. z’f"! . "y"u"$p‘?

' 517W??? ' _ , . , ‘3" ’ . 1

' . ' t _ 1 , _ ”7 a“!

mtg/“33.11“” (I "‘4‘ '31.)“ ! ~\ (I‘D .4 , #HL 39';

Jr.” I $1?" V ‘ _.’.3‘:g’“ XE?“ f ‘ , fi".""l'("fl4$’:uf . ‘
:38 ’ affi-g ' z. w: a.

’ 3Erflm

' . idlg‘L-lz-i‘ ‘
kw W 3;“, 2:3? 1-2;. -
M‘fifitg'x‘ '3‘th ,«“3‘TE$'§‘.§'2
figfii ‘tn‘ "nuug :1. ‘ 7% "f SJ : 3‘ ..-

$.ng y: ;.E:::i 37?:35"

“$11)":th
‘ ' vU'v- :z‘uI' ‘
"Hf—"-
r9" .3” “ 1‘“

"ya.-.“

”waist. .

. k3” .E‘vfi

\‘ - 131.4%"

“g.}:':M{‘u 'é‘? 2'3“: 1":

J 1"“ >
41.}: ‘J i:

A“ it

L-
«vi?
I\ ‘
...u~ ‘
'Illo ‘
w u

wrurlyn— -..-r

”“1"

§ :9

~ ~91.» rs:
. .

* n.
‘31:” M§;:’f- ,ka
' u.

_ . 3W "gfifin-fid 347%“
. ‘v‘f‘: uyx 1h '3.

' - E Iv I ' "r 1"- : .339",
“JR. -‘ -, I" '1 -'~,~'{ “.413“ ‘1’" . ‘ ~ , . {m.u¢w t“. “City?”

H” $3??? “““' {353’ RE ' fix»- XEW‘W " *E‘Sz”’”-~“

'43,. " ‘53: whar- ‘ . ' ' “C‘wr‘~ " '

. ”h w - a)“

"1:.
V: ' ,.

J—n ' 33%
3'39““ 4.43m. n
1, I ,-
‘ V. ”Wmddlfx ‘0
«4’ I!
aim-1’“ 3}: ~,

J‘ ”E’JLIEJ“.
5‘ 3=

 

.xgtr E.
i“ a

....I ,

.. m.- «M5
I

. £24“.

Tr ‘ ‘ | ‘ a".
"L w ‘ ‘ m" '
u Liqfikfiyfifi. H .
' I-l

-‘i .
um:

“$1315, .

”I-

 

 

 

l
( LIBRARY
‘Mlchlgan State
L University

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before data duo.

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MSU Is An Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution ‘
emana-pd

SELECTED ASPECTS OF PERFORMANCE PRACTICE IN THE FLUTE TUTORS
OF CHARLES NICHOLSON

By

B. Eldred Spell

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

School of Music

1990

ABSTRACT

SELECTED ASPECTS OF PERFORMANCE PRACTICE IN THE FLUTE TUTORS
OF CHARLES NICHOLSON

By

B. Eldred Spell

Charles Nicholson has been remembered as the flutist
whose volume of sound inspired the invention of the modern
Boehm-system flute. Much criticized in his own time,
Nicholson has been associated with bravura display and
questionable musical taste. Since he was a controversial
figure, contemporary sources must be read with care.
However, direct investigation of his tutors, with the
appropriate flute in hand, reveals a complex performance
practice based on control, contrast, and musical expressicn.

Nicholson’s specialized techniques are intimately
associated with his modified flute. Although difficult to
play, it was ideally suited to his purposes, allowing
incomparable flexibility in matters of pitch, timbre, and
dynamic. In many respects it represents the ultimate
development of the keyed flute. With this instrument
Nicholson was able to exploit tone, vibration (a form of
vibrato), the glide, ornamentation, and articulation for
maximum musical effect. His use of these devices represents
an extension of the expressive capabilities of the flute.
Nicholson did not just play loudly, but emphasized the

expressive use of tone. His pursuit of contrast also

included the use of varied tone colors, and his altered
fingerings expanded both the tonal and technical
possibilities of the instrument. Nicholson’s vibration
produces a remarkably subtle effect and he uses the glide
not as an abstract device, but rather as a means of musical
expression. Much of Nicholson’s expressive musical language
was eliminated with the adoption of the Boehm flute.
Nicholson lived during a period of change and
transition. His vibration represents the continuation of a
baroque practice side-by-side with innovations in sound
production which foreshadow modern practice. Subtleties of
articulation were being explored, as responsibility for
articulation was moving from the performer to the composer.
The nature of ornamentation was also changing. Nicholson’s
use of the shake reflects a melodic rather than harmonic
conception and his flexible approach to rhythmic values of
the appoggiatura emphasizes its expressive nature.
Nicholson emerges as an innovative musician, deeply

concerned with musical sensitivity and expression.

Copyright by
B. ELDRED SPELL
1990

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am indebted to a number of persons who aided and
encouraged this research. Foremost among these is Stephen
Preston, who has shared freely of his knowledge,
instruments, library, enthusiasm, and friendship. As
Britain’s foremost performer on early flutes, his
comprehensive knowledge of eighteenth- and nineteenth-
century performance practice has proven invaluable. Adrian
and Anna Brett provided lodging during the writer’s
prolonged stay in London. Tony Bingham allowed exploration
of his collection of instruments and library of rare books
on the flute. Glennis Stout likewise allowed access to her
extensive collection of flutes and the loan of several
important instruments for this study. Douglas Worthen
loaned instruments and generously shared his insights into
the early keyed flutes. Jerry Rife made available a draft
copy of his translation of Furstenau’s Floten-Scbule as did
Jan Boland of her translation of Tulou’s.Methode de Flute.
She also timed her reprinting of Drouet’s Mbthod for the
convenience of this researcher. Anne Thompson was

instrumental in obtaining several rare sources.

ii

Thanks also to the staffs of the Music Divisions of
the Library of Congress and of the British Library, and the
Music Library of the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor.

The interest and support of the music faculty, staff,
and students at Western Carolina University is gratefully

acknowledged. My sincere thanks to my advisor, Dr. Rosalie

Schellhous, for her unswerving advocacy of both this writer
and this project. Above all I wish to thank my parents
and wife, whose infinite patience and unfailing support

made completion of this study possible.

iii

PREFACE

Charles Nicholson was a seminal figure in the history
of the performance practice of the flute. It is now common
knowledge that Nicholson’s playing inspired the development
of the modern Boehm-system flute.‘ His conception of the
flute as a powerful and noble instrument and his success in
making it so changed the way in which the flute was and is
perceived. Contemporary accounts present Nicholson’s
performances as extraordinary examples of both style and
technique. Among a generation of celebrated virtuoso
flutists, he dominated flute playing in England from about
1816 until his death in 1837.

