As a beginner, I’m just about to head into the wonderful world of ornamentation in a more serious way. I just want to get some insite before I head too far down the track.
What fingering do I use for cuts. Some seem to suggest that for D, E F# and G you use the third finger of the top hand and for A and B you use the first finger of the top hand.
In the Grey Larsen book which I’m getting into now, he says use the finger one up from the lowest hole covered. Eg, for bottow D cut with second finger of the bottom hand and E cut with the first finger of the bottom hand etc. He believes that the first option above gives too sluggish response.
I’m seeking guidance as to which way people think I should learn
As he says that the issues are a bit different for flute and whistle I have posted this question on both forums, as the responses may go different paths.
I agree with Cork. People tend to get a bit doctrinaire on this topic (may have been myself in the past !) - I’m sure you’ll find a plethora of old threads on the topic on both fora if you use the search facility. (Save us re-hashing it here!) Personally I developed untutored using chiefly the “next neighbouring finger” method as a basis, but have ended up using a variety/combination of alternative cuts in varying contexts. I certainly don’t stick to the (questionable) “purist” version that you summarised above by contrast to what Larsen advocates.
In general I DISLIKE Larsen’s method! As regards this topic, anyway. It’s the statement about using the 3rd finger of the LH being sluggish that gets me every time…I personally never noticed Matt Molloy sounding particularly sluggish when he uses that finger to cut a note below F#. The real-world fact is that loads of great players do the exact opposite of what Larsen says to do, and suffer no ill effects to their sound or the speed of their execution.
While I do break from this scheme once in awhile to get a different efffect, I generally do all of my cutting with either the LH 3rd finger (E,F#,G, sometimes D, though I like RH 2nd as well for certain passages) or the LH 1st finger (A,B). It’s beautifully simple, sounds just fine, and is very easy to learn and practice. It also sets you up nicely for playing crans, since you’ll already be used to leading an ornament down in the lower register with a LH 3rd cut.
Try it, and as you’re deciding which way you’d like to do your cuts from here on out, just be aware that plenty of people do just fine without taking the advice from the Larsen book (or from me, either, for that matter). If it feels good and sounds good, it is good! Best of luck,
I learned to cut D,E,F# and G with the LH 3rd finger, and the rest with the finger above the note, but I’ve messed around with other fingers and know that you can get some nice effects by changing to another finger, depending on the instrument.
Rob, where and when are you playing this afternoon? I sent you a PM.
I’ll second what Jem and Rob have said here, and add that what sounds best is also determined by the flute you happen to be playing - some tapped/cut holes pop better on one flute over another, others sound dull or clumsy. Additionally, your hands are different from others, you probably hold your flute slightly differently, and therefore you’ll probably have a preference based on what works best for you – following a prescribed method implies there’s only one way that works best for everyone, and that’s just not the case. In this, it’s best to think the way Jem suggests and develop versatility in your choices. Listen to which cut cuts better, and pay attention to which feels more natural to you.
yes I would have learned like this but also use some of the other variations discussed. I think try and figure out which approach works best for yourself.
Yes someones left hand fingers could be lazy no better way to remedy this than utilising them for your cuts and rolls.
Thanks for these responses. I did do a search first, but came up with so many results for ‘cuts’ I didn’t know where to start.
One of the major themes that I am starting to pick up in my journey as an ITM beginner, is there really is no one way of doing anything. As a musician keep as many options open to you as possible and the ones that work best for the piece your playing, the instrument you’re playing and your current skills, is the best.
The major principle, at least is the dance music, seems to be “rhythm is the most important thing”. With regard to cutting, I seem to be hearing/ that it’s not so much how or even what you cut, it’s the timing and preciseness - the articulation. It’s probably the same for the rest of the ornamentation, but I have not go that far yet.
Your cuts will be crisper if you play them on a hole closer to the note you’re playing. That’s simply the physics of how a flute works. When you open a hole for a cut, all the air vents out that open hole. When you close the hole again, you have to re-fill the bore down to where the note is sounding – the more space there is, the longer it takes to fill up.
However, depending on the flute and the player, it may not make a huge difference in the sound – as Rob pointed out, plenty of people cut all the low notes with L3 and that works just fine for them.
And on the other hand, cutting higher on the flute will often produce a more distinctive sound (I suppose because of the larger difference in pitch).
In the end, you’ll have to experiment a bit to find what works well for you and your flute. But the Larsen method and the L3/L1 method seem to be the most common, and are good starting points.
I actually do my cuts in a rather odd way – I cut with the lowest finger when I can (for example I cut A with L2, G with L3). But I cut F with L3 because it doesn’t have much oomph with R1. If cut E mostly with R2, but sometimes with R1, or L3 for a roll – L3 produces a rather mushy sound for me, but I have trouble doing the roll all on the right hand.
I honestly have no idea how I arrived at this system, and I wouldn’t particularly recommend that anyone try to copy it. But it works for me.
