Re: Finding a Shakuhachi & Monty's Flutes

From: edBeaty (edosan@boulder.net)
Date: Tue Jun 18 2002 - 09:55:31 PDT


--============_-1187702977==_ma============

Some comments on Monty's method:

There is nothing mysterious or "secret" about Monty's cast bore
method; the "=A9" merely means that you and I cannot use his methods to
produce flutes which are then sold for profit.

As I understand it, the advantage to Monty's method is that, using
his wits and powers of observation, he has conjured a way of getting
the bore into the "ballpark" a bit quicker, as it were. By
scrupulously measuring the bore of a flute of known performance, and
then using the measurements to produce a positive mandrel for casting
(this looks like a very precisely made flexible plastic carrot...),
he can produce a bore which is close to that flute. He makes these
mandrels on a specially designed lathe which allows him to apply to
it the precise bore measurements he made of the known flute.

There is nothing special about the polyrester resin used, except in
the sense that it's of a type that meets Monty's needs for hardness,
stability, shrink-resistance, and the like--it's mainly something to
duplicate the time-consuming process of applying urushi, testing the
flute, applying urushi, testing the flute.....

=2E..as Monty noted, the flute still needs work after the casting is
done; it's just closer to the mark after the bore is cast.

It still takes a craftsman of discernment and experience to put the
holes in the right places, shape them properly toward the bore, find
the weak and strong points of the cast flute's performance, achieve
good intonation, and then subtract or add minute areas of bore
material to achieve the inevitable compromises required in a flute of
good (or great) performance..

All of this activity still requires a lot of R & D and trial and
error, both to refine the method and to increase it's efficiency, the
idea being to produce flutes comparable to traditionally crafted
flutes, but with somewhat less effort. Whether Monty has accomplished
this is, of course, arguable, but I think he's done a fine job
indeed. Monty is a fastidious craftsman and he is driven to a very
high standard. He is a gift to us all.

eB
Boulder, CO

>Well, while this is being brought up, I might as well follow up with
>a question about the
>"<http://www.shakuhachi.com/Q-PCBStory.html>Precision Cast Bore=A9
>Technology" or really about cast-bores in general. From reading the
>mail below, it seems to me that the basic difference is that while a
>traditional maker would use tonoko and urushi to make ji, the cast
>bore maker is using some kind of epoxy resin?
>
>(I realize there is a "=A9" after the "Cast Bore" so maybe there is
>some trade secret I'm being nosy about.)
>
>So I don't know, maybe it's not epoxy resin (I thought I read that
>somewhere, but now I can't find where I might have read it); let's
>just call it compound X, OK, anyway it's not ji. From the mail it
>sounds like after the cast bore is fitted, there is a fine-tuning
>adjustment done, presumably by little bits of scraping, cutting,
>sanding, etc., of the ... compound X ... bore.
>
>(Again, there's the matter of the "=A9" so I won't snoop around any
>longer than absolutely necessary.)
>
>A traditional maker would do about the same, but with ji. However,
>while some makers might coat the entire bore with ji before
>sculpting it to "ideal dimensions", there are also others who add ji
>much more sparingly, or even none at all (the ji-nashi makers).
>
>I find curious Monty's statement that "The traditional maker puts
>all of his work into fashioning a bore from tonoko and urushi. I put
>all my work into fashioning a master form and fine tuning each
>instrument", because the second sentence is basically a mirror of
>the first: "fashioning a master form and fine tuning each
>instrument" is presumably what the traditional maker does when he
>fashions the bore from tonoko and urushi. The difference is,
>presumably, Monty uses ... compound X=A9 and this material has
>"certain [other] advantages" which I'd like to read more about.
>
>(Er, assuming I'm not infringing on a copyright ... sorry Monty!)
>
>
>Best,
>Reg
>
--============_-1187702977==_ma============