Nicholson carried the development and performance of
the keyed flute to an extreme. The "Nicholson’s Improved"
flute allows extraordinary flexiblity in matters of pitch,
dynamics, and tone color. But flexibility came at a cost,
for Nicholson’s altered instrument was so difficult to play
that few could manage it.1 Nicholson developed a
specialized and subtle expressive language based on this
instrument.

Unable to compete with Nicholson, another flutist was

moved to transform his instrument:

 

1 Boehm, The Flute and Flute Playing (New York:
Dover, 1964), 8
3 Anon., "Flute," The Harmonicon, 5 (1827), 14.

iv

 

 

Boehm!
loss 1
(deve
play

flute
flute
flute
by pl
new m
allow
NiCho
influ
adapt

and t

I did as well as any continental flutist could
have done, in London, in 1831, but I could not
match Nicholson in power of tone, wherefore I set
to work to remodel my flute. Had I not heard
him, probably the Boehm flute would never have
been made.3

Nicholson provoked the development of the modern
Boehm-system flute, the demise of his own, and with it the
loss of his specialized musical language. Boehm’s flute
(developed after 1881) was better in tune and easier to
play than either Nicholson’s or the conventional keyed
flutes. Because of its technical accessibility, the new
flute supplanted the older and more difficult keyed
flutes.‘| Boehm’s mechanism achieved technical superiority
by placing keys between the fingers and the flute. This
new mechanism, which is basically that of today’s flute,
allowed greater facility but effectively prohibited most of
Nicholson’s expressive techniques. What remained of his
influence were those characteristics which could easily be
adapted to the Boehm flute, particularly the large sound

and taste for virtuosity of technique still typical of

 

3 Boehm, 8.

4 There is a common conception that the Boehm
flute achieved early success because it was louder
than conventional instruments. This writer has had
the opportunity to play a number of early Boehm flutes
as well as those by his licensees Claire Godfroy and
Rudall & Rose. While the Boehm flute has many obvious
advantages, few of these instruments proved to be
dramatically louder than conventional flutes of the
period and none approached the volume produced by a
typical Nicholson model flute.

V

 

 

y —:
.rl

English flute playing. The special expressiveness
available when the fingers directly govern the tone holes
was lost.

Interest in the authentic performance of music has
recently expanded beyond the eighteenth century, so that
works from the early nineteenth century are now commonly
performed on original instruments. Research into this
period is at a comparatively early stage, and this study
hopes to offer insight into the specialized performance
practice of the flute.

Although the history of the flute has been researched
extensively, Nicholson is often treated as little more than
a curiosity. David Eagle’s social history is exceptional
in providing a detailed and lively account of the period.5
His frequent citations of contemporary music reviews and
articles provide a wealth of background information.
Nicholson’s tutors were treated pedagogically by Donald H.
Hartman.o Catherine Smith and Nancy Toff have both
addressed specific aspects of Nicholson’s performance as
isolated "devices" (harmonics, trills, and vibrato) in
relation to general performance practice of the pre-Boehm

flute.7 David Jacobsen has addressed Nicholson directly,

 

5 David Eagle, A Constant Passion and a Constant
Pursuit: A Social History of.Flute-Playing in England
from 1800 to 1851, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of
Minnesota (1977).

‘ Hartman, Donald H., Pedagogical Practices
Relating to the German Flute in England from 1729 to
1847, DMA Thesis, Eastman School of Music (1961).

7 Catherine Smith, Characteristics of Transverse
Flute PerfOrmance in Selected Flute Mothods from the

vi

discussing details of his life and works, but he largely
ignores the performance implications of the original
instrument and in fact edits several of Nicholson’s
compositions for the modern flute.a While much has been
written on Nicholson in a general sense, no focused study
of his performance practice has been undertaken to date.

My interest in this topic stems from a background as a
performing flutist and as a flute maker with a fascination
for the physical evidence presented by many historical
instruments. The nature of past performance practice must
be inferred from whatever evidence remains. In the case of
Nicholson there is much to be learned from an examination
of his tutors and the Nicholson flute. For the purposes of
this investigation into selected performance practices of
Charles Nicholson, the author selected first editions of
his three tutors for primary study.

Research for this study has involved learning to play
the Nicholson flute and the traditional keyed flutes from
appropriate tutors. The Nicholson flute represents a
highly evolved tool which was successfully modified for its
purpose. A comparison of the characteristics of the

Nicholson flute with the instructions for its use is more

 

Early 18th Century to 1828, DNA Project, Stanford
University, 1969 (unpublished); Nancy Toff, The
Development of the Modern Fiute (New York: Taplinger,
1979); Nancy Toff, The Flute Book New York: Charles
Scribner’s Sons, 1985).

9 Jacobsen, David. Charles Nicholson (1795-1837):
His Influence on Flute Performance, Manufacture,
Pedagogy and Literature. DMA Thesis, University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1982.

vii

revealing than a study of either the tutors or the flute in
isolation.

Realization of the examples from the Nicholson tutors
has been essential to an understanding of his intent.
Several historical instruments were purchased and a larger
number borrowed from private collections. There are
significant variations even among today’s mass-produced
instruments, so a number of flutes were required in order
to make valid generalizations. These flutes are listed in
Table 1 of Appendix A. Dates for these flutes are based on
information found in Lyndesay Langwill’s Index.’ Two
flutes from the collection of Glennis Stout were dated by
Dr. Robert A. Lehman-for an exhibition at the Metropolitan
Musuem of Art.1° These are Clementi & Co. (1822) and

Thomas Prowse (1834, #3879).

TUTORS

Nicholson wrote three tutors for a public that wished
specifically to imitate him. These are the Camplete
Preceptor (1816),11 the Preceptive Lessons (1821),12 and

the School (1836).u Nicholson had no successful imitators

’ Lyndesay Langwill, An Index of.MUsical Wind
Instrument Makers, 6th ed. (London: Author, 1980).

1° Historic Flutes from Private Collections (New
York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1986), 26-27.

11 Charles Nicholson, Nicholson’s Cbmplete
Preceptor for the German Flute (London: Preston,
1816).

‘3 Charles Nicholson, Preceptive Lessons (London:
Clementi & Co., 1821).

13 Charles Nicholson, A School fOr the Flute (New
York: Wm. Hall & Son, 1836).

viii

in the nineteenth century and it seems unlikely that anyone
could truly reconstruct his sound or style today. However,
through his tutors it is possible to gain an understanding

of his methods and approach to the instrument.

