dcopley wrote:Unseen122 wrote:
Comparing the Copley and Gallagher flutes comes down to things like this, for instance, John uses forged keys as opposed to casting them like on the Copley's; forging is a much more time-consuming process but yields a much more durable result. Will it affect tone and play-ability? Probably not, but it will add to the cost of production.
An interesting discussion but I would take exception to the above statement. You are correct that forging keys is a much more time consuming process than casting, but wrong in saying that it yields a much more durable result. This may have been true with 19th century casting techniques, but modern silver alloys and casting methods, with subsequent solution heat treat and age hardening, result in a key many times stronger than in needs to be. I don't recall ever having to repair any of our cast keys.
My apologies Dave, obviously I was misinformed and you clearly know more on the subject than I do! Further evidence that a person shouldn't take things they read online as gospel!
Peter, I didn't take this as fighting or arguing, I expressed an opinion and you pressed me to substantiate it; I've done the best I can considering the medium! Difficult, but I think we've stayed civil and haven't degenerated into ad hominem style attacks so that is always good!
My point in bringing up small construction details is, more-so, to explore objective points in which one could say one is of a higher quality v the other and not rely on subjective playing terms. I've done the best I can to explain why I prefer the way one plays over the other and feel like I would just start talking in circles if I continued to do so! As I said it's these small touches that, IMO, differentiate between very good and exceptional. That doesn't mean one would suit a certain player over the other just that it may explain differences in pricing, reputation, etc. As I said it would be dangerous to assume something is better because of the price but I do also think that, to a certain extent, you get what you pay for. (If buying new, used Olwells sell for a substantial mark-up due to the wait time for a new one, desirability, and other market factors.) Also, that reputations should be taken with a grain of salt but not dismissed entirely, if someone like Matt Molloy is playing an Olwell it is probably a fine flute but getting one isn't going to make you sound like Matt nor are you guaranteed to feel the same way about it as Matt does. Personally, I think the Molloy factor contributes a lot to the reputation of Olwells! (Or the Crawford factor for Grinters, etc.)
The original topic was about flutes comparable to Olwells which have a, deserved (even if I haven't been particularly fond of the way they play), reputation for superior quality. I do quite like Copley flutes and have been an outspoken supporter of Dave's work on this forum for a number of years. Your experience with Dave, and my own in working with him, are reasons I would say he has some of the best customer service in this industry. The topic is about top-end flutes and I have tried to express what
I think fits that description. There are a lot of instances where I
would recommend one of Dave's flutes and wouldn't own a D/C delrin set if I didn't like his work! However, I interpreted the question being asked as what is a good substitute for an Olwell that doesn't have the substantial wait or after market mark-up. I made my recommendation based off of this assumption; much in the same way, if this were about acoustic guitars, I wouldn't recommend a recent Martin DC-15 as a substitute for a pre-war D-18, even though I have one (a recent dc-15 not the pre-war!) and like it a lot, as I wouldn't think it fits the bill! (Or name any really high-end instrument vs. something that is of solid quality but isn't the 'creme de la creme' of it's field!)
I would agree with the comments by chas, Kirk, and Tjones, there are many fine flute makers listed in the thread, personally I would still rate some higher than others based off of factors I've outlined in previous posts, but one really couldn't go wrong with any of them! If one has specific needs as a player and is really aware of what those needs are, then it's time to acquaint one's self with the various nuances of each and go for one based off of that rather than what a bunch of us say are 'good quality' or what have you.
I do think discussions like this, when everybody remains civil, do serve us as players and will also serve any makers reading this to look at ways in which they can improve their craft (even if it is uncomfortable to have your creative output looked at in very critical terms!). I would not describe any of these instruments as bad; however I would say there are differences in quality even if they become smaller and smaller towards the higher end. I think most here would agree, there is a much bigger difference between a Pakistani flute-shaped-object and a Copley than there is between a Copley and an Olwell!