What is your favourite beginner flute? Has it been ousted?

[cflutist]

Back in 1968 when I started playing, I had an Armstrong 104.

[flutego12]

@ Phineas
It would appear that many pros and serious players in the US have cut their teeth on the trusty old Armstrong 104 (& Gems).

@Cflutist
WOW, I would simply love to hear your flute journey, Cflutist.
How has your romance with the flute evolved through the years? Were there inflection points or was it a straight trajectory? 45 years is a long time. This is an abiding passion, apart from if it were a profession, how does one keep it alive - through the years you would have possibly mastered all the repertoire, do you then move to the contemporary, assuming they are palleteable to you?. At some point did your interest morph into flute collection. Do you still keep to daily regime now? How do you maintain form. I salute you.
(And I had a peek at your flute collection too -love your flutes!)

[Brette]

About 5 years ago, I found an Artley 0-18 at a rummage sale for $40. I played the clarinet in school, but I was always a frustrated flute player. I bought the rummage-sale flute, got some Basic Elements books and proceeded to teach myself. What I didn't realize was that some of my problems playing were not me, they were because of the flute.

Thanks to so much good information on the Internet, I've learned a lot since. The Artley, heavy and clunky and probably leaking like a sieve, just made learning to play harder. After doing some research, I bought a new Yamaha from the 300 series. Oh, what a difference.

I know there's no substitute for a good teacher, but I have made considerable progress on my own with the help of books (Flute for Dummies) and Jennifer Cluff's web site. But the old Artley (very common when I was in school) at least got me started. I know it's not worth anything except for a wall decoration or flute anatomy study, but it was the beginning of an enjoyable hobby for someone who is long out of school.

[flutego12]

About 5 years ago, I found an Artley 0-18 at a rummage sale for $40. I played the clarinet in school, but I was always a frustrated flute player. I bought the rummage-sale flute, got some Basic Elements books and proceeded to teach myself. What I didn't realize was that some of my problems playing were not me, they were because of the flute.

Thanks to so much good information on the Internet, I've learned a lot since. The Artley, heavy and clunky and probably leaking like a sieve, just made learning to play harder. After doing some research, I bought a new Yamaha from the 300 series. Oh, what a difference.

I know there's no substitute for a good teacher, but I have made considerable progress on my own with the help of books (Flute for Dummies) and Jennifer Cluff's web site. But the old Artley (very common when I was in school) at least got me started. I know it's not worth anything except for a wall decoration or flute anatomy study, but it was the beginning of an enjoyable hobby for someone who is long out of school.

That's great to hear Brette. I cut my teeth on a Yamaha Allegro 371 and went backwards to find the 221 and F100ASII! Love them ALL. They are good for me due to breath economy, especially the F100ASII. Good luck on your flute adventure. evmre is just biased that's all.

[evrmre]

About 5 years ago, I found an Artley 0-18 at a rummage sale for $40. I played the clarinet in school, but I was always a frustrated flute player. I bought the rummage-sale flute, got some Basic Elements books and proceeded to teach myself. What I didn't realize was that some of my problems playing were not me, they were because of the flute.

Thanks to so much good information on the Internet, I've learned a lot since. The Artley, heavy and clunky and probably leaking like a sieve, just made learning to play harder. After doing some research, I bought a new Yamaha from the 300 series. Oh, what a difference.

I know there's no substitute for a good teacher, but I have made considerable progress on my own with the help of books (Flute for Dummies) and Jennifer Cluff's web site. But the old Artley (very common when I was in school) at least got me started. I know it's not worth anything except for a wall decoration or flute anatomy study, but it was the beginning of an enjoyable hobby for someone who is long out of school.

That's great to hear Brette. I cut my teeth on a Yamaha Allegro 371 and went backwards to find the 221 and F100ASII! Love them ALL. They are good for me due to breath economy, especially the F100ASII. Good luck on your flute adventure. evmre is just biased that's all.

A bias is only an embarrassment when it is not fully justified. For example, I'm extremely biased towards getting an EX 111 as my next flute... And while not as light to play as the Yam's, the Gemeinhardts have a resonance the Yam's just never had.

