Problems with a new flute?

Irish Flute
1

Hello all, I don’t know whether I’m being paranoid or not, perhaps you could help.
I recently received a brand new flute–what an exciting moment that was. The flute has many wonderful features: light-weight, attractive silverwork, inspiring balance. Yet, there are some things about the flute that I find questionable, and I’m curious to know your opinion about them. Also, if you could tell me whether I’m just being “anal”, or overreacting, that would be nice too.
Oh, I would also like to say that the only other flute that I have to compare with this one (besides the Healy I played for my first two years), is a Pat Olwell Pratten–this may have influenced my expectations for a new flute.

The first thing I noticed about the flute when I took it out of the bubble wrap was the tone holes; this is purely aesthetic, but the lower two tone-holes are a bit irregularly cut, and all of the tone holes are a bit sharp–not like my Olwell, each one on that is nice and smooth-consistent around the board.

Second thing is the exterior finish of the flute. The head itself, and the embouchure hole are quite nicely finished, yet there are vertical concave paths in the wood of the body in some place (though not too many) that catch the light and detract from the rest of the flute. Are these (sap streams?) things that a maker could address before sending the flute out? Or are they irregularities that the buyer should live with?

The last two, and most troubling to me, are the inside of the bore and the foot piece.

Now, I don’t know high marks inside a bore have to be before they cause a problem, but when looking through some of my tone holes, I can see circular marks left by a reamer–these I can also see when I look down the body of the flute when it’s put together. Whether or not these affect quality of the sound I produce I don’t know, however, they are disconcerting to say the least.

And finally the foot. Here is something, if I choose to keep the flute, I will definitely ask the maker to remanufacture (which I’m sure he will, he has been quite generous in his time on the phone and email thus far). When looking into the foot of the flute, from the top of the joint to the first open hole I can see deep pockmarks that can only be described as “acid marks”–I really don’t know how else to describe them, yet if I could touch them, they would be rough on the finger tip.

Though the flute is high caliber, and was sent to me in record time, this really troubles me. I almost wonder if, because of my relative newness to the flute, I was sent this foot because the maker suspected I may not really know the difference. I really hope that’s not true, but I don’t understand why an instrument with such an obvious deformity would be shipped–especially when we’re talking about a flute in the $1200 dollar range (keyless).

As for the playability, from G up, it is quite strong, but a few of the lower notes are rather tentative. I’ve not played a Rudall style flute before, and the light weight and narrowness are great fun, yet–it’s just not as consistent as I would like. I realize that in order to make an accurate appraisal of the flute, I need to spend more time with it (which I can only do in short doses because of the breaking in period), yet, these are some worries I have now, and hope some of you might give me direction with.

I’ve communicated with the maker about these things, and though polite, his response was basically, “I get the best timber I can.” Are these problems that a maker can address before mailing a flute?

That about does it. I have had fun on it here and there, but if I’m to keep it, I need to put to rest these concerns.
Thanks in advance,
Matt

2

Hi

Who is the maker (if nothing confidential)?

Best wishes

3

As for the maker, I’d rather not say. It strikes me that our community is quite small here, and seeing as how flutes can be an emotional topic (for me esp.), let’s leave the maker out of it until the matter is dealt with. I really feel like this must just have been an accident or something.
Any advice on my observations about the flute?

4

I can’t understand why such an expensiive flute isn’t perfect. 1200$ means a full satisfaction out of the box.

I couldn’t accept it, and even if the maker fixes the problems, I couldn’t trust him anymore.

Rather than fixing all the defaults you noticed, I think you can ask for a whole replacement.

Does the maker work alone? Does he employ other people who could be responsible?

Best wishes

5

The only thing that did not shock me in your message were the circular reamer marks: I have (rather small) ones in my Rudall.

For the rest, I think there is a problem, especially for that price.

BTW, what wood is your flute made of?

On another hand, playing a Rudall style flute is difficult if you’re not used to it, the scale can seem a bit strange if you come from the “Pratten world”.

