I’ve never played a bona fide old Rudall, however
I’ve read that there were often internal tuning problems,
at least to the contemporary ear.
A flat low D, a flat F sharp, maybe the A out of tune (sharp?).
I need some info.
How did people play these notes? Did they just ‘hear’
them as in tune? Or did they bring them up or down
in pitch by blowing them in tune?
And what do people do today who play an authentic
old Rudall–do they blow it in tune?
If you get your fins on an old Rudall with the standard
tuning problems of that day, and you’re a pretty good
flautist, can you play it in tune?
the usual tuning is A and B are 20 30 cents sharp, the F#, 30cents flat the foot 30 cents flat. The trick that I have found is blowing more into the flute, this way the flute is played with the slide pushed in more, thus correcting some of the tuning problems. Another idea is the wax-shellac-whatever into the A and B to damp them down a little. I might add, this tuning is due to what the flute was designed to play in, 430 htz versus the modern tuning.
Let the hail storm begin, get out you new decoder ring tuner, and have at it!
All those that the Metzler in the article suffers, Rudalls are prone to as well. Indeed, so are all the other first half 19th century flutes, such as Nicholson’s Improved.
I need some info.
How did people play these notes? Did they just ‘hear’
them as in tune? Or did they bring them up or down
in pitch by blowing them in tune?
I can’t believe they couldn’t hear them, Jim. There’s nothing to say we’ve become more sensitive to tuning than our forebears. They had plenty of fixed pitch instruments - pianos, organs, concertinas, fretted instruments - to compare them with. Presumably they did their best to blow them into tune (what else could you do?), probably with varying degrees of success. That remark of Nicholson’s I quoted is probably a clue to the degree of frustration met by some.
Even Carte, just admitted to partnership in Rudall & Rose commented:
“… so the Ordinary flute as to intonation is nearly as incorrect as it was two hundred years ago.”
And what do people do today who play an authentic
old Rudall–do they blow it in tune?
If you get your fins on an old Rudall with the standard
tuning problems of that day, and you’re a pretty good
flautist, can you play it in tune?
It has been often asserted that you can blow them into tune, on the run at dance speed. I frankly do not know if that is possible, I have found many of these flutes I cannot blow into tune sang froid in front of a tuner. The good news now is, with Reel Time Tuning Analysis
we now have the capacity to test whether this actually happens, or if we are simply blinded by speed and cannot tell that the notes are not in tune. We just need some guinea pigs!
Whichever way it works out, it is going to prove interesting!
Hi David
I’ve read everything I can easily find on meantone, equal and every other temperament. eg here http://www.kirnberger.fsnet.co.uk/ and elsewhere. While I agree it has been time well spent it seems to me to only explain a little about the tuning of these old flutes, not a lot.
True David,
I have not tryed that many R&R flutes, I have had about 6 in my shop so far, and most of these had the same tuning. Now, I am a proud owner of my first RRC, (sorry, no serial number) a 8 key cocus beauty, just got it playing, after 3 socket replacements, 6 cracks, one block replacement and 2 new keys, Cnat and short F… She can really sing, the tone just gets sweeter and sweeter, as the flute gets broken in.
From the Wikipedia:
Meantone temperament, a system of tuning which averages out pairs of ratios used for the same interval (such as 9:8 and 10:9), thus making it possible to tune keyboard instruments. Next to the twelve-equal temperament, which some would not regard as a form of meantone, the best known form of this temperament is quarter comma meantone, which tunes major thirds justly in the ratio of 5:4 and divides them into two whole tones of equal size. To do this, eleven perfect fifths in each octave are flattened by a quarter of a syntonic comma, with the remaining fifth being left very sharp (such an unacceptably out-of-tune fifth is known as a wolf interval). However, the fifth may be flattened to a greater or lesser degree than this and the tuning system will retain the essential qualities of meantone temperament; examples include the 31-equal fifth and Lucy tuning. Equal temperament (a special case of mean-tone temperament), in which adjacent notes of the scale are all separated by logarithmically equal distances (100 cents) - A harmonized C major scale in equal temperament (.ogg format, 96.9KB). This is the most common tuning system used in Western music, and is the standard system for tuning a piano. Since this scale divides an octave into twelve equal-ratio steps and an octave has a frequency ratio of two, the frequency ratio between adjacent notes is then the twelfth root of two, 21/12, or ~1.05946309…
There seems to have been a lot of “mean tone Temprerment” lately on C&F.