Having said that, the Gem just isn't as easy for the really quick stuff, so might have to upgrade sooner than I thought... 'sigh'

[flutego12]

[ evmre wrote:
A bias is only an embarrassment when it is not fully justified. For example, I'm extremely biased towards getting an EX 111 as my next flute... And while not as light to play as the Yam's, the Gemeinhardts have a resonance the Yam's just never had.]if we are on the same page about resonance, I thought the F100ASII had great resonance but then, I've nvr played a Gem3KG (yours is full silver isn't it) so we are perhaps comparing apples with oranges The vibrato on the F100ASII I have is pengsan good, decent projection too when you don't have to play in a band or orchestra.
According to Dictionary~
resonance |ˈrezənəns|
noun
the quality in a sound of being deep, full, and reverberating : the resonance of his voice.
• figurative the ability to evoke or suggest images, memories, and emotions : the concepts lose their emotional resonance.
• Physics the reinforcement or prolongation of sound by reflection from a surface or by the synchronous vibration of a neighboring object.
• Mechanics the condition in which an object or system is subjected to an oscillating force having a frequency close to its own natural frequency.
ORIGIN late Middle English : from Old French, from Latin resonantia ‘echo,’ from resonare ‘resound’ (see resonant ).

Having said that, the Gem just isn't as easy for the really quick stuff, so might have to upgrade sooner than I thought... 'sigh' [/quote] Surprising enough, a well maintained F100ASII really amazed me (I am easily amazed perhaps). The breath economy is astounding - and FOR A BEGINNER TO INTERMEDIATE (MUST QUALIFY THIS), the "color and dynamics it affords with just a delicate puff is nothing short of AMAZING! .
How exciting to be planning a new acquisition . Go get the EXIII already. Have you thought about the specs yet. What are you going to have on it?

[evrmre]

[ evmre wrote:
A bias is only an embarrassment when it is not fully justified. For example, I'm extremely biased towards getting an EX 111 as my next flute... And while not as light to play as the Yam's, the Gemeinhardts have a resonance the Yam's just never had.]if we are on the same page about resonance, I thought the F100ASII had great resonance but then, I've nvr played a Gem3KG (yours is full silver isn't it) so we are perhaps comparing apples with oranges The vibrato on the F100ASII I have is pengsan good, decent projection too when you don't have to play in a band or orchestra.
According to Dictionary~
resonance |ˈrezənəns|
noun
the quality in a sound of being deep, full, and reverberating : the resonance of his voice.
• figurative the ability to evoke or suggest images, memories, and emotions : the concepts lose their emotional resonance.
• Physics the reinforcement or prolongation of sound by reflection from a surface or by the synchronous vibration of a neighboring object.
• Mechanics the condition in which an object or system is subjected to an oscillating force having a frequency close to its own natural frequency.
ORIGIN late Middle English : from Old French, from Latin resonantia ‘echo,’ from resonare ‘resound’ (see resonant ).

Having said that, the Gem just isn't as easy for the really quick stuff, so might have to upgrade sooner than I thought... 'sigh'

Surprising enough, a well maintained F100ASII really amazed me (I am easily amazed perhaps). The breath economy is astounding - and FOR A BEGINNER TO INTERMEDIATE (MUST QUALIFY THIS), the "color and dynamics it affords with just a delicate puff is nothing short of AMAZING! .
How exciting to be planning a new acquisition . Go get the EXIII already. Have you thought about the specs yet. What are you going to have on it?[/quote]

Yeah... it's probably just an individual thing, but I could never get the tone I love on any of the Yam's. Having said that, I could pick up any of them and play them pretty easy without any warm in time, which speaks well for them.

My current Gem is Silver head with Gold riser and internal gold plating in headjoint, silver plated body (which was a disappointment, but at least the springs are white gold, with good mechanisms), and full silver B foot. Sound is quite rich and complex (what is often called 'dark', I think), and made my old Gem (a 2esp) seem a little weak by comparison (lovely sweet sound, but just lacking strength).

