I'm no flute maker, but I know that not all timbers are suitable for making fifes and flutes. This could be down to density, porosity, propensity to warping, swelling, etc. Loads of things.
Agreed.
Further, the issues can increase depending upon the style of flute.
A single piece keyless flute is one thing, but a three-section keyed model can be a sad thing when the different parts do different things over the years.
Stability of components seems to be the main issue.
(Although much has been done in recent decades finding methods to stabilze certain woods before turning them into woodwinds.)
Ash and oak are both highly porous woods, so not ideal for an instrument that needs to be airtight to work properly. Rosewood, blackwood, cocuswood and boxwood, by contrast, are very close-grained. Oak is also an unstable wood, so there'd be a high risk of an oak flute turning oval or developing splits.
I'm not a flute maker, but I think one of the other reasons why hardwoods are preferred, is that it allows very smooth, precise cutting of the tenons and holes without tear-out of the wood fibers.
For example, the embouchure and finger holes aren't always just a straight-through cut; often they're undercut slightly to tweak the timbre and pitch. That's why synthetic materials like Delrin are a reasonable option for a beginner flute. It's a material that machines well.
There are other factors too, of course -- historical preference, resistance to environmental changes, subtle differences in tone, whether the sawdust causes allergic reactions, etc. But I think "easy to work and machine with precision" is right up there in priority.
It's not to do with whether the woods are hardwoods or not. Oak and ash are both hardwoods, as is cocus. Balsa wood is also a hardwood. Pine and spruce, as used for the bellies of stringed instruments are both softwoods.
It's not the wood, it's the maker. A good maker can make a flute out of petrified dog sh*t and it would sound ok. Here's the thread on the maker of flutes made from "ash" and "oak."
Sorry I didn't get back on the last thread Jonathan but the points made above pretty well sum it up, particularly the point about closeness of grain, and oak particularly is susceptile to cracks and shakes so is best avoided.
Also a good point made by ethical about timbers. Technically any deciduous tree is classed as hardwood and coniferous trees softwood, generally trees that drop their leaves are deciduous and evergreens softwood.
The grey areas are trees like evergreen oak which keeps its leaves in the winter and yew which technically is a softwood though anyone who has worked with it will know it is extremely hard and dense
Good luck with getting your new flute and I hope you find a good one.
I thought boxwood was 'notorious' for ovaling and bending like bananas etc. I've heard it said that boxwood flutes still think like they're part of a tree etc. So that still doesn't quite explain it that aspect. Oak is very slow growing and dense (300 years a growing, 300 years in it's prime and 300 years dying), so must be something to do with workability.
"Also a good point made by ethical about timbers. Technically any deciduous tree is classed as hardwood and coniferous trees softwood, generally trees that drop their leaves are deciduous and evergreens softwood."
That's not true, banjoburger. In fact, it's close to be ing the opposite of the truth, at least as far as flute woods go..
In temperate climates, trees producing hardwoods tends to be deciduous, but that's got nothing to do with the definition of a hardwood. A closer definition is that they are broadleaf trees. (Closer, but not completely correct.)
For instance - and it's the classic instance - cocus wood, which is a hardwood, comes from an evergreen tree, mostly brya ebenus. Almost all classic flute hardwoods come from evergreen trees. They are, despite being evergreens, broadleaves rather than conifers. And they're all hardwoods.
Also, not all deciduous trees are hardwoods. For instance, most larches are deciduous, but are also coniferous and classed as softwoods.
Oh, and neither evergreen oak nor yew are grey areas as far as wood classification is concerned. Yew is a conifer. Its wood is classed as a softwood (even though its wood is hard). Evergreen oak is still an oak, ie a broadleaved tree, and the wood from it is classified, totally consistently, as a hardwood.
In light of the back-and-forth on the status of oak as a hardwood in strict terminology, I'll amend "one of the other reasons why hardwoods are preferred" in my post above, to "one of the reasons why fairly dense and fine-grained wood is preferred".
There will be tonal differences too, which is why most higher-end flutes are blackwood, rosewood, mopane, boxwood, or other fine-grained and resonant woods. But that probably gets into the "can you tell a Strad blindfolded?" area and should be left for another topic.
OK, I mentioned Alder out of mischief. The 'cones' used to be thought of as if they were true cones. I'm not sure what the current botanical thinking is. I think it is just that they're 'conelike' these days.
Well well! The things you learn. Looking up Alders, I've just discovered that it's the favourite wood for making the bodies of electric guitars, apparently because of its tone qualities. Well, I didn't know that!
Fair play, eb. Ironically it was just yesterday I cited you as a reliable source of information. I left out the mischievious bit. Bottom line is none of the classifications for trees & their wood is going to tell you what works for making a good flute. Especially when hardwoods vs softwoods has so little to do with their density.
Cheers! Now I wish I had something to say regarding the OP. It's already been said but the preferred woods always seem to be the best for flutes ~ blackwood & rosewood have been used in the best flutes I've played. There was one pentatonic flute, made of black bamboo, I played once & that flute had beautiful tone. I don't know how it would be over time. But, I wish I had bought it. The other thing is it does matter who makes the flute.
"Looking up Alders, I've just discovered that it's the favourite wood for making the bodies of electric guitars, apparently because of its tone qualities."
Presumably you also found out that it is the traditional wood for clogs and for brooms (the block and bristle kind, not besoms).
As Tonya rightly says, Alder has cone-like inflorescences - call them cones if you will - but it is, botanically speaking, no more coniferous than an ice cream seller. Yew and Juniper, on the other hand, which bear 'berries', *are* conifers; of course, they are not really berries, they're just berry-like cones. For a fuller explanation, you'll have to ask a botanist.
"...hardwoods vs softwoods has so little to do with their density..."
Hardness, rather than density, is the issue here - although the two are related. To be fair to the classification, it could probably said that the majority of hardwoods are harder than the majority of softwoods. It is true that there are notable exceptions: Balsa and basswood are soft hardwoods, whilst Yew and larch are hard softwoods, for example. But the pines, firs, spruces, cypresses, redwoods, cedars* etc. - which make up the majority of softwood species - are all softer than the rosewoods, ebonies, maples, oaks, ashes, mahoganies, fruitwoods, walnuts etc..
*I refer to true cedars here, Cedrus spp. - but it holds true for the 'red cedars' (eastern and western) also, which are of the cypress family. 'Spanish' or 'cigar box' cedars, Cedrela spp., as used for classical and flamenco guitar necks, are hardwoods.
Just for a reference the flutes Jonathan is asking about (hopefully I have this right) are the Folk Flutes in D made by David Angus. So, my first question is always have you played one of the flutes, or do you know someone who has played them?
He makes 2 & 3 piece flutes ranging from £120.00 - £140.00 in Oak, Maple, Ash, Amazique, Mahogany, Purple Heart, or Plum Wood. There's also a Folk Flute made from Sapele for £85.00 (description says 2 pc. but picture looks like 1 piece). & the lowest priced is Aluminium @ £50.00
For flutes it's not just hardness and density, it is also propensity for cracking. The heartwood of yew was traditional for longbows so maybe it would be good for flutes. The branches make poor morris sticks though - they soon split.
I suspect I was not the only on checking up if Alder was a monocot or dicot.
"The heartwood of yew was traditional for longbows so maybe it would be good for flutes."
If you turned a flute out of yew, would you have a yew tube?
One thing that has to be considered is toxicity. Although timber in its bulk form is relatively safe, I would be wary of constant contact with the bottom lip with certain hardwoods. There may be slight risks in letting your horse play an oak flute too.
Yew is very unstable - yew lute backs move about all over the place, and I think a yew flute would do the same.
Another factor that might need to be taken into account is rot resistance - it is noticable that all the traditional flute making timbers - blackwood, rosewoods, box etc. are all very rot resistant. Yew isn't, and after a few months soaked in flautists drool I think a yew flute would probably go mouldy.
Box isn't anywhere near as rot resistant as other flute woods. That's just one of its many problems as a flute wood. It, too, "move[s] about all over the place" which is another of its issues.
But then again, the sound! And I don't care how many studies say that the material doesn't make a difference to the sound, to me as a player, box is just gorgeous to play. Provided, that is, that it's in a good mood on that particular day.
On the difference between hardwood and softwoods, the classification isn't on whether they are broadleaf, conifer, monocot or anything else, it is based on the timber structure, and comes down to basically whether they are deciduous or evergreen. But it only applies to wood from temperate climates.
The reason we make the distinction between hard and softwood is that the wood structure is different. In a deciduous tree growth only occurs in summer, all at approximately the same rate/density, so the timber has an even texture. But evergreen trees continue to grow through the winter, but at a much slower rate, giving higher density. So evergreens (softwoods) have alternate rings of hard and soft tissue. And that is the important property that makes it worth classifying them as different from hardwoods. I suspect the terms 'hardwood' and 'softwood' date from the time before mechanical sawmills - because of they laminar structure, softwoods are much easier to split with froe and wedges.
When it comes to tropical timbers, there can be no such thing as a 'tropical softwood', because there is no summer and winter in the tropics. All tropical trees are evergreen, but because they grow evenly throughout the year, their timber does not have the laminar structure of temperate evergreens, so they are all classed as hardwoods.
