material... true or false?

[Jon C.]

Nancy Toff, in The Flute Book, writes:
"Almost nothing can start an argument among flutists faster than a discussion of the relative merits of various materials for constructing flutes...There are several aspects to this issue: the effect of the material on responsiveness (perceptible only to the player); its effect on tone quality (evident to both player and listener); and the more concrete (no pun intended) questions of ease of fabrication, durability, and dimensional stability. Added to these is the long arm of tradition, a powerful force in the musical world and one that in this case carries strong nationalistic overtones. The scientific arguments are too lengthy and technical to be of much interest or assistance to the flutist...Among players, not surprisingly, the choices between materials are largely unscientific, a matter of tradition and intangible personal preference...often perceptible only to the player...I participated in a trial of two Lamberson flutes, one gold, one sterling silver, a scene undoubtedly repeated at many times in many places. With backs turned, a group of (flute) students listened to our teacher alternate between the two instruments, noting which one we thought we had heard. Our accuracy record was notably poor...When we each played the two instruments ourselves, however, we had strong personal preferences."
I myself have owned and played Irish flutes in boxwood (1830), blackwood (modern), and cocus (1860), and each material seems to have its own properties. At a flute convention I tried a number of wood headjoints on the same silver (Boehm) body and once again each type of wood had special properties, though as Ms Toff points out these may be much more apparent to the player than to the listener.

Interesting write up, that the player would notice over the listener. The vibration of the flute when played, is definitely be noticed by the player. I know when I play a Boxwood flute, then play a cocuswood flute, I notice the difference. I don't know if it is the sound or the actual vibrations on the fingers... I guess a scientist would see this a loss, when the sound frequency is vibrating through the wall of the flute, the player would just think it was cool...

[rama]

what do the scientist, the flutemaker, and the fluteplayer have in common??

[Terry McGee]

The Scientific American article:

UNSOUND REASONING

Are wind musicians loving tropical woods to death?

At a recent conference on music and human adaptation at Virginia Tech, physicist John W. Coltman demonstrated what he first described in the early 1970s. After asking the attendees to divert their eyes, he played the same tune twice on the flute. He then asked whether anyone heard any difference between the two performances. No one spoke up; the two were virtually indistinguishable.

Then Coltman revealed his trick. The first time he performed the tune, he played it on a simple side-blown flute made of lightweight cherry wood. The second time he used a flute of identical design, except for one detail: it was made of concrete.

To anyone schooled in the physics of wind instruments, Coltman's point is old news. Whether the air is set to vibrate by an edge tone as on the flute, by a reed as with the clarinet or by buzzing lips as with the French horn, the sound itself comes from the vibrating air column inside the instrument. This sound is produced through the end or through open tone holes, not by vibrations of the instrument's body, as is true of string instruments. Dozens of published reports, some dating back 100 years, converge toward the same general conclusion: so long as the walls are thick enough to remain rigid--about 0.4 millimetre (0.016 inch) for metals, two millimetres ) for woods--and the inside walls are smooth, the kind of material used for a wind instrument is, for the most part, immaterial.

But to many musicians, even a mountain of research remains un persuasive. "We all know that wood flutes are much more dolce, much sweeter," says flutist Paula Robison. In contrast, "a gold flute sounds like an instrument made of gold. The silver flutes are much more perky."

The variation in timbre of wood and metal instruments stems from differences in acoustic dimensions brought about by the manufacturing process, not by the materials per se, says Robin Jakeways, a physicist at the University of Leeds .For example, holes in wood flutes are simply drilled in, whereas metal flutes have holes enclosed in a short length of pipe. Brian Holmes, a physicist at San Jose State University and a professional horn player, cites a study that found that plastic and metal clarinets had tone holes with much sharper edges than their wood counterparts. When these holes were rounded off, these clarinets sounded much more like wood ones. Materials also differ in their ability to conduct heat and vibrations. "While those vibrations may not affect the sound significantly, they certainly affect how the instrumentalist interacts with the instrument," Holmes explains. After spending a premium for an instrument made o expensive material, it's only human to convince yourself that you must sound better. And, as flutist James Galway points out, the workmanship of an instrument made of $70,000 worth of platinum is likely to be of extraordinarily high quality. "People pick up my flute and say, 'This is better.' Of course it's better; it's like getting into a custom-built motorcar," he says.

Whatever the underlying reasons, the devotion of many musicians to rare o precious materials could help contribute to their extinction. Dalbergia melanoxylen, known as M'Pingo, grenadilla or African blackwood, and D. nigra, also called rosewood or palisander, are considered endangered by those countries that are developed enough to keep reliable data, says Richard F. Fisher, a forest scientist at Texas A&M University. Grenadilla is the wood of choice for clarinets, oboes and, increasingly, for wood flutes and piccolos; rosewood is a favorite for recorders.