The EX has a slightly sweeter sound than my current one, but without losing the strength like the 2esp did. Not quite as rich as the 3KG, but perhaps more vibrant in tone. And as for playability, there was no comparison.
Haven't decided on options yet, but definitely B foot and offset G (short fingers lol). I've not really played much with the split E or G trill to know yet, but will have to check them out further before I get it.
Once the $ are figured out, of course

[Silversorcerer]

I know definitions can be kind of relative, but when we talk about beginner flutes, doesn't that kind of mean that we are talking about flutes that are either nickel or silver plated, that generally would have plateau keys, offset, with a C foot? My thinking is that as soon as we start discussing open-hole, inline, and B foot models and models that are solid silver head to foot, that we might be discussing intermediate flutes. Even if a "beginner" started with one of the intermediate models, that doesn't really change what a "beginner" flute is.

I suppose the question "Has it been ousted?" could mean two things. Did you upgrade to an intermediate, or did you try other beginner flutes and find a different beginner flute that played better and that, in your opinion, would be a better flute for someone just beginning to play. If the point of the discussion is the first case, then essentially we would be recounting progressions to intermediates and flutes with more professional features that we liked better than what we started with. So the original question could use some clarification. Are we talking about what we started with and what we upgraded to or are we comparing different beginner flute models with essentially similar specifications?

For instance, I started with a vintage Gem M-1, circa 1961. I put new pads on it and it played very much like my friend's 1990s 2SP. It sounded the same also. Side by side these were dimensioned alike, no differences in the "scale" dimensions. It was OK to learn on the M-1 until:

Later, when I obtained the 1970 DeFord in good playing condition and I felt like it was a much easier instrument to play. In terms of features, the DeFord had rolled tone holes but otherwise it was also a plated, plateau keyed, offset, C-foot student flute. So the DeFord "ousted" the Gem M-1 as the preferred beginner flute. I'd say that it also ousted the 2SP at the same time by extension. I feel it is important to note that the two were in equally good playing condition concerning pads, corks, springs, etc. The DeFord just was easier for me to play. Some other players that tried it agreed.

If I compare the DeFord student model to the Gem KGB special, then I am really not being fair, or I am just recounting my step-up path, which also includes an Armstrong 80, a vintage Olds Special, an Artley Symphony, a rare VOSS, and lots of intermediate models with features that might be preferred over the DeFord. That's not really useful discussion if the goal is to establish what "beginner" flute is my preference. The problem with establishing the "favorite beginner" flute is that most flute students only play one beginner flute for any length of time. Usually it is enough time that a different beginner flute requires some getting used to. Unless you have a class of beginners, all with different beginner models and you pass them around and try them all, the question is hard to answer. Perhaps most students could try out the instruments before buying them, but how is a true beginner going to be able to compare them when they don't know how to play at all?

Also, I think it might be a bit unfair to include an "unfavorite" beginner flute that has that status because the pads were shot or the flute was not correctly adjusted. Any flute could acquire those problems and if it was a bad flute due to needing maintenance, well it might have been a favorite beginner flute if you'd gotten it fixed!

That said I do have an old 1962 Elkhart Artley with a silver head, no crown, almost no plating on the keys, open holes, and it is nearly played to death, but still plays fantastic. But it isn't and never was a "beginner" flute, unless a beginner began by playing it? No, it's a step-up. No matter how tattered it is, it is not a beginner flute, not with open holes and a silver head. Do you see the point?

On a level playing field of student flutes in good playing condition, what is the favorite? And to have a favorite you must have played more than one beginner flute long enough to get used to playing the ones that you pick the favorite from. If you began with a flute and never tried others until you stepped-up, you simply have nothing to favor, other than no beginner flute at all.

I'm an old musician, old enough to remember Arnold flutes, Bettoney Cadets, Pedlers, that some of my school bandmates had. By far the most common student flutes when I was in school were Bundy, Armstrong and Artley. DeFord was still production foreman for Armstrong at the time. Gemeinhardts were slightly less common and were considered to be somewhat better than the rest. Selmer flutes were usually intermediate models, like the Signet, and a few people had those. Yamaha made motorcycles. They made a loud whiny high RPM noise compared to the pleasant purring of a Honda or the deep rumble of a Harley. If someone talked about how a Yamaha sounded, it was not a pleasant thing usually. They needed better mufflers. I don' think I saw a Yamaha musical instrument until the mid 1980s. It was a nice silver trumpet. They did start exporting decent acoustic guitars in the late 70's.

