It is currently Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:22 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 01, 2018 7:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 7:19 pm
Posts: 361
Location: Hood River, Oregon, USA
I'm not sure how old my Grinter is. I bought it from a member here in 2015. I think it is pretty new though.
It is a keyless D flute with rudall-style separate left and right hand body sections and a separate foot. It also
came with additional body sections to play in C, using the same head and foot. It has a long foot.

It plays in tune with itself at A=440, almost perfectly for me, with the tuning slide extended about 4 mm at
a 70 degree room temp. The low B and D are very well aligned with that slide extension, and the tuning is very
close to that of my Olwell when played back to back in the same environmental conditions, and the tuning on
that is the best I've ever seen. Both are as close to "perfect" as any player would need them to be, in my opinion.

So, given that the flute is keyless I can't address your spring question or the C#-Eb measurement. However,
the C# to D measurement (center of hole that vents C# to center of top foot hole that vents D) is about 289 mm,
if that is of any use.

I really like how this flute plays, so I profiled the bore and was surprised to find that it was almost identical (at
least within the margin of error for measurement, reamer reproduction, and finishing) to that of my Olwell. In
other words, you could make a decent replica of either instrument using the same reamer. The two flutes have
subtly different embouchure cuts and a slightly different tone hole matrix, and that makes them distinct from
each other. But I think the similar bore is telling, in the sense that the Olwell is supposedly a "Pratten", and the
Grinter is supposedly a "Rudall". From my perspective, though, they both look, feel, and play, like highly optimized
modern flutes. They are really GREAT flutes, but they are quite distinct from antique Prattens and Rudalls that
I've experienced. This is why I tend to recoil a bit when I see discussions that try to categorize modern flutes as
either Pratten or Rudall, when they are not intending to replicate a particular Pratten or Rudall antique.

So, I don't know if Grinter uses different reamers for his keyless and keyed flutes, or if he has evolved his reamer
design over time. I strongly suspect that he has many different reamers. I already do, and I'm only just starting
out in flute making and have not yet tried to sell a single instrument.

Maybe the keyed flute you are working on is an early one that was a direct copy of an original antique, complete
with its tuning anomalies. Maybe this was a convenient starting point for a new maker back in the day, or maybe
the intention was to deliberately create an accurate replica, and the flute is not one of his early ones at all.

Which is representative of his work? Well, they both are, I guess. My feeling is that makers like Grinter, Wilkes, etc
are extremely talented flute makers who are capable of making just about any flute they want. They can copy originals,
and they have evolved their own designs over time, through a laborious iterative process, and by learning from each
other and past masters. They can tweak particular instruments in many different ways, as top flute makers seem to
have done throughout history. Flutes from a specific modern maker differ from each other over time, as do flutes
from specific historic makers. Your study of the evolution of Rudalls is a great example of this.

This is why I think we need to be careful about making overly general statements about the characteristics of flutes
from specific makers, and then making inferences about a maker's capabilities. Its better to collect experiences with
specific instruments and qualify them with as much background information as we have, which I guess is what we are
doing here.

Oh, and my flute has Grinter's maker's mark on every section, but I have not found a serial number anywhere.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 01, 2018 8:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2004 2:06 pm
Posts: 2329
Location: Dartmouth, Massachusetts, USA
paddler wrote:
...I tend to recoil a bit when I see discussions that try to categorize modern flutes as
either Pratten or Rudall, when they are not intending to replicate a particular Pratten or Rudall antique.

Drifting a bit, but there seems to be a tendency to lump one-piece bodies as Prattens (damn spell-check keeps trying to change that to pre-teens) and two piece bodies as Rudalls. As Paddler hints, and I strongly concur, it would be nice to get away from this somehow.

Best wishes.

Steve

_________________
"[Some flutists] place the flute between the upper lip and the nose, blowing the instrument from below. This position does not prevent good playing, but it does not look graceful."
~ Antoine Mahaut, 1759 in a tutor for playing the transverse flute ~


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 01, 2018 10:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2002 6:00 pm
Posts: 2592
Location: Sweden
I have a Wilkes made in 2000 with medium sized holes. I'm not sure on which Rudall flute Chris has based the Wilkes I have. The embouchure hole is the same shape as the embouchure holes on three Rudall flutes made in 1842, 1844 and 1891-2. All three Rudall flutes have been repadded, are airtight, and are easy to play I find, after playing them on a regular basis. As discussed in an earlier thread, I find the Wilkes easy to play too after becoming accustomed to the Rudall embouchure.