Skreetch - that's is completely false. Cocus is an evergreen tree. It is a hardwood. Well nigh every other flute wood is an evergreen hardwood. Not all evergreen hardwoods are tropical. Like box, for instance.
Tropical conifers are not classified as hardwoods.
You've just got about everything round the wrong way there.
We are taking here about classification of timber, not trees. The classification is based on the nature of the timber, not the habits of the tree it came from.
Box and Holly are evergreens. But they don't grow in winter, so their timber is homogenous - hardwood. Larch is deciduous, but continues to grow in winter, its timber is lamenar - softwood. Think of it as the difference between sandstone and slate.
"Cocus is an evergreen tree". Yes, a TROPICAL evergreen - see my previous post.
Yes, there are conifers that grow in the tropics. But as far as I am aware they are all species that also grow in temperate areas, hence their classification as softwoods. I'm not aware of any conifer that is exclusively tropical. There are no conifers in the rainforests.
Wrong again. IIRC, there are about 25% of the Amazon rainforest trees whcih are conifers. Indonesian (tropical) rainforest is mainly coniferous. India has huge tracts of coniferous rainforest. And there are plenty of temperate climate, coniferous rainforests.
You just don't understand what the word "hardwood" means.
"For flutes it's not just hardness and density, it is also propensity for cracking."
Yes. Sorry - when I mentioned hardness and density, it was only in reference to the hardwood/softwood classification. A tangent has been well and truly gone off at.
"The heartwood of yew was traditional for longbows so maybe it would be good for flutes."
...
"One thing that has to be considered is toxicity."
I have heard of yew being used for whistles/flageolets. But I have also heard that it is recommended that the mouthpiece be made of some other timber, owing to the toxicity of yew. For all its mystery and romance, no doubt appealing to mediaeval re-enactment societies and the like, I think there are stability issues with yew that would make it less than ideal for flutes.
Sorry Skreech - I have to agree with ethical blend that what you say is incorrect. It is true that the seasons affect the growth rate of wood, and the characteristics of the wood that is produced, but this applies to all trees in temperate regions - they all have annual growth rings. For N. Europe, it does almost hold true that evergreens produce 'softwood, as there are very few evergreen broadleaved species - holly and box are notable exceptions, and most definitely hardwoods; in warmer temperate regions, such as S. Europe, there are a number of evergreen species of oak, the bay (laurel) tree, prunus spp. (Portugal laurel, cherry laurel) - all hardwoods.
Conifer species in tropical reasons are few and far between, which is why we don't often hear of 'tropical softwoods'. Those that there are grow at very high altitudes, where the climate is not that which we would generally think of as 'tropical'. Tropical regions are not necessarily without seasonal variation - S. Asia has the monsoon, for example - and presumably high altitude regions have their own seasonal peculiarities.
"Cocus is an evergreen tree. It is a hardwood."
To be fair, Ben, cocus is a tropical tree and Skreech did say, if incorrectly, that all tropical woods are hardwoods, despite being evergreen.
Tosh. One example: Podocarpus falcatus. There are several other coniferous species in the "transitional rainforests" - tropical montane forests (usually classed as rainforests) and cloud forests have native coniferous species.
Skreech - I know Wikipedia is far from 100%, but this article (which, I promise you, I didn't write - neither did I read it before posting on this thread) seems to agree with Ben and me on the distinction between hardwood and softwood: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_woods
Yes, I know that is what a lot of book say, I can only conclude that people who write books like to put things into nice little compartments. But, as has already been pointed out by others, none of the botanical explanations really work, they all have exceptions.
Think about who first came up with the distinction between hard and softwoods, and who uses the classifications today. - Timber merchants selling wood to woodworkers. Woodworkers don't give a damn whether the tree had neegles or leaves, or cones or whatever. What they care about is the working properties of the wood. And that is why (and how) the timber merchants separate hard and softwoods.
"Box and Holly are evergreens. But they don't grow in winter, so their timber is homogenous - hardwood."
Many hardwoods - oak, ash, elm, hickory, for example - have distinct bands of porous wood alternating with non-porous, corresponding to seasonal growth variation. Do you classify this as 'homogenous'?
>>"Many hardwoods - oak, ash, elm, hickory, for example - have distinct bands of porous wood alternating with non-porous, corresponding to seasonal growth variation. Do you classify this as 'homogenous'?"
No, the bands you see in wood like ash and oak aren't summer and winter growth, they are the phloem and xylem, which carry water and nutrients about the tree. They grow in distinct layers under the bark (in all trees) but in species like Oak and Ash the phloem are much bigger than the xylem, so you get layers with large and small pore sizes, but the density and hardness of the wood is the same, and there is no winter growth
Re your penultimate post, Skreech, I understand where you are coming from. The system of hardwood/softwood classification is clearly unsatisfactory, if it allows the softest wood to be classed as a hardwood and some very hard ones - with more physical characteristics in common with hardwoods than with other softwoods - to be classed as softwoods. As you say, the idea of dividing wood into two broad types came from sawyers and carpenters and was later appropriated and 'rationalised' by botanists and dendrologists. But you have attempted to back up your assertion with a number of incorrect statements.
Whichever way you look at it, nature defies categorisation.
Now, what was it we were talking about? Flutes, wasn't it?
"No, the bands you see in wood like ash and oak aren't summer and winter growth, they are the phloem and xylem, which carry water and nutrients about the tree. They grow in distinct layers under the bark (in all trees) but in species like Oak and Ash the phloem are much bigger than the xylem, so you get layers with large and small pore sizes, but the density and hardness of the wood is the same, and there is no winter growth "
>>"Natural distribution
This tree occurs from the southern Cape, northwards to the Limpopo and also eastwards to Mozambique."
Weej, once again you have waded in on the basis of a bit of inaccurate googling. The Limpopo might be in Africa, but it is several hundred miles South of the tropics. Therefore, according to your own reference, Podocarpus falcatus does NOT grow in tropical rains forests. Which is what I said originally.
But you are right about the difference between hardwood and softwood being down to timber structure, not whether the tree was a conifer or not. But the bit about "Hardwoods have vessels - softwoods don't" - if you'd looked at the pictures ( no need to bother reading the text even) in the .pdf document you linked to, you would see that they both have vessels. It is only the arrangement of them that differs.
"Weej, once again you have waded in on the basis of a bit of inaccurate googling. The Limpopo might be in Africa, but it is several hundred miles South of the tropics. Therefore, according to your own reference, Podocarpus falcatus does NOT grow in tropical rains forests"
Skreech, I did suggest that you would make a fool out of yourself. For a start, I was responding to your words "There are no conifers in the rainforests. "
You didn't say "Tropical rainforests"
However, there is a big difference between "the southern tip of South Africa" and "the southern Cape, northwards to the Limpopo and also eastwards to Mozambique"
This particular tree grows in the Afromontane rainforests Moreover, it grows in Mozambique - what is the climate in Mozambique?
"Mozambique has a tropical climate which is also divided into 3 major climate zones, namely: tropical humid, tropical dry and tropical climate of altitude. "
"Assessing the presence or absence of vessels is the foremost and simplest means of distinguishing hardwoods from softwoods: in softwoods they are absent whilst in hardwoods they are present. Occurring parallel to the longitudinal axis of a tree, vessels are the conduits that transport water and sap from the roots of a tree to its leaves. A single vessel is made up of cells (vessel elements) separated by perforation plates. Vessels are also known as pores, particularly when viewed on the transverse surface. "
I'm wondering if Jonathan could plant an acorn, grow a healthy oak, cut the tree down, mill the wood, stack & dry, & make his own flute before a few responders get around to answering the OP.
Myself included.
The question has been answered, Tonya. Several people have said why they think oak is unsuitable for flutes. I even warned why you shouldn't let your horse play an oak flute.
My post about Jonathan growing his own tree was me being mischievous. The smilie thing > >
Yes, of course the question as to why not oak or ash has been answered quite well. But, since Jonathan is looking into Angus flutes I cannot help but wonder if the purpleheart flute in any good. Maybe that's just me going off on some wide tangent.
Fair play, Weejie ~ about the purpleheart. I've always wondered why some flute makers use it.
Jonathan, I agree with those who are suggesting oak or ash is not your best choice for a flute. But, going from what Andy Sugden said on your previous thread it might be worth checking into an Angus flute in a more preferable wood. The price of £130.00 for the 2 piece purpleheart flute sounds like a very good price, if it's a good flute. I should mention purpleheart has caused a reaction in some people, though rare when it's just through contact with the wood (as opposed to sawdust). This site lists it as a sensitizer. http://www.mimf.com/archives/toxic.htm
If it was myself I'd contact David Angus & see if he could make a 2 pc. flute in either Hondouran Rosewood or African Blackwood*, how long it might take, & the price.
>>."This particular tree grows in the Afromontane rainforests Moreover, it grows in Mozambique - what is the climate in Mozambique?"
According to your reference, the Northern limit for the species is the Limpopo river. Yes, part of Mozambique is South of the Limpopo. But that part of Mozambique is not in the tropics - it has seasonal weather.
>>"For a start, I was responding to your words "There are no conifers in the rainforests. "
You didn't say "Tropical rainforests"
No, but I was talking specifically about tropical timbers. I would have thought it was obvious to even an idiot that in that situation I was also talking specifically about tropical rain forests.
