Talk:Western concert flute

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 January 2022 and 30 April 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lhund (article contribs).

Flute or Fife?

It is impossible to play a flute while dressed as a colonial american because that makes your flute a fife. I think the video should be removed or put on the "fife" article --XXxJediKnightxXx (talk) 05:15, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Concur with the above, it's clearly a fife. Andrewpetergoss (talk) 05:17, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

List of flautists

I don't consider Robert Dick a jazz flutist; rather, a modernist (post-modernist?) classical flautist who uses extended techniques. Speaking of which, there used to be a list of classical flutists, probably in the "flute" article. What happened to it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 151.202.113.114 (talk • contribs) .

Are you maybe thinking of the list at Flautist? --Craig Stuntz 12:36, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Playing a Western Concert Flute

However well-intentioned, the material contained within this section pushes the boundaries of NPOV and original research. Many players have a strong view on how the instrument should be played, but there is no consensus. Any advice for students on vibrato, etc. is misplaced - see WP:NOT. If it belongs anywhere, it's somewhere like wikibooks. Parts are brutally oversimplified, for example, even among musicians where there is a broad consensus of what constitutes a good tone, there are as many "correct" embouchures as there are types of lips: [1].

Other parts are liable to confuse a reader: "All things being equal, a breathy sound is preferable to a pinched sound, but an efficient approach to air stream direction is best."

And parts are simply "off the wall" like the section on outdoor marching!

In all, I think that this section needs to have a chainsaw taken to it. –– Pathlessdesert 17:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Moving text

It seams like the first two paragraphs under the heading "description" actually belong under the heading "Playing a Western Concert Flute". I thought that this should be agreed upon, before any decisions were made. J Hill 13:12, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Failed GA

This article failed the GA noms due to lack of inline citations. Tarret 21:30, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Alto flute

Alto flute redirects here, but there is no information of note on them in this article. Adam Cuerden ^talk 21:55, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Also, I believe your date of invention for Bass flutes is wrong by several decades: I have old orchestration books mentioning them. Adam Cuerden ^talk 21:57, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Good article candidacy

This article contains only three citations.. Consider adding more; article quality looks very good! Firsfron of Ronchester 02:16, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

The new references added to this article appear to be the same web-site. Although many references were added, they all come from the same source material. I would have liked to have seen different sources used. While the overall quality of the article is good, at this time, I do not believe the citations used satisfy the criteria laid out at WP:GA. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:43, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

What are you talking about? There are like 12 citations and also books listed... Another thing, only facts that need citations need citations... (if you get what I mean). Cbrown1023 05:04, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

As I said, the new references added to this article appear to be the same web-site, listed 10 times. Although many references were added, they all come from the same source material. I wouldn't call the same source cited over and over a good example of citation. You are free to find another opinion, but I personally could not in good faith pass this article, as I do not feel that three in-line citations (because that's what it is: three web-sites) is "enough" for an article of this length. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:31, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

There is enough material for inline quotes, but lack of wiki tooling makes inline references harder to do. --121.45.246.110 13:49, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

The range of the flute is not correct in most tutor books the fingerings are only taught up to the C7 (3 octaves above middle C on the piano)

Though most student books go to C8 on fingering charts, experienced flutists can use alternate fingerings to reach above C7 to notes as high as C8. J Hill 15:02, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree with J Hill. Is there any way we can change this, although I know no one has posted in a few weeks?--Dark Kubrick 11:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Page move

The page move from "Western concert flute" to "Flute (Western concert)" was very bad and I don't see that it was discussed here first. The new title is horribly cumbersome. Badagnani 03:05, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

I completely agree.--Dark Kubrick 10:59, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I also agree. LT marching flute 01:18, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it's been awkward-seeming to me too, so I moved it back. Stan 03:02, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus to move the page, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 05:27, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

---

While the term "western concert flute" may sound technically correct, all of the references in the article, most of the text in the article and overwhelmingly common usage is to call the transverse western concert flute simply "flute". There are an underwhelming number of references to "western concert flute" in musical literature. Google hits about 3000, compared to 22 million for "flute", overwhelmingly meaning the modern shiny instrument played worldwide. Agree that "Flute (Western Concert)" does not sound nice, but "Western Concert flute" is far worse and not in common usage in the modern world.--Blouis79 20:47, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

