Original Flute Owners - data needed!

[Terry McGee]

Hi owners of original flutes

I'm working on a very interesting comparison of the scale lengths of the various 19th century flute originals, and I'm looking for some more data to fill in blanks. The areas I'd particularly like more information include:
- Large-hole Rudall & Rose flutes between #519 and #4683
- Rudall Carte flutes between #6409 and #7120
- Pratten flutes

but, hey, I'm a data junkie, and will be grateful for info on any other original flutes too!

The information I'm looking for is the C# to D# distance, in mm or inches. You can see where to take the measurement from the image at:

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

Either respond here, and bore the pants off everyone else, or directly to me at terry@mcgee-flutes.com

Thanks!

Terry

[jemtheflute]

Terry, given what we discovered (from comparison with C#-E and emb-C# lengths etc.) about structural/proportional changes in flute design over time in the thread which I take it engendered this plea, what's your thinking in only gathering C#-Eb lengths? I appreciate the need for simplicity/reductionism in what you ask folk to do, but wouldn't we learn far more from that raft of dimensions we compared in the other thread?

[Cubitt]

Terry,

My flute is an eight-key Pratten made by WD Cubitt, Son & Co., London in 1882. The distance you asked for is 255mm. I play the flute with the embouchure in line with the tone holes, sometimes slightly tilted outwards. I keep the head flush to the barrel, which usually puts it in concert pitch (A=440). I see by your chart that you would expect my flute to be pitched lower than that, which is why I wanted to explain how I position the embouchure. Since many players tilt the embouchure inwards, which would make the flute flatter, I assume such players would have difficulty playing my flute in tune, since the head is already in as far as it can go.

Cheers.

[jemtheflute]

My flute is an eight-key Pratten made by WD Cubitt, Son & Co., London in 1882. The distance you asked for is 255mm.

Surely that should be "approx 23% of an (English) ell"?

[Cubitt]

My flute is an eight-key Pratten made by WD Cubitt, Son & Co., London in 1882. The distance you asked for is 255mm.

Surely that should be "approx 23% of an (English) ell"?

I don't understand what you are asking.

[AbraXas]

Jem tries to point out that you are missing a comma. You surely mean 25.5mm, very close to an inch (2.54cm).
An ell is approx one arm length, and I guess 23% of an ell is a bit on the large side

[Steve Bliven]

I think that he, indeed, does mean 255 mm in order to match Terry's requested measurement as shown below:



No missing commas, decimal points or otherwise.

Best wishes.

Steve

[an seanduine]

I suppose it would be asking too much for Jem to give us that measure expressed as a per centage of a cubit. . .

Bob

[AbraXas]

I think that he, indeed, does mean 255 mm in order to match Terry's requested measurement as shown below:



No missing commas, decimal points or otherwise.

Best wishes.

Steve

Oops, sorry about that. I didn't read the first post properly and thought that it was the distance between two foot keys.

[jemtheflute]

No original decimal error and Bob has divined my drift.

[Terry McGee]

Terry, given what we discovered (from comparison with C#-E and emb-C# lengths etc.) about structural/proportional changes in flute design over time in the thread which I take it engendered this plea, what's your thinking in only gathering C#-Eb lengths? I appreciate the need for simplicity/reductionism in what you ask folk to do, but wouldn't we learn far more from that raft of dimensions we compared in the other thread?

I think we probably would, Jem. I did want to make it easy for contributors, and for the study I'm on at the moment, I only need the c#-d# dimensions. I already have a lot of data points, I'm just hoping we can fill in a few gaps, which is happening.

I guess we have yet to prove the value of these indicators, but then of course, that's a circular argument - we can't prove the value of data we haven't got!

Do you think the measurements you provided in the table represent a good data set? Perhaps we should gather some more data in that format and see what we can learn from it?

Terry

[Terry McGee]

Terry,

My flute is an eight-key Pratten made by WD Cubitt, Son & Co., London in 1882. The distance you asked for is 255mm. I play the flute with the embouchure in line with the tone holes, sometimes slightly tilted outwards. I keep the head flush to the barrel, which usually puts it in concert pitch (A=440). I see by your chart that you would expect my flute to be pitched lower than that, which is why I wanted to explain how I position the embouchure. Since many players tilt the embouchure inwards, which would make the flute flatter, I assume such players would have difficulty playing my flute in tune, since the head is already in as far as it can go.

Cheers.

Thanks Cubitt

That's interesting because although it presumably looks like a Pratten, its scale length is more in keeping with the Improved era flutes like the Rudalls (Prattens are typically 245-246mm).

Interesting too, in that you have to have the head slide right in. You're supporting the call for collecting a wider range of data made by Jem further up. What is the emb to c# length?

And you are right to challenge my interpretation so far of what scale lengths imply what best pitch. Graeme Roxburgh and I have discussed this too - he feels comfortable playing 255mm scale length flutes at modern pitch. I'm hoping the study I'm currently seeking data for will help us progress our understanding here. So, hold that thought, and let's take it up later.

The next interesting question we have to answer is do any players feel that, when playing shorter scale length flutes (Prattens, some Siccamas, and Rudalls after about #7100) at modern pitch, the low notes end up too sharp? That would suggest that 245mm scale length flutes are indeed intended for pitches above 440.

Terry

[Cubitt]

Terry,

The center of the embouchure to the center of C# is about 223mm.

