Boxwood: Scoop wanted

Jayhawk · Post by **Jayhawk** » Mon Jun 09, 2003 9:17 pm

Jim - What's your opinion of your Bleazley flute? I don't think I've seen a review of them, and his prices are nice and low.

Eric

The Sporting Pitchfork · Tue Jun 10, 2003 1:28 am

I don`t actually play a boxwood flute, but my uilleann pipes are boxwood (and they`re a d set , not flat pitch as is more common with boxwood pipes). I have played boxwood flutes though and notice the same thing with my pipes: little or no discernable difference in volume, but a "sweeter" tone. As for why this is, Hamish Moore told me once that boxwood cannot be bored out and polished as finely as blackwood can, hence a less direct and piercing tone.

As an aside, my chanter has been getting a very slight "banana" curve lately. I`ll try the tupperware/sponge thing and see if it helps at all.

Pan · Post by **Pan** » Tue Jun 10, 2003 1:59 am

All this talk about sound of boxwwod makes me drool

I´m on the list for a boxwood R&R from McGee.

/Peter

chas · Post by **chas** » Tue Jun 10, 2003 5:34 am

Jayhawk wrote:Jim - What's your opinion of your Bleazley flute? I don't think I've seen a review of them, and his prices are nice and low.

Eric

I posted a review just a couple of weeks ago; it's about halfway down this page.

Jayhawk · Post by **Jayhawk** » Tue Jun 10, 2003 6:07 am

Chas,

I'd forgotten you posted a review! Mea culpa...

Has your review changed now that you've had a chance to spend more time with the flute?

Eric

jim stone · Post by **jim stone** » Tue Jun 10, 2003 10:36 am

I haven't played the bleazey g enough to really
know it--it takes a couple of weeks breaking in, etc.
However I think there is great promise here
and that Bleazey's flutes may well deserve
more attention. On the g flute the craftsmanship
is excellent, there is plainly a lot of attention
to the embouchure hole. As mentioned
the prices are low. I'll try to say more
when I can.

The real question for me now is his
top end pratten flute (he makes two D flutes,
one cheaper the other less so).
Has anybody played this? (350 pounds,
it seems, which is a great price),

chas · Post by **chas** » Tue Jun 10, 2003 4:08 pm

Eric: My impressions of the Bleazey are still pretty much the same. The perfect flute for me now, probably not what I want to play for the rest of my life. We'll see.

Jim, I asked Phil about his Prattens, and especially the difference in price. He said that he does a lot of hand-finishing of the bore through the (much larger) finger holes. If nobody posts a review of one in a year or two, I'll probably get one.

Is boxwood really much less dense than blackwood and cocobolo? I thought the Bleazey felt heavier than my other Irish flutes, but they all weigh 11 ounces -- I know the Bleazey is somewhat heavy-walled; I'm wondering what the difference in densities is.

bradhurley · Post by **bradhurley** » Tue Jun 10, 2003 4:14 pm

chas wrote:Is boxwood really much less dense than blackwood and cocobolo?

Yes.

My boxwood Wilkes flute in Bb weighs about the same as my blackwood Cotter flute in D. I just weighed them on my kitchen scale to be sure (taking off all the keys and leaving the headjoints off, since the Wilkes headjoint is unlined and the Cotter headjoint is lined and has a tuning slide).

sturob · Post by **sturob** » Tue Jun 10, 2003 6:13 pm

bradhurley wrote:I just weighed them on my kitchen scale to be sure (taking off all the keys and leaving the headjoints off, since the Wilkes headjoint is unlined and the Cotter headjoint is lined and has a tuning slide).

We know what your flute was wearing. What were you wearing?

Stuart

bradhurley · Post by **bradhurley** » Tue Jun 10, 2003 7:48 pm

sturob wrote:We know what your flute was wearing. What were you wearing?

Stuart

I took off all my keys too. Removing my headjoint was harder, but it seems to have worked. Now I just have to figure out how to put it back on.

chas · Post by **chas** » Tue Jun 10, 2003 8:07 pm

bradhurley wrote:
chas wrote:Is boxwood really much less dense than blackwood and cocobolo?
Yes.

My boxwood Wilkes flute in Bb weighs about the same as my blackwood Cotter flute in D. I just weighed them on my kitchen scale to be sure (taking off all the keys and leaving the headjoints off, since the Wilkes headjoint is unlined and the Cotter headjoint is lined and has a tuning slide).

Just as my box Bleazey weighs the same as my blackwood Burns and my cocobolo Schultz. I've looked a little bit on the web and the only density I've found for boxwood is 1.1, which puts it in the ballpark of blackwood.

jim stone · Post by **jim stone** » Tue Jun 10, 2003 9:03 pm

Boxwood is light, which I suppose goes with
less density.

sturob · Post by **sturob** » Tue Jun 10, 2003 11:11 pm

But I think Charlie is saying its density is very close to blackwood.

Here's what I found:

Boxwood (Buxus sempervirens) 0.95-1.1 g/cc
Blackwood (Dalbergia melanoxylon) 1.2-1.25 g/cc
Rosewood (other Dalbergia spp.) 1.0-1.1 g/cc
Pearwood (Pyrus spp.) 0.65-0.8 g/cc
Cocobolo (Dalbergia retusa) 1.1 g/cc
Pink ivory (Berchemia zeyheri) 0.99 g/cc
Cooktown ironwood (Erythrophleum chlorostachys) 1.2 g/cc
Cocus (Brya ebenus) 0.6 g/cc

I am just blown away by this stuff, which is available on several sites, most notably the wood density database. Makes me think that what we think of as making a timber "heavy" or "dense" is actually the closeness of the grain rather than its actual density.

Cocus is light; I have a set of Highland pipes that may not weight as much as two B-flat flutes. But can you believe the densities are that close for box and blackwood? I'd imagine that any discernable differences, when we're talking about 0.1g/cc in an instrument that might displace, oh, 100cc . . . that's like 3 1/2 ounces. Not a huge deal.

But cocus is so NOT dense. Interesting. I put in the other timbers that seem relevant, and threw in pearwood thinking it would be the odd man out and be really light. But NO! Cocus. Sheesh.

Anything above 0.9 g/cc is considered "very dense" in the woodturning sense.

Stuart

eilam · Post by **eilam** » Wed Jun 11, 2003 12:01 am

Stuart where did you pull that info from?
I always wonder about Osage Orange, it very dense and durable, not prone to decay,
and turns to a glass like finish.
Thanks, eilam.

sturob · Post by **sturob** » Wed Jun 11, 2003 7:48 am

From the wood density database. Hey, I put the link above! I try to be thorough.

Osage orange (Maclura pomifera) 0.8 g/cc

Not as dense as the others. But, like everyting . . . more dense than cocus.

Stuart