Although the demand for fine musical instruments might seem too small to inspire a harvest would have a dramatic effect on the rain forest, Fisher asserts otherwise. To get to the remote regions where these trees grow, harvesters must clear rivers or build roads. "In many of these areas there are so many landless peasants looking for a piece of land to farm that after you remove just the few trees you want, they go in and invade because now they have access--you've created the access," Fisher says. "They cut down the rest of the forest... and start to grow crops."

Fisher adds that these tropical species are extremely difficult to raise on plantations. They take 60 years or more to reach maturity and tend to grow poorly when raised clustered together in stands, as their key defense against predation is being scarce in the forest.

Indeed, an instrument maker in Libertyville, Ill., Boosey and Hawkes, has been unsuccessful at replenishing M'Pingo trees, says Francois Kloc, a master craftsman there. To offer an alternative material that is also more resistant to cracking, the company developed a "green" line of oboes and clarinets. These instruments are made of M'Pingo sawdust and a patented mixture of fibre carbon and epoxy glue that is heat-treated and placed in an 80-pound(36-kilogram) press to give it the density of whole wood. This process enables the company to use all of the tree instead of only the prime 20 to 30 percent that was usable before. Old, damaged clarinets can also be recycled in a similar way to make new ones.

Whether such innovations will ultimately be widely accepted by music lovers remains to be seen. "Most musicians and many listeners believe without question that the material of which a wind instrument is made has a profound effect on its tone quality," Coltman remarks. "After 100 years, scientists have still convinced nobody."

--Karla Harby in Rockville Centre, N.Y.

[rama]

thanks terry. here's another view:

http://www.makersgallery.com/concrete/other.html#FLUTES:

"The flutes were identical in all respects except for the material that enclosed the vibrating air column."

[jim stone]

I posted this on another thread:

About flutes vibrating.
I believe (but don't claim to know) they do.
It stands to reason, IMO. There is a vibrating
column of air within a container that's
far from absolutely rigid, wood being especially
'plastic.' So it's likely to move with the vibration,
even if we don't necessarily notice it.
I think this explains why different materials
sound different, e.g. cocus, blackwood, boxwood,
etc. They colour the sound.

Or perhaps the movement of the material,
different with different molecular structure,
affects the vibrating column of air.

On its face the flexibility of the container
of a vibrating column of air would appear
to affect the sound.

That's my theory for today.

.............................................

I'm too sleepy to read all this stuff carefully,
however it seems to me, from reading terry's earlier
account, that the first, more scientific, experiment
didn't show the material of tubes don't matter to sound.
At most the experiment shows tube-material
doesn't matter to sound when the flutes have
very similar plastic headjoints.

It's consistent with this that flutes with tubes
made of different stuff and the same metal headjoint
or the same wood headjoint
(suppose it's shifted from flute to flute),
sound different.

Plastic might
obliterate differences in tone that would emerge
with the same metal headjoint or wood headjoint.

[Terry McGee]

It was only the embouchures that were cast in plastic in John's earier experiment - the three tubes were made fully in metal. So I think it was quite a valid proof that players were unable to tell what the tubing was made of. It was important to his experiment not to give the players any clue as to which metal they were playing. Differences in thermal conductivity are pretty obvious to the warm-blooded. Some metals also give electrolytic clues.

If you think John was off-the-mark trying to protect flute players from exploitation, check out:

http://www3.sympatico.ca/harold.gomez/flute.html

http://www.flute4u.com/Foster_Extension.html

Have I mentioned our new product, MattMalloyTone (TM) capsules, available only from McGee Flutes?

Terry

[peeplj]

"Foster & Gomez Universally Acclaimed Remedy for the Aphysickal & All Manner of Ailments" (TM) <-- label on a brown bottle



Terry, I see what you mean.

--James

[jim stone]

It was only the embouchures that were cast in plastic in John's earier experiment - the three tubes were made fully in metal. So I think it was quite a valid proof that players were unable to tell what the tubing was made of. It was important to his experiment not to give the players any clue as to which metal they were playing. Differences in thermal conductivity are pretty obvious to the warm-blooded. Some metals also give electrolytic clues.


Have I mentioned our new product, MattMalloyTone (TM) capsules, available only from McGee Flutes?

Terry

Thanks, Terry. I've tried to read Coltman's piece here.

http://ccrma.stanford.edu/marl/Coltman/

Need to read it again. Not awake till one in the aft.
As I read the experiment there is a short delrin
headjoint, more than two inches long, and the
embouchure itself is also plastic. If so,
one may need to count the possibility that
the results are limited to flutes with delrin
headjoints.