I think the Wilkes I have sounds similar to the Rudall flutes, maybe a tad louder. No special tricks needed to play the Wilkes or the Rudalls. It's just to have the patience to become familiar with your instrument, just to blow, spend time. We all have different mouth shapes, also different teeth configurations, or perhaps missing molars, over- or underbite. There are lots of facial variables, that can have positive or negative issues, that also have to be taken into consideration irrespective of whoever you're trying to play a Victorian or modern timber flute.

I think the Wilkes I have is very close to the Rudall & Rose and Rudall Carte & Co. flutes I play.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 01, 2018 10:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 3:50 pm
Posts: 230
Interesting discussion, there is definitely a categorisation system in place for Irish flutes which equates to; one piece body = Pratten, two piece body = Rudall. As Terry has shown, one of the most prominent and perhaps the most prolific makers Rudall & Rose appeared to produce flutes with a broad range of variations. Paddler's observations regarding the similarity of bores between a Grinter and an Olwell flute are important, I have even heard it said that modern copies of Prattens and Rudalls are indeed so similar, that the number of middle joints ( one or two) is the only true difference between many of them, unlike the originals.
So perhaps it may be appropriate to refocus the discussion, say, which makers of Irish flutes do we feel stay truest to the original instruments? So far, the names; Bryan Byrne, Rod Cameron, and Glen Watson have been mentioned in this respect. It would be interesting to see if other members concur with the names mentioned above, or feel other maker's names should be included in this category. Could the keyed Grinter that Terry worked on with the broad intonation be considered a contender as well?

Out of interest, I have read that Grinter has produced two noticeable flute designs, and that his earlier instruments were based on a Wylde, can anyone confirm this?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 01, 2018 2:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 6:00 pm
Posts: 294
Location: Sevilla, Spain
I have a Wilkes, made in 1992. It´s a second hand flute, I own it since 2001 and I was told that this flute was an exact copy of a particular Rudall and Rose flute. I always thought that but I don´t know it this is completely true. I think that most of the makers start copying some original flute and continue his career developing and modifying the starter design to reach what customers and makers consider a better flute-
In my particular case at the begining I did struggle a lot with the tunning, because the foot notes were very flat to me. The foot joint was rebored and after that I felt that the flute was perfect in tune since then, at leat to my feeling and embouchure.
I have tried a few Wilkes made years later than the mine. They presented different tone holes and bore size than the one I own. All of them were terrific flutes. I know Chris has been changing the design along the years. But, after all, I prefer the mine one. It suits me better. May be it´s me.
Regards,
S.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2002 6:00 pm
Posts: 1216
Location: Ojai,CA
i have a keyed Wilkes (pratten) and a keyed Grinter........also a few other keyed and keyless flutes by other modern makers.....
i am used to pushing harder on the lower notes and find some of the other flutes i have that may be tuned truer less fun to play because i can't lean harder on the low D.

_________________
www.eilambyle.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2002 6:00 pm
Posts: 2285
Location: Montreal
Uni Flute wrote:
So perhaps it may be appropriate to refocus the discussion, say, which makers of Irish flutes do we feel stay truest to the original instruments? So far, the names; Bryan Byrne, Rod Cameron, and Glen Watson have been mentioned in this respect.


Bryan Byrnes' flutes are definitely his own designs; he might use Rudall & Rose and Rudall Carte flutes as starting-off points but I wouldn't consider his flutes replicas by any means. My own 6-key Byrne was based roughly on a Rudall Carte owned by a friend of mine, but the two flutes sound and play very differently.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 02, 2018 1:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2014 6:04 am
Posts: 14
Off subject, but, what happened to Bryan Byrne? Has he stopped making flutes?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 7:43 pm
Posts: 15
Location: Oakland, California
I agree with the list so far. (Hamilton, Murray, Grinter, Wilkes, Watson)
I wonder if Jezquel might be included, or if I'm mistaken?
(Full disclosure: I'm going by recordings I hear online, and while I typically listen to more than one of a maker, since players vary more than flutes do, it's still a trifle compared to playing the flutes first hand)

