deisman wrote:It'd be helpful to a beginner like me if anyone has more video's they could post as good examples of this sound.
There are heaps of excellent vids on youtube (check out the sticky thread), however the following have good enough audio quality and the reverb doesn't get in the way of the tone:
As I listen to it now, it sounds a bit more dark than what I usually strive for, maybe because it's just me on my lonesome. I usually try to start dark and sharpen up, rather than starting sharp and breathy and trying to darken down, if that makes any sense. Cheers,
Tell us something.: I'm a traveling man, made a lot of stops. All over this world. And in every port, I own the heart of a cute little girl. Woah, I'm a travel'n man. Yes, I'm a travel'n maa-an. Woah, I'm a travel'n man.
I have been told on several occasions that I have a good tone. What I don't know is whether or not I have a dark, reedy tone. Give a listen to the examples below and let me know. Thanks,
Arbo
And, if you run the Autotuner on FFT while listening, you'll see Rob has crammed a lot of energy into those harmonics just above (to the right of) the fundamental (the left-most peak), similar to the red trace in the curve I published above.
I won't publish Rob's results as we can't be sure what the video's audio compression algorithm is doing to the spectrum. (It's certainly injecting in an annoying artifact up around the 9-10KHz region, fortunately well above our region of interest. Anyone old enough to remember AM radio will remember the interchannel whistle audible particulalrly on long distance stations.) But it illustrates that FFT could be a useful tool in educating your ear about tone, and your lips about getting it.
Tell us something.: I'm a traveling man, made a lot of stops. All over this world. And in every port, I own the heart of a cute little girl. Woah, I'm a travel'n man. Yes, I'm a travel'n maa-an. Woah, I'm a travel'n man.
Thanks for the links - I really enjoyed listening to them and you play wonderfully. IMO your tone is very reedy compared to what I have heard. You get a very aggressive (in a good way) bark out of your instrument on the low D. Is that the "honk" people talk about ? I assume so.
I'm curious to know what kind of flute you play and who the maker is? What do you guys think of Arbo's sound? I like it & hopefully someday I'll be able to sound like that too... thanks again for posting them.
thanks for the feedback. I don't know if I have the 'honk' people refer to. I am playing an original Hudson Pratten, cocuswood. My ONE flute to rule them all.
Thanks again for listening!
Arbo
Terry McGee wrote:And, if you run the Autotuner on FFT while listening, you'll see Rob has crammed a lot of energy into those harmonics just above (to the right of) the fundamental (the left-most peak), similar to the red trace in the curve I published above.
I won't publish Rob's results as we can't be sure what the video's audio compression algorithm is doing to the spectrum. (It's certainly injecting in an annoying artifact up around the 9-10KHz region, fortunately well above our region of interest. Anyone old enough to remember AM radio will remember the interchannel whistle audible particulalrly on long distance stations.) But it illustrates that FFT could be a useful tool in educating your ear about tone, and your lips about getting it.
Terry
Agreed on the audio artifacts - sounds like robo-flute to me. Good call on not publishing that one. If I ever get a good solo flute recording, you can run it thru yer aul' yoke and display the result for all and sundry. Cheers,
Had a quick look at the Geezer Reel and sure enough, the same general pattern emerges - the first few harmonics above the fundamental have as much energy as the fundamental. And it's certainly consistent with the "tearing roofing iron" sound you are getting.
This is a long way from the sterotypical view of the flute as being a "pure" (ie sinusoidal) note instrument, which would have all the energy in the fundamental. You wonder where some of these allegedly scientific writers go to hear their flutes!
I can post an image if you like, although we can't be sure how accurate it really is - I'm just snitching notes on the run, rather than presenting the analyzer with just that note.
This is something you can do at home using Tatsuaki's free Autotuner - all you need is a microphone - I'm happy to issue some blow-by-blow instructions if anyone wants to try it, and then attempt to interpret the results if posted.
Hmmm, "blow-by-blow". Sounds like something from a "Martial Arts for Fluteplayers" training course.
Terry McGee wrote:This is a long way from the sterotypical view of the flute as being a "pure" (ie sinusoidal) note instrument, which would have all the energy in the fundamental. You wonder where some of these allegedly scientific writers go to hear their flutes!
Agreed... I have never heard a flute, classical or otherwise, that truly sounded like it was producing sine waves. Those are people the same people who say that the natural minor scale and, heaven forbid, dorian mode are rarely used.
Edit: Further question for Terry. What do you find if you run a recording of Paddy Carty through your analyzer? What about Fintan Vallely?
Terry McGee wrote:...the first few harmonics above the fundamental have as much energy as the fundamental. And it's certainly consistent with the "tearing roofing iron" sound you are getting...
I agree with this characterization but also suggest that the method of recording, particularly the distance of the mic from the flute, the quality of the mic, and any automatic gain control will influence the ratio of the first harmonic to the fundamental. At least that's been my limited experience with recording the flute.