In his tutors Nicholson describes a highly evolved
performance practice and the technical means used to
achieve it. They contain practical instructions. He did
not concern himself with abstractions. All three volumes
were reissued and reprinted in numerous editions, many of
which are surveyed and discussed by David Jacobsen.H
Although a detailed evaluation of Nicholson’s influence on
later generations is beyond the scope of this study, it
should be noted his tutors were adapted by others for the
Boehm and other system flutes, and they remained standard
references in England long after Nicholson and his flute
had passed from the scene.15

Nicholson’s Complete Preceptor, published in 1816 by
Preston, is specifically intended for beginners.u There
are twenty-six pages of text with musical examples, forty
pages of "Progressive Lessons" consisting of duets, three

pages of "Preludes,' and two pages of "Cadenzas.". The

fingering charts are for the one- and six-keyed flutes.

 

1‘ Jacobsen, 43-53.

15 Kenneth Bell, "Flute Playing in Britain:
Stylistic Origins and Developments," Pan, The Journal
of the British Flute Society, 17 (Dec. 1989). 12-19.

1‘ Complete Preceptor, introduction.

ix

The Preceptive Lessons were issued in 1821 by Clementi
and are intended for advanced players.1' Each lesson was
published individually. Nicholson offers these to those
who, because of distance or "pecuniary disability," are
unable to study with him. Stephen Preston has described
the Preceptive Lessons as "a do it yourself Charles
Nicholson kit."19 The Preceptive Lessons are specifically
geared to the Nicholson flute and emphasize matters of
technique and expression as related to it. This is most
apparent in the extensive notation of alternate fingerings,
glides, and vibration. Because a basic level of knowledge
and skill is assumed, many details common to other tutors,
such as tone production and the interpretation of
ornaments, receive little attention.

Each lesson introduces new key signatures With scales
and fingerings, appropriate shakes, exercises and
unaccompanied solos. In the last lesson Nicholson explains
why the series ends with ten rather than twelve lessons as
originally planned. He attributes this abbreviation to the
increasing difficulty of the lessons and a lack of interest
on the part of the public.u

A School for the Flute was issued in 1836 by Wm. Hall
& Son of New York. There is no obvious reason for this
American connection. Apparently Nicholson never left

British soil, but he alludes to having had American

 

1’ Preceptive Lessons, 1.
10 Personal conversation, June 23, 1985.
1' Preceptive Lessons, 89.

X

pupils,2° and the American publisher of the School inserts
an advertisement for his own Nicholson style flutes.21 The
cover promotes it as a "Practical Instruction Book."

The School does not offer the detail or the carefully
notated musical examples found in the Preceptive Lessons
and so complements rather than supersedes them. It is
comprehensive in scope and does not presume previous
knowledge of the flute.

The School is printed in two volumes and, with a total
of 132 pages, is the longest of Nicholson’s tutors. Volume
one contains basic instructions, exercises, musical
examples, and instructions on syncopation, articulation,
and double tonguing. Volume two includes instructions on
the appoggiatura, glide, vibration, chromatic scale, turn,
shake, and harmonics. It concludes with twelve exercises
for double tonguing and "Twelve Impromptus to the Minor
Scales."

Nicholson justifies the release of another tutor
because

the experience in my profession which I have
acquired during twenty years since the appearance
of my former Instruction Book, has convinced me
that a new one is requisite. I trust, therefore,
that in the following pages it will be seen, that
what ever I have gained in knowledge, I am

desirous to impart in the fullest manner to all
amateurs of the instrument.22

 

2° School, 54.
31 Ibid., 5.
33 Ibid., 1.

xi

In addition to these three primary sources, several
other publications by Nicholson were examined. These works
include a set of edited musical extracts titled A Selection
of Passages (1817), and a set of pieces titled Appendix to
.Nicholson’s Preceptive Lessons (1825), as well as selected
compositions by Charles Nicholson.

The Passages are mentioned here because they are newly
discovered. Stephen Preston, the preeminent British
authority on eighteenth and early nineteenth century
flutes, recently located this work and made it available
for this study. The Passages consist of extracts from the
works of a number of then-popular composers including
Kreith, Schneider, Krazinsky, Hoffmeister, Berbiguier,
Devienne, and Tulou. To these Nicholson adds marks of
"Articulation, Expression & Fingering."33 There is no
text, and the fingerings are chiefly for facility rather
than~tone color or effect.

The Appendix to Nicholson’s Preceptive Lessons
appeared in 1825. This independent publication, which
bears little resemblance to the original Preceptive Lessons
(1821), consists of thirty-two short pieces for flute with
piano accompaniment. Nicholson’s fingerings are again
featured and there is no text.

Selected compositions by Nicholson were examined to

verify practices found in the tutors. Reference to these

 

’3 Passages, cover.

xii

r —

is made where appropriate and a listing of compositions
examined is included in the bibliography.

Nicholson published a quantity of accompanied and
unaccompanied music for the flute, consisting largely of
interpretations or variations on popular and national airs.

No complete catalog of Nicholson’s works exists and a

survey of this material is beyond the scope of this study.
In 1914 Fitzgibbon described Nicholson’s once-popular
output as "mostly rubbishy airs with well-nigh impossible
variations, embellishments, cadences, cadenzas, and shakes
of inordinate length."3‘ Nicholson was not an educated
musician,25 and the piano accompaniments in these works are
generally written by others. An advertisement for Clementi
& Co. (dated 1821) lists six fantasias composed by
Nicholson with accompaniments by five different composers.
John F. Burrowes appears to have been Nicholson’s usual
partner. He is listed along with Nicholson as a composer
of twelve "Select Melodies with Variations" published about

18213“ by Goulding, D’Almaine, Potter & Co.

 

2‘ Fitzgibbon, 209.

35 James, A Wbrd or Two, 161.

3‘ Charles Humphries and William C. Smith,.Music
Publishing in the British Isles (London: Cassell and
Co., 1954), 101, 158. Chappell & Co. is listed in
partnership 1819-1826 and Goulding 1811-23, leaving
the period of 1819-23 for publication of the Select
Melodies.

xiii

V—

 

COMPARATIVE SOURCES

Nicholson was a practical working musician without
formal training. His instructions are direct but
maddeningly incomplete. The author consulted a number of
contemporary and earlier flute tutors in order to provide
perspective on Nicholson's writings. Copies of flute
tutors, including first editions of Nicholson’s, and a
variety of related publications were obtained from both
public and private sources. To provide the reader with an
overview of this material, a chronological list (divided by
country) of the flute tutors consulted is given in Table 2
of Appendix A. Because the precise dating of these works
is often problematical, many dates are approximate and some
are only tentative. The dates in this table are generally
based on Thomas E. Warner’s bibliography.27 Undated tutors
not included by Warner are dated by publishers' addresses.

