Learning to play in tune - help requested.

Irish Flute
1

I have an 1832 Hill/Monzani flute I really like which when I play it is like other flutes from that period that I’ve tried with a low F# (even if using the F key), high A and B, and flat foot. On one of our web pages about RTTA I wrote: “Learn about your specific tuning when playing your flute. Are you always sharp/flat on certain notes? Do you want to do something about it? Can you adjust how you play? Can you adjust your flute?”

Well I’ve adjusted the flute with wax in some of the holes to lower the high pitched notes and I’ve put up a web page with instructions on how to do this and tuning plots showing how successful it has been. I’m now having a lot of fun playing this flute both by myself and in sessions.

But I’ve been told I’d be better off adjusting how I play. Fair enough - I’m wanting to try but don’t know what to do. Can someone please provide me with instructions on what to practise. And I don’t mean something vague like “learn to play with a focused embouchure rather than a relaxed one” as I think I am already doing that. I need more detailed instructions. Please.

Thanks in advance
Graeme

2

I think that to start it’s like learning to get good tone in the first place, so play lots of long notes. Start centred on each note of the scale using your best embouchure, and then try to make thenote slowly go as sharp as you can, and then slowly go as flat as you can or vice versa. Since everyone’s lips/jaw mouth cavity is different, I don’t think it’s useful to say "put your lips this way. The point of the exercise is to see what works for you, and then try to build up the muscle memory of what it feels like to be playing sharper or flatter than where the flutemaker drilled the hole/adjusted the bore/undercut. By sliding towards the eventual goal, somehow it’s easier to get a sense of what is taking you there in a controlled way.

I know this is frowned on, but lots of professional traverso players leave their flutes rather still but raise or lower their chin (or you can think of it as nodding your head) to change the direction of the airstream. I found it much easier in the beginning to control the big muscles in my neck than the little muscles in my lips. I also found it easier to remember (in the muscle memory sense) than physically rolling the flute out or in.

In the beginning I had to move my lips and move the flute indirectly by nodding my head up or down to tune F and F# particularly, but later I could mostly do it with my lips. I’ve never played a flute with a flat foot, but can imagine I would be using every trick to get it close.

I few days ago I was seeing what was possible on one of my contemporary Rudall copies, and I would say that +/- 20 cents is relatively straightforward, but more than that would take a lot of practice. And then there’s learning to do it fast. But as the saying goes, if you can’t do it slowly, you can’t do it fast, so start on the long tones.

This may sound perverse, but I often find the best way to do stuff is to sidle up to it and give the brain something else to do. So just play slow tunes with an instrument with frets, keyboard, buttons, and try to play in tune. Most human ears are much more forgiving, the target is more accessible, and it’s more fun. It’s helpful if your partner has a good ear for intonation and could tell you how you are doing. You might find that when you aren’t thinking about how you are doing it that you are actually doing it, and this is encouraging to know it’s possible.

Oh yes, and long slow scales with attention to how it feels when your embouchure gets the interval right. The other thing is that the more breath support you have the better.

Cheers,Hugh

3

I’ve been using the same techniques as Hugh describes for the last couple of weeks and am now playing more in tune than before.

I’ve also been playing every thing slowly with a tuner and recording it and I’m playing along with slowed down solo flute tunes (from CD’s) on the computer and just concentrating on keeping in tune.

John

4

The “nodding up and down” is pretty much what I do – to flatten I tilt my head down slightly, dropping my chin so I’m blowing a bit more into the hole, and to sharpen I raise my chin thus tilting my head back so I’m blowing more across it. These are subtle movements, and the importance of having a focused embouchure is that you can control the tuning more efficiently that way with just slight variations in the blowing angle. I’m not sure why that is, but if you’re not blowing with focus my experience is that you tend to have to do more work to get notes into tune.

I remember seeing some YouTube clips of Matt Molloy playing and you can see him making these small head adjustments all the time, while he’s flying through dance tunes. It becomes unconscious after awhile, much like the way a fiddler can play notes in tune despite not having frets; it’s that “muscle memory” thing that Hugh mentioned above.

Years ago a flute-making friend of mine made an experimental flute: a cylindrical-bore simple-system flute with all the holes in the acoustically correct positions and sizes. It was a bear to play; I could do it but only because I have large hands and very long fingers. Some of the toneholes were so large that I got my fingers stuck in them. The sound of that flute was enormous, but I also found it very one-dimensional and ultimately not very interesting. To me, the changes in tonal quality that come from all the little gymnastics we do to play our flutes in tune are part of the magic of the wooden flute sound. Could you imagine what a set of uilleann pipes would sound like if every note had the same tonal quality as the bottom D? Ugh. Similarly, I like the fact that every note on the flute sounds a bit different than every other, in part because of the size of the tone holes (E coming from a much smaller tonehole than D for example) but also in part due to the effect of the adjustments we make to get those notes into tune. I wouldn’t want to lose that complexity and diversity and richness.

