Carbon fibre

The Chiff & Fipple Irish Flute on-line community. Sideblown for your protection.
User avatar
Cathy Wilde
Posts: 5591
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2003 4:17 pm
antispam: No
Please enter the next number in sequence: 8
Location: Somewhere Off-Topic, probably

Post by Cathy Wilde »

Of course there could be a variety of factors at work here, but my fella sounds so much better now that he's ditched his carbon fiber bow and gone back to a wooden one. The fiber bow seemed to magnify everything almost to the point of shrillness. (And yes, I could tell the difference with my eyes closed and back turned 100% of the time)

OK, back to flutes ..... :-)
Deja Fu: The sense that somewhere, somehow, you've been kicked in the head exactly like this before.
User avatar
Jack Bradshaw
Posts: 933
Joined: Thu May 01, 2003 2:49 pm
Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
Location: Hampstead, NH
Contact:

Post by Jack Bradshaw »

Flute fibah frum New Hamshah...???

Edit: I do have a sputter coater setup just for fiber if someone wants to hold the record for the world's most expensive flute.....be glad to help ! :D
603/329-7322
"I fail to see why doing the same thing over and over and getting the
same results every time is insanity: I've almost proved it isn't;
only a few more tests now and I'm sure results will differ this time ... "
meemtp
Posts: 911
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 12:01 pm
Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
Location: Bridgton, Maine

Post by meemtp »

Carbon fiber has been used in stringed instruments with a degree of success. It sounds better than instruments up to a certain range of quality, however (to my ears and mamy way more accomplished than myself) there's still a difference in timbre, etc. between a carbon fiber cello or mandolin and a master-made wooden one. Also, carbon fiber will not "open up". Furthermore, woodwinds work differently than stringed instruments. Regardless, the mileage is likely to be similar, better than plastic or delrin probably, but probably still not like wood. Science and technology have a long way to go to equal nature, I think that's been proven time and again.
Corin
User avatar
Lucas
Posts: 306
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 3:13 am
antispam: No
Location: where the beer is good and plenty (that be Belgium)
Contact:

Post by Lucas »

meemtp wrote:Science and technology have a long way to go to equal nature, I think that's been proven time and again.
I think science is a way to describe nature, just as poetry is, only a little more accurate :lol:
I know technology is able to reproduce an item a million times within given specs, nature isn't.
Don't confuse what you feel with what you know. As an engineer with a scientific education I KNOW materials do not make a difference, as a flutemaker I FEEL they do.

Talasiga's post was about the use of carbon fibre in simple system flutes. Why does nobody use it? Because the material is expensive and not in demand. IMHO acoustics have nothing to do with it.
Digiti animaque non satis
http://users.skynet.be/fluiten
User avatar
Jumbuk
Posts: 311
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 10:58 pm
Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Post by Jumbuk »

Lucas wrote:I know technology is able to reproduce an item a million times within given specs, nature isn't.
Hmmm ... trees, leaves, viruses, hydrogen molecules, stars etc etc ?
User avatar
Lucas
Posts: 306
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 3:13 am
antispam: No
Location: where the beer is good and plenty (that be Belgium)
Contact:

Post by Lucas »

Jumbuk wrote:
Lucas wrote:I know technology is able to reproduce an item a million times within given specs, nature isn't.
Hmmm ... trees, leaves, viruses, hydrogen molecules, stars etc etc ?
Ever seen two trees or leaves or stars that are exactly the same? I haven't.
I have never seen a hydrogen molecule, so you might be right on that one.
Digiti animaque non satis
http://users.skynet.be/fluiten
User avatar
talasiga
Posts: 5199
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2004 12:33 am
antispam: No
Location: Eastern Australia

unitas

Post by talasiga »

Lucas wrote:
meemtp wrote:Science and technology have a long way to go to equal nature, I think that's been proven time and again.
I think science is a way to describe nature, just as poetry is, only a little more accurate
......
Ergo, the "accurate" can never equal the "poetic".
I am glad we all agree.
:party:
qui jure suo utitur neminem laedit
Gordon
Posts: 1270
Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2002 6:00 pm
antispam: No
Please enter the next number in sequence: 8
Location: Actually, now I'm over there...

Post by Gordon »

Lucas wrote:
Jumbuk wrote:
Lucas wrote:I know technology is able to reproduce an item a million times within given specs, nature isn't.
Hmmm ... trees, leaves, viruses, hydrogen molecules, stars etc etc ?
Ever seen two trees or leaves or stars that are exactly the same? I haven't.
I have never seen a hydrogen molecule, so you might be right on that one.

And this is a good thing?
I'm not adverse to science and technology in instrument building, if it can lower the price, save a rare tree, and improve quality for low-end instruments, but perhaps it's the "flaws" in natural things, the slight variations found in nature, tree to tree - the minor vibrations that cause sonic imperfections, in the case of woodwinds (and more dramatically, stringed instruments) - that make a wooden instrument sound better to our ears.
Gordon
mcdafydd
Posts: 172
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:51 pm
antispam: No
Please enter the next number in sequence: 8
Tell us something.: My wife and I moved back to beautiful Central Vermont and I need to update my Location! Thanks much...
Location: Central Vermont

Post by mcdafydd »

talasiga wrote:I would like to emphasise that my interest in carbon fibre flutes is prompted by the fact that it is a very strong, durable material and very LIGHT.
I'm interested in John Landell's use of titanium for the same reasons you mention. I asked him about making a titanium alto flute (not that I have $20K lying around for what I'm sure it would cost), but he said that it's too difficult of a material to work with to warrant such an undertaking.

