I was looking at the German section of Rick Wilson’s wonderful oldflutes.com, he has an interesting photo of the upper joints of a flute by J. G. Braun (Mannhein, c.1825). This was a six keyed flute built with no tuning slide, and instead came with three corps de rechange, for playing at approximately A=435, A=440, and A=446. Here is a group photo of all three, highest pitch on the left. Underneath is Rick’s text for this pic.
“The second holes of the three centers can be seen below. The shortest joint (A=446) is on the left; it has received by far the most use, and the holes are worn. The A=435 joint on the right, on the other hand, is in like-new condition and was possibly never played.”
The wear on the holes of the shortest joint is something I’ve seen on other old instruments, and I’ve even heard it refered to as “overcutting,” makers replicating it on new instruments.
My question - is this something that just happens from heavy playing, or did old makers deliberately to this to woodwind instruments?
I’m cross-posting this on the uilleann pipes forum, also.
Good question. My experience is based on blackwood and cocus wood flutes. I have a number of antique flutes, examining the tone holes I can see little evidence of wear. You can see ‘slight’ marking around the embouchure on most flutes - antique and modern. I was examining a friend’s flute (modern) the other night, and noted how sharply cut the tone holes were compared to my modern flute. He had played this flute near enough everyday for the last 15 years - yet from the tone holes it could have been new.
A flute maker told me that ‘worn’ tone holes on antique flutes was generally a good sign in that it meant the flute was well played (a bad flute wouldn’t get played as much). Indeed my best antique flute, a Binyon, does indeed have considerable ‘wear’ on the tone holes.
If the worn with playing theory is correct, would we not expect a certain amount of wear under the keypads on those worn antique keyed flutes? Unfortunately I do not have my Binyon to hand to check this.
Personally I find the use of undercutting of tone holes by some contemporary makers more comfortable to play. I would certainly not discount that some of the ‘wear’ seen on antique flutes may indeed be a result of makers/players preference.
A friend of mine was telling me about seeing Willie Ross’s Highland pipes chanter. Very worn. Willie was a stonecutter. I’m not sure which Willie Ross this is (there was an earlier one and a later WR who made many recordings).
I would think that most of rounded tone holes was rounded by the maker. I a hve 1840 flutes with crisp sharp tone holes. If you look at the Nickolson" Improved flute with the rounded edged tone holes and the flattened sections, you will see that it isn’t wear…
Without knowing a flute’s entire life history in detail its hard to tell if this is wear and tear or something intentional, added either by the maker or a later repair person or in some cases the player or a former player him/herself. A better sign of determining the degree of wear and tear is how otherwise the instrument is beat up. Dings and dents from dropping, dog teeth marks (not uncommon!), engraved SSI numbers, etc.
Old Prowse Nicholson flutes show the range from everything sharp as right off the lathe to leveled tone holes, greatly rounded over and flattened, along with the prerequisite chunk of dogfish skin shellacked to the tube for the right hand thumb.
It has been my observation that modern makers have their own style, the most common being the sharper edged holes. A few like myself prefer something a little more beveled, but I customize to a player’s hand ergonomic needs and preferences. I can’t detect any acoustical effect, except better sealage for some perhaps. However, with a recently reborn interest in guitar playing I myself am finding I have to work a little harder with my left hand due to the new calluses on my fingertips!
Of the two there was Uilleam Ross and Willie Ross. The former was Queen Victoria’s piper and edited a vast collection of tunes (as well as being an entrepeneurial reed, pipe, and kilt maker). The latter was the first Army School of Piping instructor.
The only book I had handy was William Donaldson’s book, “Pipers” and the only mention I could find was that Uilleam Ross “had an imposing figure” or something like that. The only stonecutter I could find was John MacColl who worked in the quarries and composed several fine 2/4 marches and was a prize winning athlete and dancer as well as a piper.
The old chanters I’ve seen are similar to Casey’s experience though I haven’t handled any thing as old as those flutes (except for other old flutes).
