Cathy Wilde wrote:So. The more experienced you are and the more solid your skills, the better you are at not only playing a flute the way YOU play, but more important, at quickly sensing and playing a flute the way *IT* needs to be played to get YOUR sound.
Jim, you've been around debate, intelligent discourse, and academia a long time. If you'd wanted to discredit Hugh's findings based solely on scientific grounds of 'insufficient data' you would have stopped at the end of your first paragraph. Instead, it seems to me that your paragraph prefaced 'FWIW' was included deliberately to blow the piece out of the water ('not only do you have insufficient data, but my experiments prove otherwise'). You know full well that your experience is so wildly at variance with Hugh's that there is no comparison between them at all, so why mention it at all, with or without the 'FWIW'?
Hugh's made a statement backed by his own experiments which supports conventional wisdom and teaching, and really the only people qualified to dispute it are those of comparable experience. Anyone disputing it with lesser 'qualifications' is merely speculating, or perhaps wishfully thinking.
Or am I missing something?
"It might be a bit better to tune to one of my fiddle's open strings, like A, rather than asking me for an F#." - Martin Milner
Tell us something.: Pipes have become my main instrument, but I still play the flute. I have emerged from the "instrument acquisition" phase, and am now down to one full set of pipes (Gordon Galloway), and one flute (Hudson Siccama).
As usual there are multiple levels of discussion occurring here. I thought Cathy's comments were wise, and I agree with her. As several have pointed out in this thread, sooner or later it is a good idea to really get to know a flute. With this experience, much of what one learns is transferrable to any flute. (Although I have to say I've been slow to adapt to Irish flutes from the baroque flute).
I assume most of us agree that one can learn a lot by playing different flutes about one's preferences (this wood or that wood, this shape embouchure or that, lined or unlined, big holes or small holes, small, medium or large bore, with keys or without, loud or soft, etc). I am not arguing against the existence of preferences, or a person's right to have preferences, or to change their preferences. Nor am I arguing that any flute is good enough. Playing on a dud is no fun and limiting. Nor am I arguing that physical issues aren't important (weight, stretch). You have to find a flute you can play. Nor am I arguing that needs don't change over time. Maybe you have switched to larger sessions, play with different instruments, are now using a microphone, have changed repertoires, whatever. Nor am I arguing that all flutes sound the same. Nor am I arguing against buying flutes for any reason that suits you. After all, it's your money and time, and you are setting your own goals, and you can try to reach those goals by any path you choose.
Once you have a flute that is good enough quality that it doesn't limit, that you can hold without strain, and cover the holes without difficulty, then the flute is no longer limiting. It's the player that's limiting. My thesis is that for all our obsessing over models, lined, or unlined, hole size, embouchure type etc, these aren't the factors that limit progress in the long run, bearing the first sentence of this paragraph in mind. I am arguing that a good player can adapt to different flutes and get the sound s/he desires. That is consistent with the possibility that that sound might be harder or easier to get on different flutes. This thesis is not arguing for or against preferences, but for the utility of distinguishing needs from preferences.
Please activate the irony detection unit. I do understand that "All generalizations are false". What I was trying to point out in my post was that my experiences 6 months ago led me to believe that differences in flutes are very important, and that my experience this week has led me to believe the converse. I hoped folks would notice the inconsistency in my post between the rational me (one flute is fine) and the irrational me (just one more....), as well as the inconsistency betweeen what I used to think and what I now think. I am not claiming that my experience will be your experience, but I am noting that my new conclusions fit in better with the conclusions of more experienced players than my former opinions. I am pointing out my inconsistencies as well as making an argument in the hope that one or the other or both are informative. But if not, not.
Jim, I think a careful reading of my first post shows that I didn't generalize, and I didn't make the claim that all flutes sound alike. I made the different claim that skilled players can get the sound they want from different flutes. Straw men and all that.
Academic joke. "Why do professors hate making decisions? Because then the argument stops."
