My (limited) understanding of the physics of HJ/embouchure cut is that some geometries enhance one aspect (say the ease of playing the highest notes) at the expense of another aspect (say a full, easy response in the low register.)

Playing different headjoints seems to reinforce that idea, one HJ might be best at one aspect, another HJ best at another. Bottom line, you have to play them to make the decision as to which one is preferred.

Great question Suzie - perhaps I have bought an extremely rare hj? *grin*

Glad you're intrigued John and glad you responded! - not to worry though - Thanks to many on this board I have gathered enough info and direction to feel much more comfortable in making reasonably informed purchasing decisions.

Questions now come primarily for pure interest and extended knowledge, as part of my vocation involves industrial ultrasonics (steels and aluminum primarily) so this foray into the realm of sonics is a bit of a treat for me. It's been quite a while since I was involved in 'classroom' so pls bear with me as I attempt to sort things out.

It's true that metal hardness (which directly affects sound velocity) will affect attenuation and reflection, with softer metals offering the greatest attenuation (or absorbtion), and harder metals providing greater transmission. Reflection due to the the air-to-metal interface is a function of the velocity of sound for the given metal, the velocity of sound in the ambient air, and the angle of attack of the projected sound to the interface. (lip plate location and orifice size and shape would certainly affect the angle)

"The thought behind this is that the thicker the metal, then the harder the metal" - this one would be a misnomer, as metal hardness is independant of thickness. It is a function purely of alloy composition, heat treating, and mechanical processing. You would expect to see an increase in desired hardness as thickness decreases in order to provide structural strength and rigidity, otherwise you may have an instrument that could easily be deformed in general use. Softer materials would require increased thickness to provide the same "strength".

Lower frequencies (longer wavelength) have more 'penetrating power' and show less attenuation than higher frequencies as thickness increases.

Based on this, I would expect that thinner, harder walls would result in higher tones, and thicker/softer in lower tones.

BUT - I haven't had my second coffee yet...

Cheers for now!

<Added>

*second coffee kicks in*

"Reflection due to the the air-to-metal interface is a function of the velocity of sound for the given metal...." should be acoustic impedance rather than velocity, although A.I. and velocity are directly related.

I have said on this forum many times, and I will say it again, whatever you try, try it blindfolded, and record yourself with good audio, if possible..

The thought behind this is that the thicker the metal, then the harder the metal" - this one would be a misnomer, as metal hardness is independant of thickness. It is a function purely of alloy composition, heat treating, and mechanical processing.

Yes, I agree this is a misnomer. I did not mean to say it was true. I did intend to mean that most people think this way. Which is why I went on to say adding different metals produces differnet results.

That is a good suggestion Patrick, and one we will use should the opportunity arise. Play testing certainly seems to be the most sure fire way to achieve the sound best suited to personal taste, as all with experience have agreed. It seems Kara, Suzie and Tibble have all had the good fortune to try out a number of hj.
Thanks for confirming that there can trade-offs involved beyond simply the tone when comparing hjs Tibble!

I was sure you weren't personally suggesting that, John

Let's wait for Joe's response before I get distracted and delve deeper into metallurgy, as that would most likely be better suited for it's own string.

BTW - mama's favorite player is Ian Anderson - anybody know what he plays?

<Added>

Patrick, could you relate the process you went thru before finding the Jack Moore that made you happy? Can you remember which you tried prior, and what liked or did not like about them? And just what was it that made you fall for the Moore?

The same question goes out to Arabians with the Yamaha EC, Suzie with her PH-7. Kara, Annie and Tibble - we don't know your favorites yet, so perhaps you could be so kind as to share that, and the process that led to it?

As this is a question of taste, obviously there are no wrong answers :)

good question, I had the opportunity to try it and it fit nicely on my vintage Haynes, the depth of the tone matches the warmth of the Haynes as does the tradional cut embouchure hole, which is slightly undercut... I also tried a Powell, which was great, but didn't fit as well..basically, I love the way it blended with my flute, I was sold by the timbre and vibration...