6

I am sorry for you, and for the flute.
but for that money, and also because you stated you would not trust the maker anymore EVEN when he is going to fix these things, I would rather think it best you return the flute and ask a full refund just because you don’t trust the maker and feel not happy with it.

hope for all the best for both of you.
warmest greetings
berti

7

About eight or nine weeks ago your posted you had a Rudall type by a particular, named, maker ordered and on the way in six weeks. I suppose that’s a bit of a give away. :roll:

8

you have noticed all these things right off the bat, not one but many things , if you have paid good money for this flute return it, if these things are bugging you now , they will continue to bug you, this flute should be perfect for a high dollar flute, if this maker could not get it right from the begining he should reduce the price, and call it a intermediate flute, as far as it it were me , if i paid alot of money for it , it had better be perfect. if it was not pleasing to the eye as well as the sound i would not accept it. remember this flute will be with you for a long time, why be dissatisfied

9

Hey Peter, you might want to think twice about that post, because Matt (baggins_21) is trying to be courteous here. Just a thought. :slight_smile:

10

Many people on this list post praise or blame for flutemakers despite their own lack of experience. Flutes that are easy to blow don’t always have a pleasing sound. They can be out of tune. They can be made of wood that is imperfectly seasoned, leading to cracks down the road. Matt’s critique is serious and believable because the faults are so obvious.
It would helpful if, when people post reviews of flutes and makers, they indicate how long they have been playing and what other flutes they have owned. Extensive experience with many flutes seems essential for serious critics.
I agree with cavefish and berti66. Matt should get a refund and move on.

11

if a person is selling bad flutes i think we have a right to know, yes it is a possibility that the author of this topic is a perfectionist, but heh, if someone is going to charge big bucks for something they had better back it up–isnt that one of the things about this forum the goods and the bads together

12

I think were moving too fast here, I’ve owned two flutes by this maker and they were great, it’s true that the emphasis of one maker may be different then another. a great polished bore does not make a great flute, nor does the out side finish, the true things that make one flute better then another are often unseen, like the angle and shape of the embouchure cut, the taper of the bore…
till today, the best Pratten I have owned and played was by that maker (keep in mind that I would only play a Pratten because of the need for volume, and the Pratten by this maker was the loudest most clear and easy to play).
The keywork by this maker was also the most practical, comfortable and bullet proof, no matter how many times I took it on and of, never a leak or wobble.
lets, give the maker a chance to correct or respond before we turn on him.
eilam.

13

Hi
None of us have seen this flute except Matt, and by what we have read, he is not totally happy with his new flute, im quite sure when matt contacts the maker of the flute in question, and demands either a replacement or his money back ,or whatever pleases him, the maker (which we all know by now) will take care of the problem,Matt it would have been best not to bring this matter out in the open untill-- and unless you got a complete refusal from the maker,
Matt by now you know there are a couple of loud–mouths (know it all) on here who love to hear complaints like this, and those same people quite often border on slander without knowing, this flute maker has a very good reputation for produceing fine playing instruments,
Email him againn Matt and im sure your problems will get ironed out.

14

Interesting.

Are there any other experienced flute players nearby who could at least offer an appraisal on the sound/playability? that is something that I would definitely not allow a compromise on. Cosmetics are not a huge deal to me personally, but I realize everybody feels differently on this issue!

15

Hi all, thanks to those of you who have replied (especially those who sent PMs-very helpful). I did wonder whether or not I should post here before at least a month went by, but in the end I decided that it couldn’t hurt to get some helpful guidance. I’d like to respond to a few points:

Matt_Paris, the flute is blackwood.

Berti, I think you mistook me for phcook, I have not lost confidence in this maker, and I am fully prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt.

I would like to echo something Eliam said, “let’s give the maker a chance to respond and/fix the problem before we turn on him”–honestly, I didn’t want to inflame anyone’s prejudices here–which we all have. No one is perfect, as a teacher I know that some days I’m “on” and others I’m not. Though I haven’t been playing flute for 15 years, I have played long enough to know that a section of the bore should NOT have the equivalent of “flute acne”–this will definately have to be remedied to put my mind at ease.
It could be that my difficulty with the low notes are due to my inexperience with the Rudall style flute, however last night I put my Olwell head and barrel on the flute and STILL had a hard time getting consistency from the G down. I think that this is moderate proof that the imperfections are causing some problems in playability–though I would love to have someone come and play the darn thing.
Anyhow, I don’t know if I should keep this flute or this style of flute, or just get a Pratten style flute from this maker–I’ve heard consistently positive reviews of these.
Thanks again, I do appreciate the feedback, and appreciate those of you who respect my wish to be corteous; the last thing I want is to damage anyone’s reputation. I certainly haven’t made up my mind about the thing yet, that’s for sure.
Matt

16

I would think that that shape of the conical section at the lower end of the flute would have a corresponding effect on the notes produced there.. but I dunno :slight_smile:

Do Prattens and Rudalls vary all that much in the right hand area?