The most significant source in this category is
Lindsay’s Elements of Flute Playing, which was published in
two parts in 1828 and 1830. In this substantial work
Lindsay quotes freely from earlier sources (such as John
Gunn) and continental contemporaries such as Drouet and
Berbiguier. Lindsay’s explanations are generally thorough
and clear, in contrast to Nicholson’s often cryptic and

confusing statements.

 

37 Thomas E. Warner, An Annotated Bibliography of
WOodwind Instruction Books, 1600-1830(Detroit:
Information Coordinators, Inc., 1967).

xiv

 

 

' _

Lindsay appears to have been well acquainted with
Nicholson, both professionally and personally. Volumes 2-6
and 8-10 of the Preceptive Lessons were published by
Clementi & Co., but ”sold by T. Lindsay." The writer’s
copy of the Complete Preceptor bears Lindsay's stamp and
was presumably sold through his shop as well. Nicholson’s
variations on Gramachree is "composed and dedicated to his
friend Thos. Lindsay."u

Smith has described Lindsay as "a rather loquacious
advocate of Nicholson’s playing."n This seems unfair to
both parties. Nicholson did not need an advocate and
Lindsay is not his apologist. While crediting him with
many developments in flutemaking, Lindsay also points out
the difficulties created by enlarging the tone-holes and
openly disagrees with Nicholson on the adoption of the long
F key.3° Neither matter was trivial at the time.

Nicholson set the standard for English flute playing and
therefore much of what Lindsay says must of necessity refer
to Nicholson’s playing.

The continental tutors were chosen principally because
their authors had some interaction with Nicholson. Louis
Drouet was familiar to English audiences and even published
an English language.Method. In this there is some thinly

veiled criticism of Nicholson’s tone, fingering, and

 

3‘ Charles Nicholson, "Introduction and Favorite
Irish Air GRAMACHREE, with Variations and Coda. . .."
(London: Clementi & Co., 1821), cover.

39 Smith, 12.

3° Lindsay (1828-30), 2.

XV

articulation. Other well known French authors of the
period include Tranquille Berbiguier and Jean Louis Tulou.
Contemporary criticism of Nicholson’s performances has
been discussed by both David Eagle and David Jacobsen.
However, comments relative to Nicholson’s performance
practice from British music journals are included where
relevant. William N. James, whose candid and biased
opinions are nevertheless enlightening, is also drawn upon

where appropriate.

xvi

List of
Chapter

Chapter

Chapter

Chapter

Chapter

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FigureSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.00.00...

I. Introduction.................

II. Playing the Nicholson Flute...

The Instrument...................
Alignment .......................
Posture..........................
III. Tone Quality................
Embouchure.......................
Coverage and Intonation..........
Variety of Color.................
Acoustical Considerations........
IV. Expression.... ..... ..........
Vibration........................
Glides...........................
V. Embellishment.................
Shakes...........................
Turns............................

The Appo‘giaturaOOOOO0000......O.

xvii

..xix

000.1

0.039

...48

..64

...86
..104
..104

...120

..132

Chapter VI. Articulation........................

Performance Practice........0.00.0000...

NotatiODOOOOOOOOOOOOOIOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO...

Techniques..............................
Application to Nicholson’s Compositions
and Editions............................
Conclusion......................................

Appendix A. Flutes referred to in this study...

Appendix B. Chronological list of flute tutors.....

Appendix C. Articulation tables from the Nicholson

tutorSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO....OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Bibliography...COCOOOOOOOIOOOO......OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

xviii

....139
....139
000.144

....151

O O O .167
O O O .172
O O O 0174

00.0176

....181
000.186

CHAPTER I.

Figure

1-10

CHAPTER II.

Figure

Figure

Figure
Figure
Figure

Figure

Figure
Figure
Figure

Figure

Figure
Figure

Figure

2-1 0
2-20

2-3.
2-4.
2-5.
2-6.

2-7.
2-8.
2-9.
2-10.

2-110
2-120
2-130

LIST OF FIGURES

INTRODUCTION
Charles Nicholson, The Flutist’s

0.03

40.00.00.000......OOOOOOOOOOOO.

Magazine,
PLAYING THE NICHOLSON FLUTE
Fingerholes, Prowse and Astor flutes.......11
Detail, Prowse and Astor flute
fingerholes........................“.......13
Advertisement by Clementi & Co.............15
Stamp from "Nicholson’s Improved" flute....17
Advertisement by Thomas Prowse.............18
Fingerholes, Prowse and Hill—late Monzani
flutes.....................................20
Nine nineteenth—century flutes.............21
Detail, excavation for left hand...........24
Detail, excavation for right hand..........25
Two headjoints for the same Nicholson
flute......................................29
Tuning slide extension of Nicholson flute..30
Nicholson’s use of Octaves, School, 73.....32
alignment marks.....34

Clementi-Prowse flute,

xix

Figure 2-14.

Figure 2-15.
Figure 2-16.
Figure 2-17.
Figure 2-18.
Figure 2-19.

Figure 2-20.

CHAPTER III.
Figure 3-1.
Figure 3-2.
Figure 3-3.
Figure 3-4.

CHAPTER IV.

Figure 4-1.

Figure 4-2.

Figure 4-3.

Figure 4-4.

Figure 4-6.

T. Prowse flute, left and right hand

alignment..................................35
Flute alignment, Nicholson’s School........36
Flute alignment, Lindsay, Elements.........38
Bad posture, School, frontispiece..........41
Good posture, School, frontispiece.........42
Frontispiece, Monzani, Instructions, 1813..44

Frontispiece, Ffirstenau, Flbten—Schule.....47

TONE QUALITY

Embouchure, School, Plate 2................57

-Harmonics, Preceptive Lessons, 65..........61

English headjoints leading to Nicholson’s..66
Headjoints, nine nineteenth-century

fluteSCO...OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.00.00.00.0000068

EXPRESSION

Vibration fingerings, Nicholson’s
tutors..................................79-80
Vibration, Preceptive Lessons, 5...........81
Vibration, School, 71......................81
Vibration with varied dynamics, Preceptive
Lessons, 32. ..............................83
Vibration before a cadence, Preceptive
Lessons, 60................................83
Vibration on a cadence, Preceptive

Lessons, 10................................84

XX

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

4-8 a

4-9 0

4.10.

4-11.

4.12.

4-13.

4-140

4-150

4-160

4-170

4-180

4.19.

4-20.

4-21 0

Vibration in a rhythmic context. Preceptive

000......84

68.00.000.000.0.0.0.0....

