Re-reaming a flute after a few years. (Repost)
Posted: Mon May 31, 2021 9:25 am
My original post got lost during the upgrade, but it got some interesting responses both here and at the Flute History forum on facebook. I can only partially reconstruct it.
My John Gallagher large-holed Rudall needed some small repairs - loose rings and tuneup. I sent it in to John, and he said he would re-ream it, as that is something he feels is necessary after one year and again after several years. I thought "Fine, you're the expert."
So John re-reamed it and re-sealed the bore, saying that "quite a bit of material came out" (whatever that means). He said it is surprising how much difference slight bore changes make. Also, he said that historic flutes certainly come with intentional bore variations.
What a remarkable transformation! This is a pretty loud flute, quite a bit louder than my antique Rudall with holes almost as large. (Larger bore; modern embouchure, I guess) Anyway, it came back louder than when I sent it. Also, I would say that the tone quality has a harder edge, less fluffy maybe? Not that I thought it was at all fluffy before.
Regarding historical flutes, I'm sure that the wood has changed over 200 years; I assume that shrinkage is more typical. I would not advocate for re-boring a historical flute, but the questions of "whether it was typical" or "how much" or "what the effect might be" raised some discussion at the Flute History Channel. The main issue for historical flutes is how you would even know the the original intention, and whether the changes hurt or helped.
With my John Gallagher flute, he has the original reamers and design drawings on file. Also, as the original craftsman he holds his intentions and experience in his mind and hands.
My John Gallagher large-holed Rudall needed some small repairs - loose rings and tuneup. I sent it in to John, and he said he would re-ream it, as that is something he feels is necessary after one year and again after several years. I thought "Fine, you're the expert."
So John re-reamed it and re-sealed the bore, saying that "quite a bit of material came out" (whatever that means). He said it is surprising how much difference slight bore changes make. Also, he said that historic flutes certainly come with intentional bore variations.
What a remarkable transformation! This is a pretty loud flute, quite a bit louder than my antique Rudall with holes almost as large. (Larger bore; modern embouchure, I guess) Anyway, it came back louder than when I sent it. Also, I would say that the tone quality has a harder edge, less fluffy maybe? Not that I thought it was at all fluffy before.
Regarding historical flutes, I'm sure that the wood has changed over 200 years; I assume that shrinkage is more typical. I would not advocate for re-boring a historical flute, but the questions of "whether it was typical" or "how much" or "what the effect might be" raised some discussion at the Flute History Channel. The main issue for historical flutes is how you would even know the the original intention, and whether the changes hurt or helped.
With my John Gallagher flute, he has the original reamers and design drawings on file. Also, as the original craftsman he holds his intentions and experience in his mind and hands.