I'm also interested in tracking down some keyed simple system metal flutes, but there were so few of them made. And that's probably due to the falling interest in simple system instruments at the same time that interest in Boehm system was on the rise. The demand to manufacture metal simple system flutes in large, affordable quantities just never manifested, even though I'm sure there were (and are) always a few interested buyers.
jim stone
Posts: 17193
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2001 6:00 pm

Post by jim stone »

I think Meempt's point was that, when it comes to making
good sounding instruments that involve vibrating air
(either because the wood vibrates as in fiddles or there's
a column of vibrating air), man-made materials have a ways
to go before they beat stuff like wood, silver, etc. That's
what M thinks we've seen repeatedly.

The bottom line is this, IMO: what does a carbon fibre simple system
flute sound like? My bet is that it probably won't sound
as good as wood. But, of course, we don't know until
we try.
jim stone
Posts: 17193
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2001 6:00 pm

Post by jim stone »

Here's part of what Matlik flute co says about Boehm flutes made
of cargon fibre (kevin k has supplied the link, above).
I must confess a certain nervousness when makers
thump on the 'material doesn't matter' motif. However:


Using carbon fibre opens up new possibilities in musical acoustics. The effect of material on the sound of flute has for long been considered controversial. Already in the 19th century Theobalt Boehm experimented with different materials and came to the conclusion that a light and strong body gives the best result. In those days the common view was that the vibrating wall of a wind instrument body creates the sound, like the cover of a violin. Conversely, scientists claim to have proven that the molecules of the flute body can not essentially participate in sound production and the material of the body thus has no effect on the flute sound. This is an ongoing debate, as artistic perception and that of so called hard scientific fact do not find agreement in this case.

Still, the evolutionary process seems persistently to hint at the potency of the material of the body. Historically viewed, the tendency has moved from soft to hard and rigid materials. Boehm's material's studies concluded by favoring the tone producing qualities of the metal flute. Albert Cooper reports that he had hammered a flute body for several weeks to get a sufficient rigidity and a good sound. Soft flute tubes haven't succeeded, and any of us can imagine what kind of an acoustic effect a soft rubber tube would have on a flute.

The idea of using carbon fibre for a flute did not begin from scientific calculations. The starting point for Kahonen was to experiment the effects of sound by the exceptional properties of the body. The focus of the studies was a body construction with a light but very aperiodic wall, where energy losses are minimal. In a body of such a configuration, the wall itself doesn't create the sound, as scientists say. The most essential element is the vibrating column of air inside the flute. The construction of the body along a proper bore dimension, the placement of correctly proportioned tone holes and an optimal headjoint taper, wall height and embouchure hole configuration creates the best acoustical circumstances for the vibrating air column of the flute.

Reportedly, players' intuitions are that the flute with a carbon fibre body produces a responsive, powerful and rich sound with wide dynamic dimensions in volume and tonal colors. Acoustical tests, carried out in the laboratory of acoustics at the Helsinki University of Technology, prove the players' intuitions to be correct. Measured maximum volume level was notably powerful compared to the best conventional flutes made of silver, gold and wood. The measured tonal spectra was notably rich throughout the octave range.
User avatar
Lucas
Posts: 306
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 3:13 am
antispam: No
Location: where the beer is good and plenty (that be Belgium)
Contact:

Post by Lucas »

Gordon wrote:
Lucas wrote:
Jumbuk wrote: Hmmm ... trees, leaves, viruses, hydrogen molecules, stars etc etc ?
Ever seen two trees or leaves or stars that are exactly the same? I haven't.
I have never seen a hydrogen molecule, so you might be right on that one.
And this is a good thing?
No. Who said anything about good or bad? I simply wanted to state that science is not the opposite of nature, in fact nature IS science.
Digiti animaque non satis
http://users.skynet.be/fluiten
User avatar
vomitbunny
Posts: 1403
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 7:34 pm
antispam: No
Please enter the next number in sequence: 8
Location: spleen

Post by vomitbunny »

How would carbon fibre compare with pvc?
My opinion is stupid and wrong.
User avatar
Jack Bradshaw
Posts: 933
Joined: Thu May 01, 2003 2:49 pm
Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
Location: Hampstead, NH
Contact:

Post by Jack Bradshaw »

vomitbunny wrote:How would carbon fibre compare with pvc?
Depends what's used to bond the fibers together.....
603/329-7322
"I fail to see why doing the same thing over and over and getting the
same results every time is insanity: I've almost proved it isn't;
only a few more tests now and I'm sure results will differ this time ... "
User avatar
BoneQuint
Posts: 827
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 2:17 am
Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
Location: Bellingham, WA
Contact:

Post by BoneQuint »

Also from the Matit website: "The metal keywork operates on magnets instead of metal springs."

Woah. That's pretty cool.
Post Reply