Hugh (a professor who doesn't imagine that the argument is going to stop)
Last edited by flutefry on Fri Feb 24, 2006 3:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I thought I had no talent, but my talent is to persist anyway.
Tell us something.: Pipes have become my main instrument, but I still play the flute. I have emerged from the "instrument acquisition" phase, and am now down to one full set of pipes (Gordon Galloway), and one flute (Hudson Siccama).
GaryKelly wrote:Jim, you've been around debate, intelligent discourse, and academia a long time. If you'd wanted to discredit Hugh's findings based solely on scientific grounds of 'insufficient data' you would have stopped at the end of your first paragraph. Instead, it seems to me that your paragraph prefaced 'FWIW' was included deliberately to blow the piece out of the water ('not only do you have insufficient data, but my experiments prove otherwise'). You know full well that your experience is so wildly at variance with Hugh's that there is no comparison between them at all, so why mention it at all, with or without the 'FWIW'?
Hugh's made a statement backed by his own experiments which supports conventional wisdom and teaching, and really the only people qualified to dispute it are those of comparable experience. Anyone disputing it with lesser 'qualifications' is merely speculating, or perhaps wishfully thinking.
Or am I missing something?
Nah, I just meant what I said. I did wish to suggest
to Hugh the possiblity that further research might come up
with well-made flutes that sound strikingly different. My experience
was included, with an appropriate disclaimer, to suggest that possibility. That's all I meant.
I was trying to be the serpent in the garden, luring him into
FLOA, not to blow anything out of the water.
flutefry wrote:As usual there are multiple levels of discussion occurring here. I thought Cathy's comments were wise, and I agree with her. As several have pointed out in this thread, sooner or later it is a good idea to really get to know a flute. With this experience, much of what one learns is transferrable to any flute. (Although I have to say I've been slow to adapt to Irish flutes from the baroque flute).
I assume most of us agree that one can learn a lot by playing different flutes about one's preferences (this wood or that wood, this shape embouchure or that, lined or unlined, big holes or small holes, small, medium or large bore, with keys or without, loud or soft, etc). I am not arguing against the existence of preferences, or a person's right to have preferences, or to change their preferences. Nor am I arguing that any flute is good enough. Playing on a dud is no fun and limiting. Nor am I arguing that physical issues aren't important (weight, stretch). You have to find a flute you can play. Nor am I arguing that needs don't change over time. Maybe you have switched to larger sessions, play with different instruments, are now using a microphone, have changed repertoires, whatever. Nor am I arguing that all flutes sound the same. Nor am I arguing against buying flutes for any reason that suits you. After all, it's your money and time, and you are setting your own goals, and you can try to reach those goals by any path you choose.
Once you have a flute that is good enough quality that it doesn't limit, that you can hold without strain, and cover the holes without difficulty, then the flute is no longer limiting. It's the player that's limiting. My thesis is that for all our obsessing over models, lined, or unlined, hole size, embouchure type etc, these aren't the factors that limit progress in the long run, bearing the first sentence of this paragraph in mind. I am arguing that a good player can adapt to different flutes and get the sound s/he desires. That is consistent with the possibility that that sound might be harder or easier to get on different flutes. This thesis is not arguing for or against preferences, but for the utility of distinguishing needs from preferences.
Please activate the irony detection unit. I do understand that "All generalizations are false". What I was trying to point out in my post was that my experiences 6 months ago led me to believe that differences in flutes are very important, and that my experience this week has led me to believe the converse. I hoped folks would notice the inconsistency in my post between the rational me (one flute is fine) and the irrational me (just one more....), as well as the inconsistency betweeen what I used to think and what I now think. I am not claiming that my experience will be your experience, but I am noting that my new conclusions fit in better with the conclusions of more experienced players than my former opinions. I am pointing out my inconsistencies as well as making an argument in the hope that one or the other or both are informative. But if not, not.
Jim, I think a careful reading of my first post shows that I didn't generalize, and I didn't make the claim that all flutes sound alike. I made the different claim that skilled players can get the sound they want from different flutes. Straw men and all that.