5

In each octave, blow the lower notes harder than the higher notes. This not only keeps things in tune, but it makes your tone and volume more consistent across the scale. Playing a B takes much less energy than playing a D.

Also, blow your higher octave more softly than your lower one. This is counterintuitive, but if you try to get into your upper octave simply by blowing harder, it’s going to get really sharp up there.

6

What Rob said. :slight_smile:

If you have a keyed flute and the flat F-sharp bothers you, add one of the F-natural keys to it, or if C-sharp is flat, add the long C key. It’ll bring up the pitch a bit, and it’ll help you increase your flexibility with using the keys as well.

–James

7

The nodding seems to me the only credible way of achieving the kind of deviations that would be needed on many first half 19th century flutes. Indeed we have historical recognition that it was necessary then. Cornelius Ward released his “The Flute Explained” in 1844, to promote his new Patent Flute. He talks about the ordinary flute and what you have to do to play it in tune in his section on the bore. I can only imagine that Rudall & Rose are the Quack Vendors in the first paragraph. Note that the contentious word “forcing” also occurs in two forms in the paragraphs below …

"The bore of the ordinary flute is made larger in this country than it should be for a flute properly constructed; because, from the enlarged capacity, and the necessarily increased force of blast, some of the cross-fingered notes become a very little better. The quack vendors of these instruments mystify the pretended effects of what they term chambering the bore, to convert to the best account their deficient skill, or their want of proper implements; as well as to cover a large amount of ignorance and pretension.

Akin to this mystification, is the course pursued in many instruction books. We have not seen one which candidly informs the learner of the manoeuvres required to play the ordinary flute in tune. They give a vast variety of modes of fingering the same notes; with the object, one might suppose, of perplexing the scholar, or of showing the author’s ingenuity. Their silence on the one hand, and their profuse loquacity on the other, furnish strong evidence of their having (in the old flute) a bad case to deal with, requiring a large amount of special pleading, and a studious concealment of the important truths.

The authors of these books do not tell the student that the intonation of the instrument rests entirely with the performer, and depends upon certain zig-zag manoeuvrings of his lip, and other subterfuges. They do not point out which notes require the flattening or sharpening, the forcing or tempering process. Oh, no! the flutes they recommend are, doubtless, well in tune: the student is to blame if he cannot play in tune; and he must take expensive lessons to learn, not how to tutor his own ear, but to correct the false intonation of the instrument.

The good old Quantz was more honest and candid. He gives full, clear, and true directions for correcting as far as possible the bad notes, which he considers and terms the natural defects * of the instrument. And he states that unless the player can use his lips and chin with dexterity, under the guidance of a good ear, he can never become a musician on the flute. Quantz was evidently not interested in puffing [promoting] any particular sort of flute; although he gives a true account of an improvement of his own. His remarks upon the method of playing in tune, and indeed upon all other matters concerning the instrument in relation to the performer, contain more sound information, and in a better form, than any modern work on the subject, although he wrote one hundred years ago.

  • Natural effects, we should rather say, of erroneous construction. Our flute demonstrates that such defects are neither natural nor necessary when the necessary natural laws are not contravened."

Heady stuff, eh? Ward was renowned for not holding back. But I think it confirms that, even in his day, just before Siccama and Boehm were to release their new models, it was still necessary to employ “zig-zag manoevres” and “other subterfuges” to get the flute into tune, even at the pitch it was designed for. So, no wonder we have to work when we play at another pitch.

Indeed, the deviations on the early 19th century flutes are probably greater than the deviations on a well-made baroque flute. My personal reading is that they had introduced some serious problems when they extended the foot from short D (as in a 4 key) down to C (for the 8-key). Richard Potter choosing to go with his longest corps de rechange when he switched to the tuning slide was a bizarre choice whcih left the flute too long-scaled. Nicholson’s Improvements opening up some holes but not shortening the foot compounded these problems. Those Quack Vendors Rudall and Rose stuffed about with chambering to try to minimise the problems but it wasn’t until we got to Siccama that anyone had a radical rethink of the problem.

No, I can’t say that with certainty, yet. Ward might have. He certainly had the understandings as you can tell from the above. He had the background - a successful flute maker for many years. Unfortunately the only Ward Patent flutes I’ve located are in museums and unplayable, so I can’t put his product to the test.

The rest of Ward can be found at:

http://www.mcgee-flutes.com/Ward.htm

Terry

8

Since I started with the traverso, maybe it’s not a surprise that I prefer Quantz’s version of what it takes to play in tune

unless the player can use his lips and chin with dexterity, under the guidance of a good ear, he can never become a musician

over Ward’s version as I think it is about skill, not force. Perhaps it’s not surprising that Ward uses the pejorative word “force” because he is trying to promote himself by running down his competitors.