What exactly does a paper about growing Podocarpus Falcatus in a managed forest in Ethiopia tell us about whether
it grows in tropical rainforests or not? If you had actually read the paper you would have noticed a) that Munessa-Shashemene is a managed forest, and certainly not a rainforest (tropical or otherwise). And b) That that was a paper concernig exotic (ie non-native) species in the forest.
>>""Assessing the presence or absence of vessels is the foremost and simplest means of distinguishing hardwoods from softwoods. "
OK, I'll apologise for that one - I was taught that the two types of transport cells were tracheids and pores. I assumed 'vessels' referred to both, it seems it refers only to pores (which, as you rightly say, are not present in softwoods)
"Think about who first came up with the distinction between hard and softwoods, and who uses the classifications today. - Timber merchants selling wood to woodworkers. Woodworkers don't give a damn whether the tree had neegles or leaves, or cones or whatever. What they care about is the working properties of the wood. And that is why (and how) the timber merchants separate hard and softwoods."
For quite a number of years, I used to be on the Executive Board of an international timber merchants. I sold timber to distributors across the UK. I sourced many different types of timber to meet my customers' needs. I visited various timber growing and producing areas in the Baltics, Russia and Africa numerous times over the whole of the period of my involvement.
About all I need to say now is: you're wrong, skreech. Just wrong.
"According to your reference, the Northern limit for the species is the Limpopo river. Yes, part of Mozambique is South of the Limpopo. But that part of Mozambique is not in the tropics - it has seasonal weather."
Ha ha.....The Tropic of Capricorn actually cuts through the Limpopo river - and Limpopo Province:
"What exactly does a paper about growing Podocarpus Falcatus in a managed forest in Ethiopia tell us about whether
it grows in tropical rainforests or not? If you had actually read the paper you would have noticed a) that Munessa-Shashemene is a managed forest, and certainly not a rainforest (tropical or otherwise). And b) That that was a paper concernig exotic (ie non-native) species in the forest."
I did read it. I wasn't saying that the particular forest was a rainforest - just that it was further north than Mozambique - if you didn't know, both the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn pass through Mozambique. However, in the paper, it says (quite clearly) "a valuable indigenous tree species
(Podocarpus falcatus)" - you do know what "indigenous" means, don't you? That paper mentioned "exotic" and "indigenous" (foreign and native).
"In East Africa Afrocarpus falcatus occurs in forest in the mountains at 1500–2400(–3000) m altitude, often associated with Juniperus procera Hochst. ex Endl. It is characteristic for undifferentiated Afromontane forest, but it can also be found in rainforest." http://database.prota.org/PROTAhtml/Afrocarpus%20falcatus_En.htm
>>"if you didn't know, both the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn pass through Mozambique."
Really? I'd love to see you google something to prove that.
Perhaps the tropic of cancer has migrated, because the whole of Mozambique is well South of the Equator?
>>"Ha ha.....The Tropic of Capricorn actually cuts through the Limpopo river - and Limpopo Province:"
Yes, The Limpopo cuts the tropic, but in South Africa, not Mozambique. The river then heads North east, and is well South of the tropic when it passes through Mozambique. (and Limpopo Provice is in South Africa, not Mozambique. Go and look at a map.
>>"I did read it. I wasn't saying that the particular forest was a rainforest - just that it was further north than Mozambique." Well then you were arguing with yourself, because it was you that posted the reference that stated that the Northern Limit of the Podocarpus Falcatus. I simply tokk what you had posted at face value, and pointed out that it didn't support the arguement that you were putting forward.
>>" I sourced many different types of timber to meet my customers' needs. I visited various timber growing and producing areas in the Baltics, Russia and Africa numerous times over the whole of the period of my involvement.
About all I need to say now is: you're wrong, skreech. Just wrong"
OK, so when your customers came to you and asked to buy some softwood, were they doing that because they needed timber with specific properties, or because it was important to them that the wood came from something that looked like a Christmas tree?
The bottom line is that it is the properties of the timber that are important, and although people have tried to tie it to specific botanical groups (evergreens, conifers, etc.) it never quite works - whatever botanical criteria you choose, there are always exceptions. So the only way to accurately classify any timber as a hard- or softwood is by looking at the parameter you are actually classifying - the cellular structure.
"Yes, The Limpopo cuts the tropic, but in South Africa, not Mozambique. The river then heads North east, and is well South of the tropic when it passes through Mozambique. (and Limpopo Provice is in South Africa, not Mozambique. Go and look at a map."mozambique latitude
That is not relevant - point being that the Limpopo is actually not "several hundred miles away" from the Tropics.
If you look at the map of the distribution of Afrocarpus (Podocarpus) falcatus it shows it as a natural species right through Mozambique and right up to Ethiopia.
>>"If you look at the map of the distribution of Afrocarpus (Podocarpus) falcatus it shows it as a natural species right through Mozambique and right up to Ethiopia"
Well OK, then you are feeding me duff information - the first link you gave on the subject (this one: http://www.plantzafrica.com/plantnop/podocarpfalcat.htm ) says "Natural distribution
This tree occurs from the southern Cape, northwards to the Limpopo and also eastwards to Mozambique."
>>"Ha - silly me I meant to say "Equator" but Mozambique doesn't quite get there. I'm getting into bad geography too!"
"Doesn't quite" is a bit of an understatement - there is the Whole of Tanzania and half of Kenya in between - that's about four days hard driving!
Frankly, I don't give a damn where it grows. But you still haven't convinced me that conifers grow naturally in tropical rain forests.
That's a bit of an assumption. It's well under 800 nautical miles, I reckon. It was an understatement, but four days is a bit of an overstatement. Who said anything about driving on land?
It's not far, relatively speaking. Even by land.
"Well OK, then you are feeding me duff information - the first link you gave on the subject (this one: http://www.plantzafrica.com/plantnop/podocarpfalcat.htm ) says "Natural distribution
This tree occurs from the southern Cape, northwards to the Limpopo and also eastwards to Mozambique"
Yes, it did - see that bit about "northwards to Limpopo"? That doesn't say "Limpopo river in Mozambique" - anyway, you didn't say "tropical rainforest" - you said "rainforest" and there are several other species of conifer that grow in rainforests.
It transpires that the particular species is even more widespread than it first appeared.
Thanks for that link, Tonya - and sorry for not taking the hint concerning my massive blunder.
Anyway, back to pedantry.
Taking the reference point from the northernmost point of Mozambique to the Equator, as the crow flies (which is most relevant), the distance using John Byers' calculator is (rounded to two decimal places):
1163.056 Km - 722.69 Miles - 628 Nautical miles
I read an argument somewhere above that the choice of blackwood, rosewood, cocus and boxwood was to do with the timber rotting due to permeability? Don't know if anyone answered it and can't be bothered to wade thru all that guff but...
Is not oak used for boatbuilding? What about oak timbers found in bogs etc. Seems to have good longevity even after the tree is felled.
And what of larch? - well known for use in trailers etc., due to its rot resistance.
Nobody has explained use of boxwood yet? It definitely absorbs moisture very readily.
If you can get it - yes. It's used for various reasons, but none of them involve setting up a vibrating column of air. Some of the problems with it is due to the tannic acid content - it isn't a great idea to use steel nails or screws in the timber as they corrode (not a problem if you are using copper boat nails). It is also liable to warp.
Larch is a softwood, of course (that might start a converstion) and it bends well, but it's not a great wood for turning (oak isn't the best either). I would imagine maintaining a sharp edged embouchure hole would be a problem. Longevity is not the biggest issue as oils etc can be employed (elm withstands constant exposure to water well - it was traditionally used for bog seats, but it's not the best for fine turnery - greenheart is used in submerged portions of piers etc, but it splinters easily - African blackwood withstands wet, but it also turns well - bar those "abnormalities" that crop up).
It's surprising how many woods will make flutes, but the less dense varieties, I've found, need oiling before they'll even play (though all woods should be oiled - the dense timbers will play straight away).
Boxwood turns readily and it its capabilities for retaining clean-edged holes is good. Generally, the traditional woods used for instruments are used for a reason, and many are not used for a reason.
I've found that rhododendron wood turns very much like box, but it is difficult to find long, straight and large section pieces. I'm not sure of the toxicity situation, either.
An uilleann pipe maker, the late Tom White from Co Wexford used to play a flute he made from bog oak (possibly another bog wood but he said it was bog oak).
There was someone around the Carrbridge area who made fiddles out of bog oak. Another person who made GHB sets.
Quite a different thing when it has gone through the process of becoming bog oak. I'd always be wary of cracking though.
I never saw one, so I'm not sure if the wood was even used for the ribs - would bog oak bend readily? I've never worked with it. I would imagine that the belly would be a softwood. I've seen hardingfele tops made from birch though.
Thanks Weejie, you've obviously tried your hand at a few. Re rhododendron there's ongoing work parties in various parts of Ireland to try and clear this out of old woodlands to allow them to regenerate - the rhodo tends to a dense shrub layer that denies natural tree seedlings access to light and life. Maybe the OPW should get together with some of the instrument makers instead of presumably burning the stuff!
Rhododendron is also now a huge problem in Snowdonia, further southwards in Wales and also in Cornwall. It would be great to harvest and use whatever wood is useable, but expensive to do, I would think. Plus, some of the control methods used involve herbicides, and some of these will, i believe, render the wood less useable.
