Jon, if you can show me a Rudall & Rose 8 keyed flute other than the flute in question,with the address Rudall & Rose, 15 Piazza, London. without the inclusion of Covent Garden, then i will agree with your idea that its genuine,
The flute can be what you want it to be in your mind, you probably know quite a lot about flutes from getting all types of flutes through your shop over the years, an yes there were flute makers back then just as good or some even better than Rudall, i would bring to mind here Butler and of course Wylde who worked for Rudall & Rose, but it seems that a lot of players back then wanted the R & R flutes—so they were the flutes to copy—thats where the money was, Tell me
why R & R put a label in their flute cases and singed their names on there? Like i said previously this flute in question is a very well made flute and the maker could do as good a job as R & R but the money was in the name and to avoid litigation they new what to do to leave out a word here or there in the stamp. I say the flute is well worth bidding on, but by no means as an investment. I can show you a boxwood R & R made around the very same time with its address Rudall & Rose, 15 Piazza, Covent Garden, London.
I am not an expert but my thinking is that people that counterfeit things for a living are not stupid or unskilled, just dishonest.
If it was left off I would assume that it was accidental at the point of manufacture. If all the other original flutes had Covent Garden on the flute a person making a counterfeit would have included that. I don’t think was a clue left by the person doing the work as a nod to those in the know.
One useful thing here would be to compile some similarly scaled images of good photos of R&R stamps with curved elements and quatrefoils from 15 Piazza and to make some careful comparisons of the curves, the quatrefoils and the type-faces and sizes of the letters and numbers. If the match is good, it would support the contention that the missing “Covent Garden” line was just an accidental omission. If the match is bad, well, that’ll speak for itself.
Jem. when the Rudall & Rose Co finished making a flute it wasn’t just put in a case and shipped out, there was quite a few flute makers in that company as you know and when a flute was finished it then went through three and maybe even four pairs of hands before it got the ok. tested for sound and tuning–for key operation— and last the quality of workmanship, yes the flute was well looked at before giving the ok----so you think they overlooked the mistake on the address----lets give these people credit for operating a very good company.
I assume that those in the “counterfeit” camp aren’t attributing the missing part of the address to incompetence on the counterfeiters’ part, but rather deliberate avoidance of copyright infringement. It’s the same reason you find “Rolax” watches and “Lois Vitten” handbags; they’re hoping those few little changes are enough to avoid legal hassle.
I’m inclined to agree with that idea, since it would be hard to believe Rudall & Rose themselves would make that mistake. But if there are other R&R flutes out there without “Covent Garden,” that might lend credence to this being legit.
All in all, it’s making me very curious indeed about this flute…
I am of course not certain that this flute is genuine and would happily accept clearer evidence either way, but thus far I still consider it more likely genuine than that it is counterfeit. I certainly think it is possible a line of stamping got accidentally omitted and yes, I do think that is possible despite whatever quality control methods R&R applied. As I keep saying and constantly observe, they were very lackadaisical about the stamping with wonky lines, overlaps, double strikes/stutters… It regularly surprises me that they were so sloppy with this aspect of finishing.
I’m not for now in a position to collect and manipulate photos of stamps to make comparisons. Perhaps someone with access to several 15 Piazza flutes, pre and post quatrefoil, all straight line or with curved lines for “Rudall and Rose” and “London” could oblige?
This flute has become, or is, somewhat of a conundrum. Whoever buys it will always have to explain the missing “Covent Garden” from the stamp. People will always doubt the authencity of the flute if it is advertised for sale, or turns up at another auction as a R&R, when they notice part of the address is missing. I agree with JMackvane as I very much doubt Rudall & Rose would make such a mistake as omitting part of the address. Again it could be a very good player, there is value in that, someone has gone to the trouble of having the tenons corked
I wonder if this is a frankenflute? It’s possible that the first joint was damaged, missing, or badly warped, and some flute maker has made a a new first joint, moved over the original keys and stamped the flute, attempting to make it seem like the original joint to preserve the value of the flute, but missed off part of the address by mistake? R&R usually have threaded tenons. 3260 is corked which would indicate that it has been looked at at some point. Just speculation I know.
Regarding Jem’s thoughts on stamps, the lettering, font size, style, and shape of curve:
R&R 3036 cocuswood, has no quatrefoils, has straight lettering on the main stamp and other stamps here at Shorey’s site: http://www.antiqueflutes.com/web%20photos%20and%20text/932.03.jpg
R&R 3203 boxwood, has no quatrefoils, straight lettering on the main stamp and other stamps. “No 15 Piazza Covent Garden” is in a smaller font than “Rudall & Rose” and “London”, claw C# & C touches
R&R 3230 cocuswood, has quatrefoils, curved “Rudall & Rose” and “London” on all stamps, claw C# & C touches
R&R 3246 cocuswood, has quatrefoils, curved “Rudall & Rose” and “London” on all stamps, claw C# & C touches
R&R 3251 cocuswood, has no quatrefoils, curved “Rudall & Rose” and “London” on all stamps, claw C# & C touches
R&R 3312 cocuswood, nine key, has quatrefoils, curved “Rudall & Rose” and “London” on all stamps, pewter Eb key, claw C# & C touches
R&R 3634 cocuswood, has quatrefoils, curved “Rudall & Rose” and “London” on all stamps, salt spoon Eb key, claw C# & C touches
R&R 3680 boxwood, patent head, has quatrefoils, curved “Rudall & Rose” and “London” on all stamps, salt spoon Eb key, claw C# & C touches
R&R 3695 cocuswood, has quatrefoils, curved “Rudall & Rose” and “London” on all stamps, salt spoon Eb key, claw C# & C touches
R&R 4275 cocuswood, has quatrefoils, curved “Rudall & Rose” and “London” on all stamps, claw C# & C touches
My earliest R&R is number 4871. It is cocuswood, has quatrefoils, and the font size is smaller. “Rudall & Rose” and “London” are curved. claw C# & C touches
One hypothesis could be that this flute bypassed the Rudall & Rose quality control department and left the premises under more mysterious circumstances. As Terry McGee points out on his website, three trials at the Old Baily occurred in which employees of the firm in question were charged and found guilty of the theft of flute parts.
