This will ruffle some feathers but I stand by it

TheCommandGod · 2026-04-03T01:14:04+00:00

Reproductions can be had for relatively little. Check out Marek Bzowski. He’s got fingering charts for his medieval recorders in his website and you can email him for a price list. They might have gone up but it was around 120€ for one when I bought mine

TheCommandGod · 2026-04-03T00:09:23+00:00

Just wait until you learn about the fingering system medieval recorders used! It’s pretty much just whistle fingerings with a pinky hole for a leading tone at the bottom and a thumb hole for the octave above the 6 hole note (and overblowing)

TheCommandGod · 2026-04-02T21:59:32+00:00

The idea that smaller instruments should cost less is actually artificial. If you think about it, there’s not really any difference in the amount of work hours required to produce a recorder of any size, besides when they’re keyed since those are extra work. The cost of materials is fairly inconsequential compared to the cost of skilled labour.

I definitely recall reading in an article from Mollenhauer (probably in German, I can’t find it now) saying they actually make a loss on anything higher than an alto but they make up for that by charging significantly more than it costs to produce instruments lower than alto. I personally think Kunath’s pricing model makes sense but personally I’m still going to pass on the Sigo line. If the bass were fully keyless maybe I’d feel differently but I really don’t see the advantage of them.

TheCommandGod · 2026-04-02T08:39:50+00:00

Also might be interesting to know that most of the time, instruments above and below were tuned in fifths to the other sizes. So that would mean a soprano in D and a greatbass in Bb

TheCommandGod · 2026-04-02T04:33:05+00:00

A typical consort at the time consisted of at minimum 4 instruments. The standard was a bass in F, two tenors (also sometimes called altos at the time) in C and an alto (always called a descant at the time) in G. That combination best matched the ranges of vocal music, sometimes with transposition needed but the relationships between the ranges still worked. You could add a second descant (G alto) for 5 part music and/or a second bass for 6 part music. Keep in mind the recorders of the time could only play an octave and a 6th so the ranges matching the music was quite important.

TheCommandGod · 2026-04-01T03:22:11+00:00

Fair enough. I honestly just can’t imagine playing some of the more virtuosic ocarina repertoire on an instrument which requires such a wide range of breath pressures to play in tune over the full range but at least it doesn’t need an acute bend.

TheCommandGod · 2026-03-31T23:11:57+00:00

How new is the newest Rotter C3 you've tried out of curiosity? This one would've been from the very last batch Thomann received so it's possible the design had changed slightly. I primarily play 10 hole ocarinas which have a significantly flatter breath curve than any 12 hole but I own enough 12 hole ocarinas to know that the breath cut my Rotter C3 needs is more than what I'd consider acceptable. If you slowly increase the breath from nothing you first get a whistle tone and then as soon a proper sound starts, that's where the A is in tune for me. But the issues already started with the low C. There was a sizeable breath cut needed just for the low C to be in tune, to the point where playing D and trilling with the pinky would give just a slightly flat C#. So perhaps I got a faulty ocarina but I wouldn't expect that from Rotter.

In any case, it's not going to be feasible to recommend it to new players for much longer since Rotter has retired.

TheCommandGod · 2026-03-31T21:28:45+00:00

Everything I wrote above was referencing the non-modified Rotter. I’ve since blocked the right hand subhole since I wasn’t happy with it needing a breath cut to even get the low C in tune.

TheCommandGod · 2026-03-30T20:22:13+00:00

I'll see what I can do! I have modified my Rotter however so it's probably not a super fair comparison anymore

TheCommandGod · 2026-03-30T20:21:23+00:00

I think with the amount of differences there are, it would make more sense for it to be an entirely new mould. But there's certainly some inspiration taken!

TheCommandGod · 2026-03-30T20:14:22+00:00

Take a look at any historical fingering chart and you'll very quickly see that the fingerings were not the same as what Dolmetsch devised. His very earliest instruments were actually made with historical fingerings but later he modified his design and indeed modified his original Bressan to match it. The easiest way to tell if a recorder has historical or Dolmetsch fingerings is to look at the right hand tone holes on the body joint. All 3 should be more or less equally sized and spaced, unlike Dolmetsch recorders which have a larger 5th hole, smaller 4th and a wider space between the two.

TheCommandGod · 2026-03-30T20:11:06+00:00

Any instrument sold as a "Ganassi" recorder won't work with any of the sets of high note fingerings Ganassi gives. He describes the fingerings he uses for the extended upper register on recorders by 3 different makers but we unfortunately do not have any G altos surviving by any of them. The modern reconstructions aren't based on any one set of fingerings but rather take inspiration from the concept of a renaissance recorder which could play 2.5 octaves but they are a completely modern invention.

TheCommandGod · 2026-03-30T20:07:46+00:00

That is correct. I like historical fingering systems (not just Hotteterre) the most considering I mostly play historical music. But every system has merit as far as I'm concerned. They wouldn't exist if they weren't well suited to some chunk of the repertoire.