Cheers,
Hugh

9

I studied physics and to me the word “force” could be describing the weight of a feather or that of a steam locomotive, - it is not perjorative. However in common parlance it has come to mean “lots of force”. We don’t know what shades of meaning Ward attached to it. But in future I’m going to use “skillful and subtle use of the lips, chin, head, breath, etc which can be acquired by many years of diligent practice, to coax” a flute into tune rather than “force” a flute into tune. It might be longer to write but it’s more informative.

Meanwhile the actual advice. This is all good advice, and I’ve been practising this sort of thing for 30 years now. I thought I should measure how well I do so I have checked out a couple of exercises. Alternating between G to B and aiming to hit the G in tune and the B as flat as I can get or as sharp as I can get. I can get the B either up or down 30 cents quite easily. If alternating from G to D I can get the D up or down 20 cents quite easily. Not surprising that the notes higher on the flute tube eg B are easier to bend up or down than the lower notes. eg D. So far so good, and I recommend this exercise to others.

My problem comes when playing music. I can get all the notes at the pitch I want when playing slowly, but the faster I play the less effective this becomes. If I’m playing a reel flat out at 120 bpm there’s a new note every 1/8 second and I end up with me not adjusting (with “skillful and subtle…”) any note in tune but just getting the underlying tuning of the flute that I would get when not "using skillful… " I notice the same thing if I analyze recordings of really good players (to a lesser extent) so what hope is there for me? Should I devote some serious time to practising to get better at this? Or should I just adjust the flute so I don’t need to, and spend that time enjoying playing music rather than doing excercises?

Reading what Ward has written it’s obvious that this is not a new question.
Cheers
Graeme

10

Ah, but they are talking about two very different flutes in two very different musical times. The flute of Quantz’s time had but one key (or occasionally two to enable D# and Eb to be played differently). The holes on those flutes were tiny, offering a reasonable prospect of cross-fingering, the music was quiet, the music rooms small, just intonation and meantone temperaments were the go. Trying to convince a flute with just 6 holes to play 12 notes is going to need a bit of coaxing. Actually 22 notes, given the enharmonic tuning demanded in the period.

By 1844, flutes went down to C, had 8 keys, big holes, tuning slides, keyboard instruments were tuned in equal temperament, power was demanded for large venues, large orchestras and piano accompaniment. The deviations Ward is railing about were greater than those Quantz had to deal with, yet the leverage players had available was less (due to the bigger holes). And this on a flute that had a key or a hole for every note! 100 years had passed, the flute had developed enormously, but intonation had gone backwards, or at best, had not gone forwards. Gentle coaxing had given away to the need for force.

Perhaps it’s not surprising that Ward uses the pejorative word “force” because he is trying to promote himself by running down his competitors.

Cheers,
Hugh

I could agree to that if he were not also right. Our measurements today support what he is saying. Carte in 1851 also draws attention to the tuning defects of the “ordinary flute”.

“This flute has two great defects; it is out of tune - some of its notes being too flat, and some too sharp; and it varies in quality of tone - some of its notes being free and clear, and others feeble and muffled.”

It is a mystery to me for example why Rudall & Rose stuffed about with their Patent Head, which at best could mask some of the side effects of trying to play both domestic and Philo pitch, instead of using corps de rechange, or even individual flutes for high and low pitch, which would have solved the problem. It seems they just didn’t understand the question. Ward clearly did, as did Siccama and Boehm. Ward might have been a curmudgeon, but he knew about flutes, and he wasn’t afraid to speak his mind.

Terry

11

Terry we agree that nodding the head is the best solution to overcoming the indisputable tuning problems of simple system flute before 1850 or so. We are disagreeing whether nodding the head requires force in the F=ma sense. Brad says

These are subtle movements

. I don’t see how you could do the hundreds or thousands of these nods in an evening if they required much force.

I think we are also disagreeing about whether “force” is the best word to use in its colloquial sense. I cheerfully predict that you wouldn’t be pleased if I described your elegant solutions to say, designing a better system of keys for a simple system foot joint as “forced”. Such a choice of words by me would ignore your 30 years of experience, the experimentation, the talent, and the perseverance necessary to get to the point where your solution was found. I feel the same way when you describe the ability to play a flute in tune as “forced”.

Cheers,
Hugh

12

Graeme asks the question about whether one is better to spend time playing a more in tune flute, or learning to play an out of tune one. Everyone has to answer that for themselves. Certainly when I switched from the traverso to the Irish flute I decided I wasn’t going through having to learn how to tune every note again!

