I’ve been quite busy lately with moving and recording an album and everything so I haven’t had the chance to write a lot.
But I reasently picked up a Seery Pratten delrin flute. I’ve just played it a little bit, but it’s definately a keeper. Good strong tone, can’t believe how easy it is to get a powerful bottom end from it. The thing just punches out that low D like there’s no tomorrow. I find it’s easier to fill than I expected as well, but that might be because I’ve toyed around a lot on a Bb flute. Basically any D flute would feel effortless.
Not going to part with my M&E though. I still think that I’m a Rudall guy at heart. I enjoy that deep, nuanced tone from the M&E Rudall, as well as the slightly quicker feel. But time will tell if I grow in to the Seery even more. So far I think the sound is just a bit too dry and thin for me, but I think I need to record myself with it to see what it sounds like then.
The embouchure hole is a bit strange, and I definately think it will take some more time to get used to it. The workmanship is of course slightly more refined than on the M&E flute, and the flute seems very slim and slender.
Not sure what more to say. I will keep toying around with this flute and see what happens. I’m glad I got it, and I will keep it. But I’m pretty sure that if I’m going to upgrade my main flute to something fancier, I’ll go Rudall-style.
This is exactly why no one reading posts on this message board should take the advice of anyone here. If you don’t understand what I mean by this, go back and look up all of Henrik’s posts on the subject of which polymer flute to buy…
Not really sure which posts you mean. I certainly have recomended the M&E on numerous occations, and I still stand by everything I’ve said (or can remember saying).
I can’t remember saying anything about the Seery except I might have speculated on the R&R vs. Pratten issue (and in those cases I’ve clearly pointed out that I was speculating).
Have I written anything that was contradictory to what I wrote here?
I’m simply saying that as I recall, there have been many, many posts where folks have asked about polymer flutes and you’ve always been very one sided in your recommendations for the M&E, suggesting them over the Seery, without having given the Seery flutes a fair trial as a basis for reference, and most often, as I recall, without stating something along the lines of “I really like the M&E, but I haven’t much played a Seery”. Instead it’s been more like “Yeah, buy the M&E”
I’m not picking on you in particular Henrik, I’m simply using your post as an example of something that happens here all the time. And as I said, I think folks should view everyone’s suggestions with regards to what flute to purchase, with some skepticism, mine own suggestions included.
I’m very sorry if it has come across that way. That was not intentional.
I’ll read back a bit and see if I can spot what you mean exactly. I know that I have recomended the M&E, and I still do, because it’s a fantastic flute. But as I recall most of my posts, I’ve just described the M&E, for obvious reasons since I have very limited experience with Seery, and in that way it’s obvious that the posts were single-sided. But if I have described the M&E as a better flute or better buy than the Seery on any occation I’ll have to go beat myself up!
No need to apologize, I think we all do it to an extent, and it may well be that I’m completely off here - my recollection of you posts could definitely be off.
‘And as I said, I think folks should view everyone’s suggestions with regards to what flute to purchase, with some skepticism, mine own suggestions included.’
Well said. It seems to me that if we will take the trouble to express
our views about whatever it is we’re suggesting, flutes,
technique, development, and so on, with appropriate ‘tentativity,’-- my new
word, just coined–so that noobies never feel they are receiving
The Word from the Delphic Oracle of Flutes, all will be well. (As in, ‘it
seems to me, having played flute for …,’ 'my opinion is that…,
‘I suggest that…,’ 'You may find that…).
Very few entirely silly suggestions are made here, certainly not yours.
One wants to signal that skepticism remains appropriate, I feel,
in the way suggestions are presented.
It’s not so much that you shouldn’t take the advice. Rather, you should try to balance the various pieces of advice, and sometimes take them with a grain of salt. Bear in mind that we’re all subjective in our postings, and our opinions change over time.
As a new player who has chosen the Seery Pratten path, I find all postings on the subject to be interesting. And, not having played a Rudall-style flute for more than a few minutes, I’m very interested in what Henrik has to say. I may not buy it all, (or I may). But I’m not looking for gospel truths from anyone — just impressions. I trust Henrik to speak his mind, even if or when it changes.
I’m glad to finally see you taking your playing Seeryously… .
Now that I’ve got that bad pun out of my system, I’m glad you’re having fun with the Seery. I still miss mine from time to time, and they are very well made.
I agree the embouchure is different. Jon C. said it’s very similar to his standard embouchure (correct me if I’m wrong Jon), but I find it a bit on the small side for my personal physiology. Despite that, I really liked it’s tone, and it’s tuning is really good.
I don’t find the M&E any more agile from my personal experience than the Seery - so my guess is that’ll change the longer you play it. The bottom end is, from my experience, much easier to find on Prattenesque flutes in general than on Rudall derived models (or old german flutes for that matter).
FWIW - I recall Henrik strongly recommending M&Es, but I don’t recall him disparaging or suggesting them over Seery’s or other flutes he hadn’t played. I was a strong Seery supporter for a while - I think Henrik and I balanced each other out. Now, I play an M&E (my only flute), and he’s cheating on his M&E…it’s kind of funny when you think about it.
