Chiff and Fipple Forums

jemtheflute wrote:Just to pin it down (in safety, of course), surely we need Terry in this thread?

Ahh yes, the Right Rev. Terry - a man of the cloth.


Rob

you young'uns should show more respect fer yer elders....

come a time you'll have issues too

Issues? Tissues!

Mr.Gumby wrote:

Peter Laban once wrote describing alterations someone had
made to the Byrne to strengthen the D.

He most certainly didn't.

He did write against people who are at best beginners having alterations done on flutes by other people than the original maker especially when done to rectify perceived problems that are more likely related to the skill of the player than they are to the flute.

Like you having a quarter of an inch chopped off a Murray because you couldn't play bottom D in tune. This thread, with you describing how you can 't handle a bottom D on some flutes, only once again makes his case. I hope you see that.

He certainly dissaproved if that's what you mean. But you are in other respects factually mistaken.
I had no problem playing the low D on the Murray in tune. Nor was I a beginner. Nor were the two flutemyths
who certified that the Murray was seriously internally out of tune. Nor have I any problem handling low Ds on
other flutes than the Byrne.

Also you've missed the logical point. Peter in fact DID describe alterations made to a Byrne
to strengthen the low D. He dissaproved, (as I expect he should have) but it happened.
This goes to the perception, I've reported others, that there are problems with the bottom of that flute.
And that's the mystery. Because this is not the result of erratic flute making.

If other flutes work well for you, and the Byrne still isn't clicking after some years, might it not be productive to switch to a flute you don't have to fight? The flute is just a tool, after all. It should be an aid to creating satisfying music, not a hindrance.

Thank you. It's because the flute is in all other respects VERY beautiful and I am convinced it can be done right
in a way it was meant to be by the maker. I once actually asked Bryan face to face if he would alter the flute
to strengthen the low D. He refused. The look on his face....

I do play other flutes, but I'm fascinated by this one.

jim stone wrote:Thank you. It's because the flute is in all other respects VERY beautiful and I am convinced it can be done right
in a way it was meant to be by the maker. I once actually asked Bryan face to face if he would alter the flute
to strengthen the low D. He refused. The look on his face....

Hi Jim,

I wonder if you had Bryan play this flute when you were face-to-face with him. How did it play for him? That would certainly rule out any problems with the flute.

Jay

Peter in fact DID describe alterations made to a Byrne

I would like to to go look for a quote there Jim. I assume you are thinking of this thread.
I can assure you that thread was not posted with the Byrne specifically in mind. The mention of alterations to that flute was merely one of a few occurring at the time that triggered that thread. As is pointed out in the thread itself:

Peter Laban wrote:I didn't want to make this particular to the Byrne, or any other flute mentioned on present thread. I mentioned the two threads because the practice seems to be getting all the more common.

Jim Stone wrote:I had no problem playing the low D on the Murray in tune. Nor was I a beginner.

I seem to remember you did quote tuning issues of the bottom note as a reason for chopping it.

About beginner status Jim, I suppose we could quarrel. But let's not, let's just say you don't think you're a beginner. You have been at it a few years. You also have posted yourself on youtube to show the extend of your playing. We live in musically different worlds, we agree to disagree.

I did note the fact that very recently someone mentioned the special approach needed to make the lower end of a Rudall (type) speak properly. You jumped at it to ask what it was, it seemed this thought hadn't occurred to you. Only a few days ago you were already giving advice about the same issue. It seemed you're quick learner. And now you're back on the same issue as a stumbling block.

Let's say it all baffles me to no end.

[edited to fix a cut and paste error in the link to the alterations thread]

''On my flute the bottom notes were OK, I like a flat low D, it was the second
octave that was the problem. I had the problem confirmed by a flutesmyth
before I had any work done. I've played flute for over six years and I've
dealt with odd tunings. This was something else. '

As you are shooting wild and we are sliding back into something nasty, I'll leave the thread.
Best wishes to all, yourself included.

I need to point out you, and nobody else, invoked my presence here with your sloppy quoting and there was no need for all this at all. I would have been more than happy to stay out of this.