There used to be a few clips on yertube of Michael Dinan playing the 'Russian' fiddle (called so because of the balalaika shape). He was wellknown for that type of fiddle. I have seen rectangular 'box' fiddles too, including one Bobby Casey supposedly started on.
My impression of bog oak is that it is too prone to splitting and is generally too long in the grain for the purpose of flute and fiddle making, there are other trees buried in the bogs (the drowned forests around the shore like in Quilty or Rinevella bay in Clare are mostly oak though) though and my impression is they are all called 'bog oak' whether they are or not. So the wood used in the fiddles may well be bog larch or something else.
There was a plentiful supply of rhodie wood on the isle of Arran some years back. I used to go across with a big rucksack and collect it. After some years of seasoning, I began to experiment with it. Not bad for fiddle pegs - I meant to make a tailpiece with it but never got round to it. I made a few chisel and gouge handles though, and piccolo and a couple of fipple flutes (tussefløyter).
I was told the rhodie logs are not so common on Arran now - much of it was burned and a lot rotted away.
"Thanks Weejie, you've obviously tried your hand at a few"
Small flutes (piccolo size) and fifes - some whistles too. I had ideas of moving from stringed instruments to pipes and flutes, but haven't got there yet. Not likely to either, with the old age coming on....
With porous wood it's a matter of lining the barrel with varnish etc.
personally I'm not keen on purple heart and would rate it along with oak for turning . I use boxwood, Blackwood and ebony .
Rhodie emits poisonous smoke when burnt green , containing cyanide. Its possible to even smell it when cutting the wood fresh. As a turner I use woods that I enjoy the feel of turning and boxwood is my favourite.
I've heard people talk of the fumes being poisonous, but it didn't stop the council burning all the plants they had eradicated from the Arran landscape. I've not read anything 100% reliable about the presence of cyanide - it's present in small quantities in bitter almond stones and other fruit stones, and I think, prunus species.
"It should be stressed that many woods are toxic and repeated exposure to any wood smoke is a health
risk. Rhododendron probably does not constitute a significantly greater hazard than other woods all of
which should be treated with respect."
Aye, I see there is more concern with ruminants in that paer, but equine beasties do get a mention:
"Also donkeys exhibited tachycardia, dyspnea, green froth around the mouth, minimal gut activity, paralysis, and inability to open their
jaws. Paralysis subsided after four days."
Most of the horses and donkeys in my session get like that after a few reels anyway.
There's someone who's a complete ass in the session I used to frequent. Sadly, they don't play flute, or I'd source them one. Mind, it's debatable what they do 'play'.
Well, first you need to get her a really expensive whistle, and don't bridle at the price. Hay! It's in a good course. And you should ignore all the neigh-sayers and general asses. Donkey'p on at her and don't nag her - just encourage her gently, that's the mane thing. Don't let her get the whip hand though, or she'll reguarly stirrup trouble.
I have tried an oak and an Ash Fife and The tone and volume are excellent.
The Reenactment group I play with have Oak Fifes in the Key o D and we are very happy with them. We chose Oak because it would be authentic with the period we reenact.
The Fifes are of good quality and they are all in tune
I would not judge any instrument by its price.
Maybe Angus Fifes instruments are very under- priced
Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Just in case anybody missed my last post about Angus fifes ~ why should oak and ash flutes be avoided?
# Posted on January 7th 2012 by Jonathan
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
I'm no flute maker, but I know that not all timbers are suitable for making fifes and flutes. This could be down to density, porosity, propensity to warping, swelling, etc. Loads of things.
m.d.
# Posted on January 7th 2012 by emmdee
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Agreed.
Further, the issues can increase depending upon the style of flute.
A single piece keyless flute is one thing, but a three-section keyed model can be a sad thing when the different parts do different things over the years.
Stability of components seems to be the main issue.
(Although much has been done in recent decades finding methods to stabilze certain woods before turning them into woodwinds.)
My twa farthings.
Good luck.
# Posted on January 7th 2012 by Piece
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Ash and oak are both highly porous woods, so not ideal for an instrument that needs to be airtight to work properly. Rosewood, blackwood, cocuswood and boxwood, by contrast, are very close-grained. Oak is also an unstable wood, so there'd be a high risk of an oak flute turning oval or developing splits.
# Posted on January 7th 2012 by CreadurMawnOrganig
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
I'm not a flute maker, but I think one of the other reasons why hardwoods are preferred, is that it allows very smooth, precise cutting of the tenons and holes without tear-out of the wood fibers.
For example, the embouchure and finger holes aren't always just a straight-through cut; often they're undercut slightly to tweak the timbre and pitch. That's why synthetic materials like Delrin are a reasonable option for a beginner flute. It's a material that machines well.
There are other factors too, of course -- historical preference, resistance to environmental changes, subtle differences in tone, whether the sawdust causes allergic reactions, etc. But I think "easy to work and machine with precision" is right up there in priority.
# Posted on January 7th 2012 by Conical bore
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
It's not to do with whether the woods are hardwoods or not. Oak and ash are both hardwoods, as is cocus. Balsa wood is also a hardwood. Pine and spruce, as used for the bellies of stringed instruments are both softwoods.
# Posted on January 7th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
It's not the wood, it's the maker. A good maker can make a flute out of petrified dog sh*t and it would sound ok. Here's the thread on the maker of flutes made from "ash" and "oak."
http://forums.chiffandfipple.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=84554
# Posted on January 7th 2012 by David Levine
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Sorry I didn't get back on the last thread Jonathan but the points made above pretty well sum it up, particularly the point about closeness of grain, and oak particularly is susceptile to cracks and shakes so is best avoided.
Also a good point made by ethical about timbers. Technically any deciduous tree is classed as hardwood and coniferous trees softwood, generally trees that drop their leaves are deciduous and evergreens softwood.
The grey areas are trees like evergreen oak which keeps its leaves in the winter and yew which technically is a softwood though anyone who has worked with it will know it is extremely hard and dense
Good luck with getting your new flute and I hope you find a good one.
# Posted on January 7th 2012 by banjoburger
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
I thought boxwood was 'notorious' for ovaling and bending like bananas etc. I've heard it said that boxwood flutes still think like they're part of a tree etc. So that still doesn't quite explain it that aspect. Oak is very slow growing and dense (300 years a growing, 300 years in it's prime and 300 years dying), so must be something to do with workability.
# Posted on January 7th 2012 by the wounded hussar
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"Also a good point made by ethical about timbers. Technically any deciduous tree is classed as hardwood and coniferous trees softwood, generally trees that drop their leaves are deciduous and evergreens softwood."
That's not true, banjoburger. In fact, it's close to be ing the opposite of the truth, at least as far as flute woods go..
In temperate climates, trees producing hardwoods tends to be deciduous, but that's got nothing to do with the definition of a hardwood. A closer definition is that they are broadleaf trees. (Closer, but not completely correct.)
For instance - and it's the classic instance - cocus wood, which is a hardwood, comes from an evergreen tree, mostly brya ebenus. Almost all classic flute hardwoods come from evergreen trees. They are, despite being evergreens, broadleaves rather than conifers. And they're all hardwoods.
Also, not all deciduous trees are hardwoods. For instance, most larches are deciduous, but are also coniferous and classed as softwoods.
# Posted on January 7th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
The British Navy liked its oak a lot younger than that. 100+ years but not many hundreds.
# Posted on January 7th 2012 by David50
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
... and then, how do we classify alder wood? Alders are deciduous, coniferous, broadleaved trees (most of them).
(btw, I know the answer, but it's not entirely helpful to the issue of what wood to use for flutes, so I won't bother to post it.)
# Posted on January 7th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Oh, and neither evergreen oak nor yew are grey areas as far as wood classification is concerned. Yew is a conifer. Its wood is classed as a softwood (even though its wood is hard). Evergreen oak is still an oak, ie a broadleaved tree, and the wood from it is classified, totally consistently, as a hardwood.
# Posted on January 7th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
In light of the back-and-forth on the status of oak as a hardwood in strict terminology, I'll amend "one of the other reasons why hardwoods are preferred" in my post above, to "one of the reasons why fairly dense and fine-grained wood is preferred".
There will be tonal differences too, which is why most higher-end flutes are blackwood, rosewood, mopane, boxwood, or other fine-grained and resonant woods. But that probably gets into the "can you tell a Strad blindfolded?" area and should be left for another topic.
# Posted on January 7th 2012 by Conical bore
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
And, just in case that post has made people think there's any ambiguity, there isn't. Hardwoods are hardwoods and softwoods are softwoods.
As Conical bore implies, it's not to do with the wood being a hardwood, it's to do with the specific type of wood. The specific type of hardwood.
# Posted on January 7th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Isn't alder an angiosperm & not coniferous?
"The fruiting inflorescences conelike (notably Alnus)"
http://delta-intkey.com/angio/www/betulace.htm
# Posted on January 7th 2012 by ain't fluffed
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
OK, I mentioned Alder out of mischief. The 'cones' used to be thought of as if they were true cones. I'm not sure what the current botanical thinking is. I think it is just that they're 'conelike' these days.
# Posted on January 7th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Well well! The things you learn. Looking up Alders, I've just discovered that it's the favourite wood for making the bodies of electric guitars, apparently because of its tone qualities. Well, I didn't know that!