Regarding these rather "vintage" USA makers, I have collected quite a few student flutes by Artley, Armstrong, Gemeinhardt, DeFord, etc. and it seems that most of these just need a bit of maintenance to be good beginner flutes.

My guess is that any discussion of "favorite" beginner flutes might reflect a bias from those that sell flutes more than those who begin to play them. Why? Because it is not possible for a beginner to have first hand information on which one plays better. A beginner by definition has no experience upon which to choose a favorite. Therefore most beginners are relying on second hand information. They buy the "favorite" beginner flute of their band director, teacher, or local music store. And by the time they learn to play, it is their "favorite" beginner flute, until they go out and look for a step-up model.

Just some thoughts to ponder about which is your true favorite? How many beginner flutes have you played?

[flutego12]

Back in 1968 when I started playing, I had an Armstrong 104.

I really must try and Armstrong 104 from the golden era one day!

[flutego12]

I know definitions can be kind of relative, but when we talk about beginner flutes, doesn't that kind of mean that we are talking about flutes that are either nickel or silver plated, that generally would have plateau keys, offset, with a C foot? My thinking is that as soon as we start discussing open-hole, inline, and B foot models and models that are solid silver head to foot, that we might be discussing intermediate flutes. Even if a "beginner" started with one of the intermediate models, that doesn't really change what a "beginner" flute is.

I suppose the question "Has it been ousted?" could mean two things. Did you upgrade to an intermediate, or did you try other beginner flutes and find a different beginner flute that played better and that, in your opinion, would be a better flute for someone just beginning to play. If the point of the discussion is the first case, then essentially we would be recounting progressions to intermediates and flutes with more professional features that we liked better than what we started with. So the original question could use some clarification. Are we talking about what we started with and what we upgraded to or are we comparing different beginner flute models with essentially similar specifications? I meant the latter

For instance, I started with a vintage Gem M-1, circa 1961. I put new pads on it and it played very much like my friend's 1990s 2SP. It sounded the same also. Side by side these were dimensioned alike, no differences in the "scale" dimensions. It was OK to learn on the M-1 until:

Later, when I obtained the 1970 DeFord in good playing condition and I felt like it was a much easier instrument to play. In terms of features, the DeFord had rolled tone holes but otherwise it was also a plated, plateau keyed, offset, C-foot student flute. So the DeFord "ousted" the Gem M-1 as the preferred beginner flute. I'd say that it also ousted the 2SP at the same time by extension. I feel it is important to note that the two were in equally good playing condition concerning pads, corks, springs, etc. The DeFord just was easier for me to play. Some other players that tried it agreed. love your answers. if you were in my english class, I'd give you A+ for content, structure and comprehensiveness

If I compare the DeFord student model to the Gem KGB special, then I am really not being fair, or I am just recounting my step-up path, which also includes an Armstrong 80, a vintage Olds Special, an Artley Symphony, a rare VOSS, and lots of intermediate models with features that might be preferred over the DeFord. That's not really useful discussion if the goal is to establish what "beginner" flute is my preference. The problem with establishing the "favorite beginner" flute is that most flute students only play one beginner flute for any length of time. Usually it is enough time that a different beginner flute requires some getting used to. Unless you have a class of beginners, all with different beginner models and you pass them around and try them all, the question is hard to answer. Perhaps most students could try out the instruments before buying them, but how is a true beginner going to be able to compare them when they don't know how to play at all? brilliant!

Also, I think it might be a bit unfair to include an "unfavorite" beginner flute that has that status because the pads were shot or the flute was not correctly adjusted. Any flute could acquire those problems and if it was a bad flute due to needing maintenance, well it might have been a favorite beginner flute if you'd gotten it fixed!

