Hi, all –
Don’t know if this is even worth a topic, and I guess I’ll find out soon enough if it dies with no replies, eh?
Anyway, I started to rush to Eddie’s side to augment his McGee note with some thoughts of my own about the McGee I played a few weeks ago … but then I found myself wandering back into this philosophical no-man’s land I’ve been inhabiting lately, and started wondering what y’all might think. Anyway, basically, here it is …
Over the last few years, I’ve had the chance to play some new flutes and some old flutes – not nearly long enough to know any of them, but enough to form a quick impression of each individual. I’ve played quite a variety, from top-end Olwells to the Burns folk flute on the new side; a Hall, a Chappell, a Metzler, a Hawkes, plus some real “Gan Aimns” the old side. And then, of course, I’ve logged countless hours on my own Ormiston & Hamilton (& the DEFINITELY unimproved Pakistani flute which I still rather like for some odd reason).
But there’s one commonality that keeps striking me every time I play one of the “improved” flutes (McGees, Olwells, Healys, Copleys, Sweets, Burnses, Ormiston) – they are ALL so easy to play it’s stunning. But then, after a while, EVEN WHEN HEARING SOMEONE ELSE PLAY THEM, they seem to sound kind of – well, er, similar. And almost too perfect.
Almost … … Boehmlike.
(Note I did not list the Hamilton up there. It seems an entirely different animal.) (Which is why, heaven help me, I love it so.)
So. Here at last is the question: does anyone else perceive/wonder about whether we’re seeing some sacrifice of tonal character for this flexibility and resonance and ease of playing we all love so much these days? I mean, the lined headjoints, the ergonomic fingerholes, the kinder embouchure shapes, the gentler chimney depths, the hybridization of Pratten/Rudall, etc., etc., etc. – are these all contributing to much more playable, flexible, and responsive flutes that are SO very rewarding at first blush – but then somehow rather “too good to sound right?”
Are these improved flutes almost too easy? I know this sounds weird, but I wonder if there’s a point where you risk sacrificing a bit of tonal character/authenticity? Or if you just never really develop that awesome low D because your flute doesn’t make you – it gives you a good enough low D right out of the box that you never really feel the need to mess with the color?
What kind of sound are we looking for? What kind of sound are makers trying to achieve? Where do we meet? Or is it different for everyone?
Are improvements killing the pure thing? Or does it evolve? Or does it even matter?
And the adjunct question: is not some of Irish music’s authenticity the result of people OVERCOMING or learning to play around their less-than-responsive flutes (c.f. Jack Coen)?
And the final question: does this even matter? Or do I just like to suffer because I was brought up Catholic? Or am I actually a Fluddite? Or worse, a Fluteistine?
Anyway, like I said, I’m curious about what you think. Please note that I’m NOT slamming anyone or any maker, because ultimately (as with all of us, alas) my opinion means zip.
Wishing You and Yours All the Best While Scratching Her Head in the Hinterlands,
cat.
P.S BTW, to satisfy David’s request … I’ve been playing flute for 30 years (getting paid for it for about 25) but Irish for only about 8 or 9, and some of that on a Boehm. Irish wooden flute for about 6, I guess. I play in a working Irish band (local), I attend sessions fairly regularly, I generally play about 10 hours a week, and I take lessons (average once a month I’d guess) from John Skelton when I’m lucky enough to. I go to the occasional clinic and school, but have really only gotten into that in the last year or so.