Which Olwell?

[Ade]

I am a relative newbie to the flute (a couple of years) and have decided it is time to get a patrick olwell. However, I do not have the opportunity to see or hear these flutes in the flesh as I live in rural norfolk (uk).

I will be orderering a Keyless blackwood with lined headjoint but cannot decide between the pratten or the nicholson. My main worry is the hole size and finger spacings. I have never played a pratten style flute. I have medium sized hands (small side of medium with a span of approx 8.5 ins).

My current flute is a Terry McGee 5088 keyless which I can play easily. Hole sizes on this flute are L8.5, 10, 8 & R 9, 10.5, 6.5. Spacings are L36, 35 & R30,37

Can anyone offer any suggestions as to whether I would also find the Olwell pratten playable or the actual dimensions from the olwell pratten.

Any advice greatly appreciated.

Ade

[Kirk B]

You might want to dig through this thread:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=71177

There's some shenanigans in there with myself being as guilty as the next, but there's also some good info.

My span is about 8.75" and I play a Pratten (Forbes Delrin). I have no problems at all with reach and I use the classical grip as opposed to piper's grip.

Edit: there's also a project going on here to catalog hole size and spacing. I can't remember who owns it but you might do some searching and find it if nobody chimes in.

Regards,

Kirk

[Rob Sharer]

If you've got a 5088 and are looking for some contrast, I'd suggest you go no further than Pat's Nicholson model. It's the latest thing; all the hip kids are playing them.

If you really like the 5088 and want something like it, go for Pat's Rudall. I just got done playing a session where I got to alternate between a boxwood and a blackwood small-hole Olwell Rudall, and I think they could even hear me in the kitchen. Plenty of volume, easy to handle, lovely tone. What more could you ask for?

Don't bother with the Pratten unless you 1) are capable of really filling any flute to capacity, and 2) are looking for that last 15% of volume and megavertebrate-scaring impact. Cheers,

Rob

[Ade]

Hi Guys

Thanks so far for your replies. This Pratten v Nicholson debate is something else. I have no doubt that if I could play the both of them I would be able to instantly decide, however that is not an option.

Thanks Rob for your views. I am not actually looking for a similar flute to the McGee 5088, just using that as a hole and stretch comparison. I do want something a bit bolder and louder. Whether that is the pratten or the nicholson I am not sure. have you ever played a 5088, if so how does it compare to an Olwell (pratten or nicholson)?

Ade

[jim stone]

megavertebrate-scaring impact.

YES!

[Ade]

Just to add further confusion, I am also interested in Martin Doyles traditional keyless. Does anyone one have any idea how these compare to an Olwell (pratten or nicholson) or the McGee 5088 that I currently have.

Ade

[crookedtune]

Interesting. Based purely on reputation, I've been considering an Olwell for a few years also. In the meantime, I've been test-driving a large-holed flute (Burns) and a medium-holed flute (Copley) to see which I like better.

The verdict: Whichever I happen to pick up is clearly the better of the two. Gimme a few more years.

But I guess if I were buying, it would probably be the Nicholson, (having gotten to hear Rob play his).

[eilam]

i think the M&E is based on the 5088 R&R? if so, the olwell nicholson has bigger spread and bigger toneholes..........the pratten and nicholson are very close in size.

[Doc Jones]

I've played all of the above. I always prefer Rudalls to Prattens. Pat's Pratten is wonderful (as is Terry's Pratten BTW). Stretch on either won't be an issue for you if you're managing the 5088.

Get on youtube. I'll bet you can find a lot of Olwells being played. You'll be able to tell the model difference because the Prattens won't have a joint between the hands.

I find the Nicholson to be warmer, more nuanced, complex and interesting...the Pratten more edgey, brash and bold. Either is more than adequately powerful for normal needs.

The Doyle is wonderful. It has a smallish elliptical embouchure that gives it a truly lovely, traditional tone. Any of the flutes mentioned (including your 5088) is capable of doing anything you'll want it to do once you get the chops.

I spent many years searching for a flute I loved and eventually developed an embouchure I love (most days ). If I could go back in time, I'd tell myself to quit fussing about makers and spend more time learning tunes and improving my technique.

My first real flute was a Doyle "Celtic model". After about a year, I decided I needed something better and began my quest for flute nirvana. It eventually led to me starting a flute store (seemed the best way to be able to play every flute by every maker).