Hi David
I’ve been thinking about this a bit more. You seem to be suggesting that the tuning on these flutes wasn’t really bad just that they were using a different temperament, one of the versions of Mean-tone. But then you say not all of them suffer from the same fate; So are you stating that RR etc started tuning them to some different temperament(s) at some point(s) in time? And what temperaments in common use at the time they were made, explain the issues?
Rockstro spends lots of time describing the mathematics of each temperament tuning. Taking the time to actually sit down with the old measuring devices to determine the ratios is a taxing affair…but one that will yield some understanding.
Remember, too, that pitch was changing from location to location, and that Rudall was no different in attempting to satisfy many people. As tuning standardized along with pitch, instruments got better.
HOw is it, you think, that today’s makers can make the flute in tune with itself and the makers of old struggled? Because today’s boys measure differently…not the precision of the bore, but the precision of the scale. There was very little standard…and you can see how that would make things all the more difficult.
If the flutes of Mozart’s day (bad example…he hated flutes) were so badly out of tune and in need of such physical dexterity to play…why in the heck were they so popular? We just hear them differently.
Try tuning a guitar to mean-tone. You’ll see what I mean.
I played an original Rudall & Rose for many years.
This flute was made at their 1827-1837 address. It was in near-perfect condition.
About the intonation, the bottom D was a tad flat, easily corrected by stong blowing on that note.
F# was a tad flat, in fact matching the “Just Intonation” F# of the uilleann pipes quite well (placed at -14 cents). If playing an air along with ET instruments I rolled out my embouchure a tad to correct that note.
The rest of the scale was spot-on.
People forget that these flutes were designed to play in tune in the 3rd register, which they must have done quite well, as that was one of the biggest knocks against the new Boehm flute, that it could not play as well in tune in the 3rd register as the old flute.
Low F# was designed to be vented with the F keys, which Irish players don’t do, resulting in a flat note.
It’s true, P.C.P. I’d go as far as to say that it’s totally impractical to constantly be pr*cking around with the F keys when what you really want is an F# in your D reel. I can’t for the life of me figure out what was gained by making the flute that way, rather than just getting that F# bang on with no messing right up front. Just one more reason to play a modern flute, or an old beater you can fettle with a clear conscience. Cheers,
After writing about it yesterday, I got inspired to finally shim the short F block, which badly needed doing since I’ve had the flute. This also involved filing the key shank, which some other tragic bodger had managed to taper pretty severely. Once I had it working to my satisfaction, I discovered that depressing both F keys at once gives a lovely “taint” note between F and F#. Not sure what to do with it, but it’s available. Great tone, as well, being so well-vented. Cheers,
Short F can be a real pain! If the key is wobbly, you can always put in a thicker pin, that helps sometimes.
I was messing with Kevin Krell’s Wylde last night, when I wrote the message. I found that venting the long F, (yes Kevin, I put the F key back together) did bring the sharpen F# by 20 cents. The Wylde has a nice reedy tone.
Way ahead of you there…Aran Olwell put the thicker pin in last week, which set up the block repair. Actually, the short F is dead on now, which is great considering what it looked like when I got it. The block was sheared off, and the key was mounted on a (rusty) steel nail, with manky thread holding the nail in place. It did work like that, surprisingly.
I’m trying to gin up enough courage to have a go at tuning the F# myself. I’ve done the wax/shellac thing to flatten a few notes, but I’ve never had a go at a flat one. Hate to screw up…
You think that is bad, this wa Kevin Krell’s Wylde flute that was traded for his Mac laptop.
The previous “repairer” had cut off the Cnat blocks, mounted the F# key there, on this makeshift block, drilled through the key in hopes of who know what? The Cnat key was broke, they had attempted to mount it in place of the F#! Imanaged to graft new blocks on the upper section, put all the keys back together, and re-mount them in the correct position on the flute.
Here is a photo of the roughed blocks
flute being further finished…
The finished flute
Ooh, now you’ve done it! You’re tempting me to saddle you with the task of mounting an extra touch for the Bb on old Wyldie. Eventually, someone’s got to bite the bullet. Might as well be you! You’d be joining a long and glorious list of flutemakers who’ve had a hand in the resto job, including messrs. Olwell, Olwell, Wilkes, Aebi, Murray, plus a couple of other rapscallions including myself. Fancy a go? Cheers,