17

I believe that flute makers may produce flutes which are unique to themselves. They have their own characteristic way of making the tone holes, of reaming the bore, and finishing the exterior. These things, I think, are what contribute to the “personality” of the flute each maker creates.

So, it might not be valid to take what you find on one maker’s flutes and expect another maker to mirror them.

I’ll give you an example. I have a Casey Burns and a McGee. The tone holes are completely different. The Burns are smaller and are undercut, and there are beveled edges. The holes are not all the same. The McGee has larger, more uniformly round holes which have little undercutting. The top edge is sharper, but which I mean it drops straight down at right angles to the surface of the flute. No bevel.

If I had believed that Burns’ toneholes were the only way to do it, I’d be upset with the McGee. But, I think the truth is just that there is more than one way to do it. Each maker has his own preference.

They play differently, but I can’t speak to quality because I’m ignorant. I have not been playing a year, so I can only give you some objective comparisons to show that each flute is unique. The Burns has very strong lower notes. They are extremely easy to produce. The higher register, though, is more challenging, and I have been told that this may be characteristic. I can play them, but I have to pay attention.

Now, I know the McGee is a good player because I had reports on it before I bought it. I was even warned that I might have some trouble with it because it required an embouchure which might be more developed than I have currently. It took me a few days to be able to get a low E and D on it without having to pay close attention (more difficult than the Burns), but the upper register was easier than the Burns.

Both of my flutes have visible grain lines and lovely surface markings. They’re wood, after all, not Delrin. Along those lines, I think it’s possible, or even likely, that different wood is different. One batch of blackwood may look different when it’s finished up. I don’t think that a grain line which catches the light is a problem–it’s just characteristic of the wood. I’m not sure that sanding would help any, since you would rid yourself of one line only to sand down to two more!

Whenever I buy something bigger than a breadbox, I invariably go through the same search for defects. It escalates with the amount I’ve spent. I avoid the distress by refusing to allow myself to think about anything until I’ve had it a reasonable length of time. Invariably, everything I had noticed as a problem works itself out.

If you believe something is wrong with the flute, and if you cannot resolve this, you need to just send it back and be done with it, because I’n not sure you can ever get over it until someone else plays and inspects this flute and tells you it’s fine. Even at that, if you’re unhappy about the finish, you’ll be unhappy forever.

18

Both of my flutes have visible grain lines and lovely surface markings. They’re wood, after all, not Delrin. Along those lines, I think it’s possible, or even likely, that different wood is different. One batch of blackwood may look different when it’s finished up. I don’t think that a grain line which catches the light is a problem–it’s just characteristic of the wood. I’m not sure that sanding would help any, since you would rid yourself of one line only to sand down to two more! [/quote]

As far as the finish, unless the grain is filled you will get little surface cracks in blackwood, this is normal. That is what people like about wood.

I would think that that shape of the conical section at the lower end of the flute would have a corresponding effect on the notes produced there.. but I dunno > :slight_smile: >

Do Prattens and Rudalls vary all that much in the right hand area?

The second section has a slightly larger bore on the Pratten. The Pratten will have a larger bore foot. Most makers open the foot up more, to give the flute more volume. The restriction in the foot was for tuning lower keys C/C# and to tune the upper 3rd octave, not many players get up there for Itrad music… :roll:
Jon

19

OOPS :blush: I must have been really tired yesterday when I got home for misreading someone’s else remark for yours, baggins_21.
hope you will accept my excuses :slight_smile: but the same still applies: if you are not happy, get your money back!

good luck
berti

20

If it’s the same maker, I trust he will resolve everything just fine. I’m very happy with mine, although I wouldn’t enter it in a beauty contest …
But I also agree they ain’t cheap, so it’s important to be happy.

If you’re having problems from the G down, maybe you should check the footjoint – perhaps a wee bit of Teflon tape or beeswax are called for? Or if you have keys, check them for leaks or any seating/sealing issues due to temp/humidity changes?

i.e., maybe it’s still adjusting to its relocation.

Anyway, good luck, baggins!