My version would be is that if the people you are with keep stopping and saying “we need to check out tuning” while they look meaningfully at you, then it’s worth working on the intonation. If people say “Hugh, fester it, play that stick in tune or I’ll break it over my knee” you have even more incentive. Sometimes you have to play out of tune just so the differences between you and that large ill-tempered piper are minimized.

I do think it’s worth learning enough about embouchure flexibility so that one can play in tune as needed for the real world because that flexibility and ear give you more options.

Hugh

13

I think some misunderstanding has slipped in here somewhere about how I’m applying the word force.

I would not use the word force to describe the manipulations a baroque flautist uses to get that instrument to comply to whatever scale they are working in. I need that word for more serious situations. Coax, maybe?

I of course can have no knowledge of the degree of difficulty faced by you, Rob or others in this discussion as I don’t know what flutes you are playing and, even if I did, I wouldnt know how well they are tuned. I’m assuming they need a bit of work, or they wouldn’t be in the conversation. If Rob characterises it as subtle, it sounds like his is in the coax category.

I do know that I cannot reliably play my Metzler original in tune. I would describe my attempts as “attempts to force it, that fail”. Maybe others could coax it, I don’t know.

I also know that no-one I have met can play my beautiful but dumb Nicholson’s Improved in tune. I pull it out routinely as a challenge to the unwary. I’d describe it as “beyond forcing”.

I think we are also disagreeing about whether “force” is the best word to use in its colloquial sense. I cheerfully predict that you wouldn’t be pleased if I described your elegant solutions to say, designing a better system of keys for a simple system foot joint as “forced”. Such a choice of words by me would ignore your 30 years of experience, the experimentation, the talent, and the perseverance necessary to get to the point where your solution was found. I feel the same way when you describe the ability to play a flute in tune as “forced”.

As you can see from the above, I would not call what you routinely do on the traverso forcing, and I don’t know what you do on your ordinary flute. But look, I’m not so wedded to the word I’m prepared to die in a ditch over it. Let’s find some words we can use, or our conversation can go nowhere useful!

We also need to agree on some boundaries, or again we could be talking at cross purposes. Something along the lines:

+/- 10 cents - in tune? (within measurement and repeatability limits)
+/- 10 to 20 cents - requires coaxing?
+/- 20 to 30 cents - requires pushing?
+/- 30 to 40 cents - requires forcing? Arghhh, quick find me a word!
+/- > 40 cents - I’d have said impossible, but ??

(not necessarily +/- n cents from A4, but from the median note?)

It would be better if our words were more instructive, eg lipping, nodding, whatever, than coaxing, pushing and forcing. But I’m out of my depth in this game, so I’d rely on others to set the techniques in order and assign them limits of effectiveness.

I’d like to hear people’s estimates of how far they can reliabily push notes when needed. I’d say I’m in the +/- 20c range. (Always been one for the hardware solution!)

Terry

14

My experience with keyed, vintage flutes is quite limited, so let me comment from the perspective of a Boehm player.

In an earlier thread, I mentioned my learning to tune an A=435 flute to an A=440 world, but even among A=440 flutes there can be considerable variation in their tuning. Although I have my favorite flutes, I occasionally do switch back and forth among several Boehm flutes, and unless it’s one I play regularly, it could take me a few days to adjust to a different flute.

In tuning a flute, it seems that the most important thing is for the player to have a good sense of tune, to begin with, and then it’s a matter of “bending” a given flute into tune, one tone at a time, some flutes being easier than others. The good news is that once a flute is warmed up, a flute tends to be consistent in its ways, so once the player has worked out any tuning issues, the flute then behaves like a predictable machine, as a tone generator.

The catch being, it can take some time to compare each and all of the flute’s tones to each other, to then make any appropriate tuning compensation(s) for any given tone(s), by means of embouchure, and to then remember any such compensation(s), such that any embouchure adjustment becomes automatic to the point of simply being a reflex. In a word, that could call for practice, practice, practice, until the tuning simply “falls” into place. Given your level of experience, however, that shouldn’t take long. Again, it could take me a few days, sometimes.

So, to address your question, it indeed does seem necessary to find the correct embouchure for each of a flute’s tones. Again, however, the flute being a form of machine, at least once the appropriate “formula” gets worked out for a particular flute, the flute’s performance should remain consistent.

As a strategy, I’d suggest working on the biggest troubles first, and it often happens that the smaller troubles could simply work themselves out, automatically. And, remember the words of the late Duke Ellington, “If it sounds good, it is good.”

Let me add, that although moving one’s head up or down could be a traditional technique, it’s really not necessary, and, moreover, it’s much too slow. The embouchure is much faster, and more convenient.

15

Brad, this is very well said. “One-dimentional and not very interesting.” I was trying to get that thought out on the RTTA names thread but you said it so well I quoted the above over there. Hope you don’t mind.