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Fair play, eb. Ironically it was just yesterday I cited you as a reliable source of information. I left out the mischievious bit. Bottom line is none of the classifications for trees & their wood is going to tell you what works for making a good flute. Especially when hardwoods vs softwoods has so little to do with their density.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by ain't fluffed
Bit of a cross post. Seems we were posting at almost the same time.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by ain't fluffed
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
I know you did, tonya, and thanks for that. I'd like to think I do my best to post reliably. At least I admit to the mischief.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Cheers! Now I wish I had something to say regarding the OP. It's already been said but the preferred woods always seem to be the best for flutes ~ blackwood & rosewood have been used in the best flutes I've played. There was one pentatonic flute, made of black bamboo, I played once & that flute had beautiful tone. I don't know how it would be over time. But, I wish I had bought it. The other thing is it does matter who makes the flute.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by ain't fluffed
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"Looking up Alders, I've just discovered that it's the favourite wood for making the bodies of electric guitars, apparently because of its tone qualities."
Presumably you also found out that it is the traditional wood for clogs and for brooms (the block and bristle kind, not besoms).
As Tonya rightly says, Alder has cone-like inflorescences - call them cones if you will - but it is, botanically speaking, no more coniferous than an ice cream seller. Yew and Juniper, on the other hand, which bear 'berries', *are* conifers; of course, they are not really berries, they're just berry-like cones. For a fuller explanation, you'll have to ask a botanist.
"...hardwoods vs softwoods has so little to do with their density..."
Hardness, rather than density, is the issue here - although the two are related. To be fair to the classification, it could probably said that the majority of hardwoods are harder than the majority of softwoods. It is true that there are notable exceptions: Balsa and basswood are soft hardwoods, whilst Yew and larch are hard softwoods, for example. But the pines, firs, spruces, cypresses, redwoods, cedars* etc. - which make up the majority of softwood species - are all softer than the rosewoods, ebonies, maples, oaks, ashes, mahoganies, fruitwoods, walnuts etc..
*I refer to true cedars here, Cedrus spp. - but it holds true for the 'red cedars' (eastern and western) also, which are of the cypress family. 'Spanish' or 'cigar box' cedars, Cedrela spp., as used for classical and flamenco guitar necks, are hardwoods.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by CreadurMawnOrganig
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Just for a reference the flutes Jonathan is asking about (hopefully I have this right) are the Folk Flutes in D made by David Angus. So, my first question is always have you played one of the flutes, or do you know someone who has played them?
http://www.angusfifes.com/
He makes 2 & 3 piece flutes ranging from £120.00 - £140.00 in Oak, Maple, Ash, Amazique, Mahogany, Purple Heart, or Plum Wood. There's also a Folk Flute made from Sapele for £85.00 (description says 2 pc. but picture looks like 1 piece). & the lowest priced is Aluminium @ £50.00
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by ain't fluffed
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
For flutes it's not just hardness and density, it is also propensity for cracking. The heartwood of yew was traditional for longbows so maybe it would be good for flutes. The branches make poor morris sticks though - they soon split.
I suspect I was not the only on checking up if Alder was a monocot or dicot.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by David50
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Yew might make a nice flute box though.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by David50
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
" It is true that there are notable exceptions: Balsa and basswood are soft hardwoods, whilst Yew and larch are hard softwoods, for example. "
It's the cell structure, innit? Balsa has pores, yew disnae.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"The heartwood of yew was traditional for longbows so maybe it would be good for flutes."
If you turned a flute out of yew, would you have a yew tube?
One thing that has to be considered is toxicity. Although timber in its bulk form is relatively safe, I would be wary of constant contact with the bottom lip with certain hardwoods. There may be slight risks in letting your horse play an oak flute too.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Yew is very unstable - yew lute backs move about all over the place, and I think a yew flute would do the same.
Another factor that might need to be taken into account is rot resistance - it is noticable that all the traditional flute making timbers - blackwood, rosewoods, box etc. are all very rot resistant. Yew isn't, and after a few months soaked in flautists drool I think a yew flute would probably go mouldy.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by skreech
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
" yew lute backs move about all over the place, and I think a yew flute would do the same."
If Ian Anderson played one, you wouldn't notice.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Box isn't anywhere near as rot resistant as other flute woods. That's just one of its many problems as a flute wood. It, too, "move[s] about all over the place" which is another of its issues.
But then again, the sound! And I don't care how many studies say that the material doesn't make a difference to the sound, to me as a player, box is just gorgeous to play. Provided, that is, that it's in a good mood on that particular day.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
I have a boxwood Eugene Lamb chanter that is banana shaped. It still plays nicely. It doesn't get soaked though, being in a cauld wind set up.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
On the difference between hardwood and softwoods, the classification isn't on whether they are broadleaf, conifer, monocot or anything else, it is based on the timber structure, and comes down to basically whether they are deciduous or evergreen. But it only applies to wood from temperate climates.
The reason we make the distinction between hard and softwood is that the wood structure is different. In a deciduous tree growth only occurs in summer, all at approximately the same rate/density, so the timber has an even texture. But evergreen trees continue to grow through the winter, but at a much slower rate, giving higher density. So evergreens (softwoods) have alternate rings of hard and soft tissue. And that is the important property that makes it worth classifying them as different from hardwoods. I suspect the terms 'hardwood' and 'softwood' date from the time before mechanical sawmills - because of they laminar structure, softwoods are much easier to split with froe and wedges.
When it comes to tropical timbers, there can be no such thing as a 'tropical softwood', because there is no summer and winter in the tropics. All tropical trees are evergreen, but because they grow evenly throughout the year, their timber does not have the laminar structure of temperate evergreens, so they are all classed as hardwoods.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by skreech
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Skreetch - that's is completely false. Cocus is an evergreen tree. It is a hardwood. Well nigh every other flute wood is an evergreen hardwood. Not all evergreen hardwoods are tropical. Like box, for instance.
Tropical conifers are not classified as hardwoods.
You've just got about everything round the wrong way there.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
We are taking here about classification of timber, not trees. The classification is based on the nature of the timber, not the habits of the tree it came from.
Box and Holly are evergreens. But they don't grow in winter, so their timber is homogenous - hardwood. Larch is deciduous, but continues to grow in winter, its timber is lamenar - softwood. Think of it as the difference between sandstone and slate.
"Cocus is an evergreen tree". Yes, a TROPICAL evergreen - see my previous post.
Yes, there are conifers that grow in the tropics. But as far as I am aware they are all species that also grow in temperate areas, hence their classification as softwoods. I'm not aware of any conifer that is exclusively tropical. There are no conifers in the rainforests.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by skreech
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
The genus Araucaria comprises coniferous trees that are mostly tropical. The wood is classed as a softwood because of its cell structure.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
To a user of wood are the terms hardwood and softwood - without more details - indicators of anything of practical use ?
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by David50
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"There are no conifers in the rainforests"
Wrong again. IIRC, there are about 25% of the Amazon rainforest trees whcih are conifers. Indonesian (tropical) rainforest is mainly coniferous. India has huge tracts of coniferous rainforest. And there are plenty of temperate climate, coniferous rainforests.
You just don't understand what the word "hardwood" means.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"To a user of wood are the terms hardwood and softwood - without more details - indicators of anything of practical use ?"
Yes. Provided you know what they mean.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"For flutes it's not just hardness and density, it is also propensity for cracking."
Yes. Sorry - when I mentioned hardness and density, it was only in reference to the hardwood/softwood classification. A tangent has been well and truly gone off at.
"The heartwood of yew was traditional for longbows so maybe it would be good for flutes."
...
"One thing that has to be considered is toxicity."
I have heard of yew being used for whistles/flageolets. But I have also heard that it is recommended that the mouthpiece be made of some other timber, owing to the toxicity of yew. For all its mystery and romance, no doubt appealing to mediaeval re-enactment societies and the like, I think there are stability issues with yew that would make it less than ideal for flutes.
Sorry Skreech - I have to agree with ethical blend that what you say is incorrect. It is true that the seasons affect the growth rate of wood, and the characteristics of the wood that is produced, but this applies to all trees in temperate regions - they all have annual growth rings. For N. Europe, it does almost hold true that evergreens produce 'softwood, as there are very few evergreen broadleaved species - holly and box are notable exceptions, and most definitely hardwoods; in warmer temperate regions, such as S. Europe, there are a number of evergreen species of oak, the bay (laurel) tree, prunus spp. (Portugal laurel, cherry laurel) - all hardwoods.
Conifer species in tropical reasons are few and far between, which is why we don't often hear of 'tropical softwoods'. Those that there are grow at very high altitudes, where the climate is not that which we would generally think of as 'tropical'. Tropical regions are not necessarily without seasonal variation - S. Asia has the monsoon, for example - and presumably high altitude regions have their own seasonal peculiarities.
"Cocus is an evergreen tree. It is a hardwood."
To be fair, Ben, cocus is a tropical tree and Skreech did say, if incorrectly, that all tropical woods are hardwoods, despite being evergreen.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by CreadurMawnOrganig
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Cross posted there.
"Indonesian (tropical) rainforest is mainly coniferous."