It's true that metal hardness (which directly affects sound velocity) will affect attenuation and reflection, with softer metals offering the greatest attenuation (or absorbtion), and harder metals providing greater transmission. Reflection due to the the air-to-metal interface is a function of the velocity of sound for the given metal, the velocity of sound in the ambient air, and the angle of attack of the projected sound to the interface. (lip plate location and orifice size and shape would certainly affect the angle)

There are a lot of factors missing here. Hardness is not the issue, stiffness is. Sufficiently rigid is the criteria. Flute wall thicknesses vis-a-vis materials are at the edge of sufficiently rigid. The player who is driving this system can cross thresholds of combinations of materials / thicknesses to create situations that are not sufficiently rigid. Those individual scenarios become problematic. (Meaning...that's not the right flute for you.)

"The thought behind this is that the thicker the metal, then the harder the metal" - this one would be a misnomer, as metal hardness is independant of thickness.

Yes,but only in light of my above statement. That is why Gold flute tubes are thinner than silver tubes in general.

It is a function purely of alloy composition, heat treating, and mechanical processing. You would expect to see an increase in desired hardness as thickness decreases in order to provide structural strength and rigidity, otherwise you may have an instrument that could easily be deformed in general use. Softer materials would require increased thickness to provide the same "strength".

Once again, it is simply a matter of sufficiently rigid to work.

Based on this, I would expect that thinner, harder walls would result in higher tones, and thicker/softer in lower tones.

There are many other variables to consider that have more of an impact however. As far as relative strengths of various partials within a sound that produce a particular sound character, (or sound recipe as it is sometimes referred to in acoustics) this is applicable. Also note thought that this will vary by player because of other more influential variables to the air column. But as far as any ONE player is concerned, this is certainly the case.

When I think of physics, this seems to make some sense, as while the velocity of sound through 2 joints of the same metal will be the same, the frequency of the transmitted sound may change as a function of change in thickness. If this is so, do the joints we have seen described have different thickness? And if they do, do the joints described as "dark" have thicker walls than the joints described as "bright"? If so, it could suggest that personal change in direction may be aided by a comparison of wall thickness (all other things being equal)

Not exactly, you are leaving out other principles which negate this suggestion. The presence of a boundary layer between the standing wave and the flute walls is the missing piece. Friction here is what warms the flute body when played and the change in temperature can alter the frequency. But that is not due to wall thickness.

Amount of total Mass in the system is another consideration as opposed to thickness. Thickness merely points to other properties already discussed, namely Stiffness and Mass.

Hope that helps.

Joe B

Puzzle,
I liked the Prima Sankyo NRS-1 best in my trial of just a few HJ's -a Yamaha EC, CY, and SY, I think it was, and the Prima Sankyo and one other that really sucked but I don't remember what it was- I played it once and never again...anyway the NRS-1 got the most volume and best response down low, it was really rich and I loved the sound. The EC was similar but the NRS-1 just fit my face better, I think.

I bought my Powell Philharmonic Grenadilla-wood HJ in a trial of a wood Yam EC, and a couple of Howell Roberts wood HJs. The Powell sounded fantastic, and you could leap octaves soooo easily, it was like going a half-strp or a whole step and not 2 octaves, it was so easy. The other HJs I didn't like at all as much as the silver one I already had. I thought I wanted a wood HJ, and also that I'd love the Yam EC wood, but until I got the Powell I was just going to can the whole wood HJ idea, b/c I didn't like any of the others much at all.

I bought the Miyazawa MZ-5 off eBay for $400, thinking I'd sell it if I didn't like it, and at that price I could mess around with it and sell it for what I had into it. It was OK, but I liked my others better so I set it aside to resell. Nobody who played it really loved it. When I did a flute quartet, I was having trouble with quick articulation in the high end on one piece and putting tone and volume in another- and the Miya was the HJ that did both ok. I kept playing on it, and I just got better and better on it. Now it is my favorite if I need volume AND tone. I like the wood Powell if I don't need a lot of volume, it is easiest to adjust pitch without pulling out/pushing in.

By the way, handcut headjoints can vary amongst hj's with the same maker and cut. Machine cut HJ's don't tend to vary much at all.
My Yamaha 881 flute came with a handcut CY head that was...weird. It was asymmetrical, and if you played until there was moisture condensation to the left of the embouchure, sometimes it would not speak. Most machine-cut CY's are nice heads, but I've heard that some of the handcut ones are fantastic, if you find a 'cherry'.

My (Zentner) piccolo has a Burkart HJ on it. It is the same cut HJ as the one that the symphony's piccolo player has. Mine is nice, but hers is reeeeaaalllly easy to play. She picked that instrument from three or four of the same model.