[LorenzoFlute]

223mm is quite a lot for an antique.

[jemtheflute]

Terry, given what we discovered (from comparison with C#-E and emb-C# lengths etc.) about structural/proportional changes in flute design over time in the thread which I take it engendered this plea, what's your thinking in only gathering C#-Eb lengths? I appreciate the need for simplicity/reductionism in what you ask folk to do, but wouldn't we learn far more from that raft of dimensions we compared in the other thread?

I think we probably would, Jem. I did want to make it easy for contributors, and for the study I'm on at the moment, I only need the c#-d# dimensions. I already have a lot of data points, I'm just hoping we can fill in a few gaps, which is happening.

I guess we have yet to prove the value of these indicators, but then of course, that's a circular argument - we can't prove the value of data we haven't got!

Do you think the measurements you provided in the table represent a good data set? Perhaps we should gather some more data in that format and see what we can learn from it?

Terry

I'm sure the data set which I arrived at somewhat happenstantially in the other thread could be refined, but I think it did throw renewed light on the probable/possible modification processes the makers of "our" flutes went through in the mid C19th.

Terry, your original arguments in favour of the C#-Eb length as an indicator still generally make good sense to me in their own right, but watching that Rudall in the other thread and with 3 different Rudalls in front of me laid side by side, the fact the C#-E wasn't changing while the C#-Eb and the emb-C# were was rather striking. As I implied above, I think this has been observed previously, but probably hasn't been sampled systematically. It does rather expose a weakness in using the C#-Eb as a sole indicator if one is trying to establish the likely playing pitch centring of a distant flute, and probably for other uses. To whit, if the essential body scaling is remaining unchanged as shown by the C#-E length, then a shorter C#-Eb tells us flat foot syndrome has been addressed and the expected use pitch range has moved higher, but not that the flute has been fully rescaled for higher pitch use.

Sounding length and C#-Eb length alone did not, in the case of #7232, tell us enough about its probable playing qualities and it would have seemed likely that it would be at least moderately High Pitch orientated. Knowing it had the same C#-E length as other flutes known to operate satisfactorily at 440 and that the foot was (probably - pending Jon's observations when he gets it) not excessively shortened and that the tuning slide had enough scope to pull the head out to a 440-zone SL made a huge difference to our attitudes towards the flute. Of course, until we have Jon's hands-on comments we won't know if our calculations are borne out, but I'm fairly confident..... If the central scaling represented by the C#-E length had been significantly shorter, our interpretation would have been different, and the C#-Eb length alone could not have shown us that.

So back to compiling a useful data set - I think the 7 measurements I hit on actually give a pretty full picture. Not as full as having measurements of the joints as well as of hole distributions, like in your full survey questionnaire you've used for years, but pretty serviceable for so few items. The only possibly significant thing they don't show is what is happening at the middle joint, between upper and lower bodies. If the C#-E length shortens, does it do so by a general rescaling of all the tone holes on the two body joints (one on a "Pratten style" flute) or by simply chopping off a bit each side between holes L3 and R4, much as they seem to have shortened lower body foot end and upper end of the foot in reducing the C#-Eb length (and maybe taken a little off the foot extremity) and in remedying flat foot syndrome when pitches way below 432 were no longer needed?

With a little arithmetic, from "my" 7 points one can see if the head/barrel has been shortened or the embouchure moved down-tube, one can see if the upper body top end has been shortened, if the lower body-foot joint area has been contracted, if the foot end has been shortened, etc., in addition to direct comparison of the simple measurements. They are also relatively easy to take and not too hard to explain. Ideally, of course, one would also wish to have some actual sound pitch data for a significant sample of flutes across the range as well, to anchor the dimensions to real pitches (say the absolute pitch of G with slide closed and the slide extension/SL which provides a concert pitch G), but that tends not to be feasible when enquiring after eBay flutes and, if a more serious scientific survey is the purpose, the problems of inconsistency between different players' techniques as testers etc. - all those imponderable variables - make things extra tricky, though I think it would still be worthwhile gathering such data. It'd probably also be desirable to have readings for low D (to examine flat foot-ism and relate it to the measurements), but as sounding D well (optimally and consistently) on a flat foot flute is a generally vexed issue, I suspect the data would be too unreliable unless one could get all the flutes tested by one (honk-proficient) player on a single occasion.

So, how's about a survey from us player types with (8-key, C foot) antique flutes in playing fettle....? Make that the 9 points (of roguery..... ).

Overall Length (OL)
Sounding Length (SL)
Embouchure centre to barrel end (Em-BE)
Embouchure to C#/L1 hole centre (Em-C#)
Centre C#/L1 hole to centre E/R3 hole (C#-E)
Centre C#/L1 hole to centre Eb key cup or centre Eb hole (C#-Eb)
Centre Eb key cup or centre Eb hole to foot end (Eb-end)
Pitch of G in Hz (or Hz +/- deviation from concert pitch), slide closed
Slide extension/SL necessary to obtain an in-tune concert pitch G.

I've got access to a few more non Rudalls which should be helpful (Fentums, Wylde, Hawkes, etc.) and should be able to get at a few more R&Rs before New Year Will try to get them done soon.

Oh, and Terry, I'm another who is perfectly happy playing a 258mm C#-Eb at 440 tuning.