"Flute" is currently occupied by a short article that tries to cover the gamut of flute history and multicultural instruments, based on those being members of the flute family. Most of the non-western flutes have their own particular names. The List of Woodwinds has "Flute" as a subcategory of "flutes" and "western concert flute" as a subcategory of "flute" which is all a bit of a classification shambles. --Blouis79 22:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Consider the consequences of the move though - if this is at "flute", then where does the general description of flutes worldwide go? "flute (not Western concert)"? There isn't an alternate term that is more general. (Would "flute family" make sense to anybody?) Stan 18:52, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Flute family of instruments? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:00, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

or even simply "Flutes" which has an existing redirect and complies with Wikipedia guidelines in Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(plurals) in section "Exceptions": Category names are usually pluralized, see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (categories). The article "Flute" would contain a disambiguation link to the "Flutes" article. The major consequence is that most people will find exactly what they are looking for. --Blouis79 05:36, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

In WP, "categories" are fundamentally different from "articles", and have different conventions. It's rare to have an article that is pluralized, and even rarer for singular and plural versions to have different content - for one thing, wiki-linkers expect [[foobar]]s and [[foobars]] to take readers to the same place. Stan 14:43, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, sorry misinterpreted the word category which is special to Wikipedia.--Blouis79 21:30, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

What about "Flute (family of instruments)" for the rest of the flutes--Blouis79 21:30, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose Flute looks like a good summary article. What's the problem? Ewlyahoocom 08:17, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

The problem has been well documented above. Isn't a "summary article" according to the guideline supposed to be an actual summary? The detailed acoustics part would more properly belong in the detailed "western concert flute"/flute article leaving a true short summary in its place.--Blouis79 11:23, 6 November 2007 (UTC)--Blouis79 11:23, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