Fortunately, in my opinion anyway, we are talking about music here, not physics. To that end, I’d say that using a further-away note sounds crisper than using the closest available note, on account of the greater difference in pitch. The term “crisp” is totally subjective, really. I think that many of the next-door-neighbor cut notes sound tidy, but boring. Definitely not crisp, in the sense of providing a bracing contrast. Cheers,
I’m no physicist, but I’ve read a great deal about the physics and acoustics of flutes and I’ve never heard/seen that before. It also does not make sense: are you saying a vacuum forms in the tube below where a hole is vented? That is the implication of your wording - and it would of course be impossible! If you are saying that the vibration of the air-column - the wavelength and frequency - changes, and that the actual part (length) of the air column enclosed by the flute tube as a whole that is in vibration changes, you would be nearer the mark, but I don’t know that anyone has ever even tried to measure the resistance if any, of the air-column to changing between notes. As the flute is notorious for the ease with which it can make wide and swift jumps of pitch (because of the flexibility of the means by which the air is set in vibration, by comparison with say a reed as a sound generator), your argument also fails to hold water on that front.
Also from practical playing experience, I do not notice any difference in response of cuts made close to or far from the note being cut - different effects, yes, but crispness and clarity is a function of the player’s motor control and timing, not the acoustical properties of the instrument, IMO. To demonstrate the fact, try playing a bottom D on either flute or whistle, then cut it a few times with each finger in succession all the way up the scale. Concentrate on getting your finger hops small, clean and quick, relaxed and controlled, and listen to the effect. (I’ve just done this on the low whistle I keep by my computer before writing.) The instrument won’t give a damn which finger you use - as long as you do it well, it will respond.
Think about it: you don’t actually “fill” the bore with your breath, the bore has air in it before you ever start to blow.
You are setting the air inside the bore to vibrating when you play, and you are using the tone holes to select where that vibrating column of air stops, because the open tone hole interferes with the standing wave and effectively makes your vibrating air column get shorter.
But whether you are playing a low D, an open C-sharp, or anything in between, the bore is still full of air all the way down to the end.
In fact, even when you’re not playing at all, the bore is still full of air all the way to the end.
To be honest, I’ve never really studied the physics of the flute, but this was the explanation given to me by a former teacher, who’s also a flute maker. While it’s true that the bore has air in, you do have to build up some air pressure inside it, and the pressure above the open tone hole is going to be different than the pressure below it.
But as I think about it more, I realize this doesn’t entirely explain what’s going on with cuts, so perhaps I’ve gotten the details garbled in my memory.
Regardless, I do find it true that cuts on higher notes are less crisp. If I cut an E or D with, say, L3, it doesn’t “pop” out the way it does with a lower finger. The high note that I’m cutting to doesn’t sound, and has sort of a breathy, mushy tone.
If I cut F or G with L3, it sounds just fine. It’s not a problem of finger dexterity, it’s just the way the flute works for me (and apparently for my teacher and Grey Larsen, too).
Thanks for all the comments of this issue. The thread is now heading in one of the directions I hoped it would. Being a new player, sometimes means that you are not even sure of the question - not just the answer
The way I read what Larsen is saying is that there is a ‘mechanical’ slowness (not sure that this is the right phrase) and sluggishness in the response in the cut. Moreso on the flute than the whistle, so it does not seem to be just about finger movement. As I’m just learning ornamentation, everything is sluggish and slow
jemtheflute wrote
…Also from practical playing experience, I do not notice any difference in response of cuts made close to or far from the note being cut - different effects, yes, but crispness and clarity is a function of the player’s motor control and timing, not the acoustical properties of the instrument, IMO…
So it looks like he has not experienced any issues.
Is this other’s experience, that the flute is not the limiting factor, but the crispness and accuracy of the playing, or is it as Larsen seems to imply that the further the cut note gets from the original note, the slower the flute responds?
BTW I’m trying to learn my cuts with a range of fingers so that I don’t have any ‘bad habits’ to unlearn later.
I started out with the L3/L1 method, then switched to Larsen’s method, then switched back to L3/L1. I think it’s much easier to remember and sounds better doing it the L3/L1 way.
That said, I don’t like my own cuts. I don’t think they sound good. I was too scared by Larsen’s book about not making a clearly distinct note with the cut that I think I went way too far to the other degree. I don’t make any note at all most of the time when I cut. Instead it sounds more like a puff of air, which I think sounds terrible.
I’m trying to undo the damage but it’s hard.
So my advice to you is even if Larsen spends a whole entire page admonishing you that if you don’t do X, Y or Z you’ll be forever damaged, don’t take it too seriously. His is one man’s opinion, and it’s the opinion of someone who is trying to instruct classical musicians in the different art of Irish flute. He’s trying to get people who do classical ornamentation to understand the Irish way is different.
Your blow is the engine of your flute playing. Nothing you do with your fingers will sound any good at all until you have your blow together. You can execute God’s perfect cran with your fingers, and if you’re not filling the flute, really exciting that column of air, it will sound miserable. Same thing goes for the lowly cut. A strong blow plus an understanding of how to control and vary your airstream to really punch out your ornaments will result in meaningful cuts, rather than indistinct, maundering little finger-flips. Yowza! Cheers,
!) - I’m sure you’ll find a plethora of old threads on the topic on both fora if you use the search facility. (Save us re-hashing it here!) Personally I developed untutored using chiefly the “next neighbouring finger” method as a basis, but have ended up using a variety/combination of alternative cuts in varying contexts. I certainly don’t stick to the (questionable) “purist” version that you summarised above by contrast to what Larsen advocates.