Interesting Eilam, that's something that I wondered about. It might be something they would find useful as feedback, if you haven't already mentioned it to them.
I imagine it wouldn't be out of the realm for some makers to offer a standard or "unmodified" tuning, and a "flatted lows" tuning for louder session playing. I've never seen it explicitly mentioned, so perhaps some do it by request, but don't advertise it?
Seems an important issue to me, considering how critical tuning is to a player.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 02, 2018 9:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2002 6:00 pm
Posts: 1216
Location: Ojai,CA
i feel like all the seasoned makers know what they are doing and the flutes they make work for the people they aim as clients.....
there are makers that i love their work and over the years had 4-5 flutes by them, only to once more find out they don't work for me.
i love playing flute and have done so since highschool, but never turned it into "work" or actually worked on becoming a better player, i just love the music and the instruments, my playing is far from polished, so i don't feel my voice counts that much to a maker....

_________________
www.eilambyle.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2018 12:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 7:43 pm
Posts: 15
Location: Oakland, California
That makes sense. I just listened to a recording of yours, Road to Glencpisdale, and I dig your style, soulful. Engaging without being pushy. I'm no expert either, but I think one thing that stands out is your phrasing. A lot of players don't catch me with their phrasing because they rush and I can't get into it, it just goes over me. So I appreciated your sense of rhythm and pace.

Two things that might help the low D sharpness (but might not, just a thought):

It looks like you already know this tip, but it could help to exaggerate it even more. It helped me zero in my tuning. The tip I was given is holding the flute so the foot end is angled in close, rather than away from the body, and blowing at an angle toward the head end of the flute. Since you're already doing this, maybe turning your head even more, and snugging the flute in even more, so it's even more angled might help.

The other thing that might help, is an embouchure tip I was given. It's less commonly known than the one above, though you may know this too:
Instead of tightening the lips as some teach to do (with the lips puckered in on the sides), letting the lips remain relaxed, creating a tiny bit of gentle smile, and then blowing, allowing the air to form the shape of the lips accordingly. At first I found it difficult not to tighten my lips instinctively, because it's hard to sound the flute at first, but eventually I got it. I don't always do it, but I'm working on doing it more, it works well.
It helps with the lips tiring, but also it enables me to put out more air by volume without going sharp, by creating a larger air hole. I also found I could get a louder sound with less effort. It's especially helpful for the low notes, I find.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2018 7:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2002 6:00 pm
Posts: 2285
Location: Montreal
Nicolas86 wrote:
Off subject, but, what happened to Bryan Byrne? Has he stopped making flutes?


Still making flutes as far as I know.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2018 1:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2001 6:00 pm
Posts: 16628
Bryan always maintained a low profile. No website, and so on.
Last I heard he is now making small-holed rudally flutes.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2018 11:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2002 6:00 pm
Posts: 1216
Location: Ojai,CA
bluesalmon, thank you so much ! i will try playing more relaxed. this recording was done about 14-15 years ago on one of those flutes that i love but can't play them in tune (they always play sharp for me)...........i recently got another flute by this maker because i love his work and his flutes.........but i can't play it in tune though i have no doubt others do..........i can get a beautiful tone.......just too high, even when pulled out as far as the slide will go.

_________________
www.eilambyle.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 6:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2002 6:00 pm
Posts: 2285
Location: Montreal
BlueSalmon wrote:
That makes sense. I just listened to a recording of yours, Road to Glencpisdale, and I dig your style, soulful.


Just a tiny correction -- that tune (which was actually composed by me, back in the 1980s) is called the Road to Glencripesdale, in honor of the 7-kilometer rock-strewn track that goes between the Laudale estate and the Glencripesdale estate on the west coast of Scotland. It's really meant to be driven on with Land-Rovers, but I did it using a tiny hired Fiat and despite my best efforts to avoid the ruts and boulders I managed to bottom out a couple of times and flattened the exhaust system, which a local garage hammered back into shape for me and the rental company never noticed. :wink:

I composed it as a reel, but Sarah Bauhan recorded it as a slow reel so a lot of people have learned it that way.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.093s | 14 Queries | GZIP : On ]
(dh)