On 2002-12-22 13:03, sturob wrote:
...
Is it me, or is that footjoint REALLY long? It looks out-of-proportion to the rest of the flute to me. I've never seen a Copley up close, though. But comparing it to R&R and R&R-style instruments, it's loooooooong. Not that it really matters a whole lot, but it might weaken the bottom end a little.
Purty flute!
Stuart
Stuart, the foot joint may appear long because of the way it was photographed. I have not been able to pull up the photo to have a look (all I get is a "temporarily unavailable" message from Geocities). I took a look at some Rudall and Rose measurements compiled by Terry McGee, and listed in a spreadsheet available from his web site. The R&R foot joints went from 131 mm long to 153.5 mm long for flutes with a bottom note of "C". There seemed to be a trend of shorter foot joints on later R&R flutes.
I have used two different foot joint designs, with length of either 132 mm or 137 mm. The only difference between the two designs is where the "split" is made between the lower body and the foot. The end of the flute is still in the same position relative to the holes.
By the way, Terry McGee has done a terrific job of assembling and presenting data for Rudall and Rose and other classical flutes.
Dave Copley
Loveland, Ohio
, but I just got mine today! I opened it and was amazed by how great it looked. I played the first note and I was in love. Great response with a good solid feel. I'll try to put up some sound files and/or pictures as I'm able to play it more in the next couple of days.