Academic joke. "Why do professors hate making decisions? Because then the argument stops."
Hugh (a professor who doesn't imagine that the argument is going to stop)
I really thought I was responding to what you said, and I in no
way meant to attack a straw man. If I did apologies. To the extent
that I now understand what you are asserting, I still
think your experience is insufficient evidence for what you
conclude. I do take you to be taking your experience with these flutes
to be confirming the claim that a good player can get the sound
he wants from any adequate flute. I don't think one
can conclude that from a comparison of two flutes.
i believe the conclusion is actually a foregone one. hugh was just adding one more case to what had already been concluded and expressed before. iow, the choir was already singing before hugh came along. hugh just joined in. however, not everyone is suited or cares to sing in the choir.
this and many other topics remind me of the age old nicholson vs. boehm dilemma. it will probably always be with us.
Unless we think that all flutes sound
pretty much the same in the hands of a good player, which
Hugh and I seem to agree is mistaken, a good player who
wants a particular sound might not be able to get it
from any flute. If you want a big booming honking sound,
you may be not be able to get it very well from some small bored
small holed rudalls, for instance. If you want to play the way
John Skelton does on Barndance on WFO,
I don't think Chris Norman's 19th century smallbore
boxwood rudall is going to make it. Obviously there
are other examples like this.
Of course there may be spectacular players who can make
any flute sound the same--Loren once told how a famous
flutist showed up at Van Heune and did just that. But it's less likely that
MERELY good players can do that. And where there's a
difference in sound, there may be a desire for that difference,
obviously. The player may be able to get the flute to
sound good in its own way, but not get
the sound he particularly wants.
So if the claim is that a good player can make any flute
sound good, I think that's probably true. If the claim is that
a (merely) good player can get out of any flute the sound
she;s after, I'm less persuaded.
I thought that Hugh was maintaining that the fact that these
two flutes sounded alike supported the generalization that
well made flutes sound more of less alike, which in turn
would certainly support
the conclusion that a good player can get whatever sound
he wants from any of them. But Hugh didn't mean that, he
has explained, so I don't see the connection
between the fact that these two flutes sound alike and his
conclusion. It may be true, I've just never seen a persuasive
reason to believe it.
yes okay jim i see where you are coming from. instead of 'foregone conclusion', perhaps 'existing opinion (or existing baises) among experienced players' or something like that might be a more palatable description.
fwiw, i have owned many flutes over the past 16 or so years. i spent alot of time and energy with flute comparisons, analyzing and intellectualizing over them, an interesting pastime in it's own right, apparently shared by many floa-er's. i don't see that it has necessarily improved my actual fluteplaying though. i found other activities proved more effective and influential for that purpose. hope that helps.
rama wrote:<snip>i don't see that it has necessarily improved my actual fluteplaying though. i found other activities proved more effective and influential for that purpose. hope that helps.
Could you be referring to 'other activities' like .... actual fluteplaying?
Was it sonja who had the "Shut up and play" quote in her signature line? I always liked that. If only I'd take her advice!
Deja Fu: The sense that somewhere, somehow, you've been kicked in the head exactly like this before.
Let me apologize to Hugh and all concerned for taking things too seriously
and getting all technical. I've been working too hard, I was upset
by recent events on the board, and I was too attached to
my own view. Thanks for all these interesting posts, Jim
FWIW, that wasn't a slam against you, Jim. I think we often end up thinking/talking about these things so much because we're all passionate about playing, and unfortunately, we can't play all the time (at least not at the unenlightened office where I spend a goodly chunk of my day ).
But hey. Even if talking about music is like dancing about architecture , it's good that we care so much about something (in my case sometimes to the point of obsession, alas!).
Enjoy your new flute!
Deja Fu: The sense that somewhere, somehow, you've been kicked in the head exactly like this before.
"It might be a bit better to tune to one of my fiddle's open strings, like A, rather than asking me for an F#." - Martin Milner
).