Lessons,
Aileen Aroon, Preceptive Lessons, 10.......85

Trill with accent, Preceptive Lessons, 57..85

Vibration with accent, Preceptive

Lessons, 65................................86
Flattened finger-holes, Prowse
flute #3784................................94

Slides, 3011001, 710000000000.0000000000000096

Glide in an Adagio, Preceptive

25.0.0000000000000000000IOOO0.....97

Lessons,

Glide with varied dynamics, Preceptive

57..OOOOOOOOOOIOOOOOOOOOOOO00.0.0098

Lessons,

Glide with crescendo, Preceptive

Lessons, 35’ 60’ and 650.000.000.000000000098

Glide with decrescendo, Preceptive

Lessons, 62................................98
Glide leading to vibration, Preceptive
Lessons, 77................................99
Glide, six notes spanning an octave,

Preceptive Lessons, 57.....................99

Glide in a moving line, Preceptive

Lessons, 41....OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.00.0100
Glide used to interrupt an established
33.0.0000000000100

tempo, Preceptive Lessons,

Glide with grace note, Preceptive

57..0....O...0.0.00.0000000000000101

Lessons,

xxi

Figure 4-22.

Figure 4-23.

CHAPTER V.

Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

5‘1.

5-2 0

5-30_

5-4 0

5-5 a

5-6 0

5-100
5’11 0

5-120

5-130

5-140

5‘15.

Decending glide, Preceptive Lessons, 10..

Ascending and decending glide, Preceptive

Lessons, 570.00.00.00...IOOOOOOOOOOOOO...

EMBELLISHMENT

Plain shake, as written and as played,
Complete Preceptor, 20...................
Shake with accelerando, Complete
Preceptor, 21............................
Passing shake, School, 82................
Prepared shake, Complete Preceptor, 20...
Grace notes played on the beat,
Alexander, Complete Preceptor, 54........
Shake above and below principal note,
Complete Preceptor, 21...................
The shake combined with a melodic figure,
Complete Preceptor, 21...................
Plain turn before the note, Lindsay, 95..
Plain turn after the note, Lindsay, 95...
Plain turn, Complete Preceptor, 20.......
Turn with accidental, COmplete

Preceptor, 20............................
Plain turn, School, 79...................
The plain turn after the note, Complete
Preceptor, 20...........................
Turn symbols, Preceptive Lessons, 64.....
Turn symbols, Complete Preceptor, 20.....

xxii

.101

.102

.106

.108
.112

.113

.114

.114

.116

.121

.121

.122

.122
.123

..124

.126

.126

Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure
Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

5-16.
5-17.
5-18.
5-19.
5-20.
5-21.

5-22 0

5-23 0

5-24 0

5-25 0

5-26 0
5-27 0

CHAPTER VI.

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

6-10

6-4 a
6-5 0

Turn symbols, School, 79..................126

Turn symbols, Lindsay, 112................127

Turn with slash, Complete Preceptor, 20...127

Turn with slash, Preceptive Lessons, 28...127

Inverted turn, Complete Preceptor, 20.....128

Inverted turn incorporated into a cadence,

Complete Preceptor, 74....................130

Inverted turn with ornamentation,

Preceptive Lessons, 60, 62, 65,and 77.....130

Use of turn symbols, School, 79...........131

Appoggiatura, Complete Preceptor, 20......133

Accented appogiatura, Preceptive

Lessons, 32.00.000.00000000000.0.0.0...0.0133
Appoggiatura, School, 69..................134
Appoggiatura, varied tempi, School, 69....136
ARTICULATION

Varied articulation, Complete

31....OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.0.00.0142

Preceptor,
Slur separating patterns of articulation,

Preceptive Lessons, 70....................143

Points and dashes, Preceptive

Lessons, 83.....OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0...0148

Breath accent, Preceptive Lessons, 57.....167

Marks of articulation, Schneider, Three

Duetto One,

Duets, 2.00.00.00.00000000.00.170

xxiii

Figure 6-6.

Figure 6-7.

Nicholson's editing of Schneider,
Duetto One, Passages, 11..................170
Marks of articulation, Schneider,
Three Duets, Duetto Two, 6................171
Nicholson’s editing of Schneider,

Duetto Two, Passages, 12..................l71

xxiv

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

CHARLES NICHOLSON

In spite of his prominence as a performer,
comparatively little is known of Charles Nicholson’s (1795-
1837) background and early life. What is,mentioned in
contemporary and later sources appears to be derived from
the limited biographical information which Nicholson
includes in the tutors. He states that his father was a
prominent flutist and credits him with developing the
concept of sound and the altered flute with which the
younger Nicholson gained fame as a performer.1 Around
1815, the aspiring young flutist moved from his native
Liverpool to London. Success came relatively quickly.
Richard Shepherd Rockstro notes that Nicholson, who was
appointed a Professor of the Royal Academy of Music at its
founding in 1822, had every playing opportunity he chose to
accept and more students than he could teach.2

By 1823 an enthusiastic reviewer could say that
Nicholson "now\;tands pre-eminent both as a composer for
the instrument and as a player."3 According to Rockstro,

Nicholson achieved the highest position ever accorded a

 

1 Charles Nicholson, Nacholson’s Complete
Preceptor for the German Flute (London: Preston,
1816), 1; Charles Nicholson, A School for the Flute
(New York: Wm. Hall & Son, 1836), 6.

3 Richard Shepherd Rockstro, The Flute 2nd ed.
(London: Rudall, Carte and Co., 1928), 608-609.

3 "Compositions for the Flute," Quarterly Musical
Magazine and Review, 5 (1823), 83.

'1

2
flutist in England.‘ H. Macauley Fitzgibbon says that

Nicholson’s popularity was "absolutely unparalleled."5
Figure 1-1 (p. 3) shows a portrait of Nicholson in 1827 at
the height of his career.

Nicholson’s approach to the flute was strikingly
different from that of his predecessors and contemporaries.
According to report, his flute playing was the loudest that
anyone had ever heard. In an age of larger halls and
increasing demands for volume of sound, Nicholson was
singularly successful. William N. James compared
Nicholson’s low notes to the sound of an organ.°

His expressive techniques included gliding between
intervals, fingered vibrato or vibration, and altered
fingerings and harmonics which he used both for facility
and for variety of tone color. To facilitate these
techniques, he made numerous alterations to the instrument,
producing a "Nicholson’s Improved" flute which differed
significantly in sound and capability from the typical
flute of the day. These activities placed him at the
center of controversy, and it is this for which he is
chiefly and perhaps unfairly remembered.

Contemporary reviews describe a player of

extraordinary musical accomplishment:

 

‘ Rockstro, 608.

5 H. Macauley Fitzgibbon, Story of the Flute
(London: Walter Scott, 1914), 208.

0 William N. James, A Wbrd or Two on the Flute
(Edinburgh: C. Smith, and London: Cocks, 1826), 90.

 

Figure 1-1, Charles Nicholson, The Flutist’s Magazine, 40.