• Support and Comment. Another possibility is to move this article to transverse flute: despite the wording of the intro, this is not restricted to the C flute, and the video from Williamsburg seems to even show a wooden flute. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 15:04, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
• Neutral and Comment I agree with the above suggestion by Septentrionalis. "transverse flute" or its native equivalent appears to be used in more than a few cultures or situations where the term is ambiguous. Verdatum 18:06, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose there are enough references floating around of other things in the English speaking world also called flutes that I don't think the association is automatic. 132.205.99.122 19:35, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
• Support, but with some reservations. It seems to me that the really clunky part of the present title involves the word "Western". Isn't that a bit redundant? I mean, the expression "concert flute" is quite common and, as far as I am aware, is absolutely identical in meaning (are there such things as Eastern/Northern/Southern concert flutes?). Septentrionalis's suggestion of "transverse flute" has the drawback of implying historical European flutes (from the 16th to 18th centuries), together with many of the world flute types in a context where they are being contrasted with duct flutes, notch flutes, globe flutes, etc. Another possibility not yet considered is the widely used "orchestral flute", though this would imply exclusion of the earlier flute types (through the 18th century, at least) presently included in the article.--Jerome Kohl 20:29, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I thought "orchestral flute" (1100 Google hits)referred to the practice of playing orchestral music flute parts, as distinct from jazz flute, rock flute, classical flute etc.--Blouis79 21:31, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose. The western concert flute is a neologism; The normal name is concert flute. Andrewa 06:48, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Concert flute hits about 43,000 articles in Google. (22million for the usual shiny silver modern instrument.) Please quote a substantial reference that uses other than "Flute" as the term. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blouis79 (talk • contribs) 20:56, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment: My claim is mainly based on more than forty years' experience in arranging for and playing the thing - not very well I admit - and the conversations that have taken place in that time, and the annotations I've read and made on sheet music and the like. It's true that it's also often simply called flute on these documents. C flute is the other term often used, to distinguish it from instruments such as the Bb and Eb flutes used in school flute bands. I guess I can dig out a student primer or syllabus that uses concert flute in the title and/or introduction if that helps. But I don't think it will help... the point is more that the term flute is also used for many other purposes, such as in the title of The Magic Flute, the song that goes I'd play the flute or play the harp..., and many, many more that don't mean the modern orchestral instrument. And I suspect that if you look more closely you'll find that many of your 22 million are in that category too. No change of vote. Andrewa 17:44, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose, but I wouldn't mind moving this to consert flute (some asian flutas are also called "transverse flute" so that's not a good name). Flute is often used to refer to a recorder or any non-western type of flute. Narayanese 09:43, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
• The " (modern) concert flute" or "Böhm system flute (in C)" is a member of the "flute family", something that no discussion on Wikpedia can change. Pride in our instrument is a fine thing but a vice versa principle does not apply here. Other members of the flute family include the recorder, the traverso, the penny whistle, technically most pipes on the organ, pop bottles and any other instrument where the sound is produced by setting up an edge tone based on the principles of Bernuli, Coanda and Venturi.
  If contributers to Wikpedia need any help on this subject I suggest they look at the work of Benade and Coltman —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.202.101.164 (talk) 19:10, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose per "Flute looks like a good summary article." Also, "The normal name is concert flute" feels right. — Sebastian 20:47, 12 November 2007 (UTC)    (I am open to changing or amending this vote or statement. If you feel facts changed sufficiently after I posted this, please let me know, as I may not be watching this page.)
• Weak oppose a move to flute per above; not sure about rename. Weak because "flute" probably does mean the Western concert flute for most people (and incoming links), yet placing a summary article there is clearly less POV by making fewer assumptions about geographic and historical scope. Regarding potential names, transverse flute seems like the most widely-used name (other than the highly ambiguous "flute"), but Narayanese points out that it is still ambiguous. Transverse flute is used in nearly all of the interwiki links (see, for example, de:Flöte and de:Querflöte; fr:Flûte and fr:Flûte traversière; es:Flauta and es:Flauta traversa; and others). Concert flute seems reasonable. Alas, flute family is also ambiguous, because it is often used meaning the grouping of different-size variants of the "Western concert flute," such as alto and bass flutes, similar to something like "saxophone family." Also, the acoustics section should definitely stay in the article it's in (whatever the title), Pace Blouis79's suggestion, as it contrasts different flutes, not just the concert flute. Rigadoun (talk) 07:33, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose. "Western concert flute" is probably flute to a majority of readers but its pretty blatant geobias, recentism, class bias, & whatever else you can dredge up at WP:BIAS. Of course if you listen to Western concert music, the "Western concert flute" is "the flute." However, if you partake of dizi music instead, it's not. There are just too many other flutes out there in space and time to justify this move. The current title is awkward but I don't have another suggestion since the dizi is also a transverse flute and a concert flute. — AjaxSmack 09:06, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Alternate proposal

So, how do people feel about concert flute as the article name, as I foreshadowed above? Rationale:

• The overwhelming majority of English speakers would know no special name for this instrument, they'd simply call it a flute, but that's not a good title and has failed to reach any sort of consensus support.
• The overwhelming majority of flute students, teachers, arrangers etc would use the term concert flute for this specific instrument (and would also recognise the term C flute but it's not the normal term).
• The current article name western concert flute is a neologism and has also failed to attract consensus support.

But we do need to call the article something, and IMO it should be something other than the current title. Andrewa 17:58, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

The article does not need renaming, it should be edited to simply link to more info. It is a reference to the Boehm system flute that is a member of the flute family and is clumsy and misleading in it's current form. My suggestion is to leave the article title but edit the body to the following-

• "Western concert flute- A term commonly applied to the Boehm system flute of 1847. The design with very few modifications is still the most common choice of flute in Western Classical and Jazz music today. Instruments are mass-produced in several countries with the weight of production in East Asia, but there are still indiviuals and smaller companies that make instruments by hand. The most common materials used are metal, but instruments are also produced in wood and man-made materials."
• The link to existing Wikipedia articles on the "Boehm system" and "flute" should cover any other need for more information. I am not logged in (don't know how) but am happy to discuss these points if you look me up on the Yahoo groups Flutenet or Galway-Flute-Chat. Both groups have members with a great deal of knowledge in this field who I am sure would be happy to discuss this too. Dean S.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.202.101.164 (talk • contribs)

It's not a critical issue IMO, this particular article name is not all that bad. The problem is more that people will see it and say, "well, obviously WP:NC and WP:UE don't matter too much, they've been ignored here", and as a result we'll get article names that are really woeful neologisms coined in good faith, and then have to waste time and/or lose goodwill sorting them out.

