualisation of the kind of movements I’d be making) about keys
in general:
While I’m still not sure I’ll be able to work an L3 G# as efficiently
as I do on Boehm (and thus need a touch/key for either L thumb or R1),
I think we should still plan for and build it rather than regret its
absence later! Also wondering whether the case for the R1 G# is
strengthened by my established practice (in case I’ve not told you this
before) of bringing R1 ‘over the top’ for trills on my L3 Boehm key?
It’s probably unrealistic to expect L3 to cope with any more than a
G# when it might struggle with even that. Which suggests that an
alternative F may be almost impossible to implement when I’d be very
reluctant to involve the R thumb and Jem’s suggestion at one point for
yet another L thumb lever (on a one-piece body of course) sounds like
potential L thumb ‘overcrowding’…
The Tromlitz arrangement (open C and closed Bb) or ‘overlapping’
substitute I’d floated before is a complete non-starter without an
alternative (ie R1) Bb touch because it’s almost impossible to
trill/move rapidly between B and Bb (A#) with just the (more ergonomic!)
Boehm thumb plates.
We can’t expect either L thumb or R1 to do everything!
And interim conclusions about all the keys stemming from the above:
Eb Standard R4 key (no problem).
F Standard R3 short F, but probably no alternative (wondering whether
any possible modifications/extensions to the touch might ease the legato
D to F problem but guessing such things have been tried and rejected
over the years?).
G# Some kind of ‘normal’ L3 key modified for usability + essential
duplication (which might yet prove my normal touch!) somewhere else.
Bb Seems necessarily bound up with both C and the alterative G# when the
absence/presence of any of these for L thumb or R1 impinges on options
for the others. So, when either three L thumb keys or three R1s sounds
like a design/playability headache (?), what can we do with up to two of
each?
a. R1 G# and Bb with no L thumb key, which opens up (no pun intended!)
the possibility of a C thumb hole?
b. L thumb G# and Bb with no possibility of a C key unless an R1 long C
can be arranged without tangles?
c. R1 G# and Bb with the Bb also duplicated by L thumb (meaning no C
thumbhole but Tromlitz-style open C key still possible because the R1 Bb
is there)?
d. Some arrangement incorporating a closed C key for L thumb, which
I’m struggling to see how you’d implement when the touch basically needs
to go right where the hole goes and the ‘Tromlitz’ thing only works
because it’s an open key with hole, key and thumb all in that place?
Peter Duggan wrote (2012-02-13 12:55):
Dave Copley wrote (2012-02-13 01:22):
The biggest technical challenge I can see is getting a good usable G# for
L3. This could be a French style, or possible a highly modified version of
the conventional simple system G#. I plan to do some experimenting on
both options.
Have made some a significant discovery here within the past few days
which I’ve been intending to pass on but (like I said) was waiting for
your reply before bombarding you with more…
So, what I hadn’t quite twigged before is that my Boehm method works
because the G# key stands above the depressed G key and probably also
because the touch is short enough to avoid catching it accidentally on
the Gs. Meaning that previous assumptions (?) about taking a long, low
touch in under my pinkie may be wrong (note my repeated musings about
whether it would even work like that!) and the French-style OTT key may
not even be the best design if not requiring a further link to thumb
lever. So think we have to be very, very careful to get this right
FWIW I tested playing the French style G# on my Boosey using my ring finger and it didn’t really work out too well for me but your results may be different. I couldn’t reach the key comfortably with L3 and close the hole at the same time although if the touch was closer to the hole it might be doable.
RE: F natural keys, the short F on my J. Gallagher is quite large and it isn’t too difficult to go from D to Fnat without sounding the E even in legato passages. Enlarging the touch or moving it closer to the hole may be a good option for you Peter if you and Dave haven’t discussed this already.
) that maybe tone-hole configuration to support cross-fingerings may be a better way to go if full chromatic accessibility is the prime consideration. However, if a butch, free, open, Prattenish tone across the board is the prime objective and keywork is aimed at supporting that…
