today when I was surfing the web came across some antique clementi/ nicholson flutes for sale.
I remember that three years ago when I just started out on flute, there were a lot of discussions about people buying a nicholson copy flute (such as olwells).
nowadays, seems we all are into pratten/ rudalls.
I wonder what happened to the popularity of the nicholson type flutes, what do the current owners think of them for the moment.
do you still play them, do makers still produce them?
what do relatively new makers think about them?
how woul a nicholson regarding characeristics, playing wise and sound wise differ from a rudall type of flute, large holed?
(other than that I seem to like the look of the old antique ones, especially those with the combing and nice rings…it will just remain a dream I am afraid unless I win the lottery, have never had the honour to play one yet)
Olwell still makes Nicholson-type flutes. I have both one of those and an Olwell Rudall-style, and playing-wise I find them quite similar – no adjustment at all if I switch between them.
A friend and I still have and play actual Nicholson’s. I also have Peter Noy’s Rudallish-Pratten (or Prattenish-Rudall) keyless which I find to play quite similar…never realy got the “feel” for an all out Pratten…
Olwell’s Nicholson flute isn’t any more a Nicholson than it is or isn’t a Rudall. The Nicholson flute that Olwell makes is very close to his Pratten model. But “Nicholson” and “Pratten” are really only model names of flutes that carry the Olwell brand.
Nicholson himself never made flutes. He was a player who wanted a larger sound. He was a big man with large hands and fingers who wanted more volume than contemporary flutes offered. He advocated large tone holes, large embouchure holes, and head pieces that were lined with metal.
In one sense, every modern flute that we use for Irish music is a Nicholson model. Few modern makers offer a flute for Irish music that is based on small-holed flutes from the early 19th. Century, or before 1820: i.e., flutes whose makers were not influenced by Charles Nicholson.
The flute maker perhaps the most influenced by Nicholson was Theobald Böhm.
The one you might be confusing him with is Robert Pratten (whose name Sidney is actually his mother’s maiden name…his birth middle name is James!).
Here is Mr. Pratten: http://home.earthlink.net/~yankees777/id87.htm
very big dude.
the large holes that mr. Nicholson (JR) espoused were actually developed and pushed by his father, Charles Sr.
and…interesting to note that Mr. George Rudall took lessons from the younger Nicholson before he entered the flute-making world.
I was waiting for someone more knowledgeable to provide input on this thread.
Someone correct me if I’m wrong; Michael Copeland’s flutes are based upon Prowse models (which were Nicholson’s Improved). I believe Copeland is the only modern maker modeling on a Prowse.
The ROSE (Rosewood Olwell Nicholson) was the finest tool for playing ITM, that I’ve ever tried. But the tone just wasn’t nearly as sweet as a good Rudall model.
Not ALL Nicholsons have large tone holes or embouchoure holes. I have a Nicholson (8 key Prowse) original as new condition and the holes are quite small. The flute itself is also not a loud player. The problem I have found with every Nicholson I have played is the bad tuning for todays ear, unless they have been modified the tuning is all over the place (way sharp and way flat), fine if your lips like gymnastics though.
Also have a Clementi (7 key) which has had bushes put in the 2nd and 4th holes as well as the lower hand joint shortnened by over half a centimeter to get the tuning sorted made by the previous owner which is in tune now. The problem with that now is that the bottom two keys are unplayable. The Clementi is lovely flute to play, well balanced and the feel reminds me of a couple of Sam Murray`s flutes I have tried.
Berti you have in fact played both of mine but it was a while ago so you may have forgotten. Next time we meet up you can have a play.
thanks I have not forgotten but not actually played at the time, found that I still had too much to learn then …there is still curiosity but the cat is still alive
Thanks DM. I assumed the early Nicholson was a large person because of what Christopher Welch says: in History of the Boehm Flute:
"The father of the late justly celebrated Nicholson gave greater power to some of the lower tones of the instrument by increasing the size of some of the apertures to a most unreasonable extent.
"Apparently Nicholson, who had very large hands, had even larger holes on his own flute than those which are found on the flutes that were manufactured under his name.
"Through Rudall, Böhm made the acquaintance of the amiable Charles Nicholson and his flute. The Nicholson flute was the ordinary one; but the tall and vigorous Englishman, … had the holes so increased in size as to suit his large and powerful fingers. "
It isn’t clear to me whether this last refers to Nicholson the son or Nicholson the father. I don’t suppose it matters much, either. We’re musician, not pedagogues.
tru enough…though the writings of Welch I think really do get at the Nicholson physique, matching the painting (and there is one print out there, which makes it appear as a larger guy)
His hands are large or at the least long-fingered (for a little guy) and he appears tall…but he was thin?
anyway… funny how son got all the credit for Dad’s presence for large-holed flutes!
I have a large-holed Clementi-Nicholson and love it.