4

Nothing can more clearly show the mastery this
artist has over the grand impediments of the
instrument than his performance last year at
Covent Garden, where he executed an Adagio (that
test of tone, taste and expression), without the
accompaniment of a single instrument, and such
was his complete success, that an encore was
demanded by the whole house with acolamation. 'In
pathetic movements he has no rival.’

This appraisal is confirmed by others, including
George Hogarth, the prominent music critic and father-in-
law of Charles Dickens:

Among the present great performers on the flute,
our own Nicholson has for many years held the
highest place. He is absolutely unrivaled in the
power, variety, and richness of his tone, and has

never been surpassed in the fine taste and
expression of his adagio playing.°

Even W. N. James had to concede that

however his style and execution may be censured,
no arguments can withstand the fact that he is
the most effective player who ever performed on
the instrument.’

This statement by James is a concession because he and
Nicholson were bitter enemies. Acrimony between the two
was mentioned by Fitzgibbon in 1913 and more recently by
David Eagle and Jacobsen10. As James’s criticism is a

primary source of information on flutists of the period, a

 

7 "Compositions for the Flute," 87.

0 George Hogarth, "Musical Instruments. The
Flute," Musical world, 3 (1836), 145-150.

9 James, A Wbrd or Two, 155.

1° Fitzgibbon, 209; Eagle, 96-97; Jacobsen,
Nicholson, 13-16.

5

few highlights of his relationship with Nicholson may prove
useful in judging his veracity.
A little known text by William Annand reveals the

seriousness of the matter:

. . . I must observe that I have been told by
good authorities, that previous to the
publication of Two or Three Words on the Flute
[sic], the author had a violent quarrel with Mr.
Nicholson, which had proceeded so far that
arrangements were made for a hostile meeting;
fortunately this never took place, or the lion
might have perished by the puncture of an asp.
In short, both parties were taken into custody,
and boundover [sic] to keep the peace.11

In 1826 W. N. James published A word or Two 0n the
.Flute in which he provides first hand descriptions and
critiques of leading flutists of the day. The volume is
dedicated to Nicholson by "his sincere friend and pupil."
This must have been galling. James’s article on Nicholson
is at first complimentary, but amongst much praise James
attacks Nicholson for his continual use of embellishment
and his compositions: "it would have been better for his
fame had they never been written." He then blames
Nicholson’s general lack of "taste and judgment" on a lack
of education.13

In closing his essay on Nicholson, James speaks

(perhaps wishfully):

 

11 William Annand, A FEw WOrds on the Flute

(London: Author, 1843), 16.
13 James, A WOrd or Two, 159-161.

6

In taking leave of this gentleman, I am perfectly
aware that he will be the first person to pardon
the freedom and candour of any observations that
I have made, seeing that they are grounded in
complete impartiality.13

James did not stop with this criticism. The assault
continues in his Flutist’s Magazine, where Nicholson is
first attacked for his lack of educationl‘ and then for his
double tonguing:

But in the performance of Drouet’s variations,
there was an absolute defalcation. There was
nothing of that chaste, dashing, and vivid
execution--one note following another as
distinctly as the magical notes of a snuff box--
which used to characterise the composer’s own
unrivalled performance; but in this exhibition,
we had a heavy, ill-defined, inexpressive,
bustling articulation, which seemed to possess no

other meaning than to get on as fast as possible
to the end of the chapter.!5

The comparison with his rival Drouet must have been
too much for Nicholson to bear. His response came in the
form of an article attached to the fourth of his Social
Pieces (1829).u Titled A Wbrd or Two to MT. W. N. James,
it explains the probable source of James’s attitude. James
had taken a single lesson from Nicholson for which payment

was never made. Some years later Nicholson had ignored a

 

13 Ibid, 166.

1‘ James, Flutist’s Magazine, Vol. I, 1827, 43.

15 Ibid, 77. The choice of syllables for double
tonguing became a central feature of James and
Nicholson’s public rancor. This is discussed in more
detail in the chapter on articulation.

1‘ Charles Nicholson, Social Pieces (London:
Clementi & Co., 1829).

7

request by James for a letter of recommendation as his
pupil. After recounting the details of this story,
Nicholson goes on to brand James as a bad flutist, ignorant
composer, and plagiarist.n There is no apparent reason to

doubt Nicholson’s judgement; James appears to be a poseur.

NICHOLSON’S CONTEMPORARIES

Nicholson achieved and maintained his success in the
face of intense competition from foreign-born artists. A
vogue for the flute began in England as early as 1774 and
probably peaked during the late 1820’s or early 1830’s.10
After the turn of the century a generation of virtuoso
flutists had appeared, including Anton B. Furstenau (1792-
1852) and Theobald Boehm (1794-1881) in Germany, and Jean
Louis Tulou (1786-1865) and Louis Drouet (1792-1873) in
France. These performers toured Europe regularly and all
toured England: Furstenau in 1826;19 Boehm in 1831, 1834,
1837, 1845, 1851, and 1852;2° Tulou in 1819 and 1829;?1 and
Drouet in 1817-19, 1829-32 and 1841.33

Many of the leading London flutists were either
foreigners or of foreign extraction, including Tebaldo

Monzani (a native Italian, 1762-1839), Charles Weiss (of

 

1' The entire article is reproduced in Appendix B
of Jacobsen, 118-124.

1' Eagle, 5.

1’ Rockstro, 595.

3° Karl Ventzke and Deitrich Hilkenbach, Boehm
woodwinds (Frankfurt: Verlag Das Musikinstrument,
1982), 19-24.

’1 Rockstro, 588-589.

33 Ibid, 598-99.

8

German extraction, 1777-1845?), and Rafael Dressler (also
German, 1784-1835). The leading British flutist in London
from 1791 until 1822 was Andrew Ashe (1759-1841), an
Irishman who had trained on the continent and returned to
Britain in 1782.23

Before Nicholson, the English seemed unable to produce
their own premier flutist. Nicholson became a national
champion by beating the foreigners, at least to the
satisfaction of London audiences. His philosophy was
simple, "powerful expression depends on power of tone; for
it is only its contrast that produces it."H English
audiences became accustomed to hearing a flute sound fill a
hall, and regardless of their skill or musical talent, none

of the continental flutists could meet this standard.

 

’3 Fitzgibbon, 206-207.
34 School, 6.

