Spot the "Frankenflute"????

jemtheflute · Post by **jemtheflute** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 4:48 pm

Currently on eBay - 19th century 8 key flute Potter . Old. Antique Item number: 170177988913

Looks very suspect to me - doubt anyone would "convert" only half the flute to metal inlaid tone holes, also doubt the pseudo Siccama R3 mechanism would belong to a short D foot, although the G sharp key does kinda match the D key and if the R hand section had its tone holes rebored that might account for the inlays...... Also the ferrule rings are an odd assortment and the crown cap, if not the whole head, looks German. Mmmmmm ???????? Thoughts anyone? (BTW, I shan't be bidding!)

The seller has some other flutes on auction as well. I don't recall seeing this seller's eBay handle before......

Denny · Post by **Denny** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 5:02 pm

odd, innit

Rob Sharer · Post by **Rob Sharer** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 5:39 pm

Am I strobing, or is the rod for the Siccama mechanism on the wrong side for a right-handed player? Cheers,

RobROBrobroBRoBROb...........

jemtheflute · Post by **jemtheflute** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 5:55 pm

Well, the axle is on the hand-side - as on a full modern Boehm system, so no probs there, but certainly early rod axles were often put on t'other side. (Real Siccamas of course don't have axles like that - see the ones on eBay recently. It's a borrowing of Siccama's hole placement/extension idea, but with a different mechanism.) But then, who's to say when this doctoring of what appears originally to have been a normal 6-key flute was done? Assuming for now that it is all one flute but not in original condition, I'd hazard that the original blocks for short F and G# were either already damaged or deliberately removed - one would be able to tell if there was a blocked up G# hole with better pics or the flute in-the-flesh. The pillar mounted extra thumb key - presumably an E trill - is also an addition, or why isn't it block-mounted? The R hand section finger-holes were presumably blocked up and re-drilled with the E hole moved lower to enlarge it and cover it with the extension mechanism, with the short F mounted on the axle for convenience (maybe why the axle is near-side?) - again, one would need proper inspection to ascertain whether holes have been filled in......
The axle/pillar and pin mounts certainly don't fit in well stylistically with the full ring block for the Eb key on the foot, though I've certainly seen other flutes with a mixture of blocks and axles. It's probably impossible to work this out without laying hands on it. I wonder how it plays!

Jon C. · Post by **Jon C.** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 6:29 pm

jemtheflute wrote:Well, the axle is on the hand-side - as on a full modern Boehm system, so no probs there, but certainly early rod axles were often put on t'other side. (Real Siccamas of course don't have axles like that - see the ones on eBay recently. It's a borrowing of Siccama's hole placement/extension idea, but with a different mechanism.) But then, who's to say when this doctoring of what appears originally to have been a normal 6-key flute was done? Assuming for now that it is all one flute but not in original condition, I'd hazard that the original blocks for short F and G# were either already damaged or deliberately removed - one would be able to tell if there was a blocked up G# hole with better pics or the flute in-the-flesh. The pillar mounted extra thumb key - presumably an E trill - is also an addition, or why isn't it block-mounted? The R hand section finger-holes were presumably blocked up and re-drilled with the E hole moved lower to enlarge it and cover it with the extension mechanism, with the short F mounted on the axle for convenience (maybe why the axle is near-side?) - again, one would need proper inspection to ascertain whether holes have been filled in......
The axle/pillar and pin mounts certainly don't fit in well stylistically with the full ring block for the Eb key on the foot, though I've certainly seen other flutes with a mixture of blocks and axles. It's probably impossible to work this out without laying hands on it. I wonder how it plays!

I think they fitted the ferrules on the lower section later, for tuning, that is my guess. The rest of the flute looks like a late model band flute.

Aanvil · Post by **Aanvil** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 7:26 pm

Thats an odd duck.

That "double ring" ring and barrel looks familiar.

The other flutes his chap is offering look a little suspect as well... not "basmati Potter" specifically but possibly as the term applies.

Jon C. · Post by **Jon C.** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 3:07 am

Aanvil wrote:Thats an odd duck.

That "double ring" ring and barrel looks familiar.

The other flutes his chap is offering look a little suspect as well... not "basmati Potter" specifically but possibly as the term applies.

I agree! The double ring was used a lot in American flutes. On clos inspection there was damage to the holes that now have ferrules. The lower tenon is a replacement, probably got crushed. The embouchure hole is classic HY Potter, along with the short female slide. The crown looks like it is from a factory German flute, the foot, is very doesn't fit the flute at all! Jem you should get it, and then you can tell us how bad it is...

jemtheflute · Post by **jemtheflute** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 4:37 am

Jon C. wrote:Jem you should get it, and then you can tell us how bad it is...

Starting at £225?! Not a chance! If I was flush for funds I wouldn't risk over £150 for it, not even for the sake of communal feline suicide.

Another thing I just noticed (having another close look at those not very clear photos) is that the foot doesn't appear to push up tight on the lower body - could just be in need of adjustment, or posssibly another indication of "foreign body" parts?

I wonder what Terry McGee makes of this.....Terry?

