Just spent an hour searching the posts and I haven't found the info I need...
So, I'm a whistler considering having a bash at flute, and I've read enough to suggest that I should start with a polymer. Thing is, while there's a lot on the Dixon (it sounds good), several of you say "M&E flute" - but I can't find anything on the M&E. What does it stand for? Is there a website? Is it better than Dixon or vv?
I have an M&E (classic or standard or non-R/R...whatever you want to call it). I'm a beginner with the flute and somewhat more advanced whistler. The M&E has a lovely sound, and has passed muster with every flautist I've shown it to. It is a heavy, substantial instrument, and very easy to care for. I don't regret a cent of what I spent on it.
Remember, you didn't get the tiger so it would do what you wanted. You got the tiger to see what it wanted to do. -- Colin McEnroe
first off, M&E's are talked about quite a bit, but the C&F search engine doesn't like searching for M&E (I've tried it with quotes "M&E", without quotes, with extra spaces - it just doesn't work). Try searching for polymer and you'll see a lot of discussions concerning Dixon, Seery & M&E which are the big 3 of the polymer world.
I have a Dixon, love it, but I honestly think you can't go wrong with either one (I have never played an M&E, but I like the sound clips, especially the Rudall & Rose M&E version which costs an extra $60 US). If budget is at issues, the Dixon is one great flute. If you don't mind the extra 65-75 pounds, the M&E can have keys retrofitted to it (many folks never, ever want keys - so that's not a major issue unless you want keys later. I've emailed Tony Dixon about keys, but he didn't sound very interested in moving in that direction). The Dixon is black delrin with brass bands on it - very attractive. The M&E costs $60 US more to add metal bands (the base model is just a black piece of plastic). To me, the Dixon is more attractive unless you pay for the bands on the M&E - then they're both great looking (I am biased towards asthetics just a bit).
I hope that helps. Be forewarned, the flute is addictive!
first off, M&E's are talked about quite a bit, but the C&F search engine doesn't like searching for M&E (I've tried it with quotes "M&E", without quotes, with extra spaces - it just doesn't work). Try searching for polymer and you'll see a lot of discussions concerning Dixon, Seery & M&E which are the big 3 of the polymer world.
I have a Dixon, love it, but I honestly think you can't go wrong with either one (I have never played an M&E, but I like the sound clips, especially the Rudall & Rose M&E version which costs an extra $60 US). If budget is at issues, the Dixon is one great flute. If you don't mind the extra 65-75 pounds, the M&E can have keys retrofitted to it (many folks never, ever want keys - so that's not a major issue unless you want keys later. I've emailed Tony Dixon about keys, but he didn't sound very interested in moving in that direction). The Dixon is black delrin with brass bands on it - very attractive. The M&E costs $60 US more to add metal bands (the base model is just a black piece of plastic). To me, the Dixon is more attractive unless you pay for the bands on the M&E - then they're both great looking (I am biased towards asthetics just a bit).
I hope that helps. Be forewarned, the flute is addictive!
Eric
Eric - very, very helpful! I've no issue with extra wonga if it's for a better instrument (and I would definitely want metal ferrules). I first got on to blackwood flutes 20y ago when a friend of mine had a Rudall & Rose original (drool) to play alongside my harp - ever since I've wanted that lovely wooden sound. If the M&E R&R copy looks and sounds like that, great! (I'm assuming the M&E R&R is keyless?)
Still would like to know about sound differences between the Dixon/M&E if anyone can help?
I haven't played the Dixon, but I can compare it to the Seery.
The Seery weighs slightly less than the M&E Rose/Rudall model, and is a little bit easier to fill. The Seery has a bit lighter tone quality to it, and the M&E has a bit more of the "growl". The reach on both is managable (I have smaller hands and can finger both, I don't have to piper grip.) The holes on the M&E are slighty smaller throughout than the Seery as well.
I've shown it to several flutists, and they all really like the tone of the M&E. I have it in keyless, with the tuning slide and the silver joint rings, and I'm really pleased with it so far. (Even as beginning a flutist as I am!)
If you decide to go with the M&E, you can order through my website as well as directly from Michael (Who is a really great guy to work with!)
If you'd like to hear the M&E, do a search for posts authored by Michael Eskin on this board, and click on his webpage link at the bottom of the post. Follow the links for Irish music, and you'll find his "whistle/flute comparison" page. Here, he heas a recording of the M&E Ruddal model, and it does sound awfully nice. Obviously, Michael's playing is what makes it sound nice, but I don't think anyone hearing the clip would be able to tell you it's a polymer flute, and not wood.
That said, I play a Dixon now, and am impressed. Also a very good sound, and capable of a good deal of flexibility in tone. A lot of bang for your dollar, er, pound. (I have a McGee R&R in blackwood coming, though, and am itching to get my hands on it.)
I have an M&E Rudall-Rose keyed flute (polymer) and it's just great. Some of the key placements aren't as ergonomically friendly as on, say, a Dave Williams (but then, I have small hands), but are definitely doable. It may be that Mike Cronolly is still experimenting with this. You may want to ask him.
I'm a huge Dixon polymer fan. It plays very well and looks good too. The M&E does have the advantage of the tuning slide and foot for probably more tonal variety and power than the Dixon. I like my Dixon and will play until I decide to get a new blackwood flute and even still will probably play it quite a bit. The M&E may hold you off for a lot longer on getting a blackwood. Either way I'm sure you'll be happy.
Cheers,
Aaron
I 've owned both the Dixon and the M&E Ruddall-Rose they are both great flutes. The Dixon is lighter weight. The R&R has a tuning slide and a slightly rounder and maybe richer sound. I honestly don't know how important the tuning slide is. It seems like I was able to tune the Dixon adequately with the tenon joint.
Buy one of each and sell the one you love least. It won't likely depreciate any.
I'll add my name to the long list of M & E advocates. I've never played a Dixon myself but I had one of Michael Cronnolly's original model flutes (he has since begun making a Rudall and Rose model as well) and I had nothing but fun playing it. It's a great flute to learn on, has a lovely tone, and won't hold you back as you progress in ability. I would also suggest spending the few extra bucks and getting the decorative joint rings, they make the flute aesthetically as well as aurally pleasing... but that's just a matter of personal preference. If you get an M & E you won't for a second regret the extra money spent.
Played them both. The Dixon is quite good, especially
for the price, the MandE better.
So there is this issue:
Either you decide that the flute is for you
or you don't.
If you do, then probably you will sooner or later
want a blackwood flute--because those send
significantly better than polymer.
so you might buy the Dixon and save your
money for the blackwood.
However you will want a polymer flute,
too, because they are a whole lot more
convenient than blackwood. So if you
might want to better polymer, like the
MandE or (if I may make this suggestion,
the Seeri). Cause in the long term
it'll please you more than the Dixon.