CHAPTER II

PLAYING THE NICHOLSON FLUTE

THE INSTRUMENT

Nicholson’s success may be attributed in part to the
possibilities afforded him by his modified instrument.
Because the techniques developed by Nicholson were tied
specifically to the flute which evolved with them, any
consideration of Nicholson’s performance practice must take
into account his modified flute. The Nicholson flute
appeared at a time when innovation in flute design had
become commonplace.1

The standard flute throughout most of the eighteenth
century had a single key, a small embouchure, and small
fingerholes. Additional keys began to be adopted around
1790, so that by the turn of the century an up-to-date flute
would have had a total of six.2 The eight-keyed flute was
described in a tutor as early as 18063 and by 1828 was
considered the flute of choice.‘ This is not to say that
flutes with fewer keys vanished or that the eight-keyed
flute represented more than a hypothetical standard.
Original instruments from this period (roughly 1800-1850)

have from one to more than a dozen keys, and fingering

 

1 Adam Carse, Musical Wind Instruments (London:
Macmillan, 1939; reprinted New York: Da Capo Press,
1975), 92.

3 Ibid, 89.

3 J. Wragg, wragg's Improved Flute Preceptor, 2nd
ed. (London: Author, 1806), 15.

4 Thomas Lindsay, The Elements of Flute Playing
(London: Author, 1828-30), 2.

9

10

charts from period tutors suggest that flutes with one key
were not uncommon and those with four to eight and more keys
continued to be played for some time. Because of the
variety of key configuration, this group of instruments will
be referred to collectively as keyed flutes.

Parallel to the addition of keys there occurred a
movement towards modest enlargements of embouchure and
fingerholes. But since this enlargement is slight compared
to that of the Nicholson flutes, these later traditional
instruments are regarded here as keyed flutes.

The instruments associated with Charles Nicholson are
distinguished by greatly enlarged embouchure and
fingerholes. Flutes bearing his name are marked
"Nicholson's Improved" and are referred to specifically as
Nicholson flutes. The differences are so great as to be
unmistakable, and the required alterations of playing
technique effectively render this a different instrument.
Nicholson flutes were widely imitated, and the genre of
flutes with similar characteristics are generally referred
to as large-hole flutes or Nicholson type flutes.

The origin of Nicholson’s flute is subject to speculation.
In the School he recounts trying flutes by several different
contemporary makers but reverting to a modified Astor which
had belonged to his father. If the Nicholson flute had been
derived from the Astor, there should be similarities in the
dimensions of the two instruments, particularly regarding

the spacing of the fingerholes and the bore of the flute.

 

 

 

 

 

11

 

 

 

 

Figure 2-1. Fingerholes, Prowse and Astor flutes.

12
Figure 2-1 (p. 11) shows the fingerholes of a typical

unaltered Astor flute from about 1800 (writer’s collection,
pitched at about A=430) compared to a Nicholson flute
(#3784, writer’s collection, pitched about A2440) made by
Thomas Prowse ca. 1830. In spite of the difference in
pitch, both flutes have a similar hole spacing. This
suggests that the Nicholson flute could have been derived
from the Astor. Enlarging an individual tone hole causes
the pitch of notes sounding from it to rise. In starting
with an older low-pitched instrument, Nicholson or his
father may have found a way both to increase volume and save
a favorite flute from obsolescence in the face of rising
pitch. Figure 2-2 (p. 13) shows a closeup of the right-hand
holes of the same Astor and Prowse flutes illustrating the
dramatic difference in tone-hole size.

The bore of the flute has a strong influence on tone
production and has been discussed at length by Rockstro, who
uses the internal diameter of the headjoint as an indicator
of overall dimensions.5 Two Astor flutes were available for
this study. One (ca. 1800, writer’s collection) measures
18.77mm at the head and another (ca. 1804, collection of
Douglas Worthen) measures 18.80mm. A Hill-late Monzani
(#1832, writer’s collection) measures 18.80mm as do two
Prowse "Nicholson’s Improved" flutes (#3784, ca. 1830,
writer’s collection; #3157, collection of Stephen Preston).

These measurements confirm that the Astor and Prowse flutes

 

5 Rockstro, 158-164.

13

 

 

Figure 2-2. Detail, Prowse and Astor flute fingerholes.

14

are generally compatible. The bore of the body section of
these flutes forms a sometimes complicated taper. A
complete comparision of bore dimensions is beyond this
study, but a cursory comparison of the diameters of the
Astor and Prowse flutes in the writer’s collection reveals
no subtantial incompatibilities. The diameter at the small
end of the right hand joint is 12.22mm for the Astor and
12.44mm for the Prowse.

Nicholson flutes were and are notoriously difficult to
play--James says by a factor of ten.6 The large tone-holes
allow for a louder sound at the expense of irregular
intonation. Nicholson minimizes this difficulty in his
tutors and describes several advantages: the tone is
louder, although it may still be "subdued"; the upper octave
fingerings are simplified; and both glide and vibration are
more effective.7 The prevailing opinion was that the large-
hole flute was best suited for concerto playing and should
only be used by superior players.‘

Nevertheless, there was "a positive craze in England
for large-hole flutes."’ "Nicholson’s Improved" flutes were
first sold by Clementi & Co. and were initially produced by

an unknown maker. Figure 2-3 (p. 15) shows an advertisement

 

3 William N. James, review of William Bainbridge,
Observations on the Chase of Imperfections in Wind
Instruments, The Flutist’s Magazine, 1 (1827), 187.

7 School, 6. ‘

0 J. Arthur, The Mbdern Art of Flute Playing
(London: Willis & Co., 1827) 3; as quoted in "Flute,"
The Harmonicon, 5 (1827), 14.

9 Philip Bate, The Flute (London: Ernest Benn
Limited, 1975), 112.

Figure

ilflflM’bM’Dil‘fi
IIIPRO VED FLUTES.

 

CLEMENT! and Co.

"are leach plea-ate to “out the Amatewre ol thie faehioaahle and admired Inetretnent
that they are now mating Flotee ol Ebony and Cocoa, with their newly-invented Euettc
Puma and ”neat! Shatnae to the Keye, alter the plea ol Mr. NICHOLSON, antler
whoee immediate inepeetlon these Flatee are finiehetl. Mr. Nieholeon'e ferorite olcl
Flute it ”the. lam in all the Public Concert Rooree ht lonrloa and meet other
rem of the Kingdom to require «hygiene; and, ee they have hall thie lnetrnnieet ee a
model (an exclaei'va adreahge which we othet Headhunter hee ever before poeeeeeed,)
they have been enehled to apply each luminance “a regard tatha Bore, he. ae have
gireatotheh'lata e chereeter oleaeli decided 8aperiority ae to' render a... worthy
of the weenieet Proteeeionel recommendatiaa.

