Charles Nicholson on Tone

Terry McGee · Post by **Terry McGee** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 5:20 am

Who was the most famous and influential player of the large-holed conical wooden flute to date? Almost assuredly Charles Nicholson. He introduced the large-holed instrument (developed by his father) to astonished audiences, he taught the flute, he instructed Clementi's workmen (Prowse) in their construction, he lead the movement which Rudall and Pratten continued, he intimidated Boehm into inventing the modern metal flute. But he also wrote down his playing method so that we can review it today, to see how it compares to our playing methods, and what we may yet learn from this extraordinary man.

I've taken Nicholson's instructions, clarified them (I hope!), and presented them at:

http://www.mcgee-flutes.com/Nicholson_on_Tone.htm

Terry

peeplj · Post by **peeplj** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 6:52 am

Terry,

Thank you for that!

This is good stuff.

--James

Hiro Ringo · Post by **Hiro Ringo** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 8:17 am

Thanks for very interesting one because I have just kept looking for the info of how French school ruled the world of flutes.

I am very glad to know he was after the tone like oboe and clarinet,so am I.

By the way,now I know Gareth Morris( of Philharmonia Orchestra) kept playing wooden Boehm by Rudall until he retired or died(it was maybe around early 1970s),and he remained the pupil of 'British' school.He seems to be the last pupil of British school.

In 1960s,a flute player in NHK philharmony visited Philharmonia Orchestra and saw all flute players using wooden Boehm flutes and felt even in those days,it's out of date (whether its good or bad). Anyway British players remained wooden flute players unlike the others.

andrewK · Post by **andrewK** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 10:42 am

I had the impression that wooden flutes are making a slight comeback. There is one in regular use in the BBC orchestra.
It was in the seventies, I think, that the user of the last Rudall Carte 1867 patent flute gave up using it in a London Orchestra.

eilam · Post by **eilam** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 12:09 pm

the tone that I look for in a flute is tight and narrow, like Oboe.
I thought Nicholson enlarged the embouchure and made the heads thinner, by that, brightening the tone and making it more open and round?
eilam

Terry McGee · Post by **Terry McGee** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 3:41 pm

eilam wrote:the tone that I look for in a flute is tight and narrow, like Oboe.
I thought Nicholson enlarged the embouchure and made the heads thinner, by that, brightening the tone and making it more open and round?
eilam

I think we can see from his description that open and round was the last thing on his mind (except as an effect in that last bit). But you are right in saying that this is the natural outcome of the larger embouchure and thinner head. So, how to explain this apparent paradox? Nicholson's technique (as described) is used to grasp back the reedy tone, but with much more volume available than the earlier small-hole flutes had.

Terry

andrewK · Post by **andrewK** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 3:53 pm

Perhaps it just shows what an exceptional blower can do, seeing that Clementi and Prowse were not doing anything wonderful acoustically.
I can think of one fine maker who despises their work and tuning.

dthepeopleskey · Post by **dthepeopleskey** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 4:47 pm

The one or two that I have heard sounded lovely. Strong and beautiful.
I suppose it is merely a matter of taste.
But did not Mr. Nicholson perfer to preform on a flute from the hands of Mr. Astor and one by Mr. Monzani? I know little of these matters but I may have heard that at some time previous to today.

andrewK · Post by **andrewK** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 5:14 pm

You sound more and more like the late unlamented Migoya, as people keep telling me ! What a surprise !
I am not surprised that you ( so modestly ) claim substantial ignorance of that of which you write.
Do we know what Nicholson preferred late in his career ?

What you say perhaps confirms that only fools buy Clementis. Especially a chewed up one like that sold at the weekend for £ 498 to someone with more money than sense.
Such a person would probably fit the description if they only had 2 cents !

As I understand it we don't know what Nicholson perferred to preform !

You may well find if you look into the question that apart from earlier today ALL times were earlier than today !

dthepeopleskey · Post by **dthepeopleskey** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 5:30 pm

Who is being churlish now?

andrewK · Post by **andrewK** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 5:35 pm

I don't know who you are to be able to answer that ( Though people keep offering their suspicions that your posts are a fraud, like others we have seen )'
Time will tell.
I shall leave it to others to decide.

andrewK · Post by **andrewK** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 5:48 pm

Had I known that you bought the Clementi I would not have mentioned it.
I shall not disclose your identity yet, respecting private messages as I do. Let's keep all these good people in suspense !

Hiro Ringo · Post by **Hiro Ringo** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 6:45 pm

>So, how to explain this apparent paradox?
>Nicholson's technique (as described) is used to grasp back the reedy tone,
>but with much more volume available than the earlier small-hole flutes had.

Maybe in that way,he could get more colours of tones but Boehm system made the goal easier? So British people after all went to Boehm system?
I wonder why they kept playing wooden ones? I guess wood is better and easier for comfortable reedy tone and the tone was not easily attained out of metal.
But as the machinery and machinists as well as flute makers prevailed the problem,they started to use metal and after that they changed the direction of the tone because.....hrmph they are all just my guess.

:roll:

Post by **Dale** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 6:53 pm

FROM THE MODERATORS:

Posting policies:
http://chiffboard.mati.ca/viewtopic.php?t=10316

Multiple Accounts

Due to extensive abuse in the past, you are not permitted to post from multiple user accounts -- you may only have one account per user. If you wish to change your username, or if you have forgotten your password, contact the administrators via the link at the bottom of every page.

Terry McGee · Post by **Terry McGee** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 7:44 pm

Hiro Ringo wrote:Maybe in that way,he could get more colours of tones but Boehm system made the goal easier? So British people after all went to Boehm system?
I wonder why they kept playing wooden ones? I guess wood is better and easier for comfortable reedy tone and the tone was not easily attained out of metal.
But as the machinery and machinists as well as flute makers prevailed the problem,they started to use metal and after that they changed the direction of the tone because.....hrmph they are all just my guess.

:roll:

They stuck to wood, but perhaps more importantly, they stuck to the elliptical embouchure which favours Nicholson's approach, while Boehm favoured the rectangular embouchure which is better for the more open approach used by art-music performers today. Boehm comments in a letter to Broadwood that he (Boehm) could never do well on an elliptical embouchure.

I prefer the rectangular embouchure for my own playing, but my approach is much closer to Nicholson's than Boehm's. What a fascinating and complex business it all is!

Terry