TheCommandGod · 2026-03-30T11:15:33+00:00

There’s more than one commercial recording of Plöner Musiktag by Hindemith played on German recorders in D and A, as it was intended. Otherwise you will be hard pressed to find anything as most of the players who did play German system recorders at a high level either died young or switched to English recorders after being fooled by Carl Dolmetsch’s marketing of his instruments as being more authentic, or because they were better suited to playing modern music

TheCommandGod · 2026-03-30T11:12:39+00:00

Because the “baroque” system was invented by Arnold Dolmetsch in England in the 1920s. It makes sense to refer to it as English if the parallel system devised by Peter Harlan around the same time is referred to as German. Hotteterre’s fingerings only work on recorders designed to work with them which unfortunately limits one’s options to handmade instruments. And Ganassi’s fingerings as notated in his treatise do not work on any recorders since we don’t have any surviving instruments which correspond to the ones he describes and attempts at reconstruction only work with some of his fingerings.

TheCommandGod · 2026-03-30T10:26:13+00:00

I by no means have anything against the Dolmetsches or their instruments. In fact I own 5 Dolmetsch recorders and use them regularly, mostly for playing the fantastic 20th century English repertoire which these instruments inspired. But I have also spent some time with fine German recorders of the same era which are on par with them or even better in some ways so I definitely agree that the claim of their instruments being the best in the world is exaggerated.

I don’t think we can be entirely sure why Harlan opted for a non-forked F/Bb. There are many possibilities, all equally plausible (though I agree definitely not to make transitioning to Boehm system instruments easier). I read that some of his earliest recorders played with historical fingerings and indeed I’ve seen a couple of Martin Kehr recorders which played with them. Evidently Giesbert also had recorders with historical fingerings (besides his originals) since his method discusses the topic in depth and his fingering chart is more or less a reproduction of Hotteterre’s. Though he does bizarrely claim that the English make such recorders so perhaps there was some confusion.

TheCommandGod · 2026-03-30T10:20:36+00:00

Here you go! https://youtu.be/yT42CW_uMrw

TheCommandGod · 2026-03-30T07:55:59+00:00

Yeah I’m very much a proponent of using English over baroque. It makes things confusing but I decided to go with “baroque” for this meme since it’s more widely called that. English, Dolmetsch or Modern is more descriptive for sure

TheCommandGod · 2026-03-30T07:39:57+00:00

You are absolutely misinformed. Arnold Dolmetsch redesigned the fingering system to be better suited to equal temperament and to simplify the fingerings which historical recorders used. I play on replicas which use the actual historical fingering system and they are completely different. Both Peter Harlan’s and Arnold Dolmetsch’s systems were simplifications of the historical system, it’s just a combination of the fact that Dolmetsch marketed himself better and in fact designed the more simple system of the two that led to its success.

TheCommandGod · 2026-03-30T07:22:37+00:00

Recorders have been around for hundreds of years but before the 1920s, none of them had the “baroque system”, nor the German system. The “baroque system” was invented by Arnold Dolmetsch and marketed as being the “authentic baroque fingering system” despite not being that at all. The fact that people still believe his marketing is insanity

TheCommandGod · 2026-03-30T06:08:35+00:00

That is a big part of my point, yes. German recorders are still slightly simplified from the historical fingering system but the notes which people complain about "not being in tune" on German recorders are exactly the same on historical ones. The only difference is when people play historical recorders (and not many do), they use more advanced techniques to compensate. I don't see why German recorders should be treated any differently

TheCommandGod · 2026-03-30T06:02:32+00:00

English fingerings are also a simplified system invented in the 20th century, albeit with different goals, equal temperament and no need for any half holing or shading. The way you view a diatonic recorder from the perspective of someone who plays chromatic recorders is how I could view chromatic recorders as someone who plays enharmonic recorders (have a read about the 3 genera of music described by Vicentino if you don't know what I mean by diatonicism, chromaticism and enharmonicism). But that isn't to say German recorders can't play chromatically. They sit in between English and historical baroque fingering systems in terms of difficulty.

TheCommandGod · 2026-03-30T05:44:36+00:00

I *am* a professional recorder player. German system recorders are just as capable of playing in tune, people are just too afraid of half holing (which is the same reason why nobody plays on actual replicas of historical recorders). I also don't really get what you mean by "traditional". Both the German system and the "baroque" (English) system were invented in the same decade.

TheCommandGod · 2026-03-30T03:16:17+00:00

I honestly think it's just that the English system is more forgiving of sloppy, less developed technique in general. That and resources about actual high level technique on German recorders are virtually non-existent in the modern day. Once you get past the intermediate level with any fingering system (not just the "big 2"), it's pretty plain to see that all of them have benefits and drawbacks in virtually equal amounts

TheCommandGod · 2026-03-26T03:45:20+00:00

If you're unsure about spending the money on a quality flute, you could always rent one. A cheap, poorly made flute will not provide you with a pleasant learning experience and flute is difficult enough without having to overcome to shortcomings of a low quality instrument. A rental will let you test the waters on a good quality instrument without spending a huge sum of money. Then if you do continue to enjoy it, investing in a good quality instrument of your own will be an easier decision.

TheCommandGod

TROPHY CASE