Second, as you say, the players aren't allowed to
touch the flutes. If I understand this, it means
they can't play tunes. They can blow only the 'fundamental'
and the 'octave.' I'm not sure what this means but
it sounds as though they have access to only two
notes, which can be blown without touching the flute.
Perhaps one of them an overtone.... The player
is asked to choose the flute the tone of which
he likes best.

The player then spins the flutes on the special revolving
holder. The test consists of finding again the preferred
flute.

On the face of things the sample of tones is too meager to provide a reliable test,
if I've got the details right. Even if there is a tonal contribution
by the tube material, one is unlikely to discern it reliably with
access to only two notes. So the experiment seems to be doubly flawed.

You'all know understand this stuff better than I do. Let
me suggest that, at long last, we all of us read Coltman's article.
It's only four pages long. The fellow deserves this much.
I'll try to read it again later.

MattMolloy Tone Capsules, eh? Any port in a storm!
Is there a discount if I buy 'em by the crate?

Thanks again, Jim

[Jack Bradshaw]

if jack b. could cast a mold, we'd be in business. mass production: just pour in concrete, let it cure overnight, and presto instant concrete flute. we could pump them out faster than the pakistani flutemakers!

Ya Jack, when is my concrete flute going to be finished?

I'm having trouble getting enough diamonds for the aggregate to make it commercially viable...

[rama]

basis of coltman's "proof" material does not matter:


36 trials (sounding length of tubes = note "g" w/ delrin hj)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1-6 silver vs. wooden tube playing the lower octave "g".
7-12 silver vs. copper tube.. " "
13-18 silver vs. wood ........upper octave "g"
19-24 silver vs. copper ......." "
25-30 silver vs. wood.......... lower octave "g" -> upper octave -> lower
31-36 silver vs. copper........ " "

the observers were *told* which pair of tubes was used in each of the above trials.
each trial consisted of 3 toots: 1 toot on a tube and 2 toots on the other tube. this trial was repeated 5 more times for a set of 6 trials (1-6), varying the order randomly. etc.

corrections are encouraged.

[bildio]

I don't know if the article on the following web page has already been mentioned, but I find it relevant and interesting, particularly the pdf study in German.

http://iwk.mdw.ac.at/Forschung/english/ ... Conclusion

[jim stone]

I don't know if the article on the following web page has already been mentioned, but I find it relevant and interesting, particularly the pdf study in German.

http://iwk.mdw.ac.at/Forschung/english/ ... Conclusion

This appears to be somebody's doctoral dissertation (sorry, don't
read German). An effort from a noobie scientist, worth
viewing with some skepticism.

Wooden flutes are omitted, so the tests don't apply to them.
In addition there seems to be no account given of how
the listeners got to hear the flutes. Where were they situated,
etc.

Except for this:

'There were two tests made: in TEST A, the Carmen solo and the Brahms solo was presented (from a CD), at first from Player 1 with all instruments, then Player 2 with all instruments and so on. The test persons had to guess the instrument. The result was interesting: no instrument was identified correctly. The best value was that for the 24 k Gold flute: only 22% of the test persons identified it as a 24 k Gold flute. Whereas the wrong allocations had much higher values: 34% identified the Platinum flute as a 9 k Gold flute (only 6.8% identified it correctly) and 32% thought that the 14 k Gold flute is the Platinum flute (11.3% were right)!'

Listening to flutes from a CD is not a reliable way to estimate
tone. The test may show more about the mode of presentation
to listeners than the flutes.

[bildio]

I found the spectral plots showing the influence of the player(s) interesting. Spectrums vary amongst players, but are fairly consistent accross materials for a player.

[jim stone]

I found the spectral plots showing the influence of the player(s) interesting. Spectrums vary amongst players, but are fairly consistent accross materials for a player.

Note that they do show 'measurable' differences associated
with the materials which, the author assures us,
aren't 'recognizable.' Why aren't they recognizable?
The listening tests!

'Similar is the situation for the sound color. The sound spectrum differs extremely between the various players. But analyzing the sound spectra of the notes played by one player with different instruments, only just measurable but not recognizeable differences can be found. This fact was demonstrated strikingly by the listening tests.'

[Cathy Wilde]

All I know is concrete cracks like a beast. You should see some of the sidewalks in town. In fact, if "trees vs. sidewalk" is any sort of a test, wood beats concrete quite often.



Sorry, I know y'all are trying to have a serious discussion. I just couldn't help myself.