Terry McGee · Post by **Terry McGee** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 5:41 am

Tricky one. Henry (Hy) Potter did band flutes, and often used a mix of block and post on the same flutes, so none of that is out of the question. But it's certainly a stylistic mix. Interesting that the block mounted keys are saltspoon and the post keys pointed.

The short foot is a typical band flute feature - no point in having low notes if no one can hear you out doors.

Note that the G# is broadly French in style, but doesn't duck under an Omega loop in the C as French flutes do.

Unsual to see a ring on the bottom of an LH section - probably to reinforce a tenon replacement after an altercation with a French horn during manouevres. These things happen, even with a short foot.

I'd agree the cap looks like a ring-in from Germany, rather than anything you'd see from Potter.

Note the different and wider ring at the top of the RH section. Needed to support a repair to the socket after the same altercation?

I suspect the second thumb key is a D rather than an E - the E has to be pretty hard up against the top tenon shoulder.

The lengths given suggest a flute higher than D - possibly high pitch Eb? That would seem consistent with the band flute appearance.

And Jon, don't you mean "on Cloos inspection" (see above, heh heh!)

Terry

Jon C. · Post by **Jon C.** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:19 am

Terry McGee wrote:Tricky one. Henry (Hy) Potter did band flutes, and often used a mix of block and post on the same flutes, so none of that is out of the question. But it's certainly a stylistic mix. Interesting that the block mounted keys are saltspoon and the post keys pointed.

The short foot is a typical band flute feature - no point in having low notes if no one can hear you out doors.

Note that the G# is broadly French in style, but doesn't duck under an Omega loop in the C as French flutes do.

Unsual to see a ring on the bottom of an LH section - probably to reinforce a tenon replacement after an altercation with a French horn during manouevres. These things happen, even with a short foot.

I'd agree the cap looks like a ring-in from Germany, rather than anything you'd see from Potter.

Note the different and wider ring at the top of the RH section. Needed to support a repair to the socket after the same altercation?

I suspect the second thumb key is a D rather than an E - the E has to be pretty hard up against the top tenon shoulder.

The lengths given suggest a flute higher than D - possibly high pitch Eb? That would seem consistent with the band flute appearance.

And Jon, don't you mean "on Cloos inspection" (see above, heh heh!)

Terry

This flute has seen better days! Does look like a Eb, and the crown could be from a Cloos...

the thing about the short foot that bothers me, is why the block wasn't trimmed? It doesn't fit the time period. The short foot Potter that I have has a more conventionally looking foot. The style block is more of the 1 or 4 key variaty, like your Blackman flute.

Jon C. · Post by **Jon C.** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:19 am

Terry McGee wrote:Tricky one. Henry (Hy) Potter did band flutes, and often used a mix of block and post on the same flutes, so none of that is out of the question. But it's certainly a stylistic mix. Interesting that the block mounted keys are saltspoon and the post keys pointed.

The short foot is a typical band flute feature - no point in having low notes if no one can hear you out doors.

Note that the G# is broadly French in style, but doesn't duck under an Omega loop in the C as French flutes do.

Unsual to see a ring on the bottom of an LH section - probably to reinforce a tenon replacement after an altercation with a French horn during manouevres. These things happen, even with a short foot.

I'd agree the cap looks like a ring-in from Germany, rather than anything you'd see from Potter.

Note the different and wider ring at the top of the RH section. Needed to support a repair to the socket after the same altercation?

I suspect the second thumb key is a D rather than an E - the E has to be pretty hard up against the top tenon shoulder.

The lengths given suggest a flute higher than D - possibly high pitch Eb? That would seem consistent with the band flute appearance.

And Jon, don't you mean "on Cloos inspection" (see above, heh heh!)

Terry

This flute has seen better days! Does look like a Eb, and the crown could be from a Cloos...

the thing about the short foot that bothers me, is why the block wasn't trimmed? It doesn't fit the time period. The short foot Potter that I have has a more conventionally looking foot. The style block is more of the 1 or 4 key variety, like your Blackman flute.

Terry McGee · Post by **Terry McGee** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 2:01 pm

Yes, I agree it seems outdated, but maybe that was due to military tradition? Check out the foot on this Bb by Potter:

Note also the mix of post and block mounts, although the cups on both are pointed types, unlike the mix on the flute in question.

(from my "Later Bb Flutes" page:

http://www.mcgee-flutes.com/Later%20Bb%20flutes.htm )

Terry

Aanvil · Post by **Aanvil** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 2:39 pm

Now see.

This is why I enjoy coming here and hanging out with you fellows.

Terry McGee · Post by **Terry McGee** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 2:55 pm

Heh heh, there were three Irishmen. One could read, another could write, and the third simply enjoyed the company of intellectuals!

Terry

Jon C. · Post by **Jon C.** » Thu Dec 13, 2007 5:07 pm

Terry McGee wrote:Yes, I agree it seems outdated, but maybe that was due to military tradition? Check out the foot on this Bb by Potter:

Note also the mix of post and block mounts, although the cups on both are pointed types, unlike the mix on the flute in question.

(from my "Later Bb Flutes" page:

http://www.mcgee-flutes.com/Later%20Bb%20flutes.htm )

Terry

Got me...