Loren - Very good point:
And as I said, I think folks should view everyone’s suggestions with regards to what flute to purchase, with some skepticism, mine own suggestions included.
That has struck me as well. You might have noticed that the topic of this thread is stolen from your previous thread where you announced getting an M&E.
It struck me as funny that we seem to mirror each other.
I’d forgotten that was how I posted after getting my M&E! Let me know what you think of the Seery after playing it for about a month. I don’t think either one is truly the better flute, but I do think some flutes are better suited to different players.
Since the topic talk about Seery, i’d like to know if someone can give his one-sided or not opinion about wooden one. Can’t remember any post about it. Sure i like the Delrin one but
i can’t imagine how nice is an olive wood Seery
This is a common problem where a quantitative and objective evaluation of a piece of equipment is unavailable. It’s certainly rampant in an astronomy forum that I participate in, a hobby which is very much equipment driven and expensive. Testimonials are rife with hyperbole, verbal gymnastics, cult of personality/flavor of the day, and parrotism (I “read” brand X is the best).
So about that grain of salt, any reader should be asking themselves:
What is the reviewer’s qualification (training)?
Is the reviewer competent (can they REALLY play)?
What is the reviewer’s experience (years of playing, professional vs amateur, etc.)?
Language and writing skills (competence again)?
Is the reviewer being objective (semi/quantitative)?
Has the reviewer separated his preferences and the actual performance?
Is the reviewer impartial and free of commercial interests?
How many samples did the reviewer use in conducting her review?
What were the test objectives (e.g., suitability for ITM) and test conditions (e.g., noisy pub or concert hall)?
etc.
But I’ll be the first to admit that few folks, if any, will ever go through the trouble to answer these questions. Furthermore, for many of us, this is just a hobby so being tough will just simply spoil the fun.
'It’s not so much that you shouldn’t take the advice. Rather, you should try to balance the various pieces of advice, and sometimes take them with a grain of salt. ’
Sensible. I’m a bit concerned for noobies reading this board.
As to equipment, one thing I’ve noticed is that sometimes
we start to get a rave review or two about a new flute
(Rush out and buy one, get on the list before the price
goes up, etc.) and then everything goes silent. Later I recieve a PM from
someone who quietly tells me he/she got one and it
wasn’t very good. The negative opinions aren’t posted, people
are hesitant to do that, for multiple reasons. So I guess
it’s smart to be careful about rave reviews.
Sometimes flutes are badly misdescribed. The Seth Gallagher
Pratten was described as a ‘balls to the wall’ Pratten. Competitive
with an Olwell. It isn’t,
it’s more of a rudall, in fact, which is no defect but it’s not
as described. But there’s no way of telling that
from the post–the poster sounds entirely knowledgeable.
So the ‘new flute’ frenzy needs to be viewed with some suspicion,
if I may say so.
As to the Seery, I played one for a year or so and liked it well
enough. The embouchure was actually pretty demanding, I thought.
The guy who sold it to me couldn’t play it.
I wish i could compare to the MandE Rudall, but I’ve played one of those
only briefly. Finally I decided I could get more out of my wooden
flutes and these are tough enough for the purposes that I kept
a delrin flute, so I sold it. To my sorrow: I’ve learned recently
that delrin dust is a hallucinogen.
No one’s posts here are PAID posts and no liability attaches to the poster in relation to the accuracy and usefulness of any advice or comment.
Everything here is under the aegis of “OPINION”.
I can’t understand why someone would point out Henke’s post as contradictory… I find his opinions quite consistent and useful - of course anyone with an open mind may at some point reconsider their thinking on specific flutes… I thought this forum is for letting people share their experience to help others and of course no one can “know” what’s the “best” flute for somebody else - Tod
Tod - good points, i too always like to read Henke’s posts, and always find them consistent, in that he write how and what he feels without ego thrown in.
i too, have both M&E and Seery, i like them in different ways, they are very different from each other.
i like playing the Seery better, but feel that the M&E is a better flute, especially for beginners.
The Seery to me, has a dry and un-interesting tone compared to the M&E, i think the M&E is at least as powerful, and may carry better because of it’s more focused tone, but the Seery feels really nice in my hands.
like i said, i play the Seery more, but would recommend the M&E, especially if it’s the only flute one has, for it’s tone and playability.
Recently, I had to face the very same decision, whether to buy a M&E or a Seery. After reading many times here and there, I came across an interesting and helpful website which features some audio files with M&E and Seery playing. Some of you might find this interesting. There is also a section (Comparisons) where one tune is played on different flutes and a mp3 running though scales.
I have the good fortune of having 2 very playable, serviceable, wonderful and highly sought after flutes, both in D.
I LOVE them both! (I have more than these 2, but they are my favorites)
I wanted to try playing one of them exclusively, as has been recommended ad nauseum on this forum, in order to see if my playing will improve by leaps and bounds, as advertised (flame away, O flute Gods)
I couldn’t decide which of the 2 I wanted for the experiment however. Much to my chagrine.
So I recorded myself playing a simple tune on both, and listened to the playback.
.