Several years into the journey, My old Doyle actually came back through the store. It was amazing...As wonderful a flute as I ever could want or need.

My personal flute is a McGee GLP. I love it. I could be very happy with any of McGee's Rudalls. I'm too lazy to be a Pratten player. I could be happy with a Doyle or an Olwell or a Copley or a Noy or a .... ... ... ...

You'll be very happy with any of the above if you give it the dedication it deserves.

Best

Doc

[Steampacket]

I have small hands, thin fingers, and have no problem with the spacing on an Olwell Pratten I recently acquired. My other flutes are Rudall inspired, small to medium holed, a Wilkes & a Murray amongst them. Anyway I'd go for the Pratten based on what I know so far if I had to choose an Olwell, but it really comes down to you, your experience, technique, lung power, and what you yourself feel comfortable with. It's more you than the flute at the end of the day. Prehaps you could get to some festival or event and ask someone if you could try an Olwell, any Olwell, to just see if it suits you physically? Otherwise they are all good flutes.

This Olwell Pratten I have is very responsive across the whole range from the bottom notes and up in the second octave, it's easy to play tune, and I find it easy to fill. It's possible to blow very hard and get a raw wild sound, not as raw and wild as from the Murray, but raw enough if that's what you're after. It's a very good flute and does the job, but then so do other flutes . As far as I know there are no other Olwell flutes in Sweden, but there should be someone in England with one, could be worth asking around and taking a trip to say
London to have a blow on one. You can have a go on mine if you get to Willie Week in July

[Kirk B]

Get on youtube. I'll bet you can find a lot of Olwells being played. You'll be able to tell the model difference because the Prattens won't have a joint between the hands.
Doc

This raises a good point when it comes to ergonomics. A two piece body allows for that much more flexibility. I have my setup such that my LH & RH holes are slightly off kilter from being in line. Not much, but a little goes a long way. Just something else to thing about.

Regards,

Kirk

[jim stone]

Well, the Nicholson is one piece too. As is the Doyle.

Personally I think that Pat O is the best maker I have ever played, though of course there are some makers I haven’t played. Martin Doyle’s flutes are very good,
I’ve played them and frankly wish I owned one, but they do not have the power and the interesting tone of Pat’s flutes. In my opinion. It’s really apples and oranges in that
the prices are so different, as well as the design. The makers are after something different.

I think the power and tone of the Pratten is there always, it always sounds different from the Nicholson, not just when you play hard. Again, my opinion. I really like the sound of the Pratten, personally, though I certainly can understand why people might prefer the Nicholson. Patrick himself thinks very well of the Pratten, in fact. As mentioned, the difference in fingering is pretty close. Also the Olwell Pratten is the easiest fingering and handling Pratten I’ve ever played, beats the Hammy and the Cotter, anyhow. And if you’re in a situation where you need that extra bark, there it is. But the Nicholson certainly has power.

At the end of the day, both flutes are extraordinary and nobody is likely to be dissatisfied. Obviously we’re getting into personal preferences about two amazing instruments.

[Rob Sharer]

My Olwell Pratten is a two-piece, so don't put too much stock in using that feature alone to identify a flute on Youtube.

Not trying to be a pill, but most of the Olwell Prattens I encounter in the wild are being gently waffled into, not being filled up to bursting as intended. Pat's embouchure cut is so responsive, so forgiving, that you can produce a pleasing tone almost any way you blow into it (as an example, my wife, having no musical experience whatsoever, can make a nice G note on any Olwell flute, but no other maker's instrument). That's part of Pat's genius as a maker, but something goes missing in the process. The tone produced when playing thus, while not unpleasant, is not really up to scratch. Fine if you're really satisfied with it, but I meet loads of players who are beating their heads up against the wall, trying to horse the tone they desire out of too much flute for their blow.

The sound we all admire, if I may presume, comes from getting the whole column of air inside the flute to be excited, buzzing, crackling. This is much easier to attain with either the Nicholson or the Rudall. A capable student of mine recently put down his Olwell Pratten in favor of the Nicholson, and inside of a week he sounded like twice the player he was before. The point is, it's easy to putter about in the low pressure zone on any of Patrick's flutes, but if you're trying to get a snappy tone, the Pratten takes the most work; this tone is easily attainable on the other flutes, with plenty of volume on tap, and with arguably more sweetness and control in the top half of the second octave. Why work hard? Work smart!


Rob