That said I do have an old 1962 Elkhart Artley with a silver head, no crown, almost no plating on the keys, open holes, and it is nearly played to death, but still plays fantastic. But it isn't and never was a "beginner" flute, unless a beginner began by playing it? No, it's a step-up. No matter how tattered it is, it is not a beginner flute, not with open holes and a silver head. Do you see the point?

On a level playing field of student flutes in good playing condition, what is the favorite? And to have a favorite you must have played more than one beginner flute long enough to get used to playing the ones that you pick the favorite from. If you began with a flute and never tried others until you stepped-up, you simply have nothing to favor, other than no beginner flute at all.too right!

I'm an old musician, old enough to remember Arnold flutes, Bettoney Cadets, Pedlers, that some of my school bandmates had. By far the most common student flutes when I was in school were Bundy, Armstrong and Artley. DeFord was still production foreman for Armstrong at the time. Gemeinhardts were slightly less common and were considered to be somewhat better than the rest. Selmer flutes were usually intermediate models, like the Signet, and a few people had those. Yamaha made motorcycles. They made a loud whiny high RPM noise compared to the pleasant purring of a Honda or the deep rumble of a Harley. If someone talked about how a Yamaha sounded, it was not a pleasant thing usually. They needed better mufflers. I don' think I saw a Yamaha musical instrument until the mid 1980s. It was a nice silver trumpet. They did start exporting decent acoustic guitars in the late 70's.

Regarding these rather "vintage" USA makers, I have collected quite a few student flutes by Artley, Armstrong, Gemeinhardt, DeFord, etc. and it seems that most of these just need a bit of maintenance to be good beginner flutes.

My guess is that any discussion of "favorite" beginner flutes might reflect a bias from those that sell flutes more than those who begin to play them. Why? Because it is not possible for a beginner to have first hand information on which one plays better. A beginner by definition has no experience upon which to choose a favorite. Therefore most beginners are relying on second hand information. They buy the "favorite" beginner flute of their band director, teacher, or local music store. And by the time they learn to play, it is their "favorite" beginner flute, until they go out and look for a step-up model.True, in most cases.

Just some thoughts to ponder about which is your true favorite? How many beginner flutes have you played?

I like your answer, it is by far the most comprehensive. This is exactly why the Q is asked, superficial as it seems, to flush out any gems we are not aware of and thoughts of peeps for an indepth historical perspective and the progression of the industry in beginner offerings. The lines are admittedly blurred in that some adults start with a step up - case in point, yours truly.

I for one can say that I haven't tried many beginner flutes apart from Yamaha 225, 221, 211, 371H(my first one, didn't like it at first but love it now), Jupiter 511s (did not like them at all - but perhaps it was like you said not adjusted), Pearl 505 =p ... then because I was an adult beginner I also got my hands on some Miyazawa, Muramatsu, Altus (which have spilled over into the blurred step up to semi category).And if I were a beginner now, I would have tried the DiZhao, Guo or TWG. Over here at my neck of the woods, we do not have your abundance of clunkers or array of choice to test - a good 'golden oldie" Gem or Armstrong etc etc is hard to come by, their spare parts are even harder to come by if there is any hope of restoring them. Thanks for sharing your thoughts (...did I detect a smug smirk at the end) as you've had the advantage of the passage of years and seen more than most of the rest of us perhaps of the flute industry's ebb and flow and hence are able to comment meaningfully.

I pick the Yamaha for it's reliability, durability, playability, good intonation, ease of procuring spare parts and its resale potential and affordability on top of that. So do a lot of parents. I can see that quite a few doublers like them and recommend them too and have used them either for practice or in albums (Hromek's Celtic guitar etc). I stand by my pref, having done the 371 and MMAs, when I discovered the F100ASII and 221, I was blown away. It made learning a whole lot more pleasurable for the relatively easy"mileage". Though the Gems and Armstrongs may marginally win on tone & resonance, where they fall down is on agility & responsiveness - it appears widespread knowledge sadly that the student armstrong headjoints are a shocker? (am I going to be stoned at this pt? fishing...) Where the Yamahas win is it's agility and responsivensss and ease of play. That again depends on repertoire. Quite frankly, with a Yamaha 200 and F100ASII, one does not have to change flutes and quite comfortably make it through Grades 1-6 (or 8 if you stretch it) which is great for the hip pocket. Repairs are cheaper due to affordable available parts and technicians.... but then, you could say I'm biased. In short, "for the moment" (to me) Yamahas win not based on good tone alone, but in almost every other regard. May not be in the exclusive club but it is very embracing and inclusive!