<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type=3D"text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
 --></style><title>Re: Finding a Shakuhachi &amp; Monty's
=46lutes</title></head><body>
<div>Some comments on Monty's method:</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>There is nothing mysterious or &quot;secret&quot; about Monty's
cast bore method; the<font face=3D"Arial"> &quot;=A9&quot;</font> merely
means that you and I cannot use his methods to produce flutes which
are then sold for profit.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>As I understand it, the advantage to Monty's method is that,
using his wits and powers of observation, he has conjured a way of
getting the bore into the &quot;ballpark&quot; a bit quicker, as it
were. By scrupulously measuring the bore of a flute of known
performance, and then using the measurements to produce a positive
mandrel for casting (this looks like a very precisely made flexible
plastic carrot...), he can produce a bore which is close to that
flute. He makes these mandrels on a specially designed lathe which
allows him to apply to it the precise bore measurements he made of the
known flute.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>There is nothing special about the polyrester resin used, except
in the sense that it's of a type that meets Monty's needs for
hardness, stability, shrink-resistance, and the like--it's mainly
something to duplicate the time-consuming process of applying urushi,
testing the flute, applying urushi, testing the flute.....</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>...as Monty noted, the flute still needs work after the casting
is done; it's just closer to the mark after the bore is cast.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>It still takes a craftsman of discernment and experience to put
the holes in the right places, shape them properly toward the bore,
find the weak and strong points of the cast flute's performance,
achieve good intonation, and then subtract or add minute areas of bore
material to achieve the inevitable compromises required in a flute of
good (or great) performance..</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>All of this activity still requires a lot of R &amp; D and trial
and error, both to refine the method and to increase it's efficiency,
the idea being to produce flutes comparable to traditionally crafted
flutes, but with somewhat less effort. Whether Monty has accomplished
this is, of course, arguable, but I think he's done a fine job indeed.
Monty is a fastidious craftsman and he is driven to a very high
standard. He is a gift to us all.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>eB</div>
<div>Boulder, CO</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" cite>Well, while this is being brought up, I
might as well follow up with a question about the &quot;<a
href=3D"http://www.shakuhachi.com/Q-PCBStory.html"><font
color=3D"#000000">Precision Cast Bore=A9 Technology</font></a>&quot; or
really about cast-bores in general. From reading the mail below, it
seems to me that the basic difference is that while a traditional
maker would use tonoko and urushi to make ji, the cast bore maker is
using some kind of epoxy resin?</blockquote>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" cite>(I realize there is a &quot;=A9&quot;
after the &quot;Cast Bore&quot; so maybe there is some trade secret
I'm being nosy about.)</blockquote>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" cite>So I don't know, maybe it's not epoxy
resin (I thought I read that somewhere, but now I can't find where I
might have read it); let's just call it compound X, OK, anyway it's
not ji. From the mail it sounds like after the cast bore is fitted,
there is a fine-tuning adjustment done, presumably by little bits of
scraping, cutting, sanding, etc., of the ... compound X ...
bore.</blockquote>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" cite>(Again, there's the matter of the
&quot;=A9&quot; so I won't snoop around any longer than absolutely
necessary.)</blockquote>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" cite>A traditional maker would do about the
same, but with ji. However, while some makers might coat the entire
bore with ji before sculpting it to &quot;ideal dimensions&quot;,
there are also others who add ji much more sparingly, or even none at
all (the ji-nashi makers).</blockquote>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" cite>I find curious Monty's statement that
&quot;The traditional maker puts all of his work into fashioning a
bore from tonoko and urushi. I put all my work into fashioning a
master form and fine tuning each instrument&quot;, because the second
sentence is basically a mirror of the first: &quot;fashioning a master
form and fine tuning each instrument&quot; is presumably what the
traditional maker does when he fashions the bore from tonoko and
urushi. The difference is, presumably, Monty uses ... compound X=A9
and this material has &quot;certain [other] advantages&quot; which I'd
like to read more about.</blockquote>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" cite>(Er, assuming I'm not infringing on a
copyright ... sorry Monty!)</blockquote>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" cite>Best,</blockquote>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" cite>Reg</blockquote>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--============_-1187702977==_ma============--
____________________________________________________



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Feb 03 2003 - 09:09:52 PST