The stamping could have been done with one eye on the door. 
I wonder if it was still being made in house, or was it made in Henry Wylde’s shop? Does anyone know when they stopped making them in house?
Mid 1830s - pretty much peak years for simple system. SFAIK definitely in-house production, well before modern system developments took over the output.
$5K now! 
And now the bidding increment is $500.
I decided to take a look again tonight at that fine boxwood flute that wants to be a Rudall & Rose, i was checking the size of the large toneholes which i like very much on a flute-- and on doing this i noticed another problem the maker had with forgetfulness, when the R & R Co introduced quatrefoils in there stamping the quatrefoil always appeared above and below each stamping, on this flute it does appear above and below the address on the main body-- but take a look at the lower body and foot joint and short barrel ? the quatrefoil is just stamped below Rudall & Rose, London, when it should be stamped above and below. The flute looks great and i like everything about it–i would love to find out how it sounds and plays.
JMackvane has noticed another stamp discrepancy. I noticed that the flute has “modern” pads which together with the corked tenons indicates that it has been played within the last few decades. I don’t like the banana warp though. I agree that it could be a good player even it if isn’t a R&R flute. $5000 plus 20% is way to much to spend on this flute even if it is a bona fide R&R which I still doubt. I have contacted the foremost Rudall expert who is of the opinion that it is a genuine Rudall because of the workmanship.
Just my opinion, but I don’t think it is a R&R because of the dodgy stamps no “Covent Garden”, only one quatrefoil instead of two on three of the stamps, the way the head joint seems to taper towards the ring at the barrel end, the distance between the embouchure hole and the top of the head joint. I think this is a replica, possibly a modern replica, by a flute maker using keys from a genuine R&R or contemporary flute. The box is genuine. I don’t believe the auction house’s “only driven to church on Sundays by an old lady” story either.
Hello, I add the link to the extra pictures from the seller:
https://wetransfer.com/downloads/6c103e70c8870cb45d6d58ee9643cf7320170407143251/7f770d1dee7961b9beedab5d3da8501e20170407143251/1a3780
I can think about one or maybe two modern makers who can make a proper rudall copy.
The price for such work would be about that amount.
About the stamp: Would that be the first or second flute with quatrefoil stamped?
Maybe there was no “standard” yet…
I guess that quatrefoils were stamped in a another moment from the rest of the marks.
I also notice that the stamping is very fresh and preserved looking on every joint, i have a boxwood flute from close to the same period and the stamps are well worn and certainly suit the age of the flute—especially around the areas which would be held when putting the flute together or taking it apart, well maybe this flute was not played much—although with the condition of the end cap stopper tells one that it was well used—and i am surprised that the owner didn’t get the stopper repaired or replaced—its a simple job for a wood turner, Also a question a buyer should have is —does the head joint and barrel joint move or come apart and hope its not seized—or whether its a patent head or not with the silver cover missing, if its a patent head it maybe a reason for not getting it replaced, although i believe it would be easy enough to get a silver cover in the UK if one knows where, Patsy Moloney has a silver patent cover on his R & R flute even though it is just a regular head joint.
I’ve also wondered about the freshness/crispness of the stamps. There is no discernable wear on the stamps that I can see in spite of the fact that the flute has obviously been used to the extent that it has had at least one repad and has had the tenons corked.
I saw the Cotter keyless flute that is for sale and noticed that the stamp was in the same style as seen on R&R flutes with curved and straight lettering. The same with my Wilkes flute. So I suppose it wouldn’t be difficult to have a stamp made up, or to assemble the individual lettering needed.
Here in Sweden there is an English eight key cocuswood flute with silver keys without any stamps at all? The owner is convinced it is a R&R. It is a very good flute. Perhaps it was made by an employee of Rudall & Rose who made it on the side, could get hold of keys and rings, but lacked access to the stamps, which I assume wouldn’t have been left just lying around on a work bench as the company would want to make it as difficult as possible for fakers. This was also a reason for the authencity certificates in the lids of their flute cases as of course, even then, stamps could be faked. This is why I think it is so strange that R&R 3260 instead of having no stamps at all, or having the correct stamps, has instead odd, or incorrect stamps that don’t see to have appeared on any other R&R so far.
We know that R&R flutes have a wide variety of options as regards numbers of keys, key styles, type of rings, head joints woods etc. We know that the addresses on the stamps don’t always coincide with the serial numbers as it seems the flute was given a serial number first when it was sold, not when it was completed. But as far as I know the stamps were always uniform in that the different addresses were spelt correctly and were complete even if they, and the serial numbers, were sometimes sloppily applied.
Just my speculations. I sense something odd about “R&R” 3260, but at the end of the day it’s up to the buyer to decide. I’ve asked the foremost expert, Mr. B. and he believes it to be genuine.
Currently at $6000, with just over two days to go. Could this flute end up setting a new price record?
Sold: $5500 + fees (!)
(while that gold commode went for $2500 for what is Worth)
It wasn’t a great fishing day for the Co—they had it at $6000 but nobody was taking the bait and of course they then had to claim a withdrawn bid, i believe they were fishing from the very beginning some weeks ago, all they needed was a couple of bidders to play with, there are quite a number of auction companies that carryout this type of behavior but not all-- as there are also some very honest auction companies out there