We work with what we have and listen to other's experiences. And watch out for obsolescence.

[goldenflute]

My first flute was an Armstrong 104 back in 1975. I still have it with its original pads and it still plays well. I guess I took good care of it!

[fluteguy18]

Off topic.... Flutego12 and evrmre.... the color in your posts gave me a headache. I'll need to wear sunglasses to read your posts from now on.

[Silversorcerer]

I for one can say that I haven't tried many beginner flutes apart from Yamaha 225, 221, 211, 371H(my first one, didn't like it at first but love it now), Jupiter 511s (did not like them at all - but perhaps it was like you said not adjusted), Pearl 505 =p ... then because I was an adult beginner I also got my hands on some Miyazawa, Muramatsu, Altus (which have spilled over into the blurred step up to semi category).And if I were a beginner now, I would have tried the DiZhao, Guo or TWG. Over here at my neck of the woods, we do not have your abundance of clunkers or array of choice to test - a good 'golden oldie" Gem or Armstrong etc etc is hard to come by, their spare parts are even harder to come by if there is any hope of restoring them. Thanks for sharing your thoughts (...did I detect a smug smirk at the end) as you've had the advantage of the passage of years and seen more than most of the rest of us perhaps of the flute industry's ebb and flow and hence are able to comment meaningfully.

I pick the Yamaha for it's reliability, durability, playability, good intonation, ease of procuring spare parts and its resale potential and affordability on top of that. So do a lot of parents. I can see that quite a few doublers like them and recommend them too and have used them either for practice or in albums (Hromek's Celtic guitar etc). I stand by my pref, having done the 371 and MMAs, when I discovered the F100ASII and 221, I was blown away. It made learning a whole lot more pleasurable for the relatively easy"mileage". Though the Gems and Armstrongs may marginally win on tone & resonance, where they fall down is on agility & responsiveness - it appears widespread knowledge sadly that the student armstrong headjoints are a shocker? (am I going to be stoned at this pt? fishing...) Where the Yamahas win is it's agility and responsivensss and ease of play. That again depends on repertoire. Quite frankly, with a Yamaha 200 and F100ASII, one does not have to change flutes and quite comfortably make it through Grades 1-6 (or 8 if you stretch it) which is great for the hip pocket. Repairs are cheaper due to affordable available parts and technicians.... but then, you could say I'm biased. In short, "for the moment" (to me) Yamahas win not based on good tone alone, but in almost every other regard. May not be in the exclusive club but it is very embracing and inclusive!

We work with what we have and listen to other's experiences. And watch out for obsolescence.

So you pick Yamaha as your favorite because those are the only flutes that you've played? I'm confused. In the first sentence you say that the only beginner flutes you tried were Yamaha, and then later you compare them to Armstrongs and Gemeinhardts. Were those models you compared them to then intermediates? And these Yamahas are reliable, durable, playable, have good intonation, are reparable, and easy to resell compared to what other brands of beginner flutes that you've tried? Yamahas are your only first hand beginner flute knowledge, so any comparison you make to other brand beginner flutes is based on ?
-What someone else told you or something you read, which is where most first time buyers would logically turn to for information. Lacking knowledge is no crime, and searching for it is no crime either.

Maybe it went something like this:

"I suggest that for student satisfaction, ease of play, reliable mechanism, least repair trips, best headjoint, and good resale value, that a parent buy a Yamaha or Jupiter/DiMedici or Azumi."