But that's assuming that Western concert flute is a neologism. You say it's A term commonly applied... and several people other people have claimed or implied it too, but nobody has produced a citeable reference to back this up. Are there any? Produce them, and it solves everything. And beware of Google, this is just the sort of thing that Google can get badly wrong. Google is evidence, certainly, but it's no substitute for a good secondary source. Andrewa 00:31, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm surprised that no-one has yet invoked the New Grove. The main article there is simply "Flute", with two main divisions: I. "General", covering acoustics, classification, and distribution (a fairly extensive survey of world flute types), and II. "Western transverse flute". Under the latter heading is found (amongst other things) "The modern flute", "Other members of the family", and a "History" section which begins—for Europe—with the 10th century. (Earlier history is covered in the "didtribution" portion of the frst main division.) So, according to this authority, at least, "Western transverse flute" and "modern flute" are accepred terms, but "Western concert flute" is nowhere mentioned.—Jerome Kohl 02:04, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Western transverse flute might be a possibility on the strength of this. Modern flute seems more like a description to me... but that line is blurred, what is an accepted term today was a description when first used, and a neologism when first promoted.

And perhaps we do need to go with a descriptive title here, if there's no accepted term, which is looking a distinct possibility. And that's surprising to many of us I think! I've always simply called it a concert flute when it was necessary to distinguish it from the Bb flutes and piccolo I've also played from time to time. Andrewa 12:59, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

IMSLP link

As the IMSLP is temporarily down, I am adding the missing info here. When it goes back up, it should be put back into the article:

*[http://imslp.org/wiki/User:Clark_Kimberling/Historical_Notes_1 Access to IMSLP 12 collections of 1000 free downloadable flute/recorder solos,] with historical notes

♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 18:16, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Playing range down to B or C?

As a flute player, I always thought the flute could not play under the grave C. The article says it can go down to grave B. Am I wrong, and in case I am, I would be interested in learning the key combination. Ppchailley (talk) 15:11, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Some flutes have a B extension. Not sure how new the development is (I'd like to know more myself!), but it's new enough and unstandard enough that one is only likely to find it in 'contemporary' works, and stuff like jazz performances where there's no written standard. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 15:21, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, some flutes do have a B extension. Some music pieces that include the flute have some low B notes. I don't know anymore reasons why the flute can have a B extension.chessmate92 (talk) 16:32, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Confusion about "concert" flute

A fatal flaw in this article is the misuse of "Western concert flute". There is much confusion about this term.

In the history of European flutes, concert flute is the term used to describe the standard size flute, the flute in C, the (or a) flute at concert pitch (i.e., not transposing). So a proper use of the term is, for example, in "I have a piccolo, an alto flute and a concert flute".

The article inaccurately uses "concert flute" to mean the "modern flute", which is more properly called the Boehm flute, or Boehm system flute. It is the members of the Boehm flute family that are listed about half way down the article, not the "concert flute family".

The term concert flute was and is still (accurately) used to mean a standard size flute of any system, not just the Boehm system.

Rickwik (talk) 02:12, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

You are right, and you are wrong. The title of this article has been contentious for some time now, and I agree that "concert flute" can refer to what the Italians term the flauto grande. But you are wrong that this article is about the Boehm flute only. I suggest you read the article first, before making such a claim.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 05:14, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the article is not only about the Boehm flute. Also, the term concert flute is at times used correctly. Rickwik (talk) 03:06, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Removed a lot

I removed a lot of material - POV, how-to, off-topic stuff that can be found in links to other articles, and some unsourced stuff that read more like a middle-school book report than an encyclopedia article. This article could use a lot more trimming. I have no desire to offend other editors' sensibilities - just being bold in starting that process. - Special-T (talk) 21:23, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Wood v metal?

The article mentions in many places, directly and indirectly, the move from making flutes of wood to making them of metal, with a remark that this is an "innovation".

I know absolutely nothing at all about western wind instruments, or any (non-percussion) instrument made of metal. Would it be appropriate to say in the article why this change occurred, and/or what benefits it had? It's not at all obvious to me that metal is a better material than wood for a Western concert flute, or even after I'm told this fact, to come up with the reason it might be better.

