At Last! The Great Flute Holes Spacing Thread!

[Doc Jones]

We spend a lot of time discussing various flutes and their respective hole arrangements. High time we consolidated the info methinks.

Makers, if you see an error kindly PM the poster that measured amiss so that the post can be edited. Makers are also encouraged to post their numbers.

Please don't respond to the posts and clutter up the thread. Just post your flute measurements in the following format:

1 shall be the top hole, 6 the bottom. Between the hole numbers shall be the distance between the holes from center to center.

Circumfereance at #1 would be good. Assume flutes are in D, if not, please note the key.

For low flutes embouchure to #1 distance and Emb to #4 distance would be good to know as well.

I'll start with my personal flute.

Terry McGee Grey Larsen Preferred, 2006:

1. 8 mm

39 mm

2. 9 mm

34 mm

3. 7 mm

(Here, let's put "Joint" or "No Joint" The GLP has a Joint )

4. 8 mm

32 mm

5. 10 mm

32mm

6. 6 mm

Circumference at #1: 85 mm
Bore inner diameter at end: 15 mm

Doc

[greenspiderweb]

Good idea Patrick! Maybe we should say how old it is also, since specs change over time?

Sam Murray Blackwood D (new 2007)

1. 7 mm

36 mm

2. 9 mm

35 mm

3. 7 mm

"Joint"

4. 9 mm

32 mm

5. 10.5 mm

37 mm

6. 6 mm

OD at 1st hole: 23 mm
ID at foot end: 11 mm

A tip for easy posting: If you just hit quote on a previous post like this one, then, copy, delete the whole quote, and paste just the hole specs, the format is all set up for you, and all you have to do is put in your numbers, and delete the others-much easier than doing it yourself.

[Doug_Tipple]

It is somewhat difficult for me to compare specifications when they are on separate pages. Therefore, I have summarized the numbers for the Murray and McGee flutes on the first two pages, and I have placed them alongside the spec numbers for my 3-piece, 6-hole low D, cylindrical-bore pvc flute with inline finger holes. All measurements are in millimeters, and T=Tipple, Mu=Murray, and Mc=McGee:

1. T9, Mu7, Mc8

L. T37, Mu36, Mc39

2. T9, Mu9, Mc9

L. T37, Mu35, Mc34

3. T8, Mu7, Mc7

joint, joint, joint

4. T9, Mu9, Mc8

L. T28, Mu32, Mc32

5. T11, Mu10.5, Mc10

L. T43, Mu37, Mc32

6. T8, Mu6, Mc6

Of course, the Murray and McGee flutes are conical-bore flutes, so you would expect them to have somewhat compressed finger hole distances in comparison to the cylindrical-bore Tipple flute. The numbers below show the stretch distance between the first and third hole of the left hand, and the stretch distance between the fourth and sixth hole of the right hand:

Left hand: T72, Mu71, Mc73

Right hand: T71, Mu69, Mc64

Bore diameter = 20 mm cylindrical bore

Circumference = 3.14 X 26 OD = 81.7 mm

[Gabriel]

Maurice Reviol Pratten-styled flute #76, made in early 2007:

Embouchure diameter: 13.5 mm x 11.5 mm

1. 9 mm

38 mm

2. 10 mm

35 mm

3. 8 mm

55 mm [no joint]

4. 9 mm

35 mm

5. 11.1 mm

38 mm

6. 7 mm

Bore diameter at end, with footjoint removed: 15mm (slightly larger at "low C")
Outer diameter at hole 1: 26mm => circumfence: ~82mm

Embouchure to hole 1: 23.6cm @ a'=440Hz
Embouchure to hole 4: 36.2cm @ a'=440Hz


Yep, it's powerful. Easily louder than a Hammy. But also VERY demanding regarding breath requirements.

I find it quite interesting that Doc's small-holed GLP has the same bore diameter at the end. Maybe that's why the GLP is still powerful, despite the small finger holes.