Interesting thread, this. I didn't know that.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by CreadurMawnOrganig
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
...and that might contradict what I have just said about tropical conifers and high altitudes.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by CreadurMawnOrganig
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"There are no conifers in the rainforests. "
Tosh. One example: Podocarpus falcatus. There are several other coniferous species in the "transitional rainforests" - tropical montane forests (usually classed as rainforests) and cloud forests have native coniferous species.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Lots of cross posting - methinks posters might be cross.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"Which is why we don't often hear of 'tropical softwoods"
There's many a counter top made of Parana pine in this neck of the woods.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Skreech - I know Wikipedia is far from 100%, but this article (which, I promise you, I didn't write - neither did I read it before posting on this thread) seems to agree with Ben and me on the distinction between hardwood and softwood:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_woods
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by CreadurMawnOrganig
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
*100% reliable*, I meant
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by CreadurMawnOrganig
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Yes, I know that is what a lot of book say, I can only conclude that people who write books like to put things into nice little compartments. But, as has already been pointed out by others, none of the botanical explanations really work, they all have exceptions.
Think about who first came up with the distinction between hard and softwoods, and who uses the classifications today. - Timber merchants selling wood to woodworkers. Woodworkers don't give a damn whether the tree had neegles or leaves, or cones or whatever. What they care about is the working properties of the wood. And that is why (and how) the timber merchants separate hard and softwoods.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by skreech
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"Box and Holly are evergreens. But they don't grow in winter, so their timber is homogenous - hardwood."
Many hardwoods - oak, ash, elm, hickory, for example - have distinct bands of porous wood alternating with non-porous, corresponding to seasonal growth variation. Do you classify this as 'homogenous'?
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by CreadurMawnOrganig
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
>>"Tosh. One example: Podocarpus falcatus. There are several other coniferous species in the "transitional rainforests"
Tosh. Podocarpus falcatus Is native to the Southern Tip of South Africa. Last time I looked, their climate was temporate, not tropical.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by skreech
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
>>"Many hardwoods - oak, ash, elm, hickory, for example - have distinct bands of porous wood alternating with non-porous, corresponding to seasonal growth variation. Do you classify this as 'homogenous'?"
No, the bands you see in wood like ash and oak aren't summer and winter growth, they are the phloem and xylem, which carry water and nutrients about the tree. They grow in distinct layers under the bark (in all trees) but in species like Oak and Ash the phloem are much bigger than the xylem, so you get layers with large and small pore sizes, but the density and hardness of the wood is the same, and there is no winter growth
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by skreech
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"Natural distribution
This tree occurs from the southern Cape, northwards to the Limpopo and also eastwards to Mozambique."
"http://www.plantzafrica.com/plantnop/podocarpfalcat.htm";
Give up now, Skreech. You'll just make a fool out of yourself.
The cell structure is the definitive method of determining hardwoods/softwoods. There are no ifs or buts. Hardwoods have vessels - softwoods don't.
http://www.faculty.sfasu.edu/mcbroommatth/Lectures/Wood_Science/Lecture_5_Hardwood_Structure.PDF
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Re your penultimate post, Skreech, I understand where you are coming from. The system of hardwood/softwood classification is clearly unsatisfactory, if it allows the softest wood to be classed as a hardwood and some very hard ones - with more physical characteristics in common with hardwoods than with other softwoods - to be classed as softwoods. As you say, the idea of dividing wood into two broad types came from sawyers and carpenters and was later appropriated and 'rationalised' by botanists and dendrologists. But you have attempted to back up your assertion with a number of incorrect statements.
Whichever way you look at it, nature defies categorisation.
Now, what was it we were talking about? Flutes, wasn't it?
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by CreadurMawnOrganig
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"No, the bands you see in wood like ash and oak aren't summer and winter growth, they are the phloem and xylem, which carry water and nutrients about the tree. They grow in distinct layers under the bark (in all trees) but in species like Oak and Ash the phloem are much bigger than the xylem, so you get layers with large and small pore sizes, but the density and hardness of the wood is the same, and there is no winter growth "
I stand corrected on ths point.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by CreadurMawnOrganig
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Why, I have a degree in Botany and one of my modules at university was Timber Technology. Ask me another.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by Steve Shaw
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Steve - You could have nipped this debate in the bud. But then, that would have ruined your schadenfreude (I have a degree in pysychotomy),
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by CreadurMawnOrganig
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
...psychotomy
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by CreadurMawnOrganig
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
And I have a degree in international relations, nanny nanny boo boo, so there!
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by AlBrown
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
I have relations in America, Germany, India and beyond, but I don't have a degree in them.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by CreadurMawnOrganig
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Cut to the chase. Who has played an Angus flute?
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by ain't fluffed
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
>>"Natural distribution
This tree occurs from the southern Cape, northwards to the Limpopo and also eastwards to Mozambique."
Weej, once again you have waded in on the basis of a bit of inaccurate googling. The Limpopo might be in Africa, but it is several hundred miles South of the tropics. Therefore, according to your own reference, Podocarpus falcatus does NOT grow in tropical rains forests. Which is what I said originally.
But you are right about the difference between hardwood and softwood being down to timber structure, not whether the tree was a conifer or not. But the bit about "Hardwoods have vessels - softwoods don't" - if you'd looked at the pictures ( no need to bother reading the text even) in the .pdf document you linked to, you would see that they both have vessels. It is only the arrangement of them that differs.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by skreech
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Cut to the chase now is it? I'm not sure I like the timbre of your post.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by Steve Shaw
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Wood that be a hardwood or softwood post?
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by ain't fluffed
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"Weej, once again you have waded in on the basis of a bit of inaccurate googling. The Limpopo might be in Africa, but it is several hundred miles South of the tropics. Therefore, according to your own reference, Podocarpus falcatus does NOT grow in tropical rains forests"
Skreech, I did suggest that you would make a fool out of yourself. For a start, I was responding to your words "There are no conifers in the rainforests. "
You didn't say "Tropical rainforests"
However, there is a big difference between "the southern tip of South Africa" and "the southern Cape, northwards to the Limpopo and also eastwards to Mozambique"
This particular tree grows in the Afromontane rainforests Moreover, it grows in Mozambique - what is the climate in Mozambique?
"Mozambique has a tropical climate which is also divided into 3 major climate zones, namely: tropical humid, tropical dry and tropical climate of altitude. "
"http://www.spgrc.org.zm/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=18&Itemid=37";
So, just trying to discredit by putting things down to "inaccurate googling" is not too smart.
I use links to back up what I say, Skreech. You use opinions.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
" you would see that they both have vessels"
Geez.....
"Assessing the presence or absence of vessels is the foremost and simplest means of distinguishing hardwoods from softwoods: in softwoods they are absent whilst in hardwoods they are present. Occurring parallel to the longitudinal axis of a tree, vessels are the conduits that transport water and sap from the roots of a tree to its leaves. A single vessel is made up of cells (vessel elements) separated by perforation plates. Vessels are also known as pores, particularly when viewed on the transverse surface. "
http://keys.lucidcentral.org/keys/jbarker/hardwood_softwood/html/Character%20factsheets/Without_vessels_(softwood).htm
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"Cut to the chase now is it? I'm not sure I like the timbre of your post."
Are you suggesting that it goes against the grain?
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
I'm wondering if Jonathan could plant an acorn, grow a healthy oak, cut the tree down, mill the wood, stack & dry, & make his own flute before a few responders get around to answering the OP.
Myself included.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by ain't fluffed
North enough for you?
http://treephys.oxfordjournals.org/content/26/8/1043.full.pdf
The question has been answered, Tonya. Several people have said why they think oak is unsuitable for flutes. I even warned why you shouldn't let your horse play an oak flute.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
But, has any of them played an Angus flute?
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by ain't fluffed
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
That wasn't the question. Wrong thread. Oak and ash will make flutes (you would probably have to oil them) but they should be avoided because.....
The question wasn't specifically about Angus flutes.
OK, the thread went wider than Skreech imagines the Limpopo river to be but it still got to the nitty-gritty.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
My post about Jonathan growing his own tree was me being mischievous. The smilie thing > >
Yes, of course the question as to why not oak or ash has been answered quite well. But, since Jonathan is looking into Angus flutes I cannot help but wonder if the purpleheart flute in any good. Maybe that's just me going off on some wide tangent.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by ain't fluffed
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"The Limpopo might be in Africa, but it is several hundred miles South of the tropics"
Not as wide as that tangent, Tonya.
"The approximate boundaries of the Soutpansberg Region include the Tropic of Capricorn to the south, the Limpopo River to the North, "
http://www.places.co.za/html/soutpansberg.html
I've worked with purpleheart, but never made wind instruments from it (not that I've made many wind instruments). I'm not that fond of it.
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Fair play, Weejie ~ about the purpleheart. I've always wondered why some flute makers use it.
Jonathan, I agree with those who are suggesting oak or ash is not your best choice for a flute. But, going from what Andy Sugden said on your previous thread it might be worth checking into an Angus flute in a more preferable wood. The price of £130.00 for the 2 piece purpleheart flute sounds like a very good price, if it's a good flute. I should mention purpleheart has caused a reaction in some people, though rare when it's just through contact with the wood (as opposed to sawdust). This site lists it as a sensitizer.
http://www.mimf.com/archives/toxic.htm
If it was myself I'd contact David Angus & see if he could make a 2 pc. flute in either Hondouran Rosewood or African Blackwood*, how long it might take, & the price.
