Which recent Rudall is closest to the originals?

[jim stone]

Which contemporary Rudall is closest to the originals?
I have a byrne, which I bought partly because
it was said to be most faithful. But I've not
had an opportunity to try others, except
the Grinter--which is not much like the Byrne.

My impression is that most contemporary Rudalls
have the bottom d tweaked so that it is more
in tune, and possibly stronger, than in the originals.
Accurate?

Which Rudalls do you'all favor?

[Gordon]

Rudalls can be as different from one another as modern makers' flutes can be. Such a question is unanswerable.
Do you mean closest in spirit, or in god-awful tuning?

[phcook]

Mine is made by Tom Aebi and is based upon a model of 1841. He effectively made some modifications to get a better tuning, and a resized some holes. He made it about 4 years ago, he changed again the model (bore) to improve the balance, and keep the 3rd octave easy to play...

I like it very much, nice sound, great bottom C (C key), well balanced between both hands.

[sponge]

I think the quest for the closest Rudall and Rose type flute is just that a quest, I have done my own degree of research, and have to say that I know longer bother, I have been looking for a good Rudall flute for some time and have played a few old flutes and some new maker flutes, my only experience with original Rudall and Rose is through recorded material, which does give an idea of what an original sounds like and yes of course the player adds his own style which further adds to the tone, the flute that Jim has ( Byrne ) which has been reported to be the closest to an original rudall in tone and is highly regarded, I managed to try one that was nearly ten years old, and it did have a great sound, I didn't find the low d a problem as some have reported it can be, anyway I digress, the point is, is that I also tried a Sam Murray, now this flute knocked my socks off, it was exactly what I was looking for, all dreams of owning an original Rudall or the closest copy went out of my head when I played it, and believe me my playing isn't that great but the Murray just sung out, so all I have to do is find one more importantly find the cash.

sponge

[jim stone]

Rudalls can be as different from one another as modern makers' flutes can be. Such a question is unanswerable.
Do you mean closest in spirit, or in god-awful tuning?

Both, either... By the way, thanks for this info.
I wasn't aware that the old Rudalls differed from one
another so much.

I think perhaps the Rod Cameron rudall may be very close
to at least some old Rudalls.
You know he made a new Rudall for Chris Norman, I
believe it is closely based on the old boxwood one.

[Loren]

Which contemporary Rudall is closest to the originals?

The one you don't have.

If you want the closest thing, why don't you simply buy an original and be done with it? They can always be had.

Loren

[jim stone]

No, I may actually have that one.

I would of course be glad to play
an original, just to make sure, if anybody
would send me one to try...

[Rob Sharer]

I would vote Wilkes.

Rob

[jim stone]

Makes good sense. Well, if someone
will send me a Wilkes I will compare
it with my byrne and write a complete
report.

[Rob Sharer]

Now you ARE dreaming out loud!

Let me know how you get on...

Rob

[DCrom]

Or if you know what KIND of R & R you like the most (large, medium, or small holes), some modern makers offer more than one R & R model.

I know that both Terry McGee and Jon C. have more than one R & R model available. Probably other makers too, but those two for certain.

[chas]

I played an "exact" copy of Chris Norman's Rudall in Patrick Olwell's shop, and have Patrick's version of the same flute. I asked Patrick for the exact copy, and he said his current small-holed flute is the same except for a very few tweaks to the tuning.

I also have a Bleazey, which Phil says is a copy of the original. He doesn't say an exact copy, and I presume there may be a tweak here and there. It's a much smaller-holed flute than the Olwell.

[Jon C.]

Rudalls can be as different from one another as modern makers' flutes can be. Such a question is unanswerable.
Do you mean closest in spirit, or in god-awful tuning?

Actually the bore contour on the original R&R's that I have measured are very close. The reamers that I desinged, are made very close to the original R&R #5000 medium holed flute to bring it in better tuning, there is minor modifications in the tone hole locations, mainly between the upper and lower section and the C# is moved up the flute. Since the originals were designed for a 430htz tuning, it is just a matter of shrpening the lower notes a little, and flattening A and B a little.
Dave Gallegher's Rudall is real close to the original, also. I am sure Wilkes is true to the original, but I haven't played one.

[Loren]

Rudalls can be as different from one another as modern makers' flutes can be. Such a question is unanswerable.
Do you mean closest in spirit, or in god-awful tuning?

Actually the bore contour on the original R&R's that I have measured are very close.

Define close? Deviating in no more than 2 places along the taper length by no more than .002"? Deviating by 10x as much? What does very close mean to you?

To quote Skip Healy, who may have been quoting Chris Abell, a couple thousandths of an inch is acres in flute making. That's the way I learned as well, where I apprenticed. The truth of the matter is that any little deviations compound upon one another and make for significant differences in the way the finished instrument plays.

The reamers that I desinged, are made very close to the original R&R #5000 medium holed flute to bring it in better tuning, there is minor modifications in the tone hole locations, mainly between the upper and lower section and the C# is moved up the flute. Since the originals were designed for a 430htz tuning, it is just a matter of shrpening the lower notes a little, and flattening A and B a little.

All of that makes for an instrument that is not "Very close" to the original, at least not in the world of Historical Woodwind making. That's not a statement of condemnation by any means, I'm just pointing out that when you deviate from bore profiles and start moving tone holes around, even for good reason, you're no longer making a close copy, you're making a different animal.

The closest thing to a Rudall is a Rudall. Modern copies with inaccuraties of copying and all the little "tweaks" end up being "Fill in the makers name of choice Improved".

Loren

[Jon C.]

Rudalls can be as different from one another as modern makers' flutes can be. Such a question is unanswerable.
Do you mean closest in spirit, or in god-awful tuning?

Actually the bore contour on the original R&R's that I have measured are very close.

Define close? Deviating in no more than 2 places along the taper length by no more than .002"? Deviating by 10x as much? What does very close mean to you?

.2 mm to be exact. Keep in mind that the original bore will have deveations in the bore, due to ovelaton of the bore, this will cause a reduction of as much as .5 mm.
To quote Skip Healy, who may have been quoting Chris Abell, a couple thousandths of an inch is acres in flute making. That's the way I learned as well, where I apprenticed. The truth of the matter is that any little deviations compound upon one another and make for significant differences in the way the finished instrument plays.

The reamers that I desinged, are made very close to the original R&R #5000 medium holed flute to bring it in better tuning, there is minor modifications in the tone hole locations, mainly between the upper and lower section and the C# is moved up the flute. Since the originals were designed for a 430htz tuning, it is just a matter of shrpening the lower notes a little, and flattening A and B a little.

All of that makes for an instrument that is not "Very close" to the original, at least not in the world of Historical Woodwind making. That's not a statement of condemnation by any means, I'm just pointing out that when you deviate from bore profiles and start moving tone holes around, even for good reason, you're no longer making a close copy, you're making a different animal.

The closest thing to a Rudall is a Rudall. Modern copies with inaccuraties of copying and all the little "tweaks" end up being "Fill in the makers name of choice Improved".

Loren

What have you contributed in the design of any Rudall copies, Loren? Have you ever made one? If so, please enlighten us with your personal experience on the subject, besides quoting the great makers. Feel free to post a photo of the flute also, so we can see your workmanship. How close are your designs?
Here is my latest delrin Rudall next to a Rudall & Rose Carte and a
#6713 R&C that is in the middle of getting a rebuild.

FYI-The Delrin Rudall is available