The article does briefly mention flutes made out of modern composite materials, which almost suggests to me that durability could be a concern, yet every western flute player I've seen has a hard case, and most of the non-western flute players I've known with wooden flutes have "soft" cases, and if durability was the deciding factor for the material used to make flutes, I would have expected the opposite from their cases.  :-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.232.11.50 (talk) 06:07, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Offset G versus In-line G

The article seems to contain a contradiction about the pros and cons of offset G versus in-line G. Are there any definitive references out there as to the relative manufacturing costs? I can see why in-line G might use less material (one less rod) but it looks a lot more complex to me. You have to put the functionality of the short rod into the main rod somehow. Thoughts? (Some random Google search results: Discussion http://www.8notes.com/f/25_166891.asp This one seems quite good http://www.miyazawa.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=33&Itemid=61 and it has nice clear drawings comparing the two) Woz2 (talk) 12:49, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Head Joint

I have noticed at music school concerts one or two small children playing what appears to be a C flute, but with the curved head of the alto. Am I mistaken, or is it possible to either marry an alto head to a C body, or else to purchase curved heads for a normal flute? If indeed a C flute can be played with a curved head, then perhaps the main article should mention it. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 13:17, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Before Middle-Ages

Hello, sorry I am very bad by using the pc and wikipedia, but I have something interesting about its history. If you want, you can add it. --- The transverse flute was played in Italy and Europe ever since the Etruscan and Roman times. You can find a representation of transverse flute in the cinerarium of Volumni, IInd century BCE; on the coin of Cesarea Paneas of 169 AD; in the Faun statue kept in the Museum of Rome; in the Roman fresco of Magdalensberg, in Tyrol. Other Roman representations of transverse flute of the 1st century AD can be found in the Domus Aurea in Rome. Source: "Il flauto traverso storia, tecnica, acustica" by Gianni Lazzari, Emilio Galante, EDT, I manuali EDT/SIdM (Publishing House), page 5. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.20.86.101 (talk) 19:23, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

This material might find a home in the more general article Flute. Since the present article focuses primarily on European flutes from the Baroque period to the present time, it is probably sufficient to mention generally that there were flutes in Europe before the 17th century, and let it go at that. Besides, as the broader article notes, by the time the Etruscans came along, the flute already had a very long history in Europe.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 21:34, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Boehm - popular at first or not?

The 2 adjacent sections on Boehm seem contradictory. The first says the Boehm system was not popular until about 40 years after its invention. The next section says it was immediately popular. Wlexxx (talk) 18:22, 14 December 2016 (UTC)wlexxx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wlexxx (talk • contribs) 18:03, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps in geological terms, forty years is scarcely worth mentioning? I have marked the contradiction in the text. Well spotted, and thank you for bringing this up!—Jerome Kohl (talk) 18:32, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Scale change in the 80s?

Was there not a general industry-wide change in the scale (Deveaux, Cooper) in the 70s or 80s? I don't know enough to add info to the article, but I'm sure someone else does (and has refs). Seems like a pretty important thing to include. Special-T (talk) 17:47, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Many flute articles are poorly sourced and promotional

I am suprised that this version of Subcontrabass flute contains so many promotional stuff. I highly suspect someone added Jelle Hogenhuis to five flute articles for promotional reasons. All minor flute type (flute articles excluding piccolo, alto and bass flute) article does not contain enough reference. Another example: "New solo and chamber music is being composed almost every day for contrabass flute", I highly doubt is that really true. If we can't fix that many, I suggest we request for deletion for those articles.

Sorry for the bad grammar. QiuLiming1 (talk) 20:17, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

No, the articles won't be deleted on the basis of promotional material or poorly sourced information, especially considering that the instruments are highly notable. Why not help improve those pages? Why? I Ask (talk) 20:44, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

@Why? I Ask Ok, but is subcontrabass flute really highly notable? QiuLiming1 (talk) 05:05, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Yes, a quick Google Books or Scholar search reveals many mentions. Why? I Ask (talk) 17:02, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Sorry I don't know the history of flutes so well, I could only stubify those pages but not improving, that's why I ask for help on the talk page. QiuLiming1 (talk) 05:07, 23 July 2022 (UTC)