IMO, bottom D comes and goes from time to time; that's just life. Forcing it isn't going to make it happen. Also IMO, if you try to push Bryan's flutes too hard you are guaranteed go out of tune. Try going all floppy with it -- open your embouchure slightly (make more of a soft pouty "o" with the sides of your mouth closed) and make sure you're not clutching the flute, pressing it into your face, or otherwise deadening it through pressure -- and see what happens. Roll it in, roll it out, and experiment with where your mouth has to be to *easily* achieve a nice round bottom D (no edge); then overblow to middle D without raising your L1 finger; then let your jaw drop slightly so the note can fall back down to bottom D. Lather, rinse, repeat about a hundred million times before you even consider trying to put more of an edge on the bottom D's tone. Then only do it by degrees -- see how little you can get away with to achieve a change.

You might just be getting in the flute's way; this happens to a lot of people. And it is possible to have too tight an embouchure. Having an old-school embouchure myself I struggle with it all the time, and I remember I had to be very conscious of it when Bryan and I swapped flutes for an evening b/c his flute was more sensitive to such things than my Murray. Super-nice flute, though and totally of the "less is more" school. Being as Bryan is a lovely relaxed player, I'd take a cue from his playing as to how his flutes go best. So why not try the floppy thing for a bit and see where it takes you?

Gosh, you've a way with words, Mr Gumby. I find I'm mortified by how often I agree with you.

Mr Gumby, or whoever you are, your credibility is shot when you say:

"I did note the fact that very recently someone mentioned the special approach needed to make the lower end of a Rudall (type) speak properly."

This was in fact Jim.

And when you say:

"You jumped at it to ask what it was,"

In fact it was me who "jumped in". Any objections?

And when you say

"Only a few days ago you were already giving advice about the same issue."

That was in fact Jim kindly answering my query.

Mr Gumby, if you make such a cockup of quoting someone you evidently regard with libellous enmity and contempt, surely you can't expect anything you say, in whatever guise, to be taken seriously?

You would be well advised to have a lawyer explain your position, in the past and now ... Be warned.

keithsandra wrote:Mr Gumby, or whoever you are, your credibility is shot when you say:

"I did note the fact that very recently someone mentioned the special approach needed to make the lower end of a Rudall (type) speak properly."

This was in fact Jim.

And when you say:

"You jumped at it to ask what it was,"

In fact it was me who "jumped in". Any objections?

And when you say

"Only a few days ago you were already giving advice about the same issue."

That was in fact Jim kindly answering my query.

Mr Gumby, if you make such a cockup of quoting someone you evidently regard with libellous enmity and contempt, surely you can't expect anything you say, in whatever guise, to be taken seriously?

You would be well advised to have a lawyer explain your position, in the past and now ... Be warned.

I can explain my own position if you don't mind:

on 12 sept 2010, Jim Stone wrote: What's the different approach Rudalls require?

That is what I referred to when I said:

Mr. Gumby wrote:I did note the fact that very recently someone mentioned the special approach needed to make the lower end of a Rudall (type) speak properly. You jumped at it to ask what it was, it seemed this thought hadn't occurred to you.

That was on this thread

Then yesterday, in reply to your query Jim, just as I described, came out in advice:

Jim Stone wrote:My understanding is that many Rudalls have to be rolled out when playing the bottom,
and a focused air stream directed into the flute. Many modern rudall copies
have been tweaked to eliminate the need, but not all. I am still locked
in combat with the Byrne. Sometimes the D is there, sometime less so.
Otherwise I think it is the most beautiful flute I know.

Which was covered by my:

Mr Gumby wrote: Only a few days ago you were already giving advice about the same issue. It seemed you're quick learner. And now you're back on the same issue as a stumbling block.

So, before lecturing anyone on their quoting, make sure you get your story straight. Statements about not being taken serious in the future may come back and bite you on the arse if you don 't. And ditto for the libellous enmity and contempt bit.

Looking forward to your apologies.

Have a good night.

Is there a full moon out?

Best wishes to all.

Steve