* He makes some fifes which use those woods
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by ain't fluffed
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
>>."This particular tree grows in the Afromontane rainforests Moreover, it grows in Mozambique - what is the climate in Mozambique?"
According to your reference, the Northern limit for the species is the Limpopo river. Yes, part of Mozambique is South of the Limpopo. But that part of Mozambique is not in the tropics - it has seasonal weather.
>>"For a start, I was responding to your words "There are no conifers in the rainforests. "
You didn't say "Tropical rainforests"
No, but I was talking specifically about tropical timbers. I would have thought it was obvious to even an idiot that in that situation I was also talking specifically about tropical rain forests.
>>"North enough for you?
http://treephys.oxfordjournals.org/content/26/8/1043.full.pdf";
What exactly does a paper about growing Podocarpus Falcatus in a managed forest in Ethiopia tell us about whether
it grows in tropical rainforests or not? If you had actually read the paper you would have noticed a) that Munessa-Shashemene is a managed forest, and certainly not a rainforest (tropical or otherwise). And b) That that was a paper concernig exotic (ie non-native) species in the forest.
>>""Assessing the presence or absence of vessels is the foremost and simplest means of distinguishing hardwoods from softwoods. "
OK, I'll apologise for that one - I was taught that the two types of transport cells were tracheids and pores. I assumed 'vessels' referred to both, it seems it refers only to pores (which, as you rightly say, are not present in softwoods)
# Posted on January 8th 2012 by skreech
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
skreech said:
"Think about who first came up with the distinction between hard and softwoods, and who uses the classifications today. - Timber merchants selling wood to woodworkers. Woodworkers don't give a damn whether the tree had neegles or leaves, or cones or whatever. What they care about is the working properties of the wood. And that is why (and how) the timber merchants separate hard and softwoods."
For quite a number of years, I used to be on the Executive Board of an international timber merchants. I sold timber to distributors across the UK. I sourced many different types of timber to meet my customers' needs. I visited various timber growing and producing areas in the Baltics, Russia and Africa numerous times over the whole of the period of my involvement.
About all I need to say now is: you're wrong, skreech. Just wrong.
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"According to your reference, the Northern limit for the species is the Limpopo river. Yes, part of Mozambique is South of the Limpopo. But that part of Mozambique is not in the tropics - it has seasonal weather."
Ha ha.....The Tropic of Capricorn actually cuts through the Limpopo river - and Limpopo Province:
"Capricorn Region
Named after the Tropic of Capricorn, which passes through the northern section of Limpopo,"
http://www.golimpopo.com/limpopo/capricorn.html
"Several hundred miles" indeed!
"What exactly does a paper about growing Podocarpus Falcatus in a managed forest in Ethiopia tell us about whether
it grows in tropical rainforests or not? If you had actually read the paper you would have noticed a) that Munessa-Shashemene is a managed forest, and certainly not a rainforest (tropical or otherwise). And b) That that was a paper concernig exotic (ie non-native) species in the forest."
I did read it. I wasn't saying that the particular forest was a rainforest - just that it was further north than Mozambique - if you didn't know, both the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn pass through Mozambique. However, in the paper, it says (quite clearly) "a valuable indigenous tree species
(Podocarpus falcatus)" - you do know what "indigenous" means, don't you? That paper mentioned "exotic" and "indigenous" (foreign and native).
You'll really have to do better than that.
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"All experiments were conducted within 1 km of each other
at the same elevation, in a degraded NATURAL forest stand dominated
by P. falcatus"
http://treephys.oxfordjournals.org/content/26/8/1043.full.pdf
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
I learnt something today. Thanks!
I never realized the Tropic of Cancer passed through that part of Africa.
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by ain't fluffed
That's a grand total of 47° of latitude. Within a single country.
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by ain't fluffed
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
You are welcome, Tonya.
More for Skreech:
"In East Africa Afrocarpus falcatus occurs in forest in the mountains at 1500–2400(–3000) m altitude, often associated with Juniperus procera Hochst. ex Endl. It is characteristic for undifferentiated Afromontane forest, but it can also be found in rainforest."
http://database.prota.org/PROTAhtml/Afrocarpus%20falcatus_En.htm
[Synonyms
Podocarpus falcatus ]
A map there for you too.
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
>>"if you didn't know, both the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn pass through Mozambique."
Really? I'd love to see you google something to prove that.
Perhaps the tropic of cancer has migrated, because the whole of Mozambique is well South of the Equator?
>>"Ha ha.....The Tropic of Capricorn actually cuts through the Limpopo river - and Limpopo Province:"
Yes, The Limpopo cuts the tropic, but in South Africa, not Mozambique. The river then heads North east, and is well South of the tropic when it passes through Mozambique. (and Limpopo Provice is in South Africa, not Mozambique. Go and look at a map.
>>"I did read it. I wasn't saying that the particular forest was a rainforest - just that it was further north than Mozambique." Well then you were arguing with yourself, because it was you that posted the reference that stated that the Northern Limit of the Podocarpus Falcatus. I simply tokk what you had posted at face value, and pointed out that it didn't support the arguement that you were putting forward.
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by skreech
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Ha - silly me I meant to say "Equator" but Mozambique doesn't quite get there. I'm getting into bad geography too!
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
>>" I sourced many different types of timber to meet my customers' needs. I visited various timber growing and producing areas in the Baltics, Russia and Africa numerous times over the whole of the period of my involvement.
About all I need to say now is: you're wrong, skreech. Just wrong"
OK, so when your customers came to you and asked to buy some softwood, were they doing that because they needed timber with specific properties, or because it was important to them that the wood came from something that looked like a Christmas tree?
The bottom line is that it is the properties of the timber that are important, and although people have tried to tie it to specific botanical groups (evergreens, conifers, etc.) it never quite works - whatever botanical criteria you choose, there are always exceptions. So the only way to accurately classify any timber as a hard- or softwood is by looking at the parameter you are actually classifying - the cellular structure.
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by skreech
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"Yes, The Limpopo cuts the tropic, but in South Africa, not Mozambique. The river then heads North east, and is well South of the tropic when it passes through Mozambique. (and Limpopo Provice is in South Africa, not Mozambique. Go and look at a map."mozambique latitude
That is not relevant - point being that the Limpopo is actually not "several hundred miles away" from the Tropics.
If you look at the map of the distribution of Afrocarpus (Podocarpus) falcatus it shows it as a natural species right through Mozambique and right up to Ethiopia.
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"and Limpopo Provice is in South Africa, not Mozambique. Go and look at a map."
Did I say otherwise?
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
>>"If you look at the map of the distribution of Afrocarpus (Podocarpus) falcatus it shows it as a natural species right through Mozambique and right up to Ethiopia"
Well OK, then you are feeding me duff information - the first link you gave on the subject (this one: http://www.plantzafrica.com/plantnop/podocarpfalcat.htm ) says "Natural distribution
This tree occurs from the southern Cape, northwards to the Limpopo and also eastwards to Mozambique."
>>"Ha - silly me I meant to say "Equator" but Mozambique doesn't quite get there. I'm getting into bad geography too!"
"Doesn't quite" is a bit of an understatement - there is the Whole of Tanzania and half of Kenya in between - that's about four days hard driving!
Frankly, I don't give a damn where it grows. But you still haven't convinced me that conifers grow naturally in tropical rain forests.
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by skreech
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Sorry , bad editing - the sentence starting "frankly..." should appear directly below the paragraph with the link.
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by skreech
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Caledonia_rain_forests
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by ain't fluffed
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Uh, I have an idea.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFQhO3LWtQk
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by Toppish
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"that's about four days hard driving!"
That's a bit of an assumption. It's well under 800 nautical miles, I reckon. It was an understatement, but four days is a bit of an overstatement. Who said anything about driving on land?
It's not far, relatively speaking. Even by land.
"Well OK, then you are feeding me duff information - the first link you gave on the subject (this one: http://www.plantzafrica.com/plantnop/podocarpfalcat.htm ) says "Natural distribution
This tree occurs from the southern Cape, northwards to the Limpopo and also eastwards to Mozambique"
Yes, it did - see that bit about "northwards to Limpopo"? That doesn't say "Limpopo river in Mozambique" - anyway, you didn't say "tropical rainforest" - you said "rainforest" and there are several other species of conifer that grow in rainforests.
It transpires that the particular species is even more widespread than it first appeared.
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Thanks for that link, Tonya - and sorry for not taking the hint concerning my massive blunder.
Anyway, back to pedantry.
Taking the reference point from the northernmost point of Mozambique to the Equator, as the crow flies (which is most relevant), the distance using John Byers' calculator is (rounded to two decimal places):
1163.056 Km - 722.69 Miles - 628 Nautical miles
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
And that has nothing to do with oak flutes.
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
So long as your horse doesn't pick up the wrong flute things should be just fine. That's what they say, at least.
;)
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by ain't fluffed
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
I don't have a horse, but my neighbour's horse is pretty nifty at playing the ney.
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Good grief, what have I started . . . ?!
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by Jonathan
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
I read an argument somewhere above that the choice of blackwood, rosewood, cocus and boxwood was to do with the timber rotting due to permeability? Don't know if anyone answered it and can't be bothered to wade thru all that guff but...