- Jennifer Cluff, who teaches flute in Canada and is the principal flute in a symphony. OK, those are real credentials. She also reads 4 flute forums a day;- busy lady. But the advice seems to assume everyone buys a new flute. Well with millions of used flutes on the market vs. a few thousand new ones, it seems reasonable that this is advice that really only applies to about 1% of the flutes available. Right? I mean correct me if I'm wrong, there are far more used flutes than new ones for sale? They've only been making metal flutes for about 100 years now, so "new" probably is about 1% of the flutes available (if one takes into account the popularity of band during the baby boom generation), and new will be a smaller percentage each year as more new flutes become used flutes. Even if we say "relatively new flutes" and extend that back 5 years, then we are talking about only 5% of the flutes available. 5 years seems like about how long most people will play the same flute. Very few will pursue music into college and fewer after. The biggest percentage of beginners will own one flute. We know at least half the students in band give it up after a year. So there's even more used flutes that are "relatively new" out there than there are new flutes in any given year. This is easily confirmed by looking at the number of "used one year" flutes on ebay. But the large majority of available flutes are decades old, like the pristine vintage Artley Symphony with a serial below 5000 that I recieved today. It was plausibly made in the 30s or 40s.

Given the rather ubiquitous popularity of new Yamahas, it certainly would seem that there is no benefit to be had in trying a different brand? The Yamahas do come highly recommended;- at least by Jennifer Cluff who had this to say about Gemeinhardts, specifically very recent Gemeinhardts:

"Gemeinhardt flutes have come to be known as having "soft mechanism" in the past few years. This information is from professional flute repair people online.

Their company has evidently switched to a softer metal, and less precision in machining parts, which means that the keys, rods and mechanism bend too easily, and do not hold up under use."-

Lets assume that this is true without contesting Jennifer Cluff. She probably knows a thing or two about new flutes. And maybe she knows about old ones too, but doesn't bother pointing out that her statement actually endorses the great majority of Gemeinhardt flutes that have been made, which would be all of them except the "relatively new ones." A 1961 M-1, 1986 3SS, etc. All those Gemeinhardts are still the same as they were before the new ones were made of softer metal. Right? So some 90% of the Gemeinhardts are good flutes according to Jennifer Cluff, but these are used flutes, not new ones. So her advice applies to new flutes.

And of course she goes on about the myriad problems the soft mechanism leads to. Great reason not to buy a new Gemeinhardt, or a better reason to buy an old Gemeinhardt in good condition. It will cost less than any new flute and will have the same quality the old Gemeinhardts were known for. And all that collective wisdom should mean that old Gemeinhardts would command a better resale value as well. Which flute will return you more of your initial investment, a used flute in good condition or a brand new flute? Well, it's anecdotal at best, but I bought a very very lightly used (not even polishing marks) lately built KG ltd. special for about 1/5 of the retail price on the hardshell case. We all know nothing sells for list, so lets assume for the sake of discussion that it sold for half list when it was spanking new. It still lost more than half the investment in less than two years. Of course it still plays great. I don't know how soft the metal is or when they switched metal, but it has a serial so recent that it is not on the company chart. Maybe in a few years I'll find out about the soft keywork, but for now it plays like new but sold for 1/5 retail when about 1.5 years old.

Now lets consider a pre-1952 fully restored (plays great also) Artley Symphony received today for the meager investment of $61 plus shipping. It looks brand new, plating 100%, new pads, tight sturdy keywork, original vintage hard shell case, sliver tenon caps, cleaning rod. Case is a little worn, but still does the job well and looks retro cool. I would wager you the difference that I would lose more money selling the newer flute in 5 years than the vintage one. In fact, the value of the vintage Artley would probably go up while the newer KGB ltd. special value goes down. When one considers that the supply of used flutes will always be higher than the demand, and that only so many new flutes are made each year, there is just no other way the economics can work.

So that covers price and resell with the favor definitely falling to both the "relatively new" or "vintage used" flute over the brand new one. As a wise person once observed, No one owns new flutes except the stores selling them. Once you buy it, it's a used flute.

Parts availability? There are millions of used flutes. Forget buying a part, just buy a whole extra flute. So we have covered parts availability. Last time I checked, just about any jewelers screwdriver set was sufficient, and the oldest flute I have has new pads, so they still make pads for them. I think it might be fairly easy to get parts to repair an old flute. You aren't competing with the parts supply being made for flutes that will be sold next year as new ones.