[Doc Jones]

Terry McGee Bb Rudall 2007

1. 9 mm

40 mm

2. 10 mm

40 mm

3. 8 mm

Joint

4. 9 mm

32 mm

5. 10 mm

40 mm

6. 6 mm

Circumference at #1: 91 mm
Bore inner diameter at end: 16 mm

Center of emb to center of #1 310 mm
Center of emb to center of #4 463 mm

Doc

[Nelson]

I wish I would have had an input before too many of you measured. This is very valuable to me because I can check the validity of my equations in http://www.flutephysics.com . I need one other piece of info: the inside diameter at the beginning and end of each section. For example, the i.d.of my first sectioin after the slide is 18.2 mm and the other end is 15mm. That gives me the taper and the taper plays a part in the hole-to-hole distance. So if you could just put the i.d. before the first hole and the 4th hole and the 6 hole, and the end.
I would really appreciate this. I'll tell yous guys if your holes fit where my equations say they should be. I'll have to do that "when the work's all done this Fall" , as the cowboys say.
Thanks
Nelson

[treeshark]

Paddy McChud Bog oak holeless.

Embouchure diameter: What is this?

1. no hole

?

2. no hole

?

3. no hole

[no joint]

4. no hole

?

5. no hole

?

6. no hole

Thicker at one end than the other

[matahari_1946]

Paddy McChud Bog oak holeless.

Embouchure diameter: What is this?

1. no hole

?

2. no hole

?

3. no hole

[no joint]

4. no hole

?

5. no hole

?

6. no hole

Thicker at one end than the other

This sounds like an easy flute to play. Are those dimensions with or without a flute beard?

[chas]

Paddy McChud Bog oak holeless.

Embouchure diameter: What is this?

1. no hole

?

2. no hole

?

3. no hole

[no joint]

4. no hole

?

5. no hole

?

6. no hole

Thicker at one end than the other

This sounds like an easy flute to play. Are those dimensions with or without a flute beard?

No flute beard, but more importantly, no positions of the hose clamps. We can't work without that.

[srt19170]

More measurements can be found in this thread:

http://chiffboard.mati.ca/viewtopic.php ... sc&start=0

Although we weren't doing hole diameters there.

It would be nice if this were "stickied" since the topic comes up fairly frequently.

[chas]

Here are some from my collection. I was quite taken aback by the difference between the Olwell small- and medium-holed flutes. I really hadn't noticed any difference; not much visually and virtually none playing.

Noy ___Olwell___Olwell___Sweet___Bleazey
_______small__medium
7.2_____7.4_____7.5_____7.8______7.5
7.3_____7.8 _____8.9_____7.9 _____7.0
6.7_____6.5_____ 7.3_____ 7.0 _____6.0

6.7_____7.9_____8.85____7.7_____5.9
7.6_____9.0_____9.6____10.6_____8.0
5.9_____5.6_____5.95____5.6_____5.0

Hand spacings are all within a mm or so of 35, 35, 32, 35

Note that the Olwell small-holed and Bleazey are very closely based on Rudall models, but different ones. The Bleazey is a VERY small-holed flute. I suspect the Noy is based on a Rudall, but pretty loosely -- the taper in the bore is very slight. I'm a little surprised at the smallness of the last Bleazey hole -- it really has a pretty strong E note, expecially compared to the Sweet. Perhaps the strength of the E doesn't correlate as closely with the size of the hole as I'd thought. The spacing from E to F (holes that you open) is about the same in all of them, so maybe that's a better guide.

[Julia Delaney]

Most flute makers change these specs at will. These really only are snapshot of a particular flute at a particular time. It is interesting but they don't have much meaning in themselves apart from measurements of the bore at different places.

[Andrew Hollom]

I measured these when this thread first appeared, but lost the piece of paper, which by luck I just found.

Bleazey Dixon(Pipe) Watson
1. 8 mm 7 mm 7.5 mm
34 mm 39.5 mm 36 mm
2. 7 mm 9 mm 9 mm
34 mm 33 mm 35 mm
3. 6 mm 7 mm 7.5 mm
(joint) (no joint) (joint)
4. 6 mm 9 mm 9 mm
30 mm 30 mm 31.5 mm
5. 8 mm 10.5 mm 10 mm
36.5 mm 40 mm 38 mm
6. 5 mm 7 mm 6 mm
? mm ? mm ? mm (Circumference at #1)
13 mm 20.5 mm 12.5 mm (Bore at end)
344 g 135 g 375 g

In case anyone's interested, I added the weight too (BTW the Watson flute has 8 keys, the others none).

Andrew.