Is not oak used for boatbuilding? What about oak timbers found in bogs etc. Seems to have good longevity even after the tree is felled.
And what of larch? - well known for use in trailers etc., due to its rot resistance.
Nobody has explained use of boxwood yet? It definitely absorbs moisture very readily.
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by the wounded hussar
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"Is not oak used for boatbuilding? "
If you can get it - yes. It's used for various reasons, but none of them involve setting up a vibrating column of air. Some of the problems with it is due to the tannic acid content - it isn't a great idea to use steel nails or screws in the timber as they corrode (not a problem if you are using copper boat nails). It is also liable to warp.
Larch is a softwood, of course (that might start a converstion) and it bends well, but it's not a great wood for turning (oak isn't the best either). I would imagine maintaining a sharp edged embouchure hole would be a problem. Longevity is not the biggest issue as oils etc can be employed (elm withstands constant exposure to water well - it was traditionally used for bog seats, but it's not the best for fine turnery - greenheart is used in submerged portions of piers etc, but it splinters easily - African blackwood withstands wet, but it also turns well - bar those "abnormalities" that crop up).
It's surprising how many woods will make flutes, but the less dense varieties, I've found, need oiling before they'll even play (though all woods should be oiled - the dense timbers will play straight away).
Boxwood turns readily and it its capabilities for retaining clean-edged holes is good. Generally, the traditional woods used for instruments are used for a reason, and many are not used for a reason.
I've found that rhododendron wood turns very much like box, but it is difficult to find long, straight and large section pieces. I'm not sure of the toxicity situation, either.
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
I was going to mention Rhododendron. Nice wood. Evergreen. Hardwood.
(Yes, there are species of Rhododendron which are deciduous, but they're not typically the best for wood.)
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
An uilleann pipe maker, the late Tom White from Co Wexford used to play a flute he made from bog oak (possibly another bog wood but he said it was bog oak).
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
There was someone around the Carrbridge area who made fiddles out of bog oak. Another person who made GHB sets.
Quite a different thing when it has gone through the process of becoming bog oak. I'd always be wary of cracking though.
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Which bits of the fiddle would you use the bog oak for? Back and ribs, I guess. You'd still need softwood for the belly wouldn't you?
# Posted on January 9th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
I never saw one, so I'm not sure if the wood was even used for the ribs - would bog oak bend readily? I've never worked with it. I would imagine that the belly would be a softwood. I've seen hardingfele tops made from birch though.
# Posted on January 10th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Then again, perhaps the maker avoided bending the ribs like this guy:
http://www.clondanaghcottage.com/music/dinan.html
# Posted on January 10th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
http://www.clondanaghcottage.com/music/dinan.html
Doesn't answer the "which bits?" question, and is indeed irritatingly vague. I'm easily irritated, though.
# Posted on January 10th 2012 by Slightly Mad Scientist
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Cross-post; should have known I'd be out-googled.
# Posted on January 10th 2012 by Slightly Mad Scientist
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"An uilleann pipe maker, the late Tom White from Co Wexford used to play a flute he made from bog oak "
Yuk. I wouldn't want to blow down a flute made from an old toilet seat.
# Posted on January 10th 2012 by Steve Shaw
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Thanks Weejie, you've obviously tried your hand at a few. Re rhododendron there's ongoing work parties in various parts of Ireland to try and clear this out of old woodlands to allow them to regenerate - the rhodo tends to a dense shrub layer that denies natural tree seedlings access to light and life. Maybe the OPW should get together with some of the instrument makers instead of presumably burning the stuff!
# Posted on January 10th 2012 by the wounded hussar
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Rhododendron is also now a huge problem in Snowdonia, further southwards in Wales and also in Cornwall. It would be great to harvest and use whatever wood is useable, but expensive to do, I would think. Plus, some of the control methods used involve herbicides, and some of these will, i believe, render the wood less useable.
# Posted on January 10th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
There used to be a few clips on yertube of Michael Dinan playing the 'Russian' fiddle (called so because of the balalaika shape). He was wellknown for that type of fiddle. I have seen rectangular 'box' fiddles too, including one Bobby Casey supposedly started on.
My impression of bog oak is that it is too prone to splitting and is generally too long in the grain for the purpose of flute and fiddle making, there are other trees buried in the bogs (the drowned forests around the shore like in Quilty or Rinevella bay in Clare are mostly oak though) though and my impression is they are all called 'bog oak' whether they are or not. So the wood used in the fiddles may well be bog larch or something else.
# Posted on January 10th 2012 by Prof. Prlwytzkofski
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
There was a plentiful supply of rhodie wood on the isle of Arran some years back. I used to go across with a big rucksack and collect it. After some years of seasoning, I began to experiment with it. Not bad for fiddle pegs - I meant to make a tailpiece with it but never got round to it. I made a few chisel and gouge handles though, and piccolo and a couple of fipple flutes (tussefløyter).
I was told the rhodie logs are not so common on Arran now - much of it was burned and a lot rotted away.
"Thanks Weejie, you've obviously tried your hand at a few"
Small flutes (piccolo size) and fifes - some whistles too. I had ideas of moving from stringed instruments to pipes and flutes, but haven't got there yet. Not likely to either, with the old age coming on....
# Posted on January 10th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
" my impression is they are all called 'bog oak' whether they are or not"
That's quite possible, Prof. I got the same impression from the way some of the Scottish "bog oak" workers talk of the wood.
# Posted on January 10th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
With porous wood it's a matter of lining the barrel with varnish etc.
personally I'm not keen on purple heart and would rate it along with oak for turning . I use boxwood, Blackwood and ebony .
Rhodie emits poisonous smoke when burnt green , containing cyanide. Its possible to even smell it when cutting the wood fresh. As a turner I use woods that I enjoy the feel of turning and boxwood is my favourite.
# Posted on January 10th 2012 by piobagusfidil
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Grayanotoxin is the thing to be wary of in rhodie plants.
http://www.drugfuture.com/chemdata/grayanotoxins.html
I've heard people talk of the fumes being poisonous, but it didn't stop the council burning all the plants they had eradicated from the Arran landscape. I've not read anything 100% reliable about the presence of cyanide - it's present in small quantities in bitter almond stones and other fruit stones, and I think, prunus species.
"It should be stressed that many woods are toxic and repeated exposure to any wood smoke is a health
risk. Rhododendron probably does not constitute a significantly greater hazard than other woods all of
which should be treated with respect."
Under "toxicity" here:
http://www.wildresources.co.uk/reports/rhodo_eng.pdf
I wouldn't let your horse play a rhodie flute, or one made of oak.
# Posted on January 10th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Just in case your horse ignores the warning:
http://www.ivis.org/advances/Beasley/Cpt14c/IVIS.pdf
Welcome back, piobagus, BTW.
# Posted on January 10th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Not quite so bad if you're a horse. But your cow definitely shouldn't be playing your Rhododendron flute, I see.
# Posted on January 10th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Ah, but the cow ate the piper......
# Posted on January 10th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Aye, I see there is more concern with ruminants in that paer, but equine beasties do get a mention:
"Also donkeys exhibited tachycardia, dyspnea, green froth around the mouth, minimal gut activity, paralysis, and inability to open their
jaws. Paralysis subsided after four days."
Most of the horses and donkeys in my session get like that after a few reels anyway.
# Posted on January 10th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
There's someone who's a complete ass in the session I used to frequent. Sadly, they don't play flute, or I'd source them one. Mind, it's debatable what they do 'play'.
# Posted on January 10th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
I keep trying to get my horse interested in playing Irish music, just the whistle as a start, but she doesn't seem interested.
If anyone has any advice for how to get her playing the whistle, it would be appreciated.
http://www.box.com/s/o487hm0a1t211md7tseg
http://www.box.com/s/60omt7ea4nraun74g4o3
http://www.box.com/s/smgpqlhkj2rzc6mlg1to
# Posted on January 11th 2012 by DrSilverSpear
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Well, first you need to get her a really expensive whistle, and don't bridle at the price. Hay! It's in a good course. And you should ignore all the neigh-sayers and general asses. Donkey'p on at her and don't nag her - just encourage her gently, that's the mane thing. Don't let her get the whip hand though, or she'll reguarly stirrup trouble.
Oh, and there's an obvious tune to start her on:
http://www.thesession.org/tunes/display/307
# Posted on January 12th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
Strap two G whistles together and you'll have a GG whistle,
# Posted on January 12th 2012 by Weejie
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
A B whistle, in German nomenclature, pronounced by a French person, might be an Ash whistle. Or you could just get her an Oak.
Da-Daar!
# Posted on January 12th 2012 by ethical blend
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
I have tried an oak and an Ash Fife and The tone and volume are excellent.
The Reenactment group I play with have Oak Fifes in the Key o D and we are very happy with them. We chose Oak because it would be authentic with the period we reenact.
The Fifes are of good quality and they are all in tune
I would not judge any instrument by its price.
Maybe Angus Fifes instruments are very under- priced
# Posted on January 28th 2012 by Davy Fifes
Re: Oak / ash flutes ~ what's up with them?
"Oak because it would be authentic with the period we reenact"
That'll be the "Oak Period" then.....
# Posted on January 28th 2012 by Weejie