Some of the characteristics rated are subjective, such as playability, etc. Let's leave the subjective out for a moment and discuss two objective things you mention that are important and also related;- intonation and obsolescence. Intonation is primarily a function of dimensions and the math that relates the length of the tube to the pitch. The length is stopped or interrupted by tone holes of course and these are spaced according to a direct relationship between each pitch in equal temperament;- specifically the twelfth root of two. The length from the embouchure hole to the end of the flute produces a fundamental and then that distance is shortened by dividing that length by the twelfth root of two to find the placement for the first tone hole from the end of the flute. Then that length is similarly divided, and the next and the next and the next, etc. The diameter of the hole comes into play also, but for now lets discuss length. How long have makers known about this math? Ever since fretted stringed instruments were built;- hundreds of years. I have seen a stringed instrument with fanned frets built before 1500 AD. The limitations of gut strings required fanned frets on some instruments to achieve higher pitches on the thinner strings. So the fine math of intonation is not anything new. It's older than science. It certainly was not learned in the last couple of decades. If we take two flutes and lay them side by side and see no difference in the tone hole locations, then those flutes will have very similar intonation characteristics. Have you placed 5 different makers flutes from 4 decades side by side? It's an informative exercise.

I did that exercise with Armstrongs, Artleys, a single Pedler (only Pedler I've seen), a Bettoney Cadet, a new Gemeinhardt, and old Gemeinhardt, a DeFord, an Amati, and an Emerson. The Emerson was different. It was sharper. The Bettoney was also different but only the top 4 toneholes and only by a fraction of a mm. I compared it to other Bettoneys and these are all made the same way, top tone hole locations are different than on other flutes. I am not sure why. A very old Boston Wonder was longer by a couple of mm overall and the tone holes were slightly shifted. My deduction was that the Boston Wonder was built to A=435, most of the batch were built to A=440, and the Emerson alone was built to A=444. Knowing what we reviewed above about used and new flutes, what pitch standard would the largest number of instruments now existing deliver proper intonation at? It is obvious that most instruments that have been built in the last century play best at 440, and this is supported by playing them into an electronic tuner and seeing the results. It seems that most allow about 3/16 inch play to sharpen the pitch at the head/barrel connection, meaning they deliver 440 top to bottom with the head slightly pulled out;- about 1/8" to 3/16". The Emerson was off and sharp. The Boston Wonder was off and flat. No surprises.

But what about obsolete and who determines what is obsolete? The makers that sell new flutes? Some bureaucrat somewhere? Someone that arbitrarily decides it sounds better sharper? The devil with that. Most everything built and in existence was built to 440. Some joker comes along and says now it's 444 and suddenly everyone (but not the string players or brass players that have slides) has to buy a new instrument to play in tune, while the orchestra is still tuning to a 100 year old oboe? I must be one really confused old fart here. Most of the instruments ever built are obsolesced by instruments that are built to a different arbitrary standard because those instruments are "relatively new". Right! And I suppose all the Korg electronic guitar tuners will just self destruct as well?

And the second greatest number of instruments is not 444, it is 435, the pre WWI LP standard. All those fine old 1900's concert grand pianos have got to go now;- ivory keys and all. Pardon me, I might be old, but I am not stupid. Pitch standard changes have one function and it is to make most existing instruments obsolete. So why do it? There is no good reason.

Playability is subjective. Tone is subjective, but I like the warmth of the Armstrong, the focus of the Gemeinhardt and the clarity of the old VOSS, but the uniformity of the DeFord. If I tried a Yamaha, I'm sure it would offer its' own advantages as well. I might get one if you will tell me the one you liked best of all the Yamahas. I don't have one yet, but I'm sure it will sound better than their motorcycles.

[flutego12]

My first flute was an Armstrong 104 back in 1975. I still have it with its original pads and it still plays well. I guess I took good care of it!

WOW! Good on you.

[flutego12]

Off topic.... Flutego12 and evrmre.... the color in your posts gave me a headache. I'll need to wear sunglasses to read your posts from now on.

Sorry. Heh heh. Thanks for letting me know.
Will be mindful next time. Might have done a few more before I read your post.
Keep the sunnies on!