In el Wind lnetraalente one of the chief neeneaciee' re a Feeeooar or To";
thie quality it hoe Men the particular cab of the Mall-lecture“ to peeeree. la theee
Flutter it ie eotnhined with aneeael eweetaeee end penned , eo perfect te the Tom-e
and Sherman, lrora the peeallae taeehaaiewiol the Keye, that they are reeotaateatletl
at perhepe the hut- laminae! the hind ever elem! to the pablie. .7 ! ' '
- ——~eoo~——

'flll FOLLOWING ARI fllBlI PRICE:

. ‘e Cole

”antennae! My (N'Ieheleaa'e [qr-rel) Flatee,wtth wifllum Key! I. I. 0
Pateat‘lahellaed.lttecflpe.flaette‘flqa.aadbodle ——r .. ea. .. e e n
Whfi‘Mhe aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa O eon... ——..0“ ea ... o

 

Ihgmhnulhpwmwm«flunthdtmqyImueflruaqmd

Chill!" C co:
“Ifloflu
I [PRO [.00 I 'I
II'IO'I’.

2-3. Advertisement by Clementi & Co..

16

by Clementi & Co. for these instruments. It claims that
Clementi’s instruments are copied directly from "Mr.

Nicholson’s favorite old flute,‘ presumably the Astor
mentioned in the School. Nicholson flutes were later
produced by Thomas Prowse (active from 1816 to 1830), who
eventually came to sell them under his own name.10 Figure
2-4 (p. 17) shows a detail of the stamp from a Thomas
Prowse, "Nicholson’s Improved" flute (#3784, writer's
collection). Figure 2-5 (p. 18) shows a broadside for

Prowse which describes the various configurations of flute

produced. The advertisement offers that:

"These FLUTES are finished under the immediate
inspection of Mr. NICHOLSON . . . where he attends
daily for the express purpose of trying each
flute, before it is sent out."

The Nicholson-style flute was widely copied by other
flute makers, notably by Rudall & Rose,11 whose flutes were
very popular. Both Rockstro and Bate consider these
superior to the flutes of T. Prowse in "intonation, tone and
workmanship.“2 Rockstro’s opinion is somewhat suspect
because his book was published by Rudall & Roses’s
successor, Rudall, Carte & Company, with whom he had a long
association. He disparagingly cites the Nicholson flute as

being of smaller bore than the Rudall & Rose flutes, giving

 

1° Langwill, 141.

11 Lindsay (1828-30), 2. Lindsay notes that
Nicholson was followed by "a whole race of imitators,
with Mr. Rudall [of Rudall & Rose] at the head of the
list."

13 Rockstro, 288; Bate, The Flute, 112.

17

 

Figure 2-4. Stamp from "Nicholson’s Improved" flute.

 

.34;

18

 

 

 

 

F0“

(3. Nicholson’s

LA’I‘F S'l‘ INII’IIOVEII
PATEN.3:...,5:..I.-.UTI=S-
TIIIDDIAS PIHDW’SE,
13,

llANVVAY-S'I‘IIEE'I‘. 0XF0lllI-S'I‘IIEE'I‘.

(LATE .IIJJ'UP'ACTURHR FOR CLEMENT], COLLJRD. 0 Ce.)

 

 

 

 
  

 

. eea-aelbaay. Iaeeaaelbeay.
weal-Hellman "new... Anon.,-mam... ""‘""~T‘F""'“'- ‘ h ‘
'“O. Iaaea it lava. and read-heeded Hr. let ‘0 -
| “unmm‘n‘ I “hiyawnhdaflew “...... I I I
7 I); .u... . . ... . no . .. ...... I I I
t t em......... . no to o
Inuiflqleyn-iiJ-Atelpeie'e ...... .. I3 I31 ’0'. 0 . II It 0
7b.. .... ...... .. u u o " '
" '" latrahe lite-rhea; Mint-hm ... . 0
Inc ..... . .... .... I5 I! O . . II .
'I
Chanel-tan]. WM InefaueuI-Mle.
Wt‘emehdleleeeltagTinleaeab‘elenI-I I“ ".'. A“ " '3. ' 7 7 '
70a. n e e
Imthfl‘Im-ithmsp: . l3 '3 o I Do. ....................... .. I I o
ilk. . ... . N It I Don't-I.
e lb. ..“... . It I: e "*"mfivffl‘.
- Iaeaaaefiawy : z 3
ma la'tae-I-aedheodlrleee‘l'lnle. he. . . 0
IMI'hI' Kym-nibbles” u... I010 0
.. ... ll ll 0
Illa ......... .....n... ............... u I! I! 0 O I O
GaaaaaeDaeey. 7 1 0
'Mchaeedltleaella'flpe, ItlneAmh’lMIfltqul . ' 0
"'"~'"‘" [DIM rum mm 6.... "I. ... era—a.
Hvegneheaeel-wpe-eeviu'thahereahhelaetn-
ween. he. ...................... .... I o
Ceae‘allloeewoadae Mahogany. with-tr- ....... . 0 It 0

 

 

 

Theta FLUTES eeeIaiehed aa-lee the immediate Bum etllr. Nll‘ IIOI :ON. .u the a-Iy lea-Inner, af Eel-paved lawn-eat,

parietal, to he being em on.
.V. 5. Earl Flea Ir cue-peeled with e Cert-jean. bearing the Signature. '0. Nrcwaeeaw. "

5k

 

 

W. POID, Prime, Ir. II, WM-ewuglad‘

Figure 2-5. Advertisement by Thomas Prowse.

at:

 

19

general measurements of .74-.75" for the Rudall and Rose
headjoint bores and .73-.74" for the Nicholson flutes. The
writer’s measurements of four instruments (Rudall & Rose
#2959, #3981, and Prowse #3157, collection of Stephen
Preston; and Prowse #3784, writer’s collection) reveal that

both Prowse flutes and Rudall & Rose #2959 measure 18.80mm
(.740") while Rudall & Rose #3981 measures 18.82mm (.741").

'Furstenau may be a more neutral authority. He admires
the Nicholson flutes for their low register, but worries
that they no longer sound like flutes. He also considers
the Rudall flutes only average.13

Examination of numerous examples of both makes, reveals
that the Rudall & Rose flutes are easier to play and
therefore better adapted to the amateur. In terms of sound
production and intonation, the flutes by T. Prowse are
difficult to control. However, if the flute is in good
working order and the player is able to control it, the
sound is much fuller and has more depth and carrying power.
These flutes are undoubtedly closer in sound to Nicholson’s
intention.

The Nicholson flute differs substantially from
contemporary European and English instruments. Monzani’s
flutes were quite popular, and Nicholson mentions having
played one for an extended period.1‘ Figure 2-6 (p. 20)

shows the fingerholes of a Nicholson flute (Prowse #3784,

 

13 Anton B. Ffirstenau, FlBten-Schule (Leipzig:
Breitkopf & Hartel, ca. 1826), 9, 10.
1‘ School, 6.

20

 

Figure 2-6. Fingerholes, Prowse and Hill-late Monzani

flutes..

21

 

Figure 2-7. Nine nineteenth-century flutes.

22

writer’s collection) compared with those of a Hill-late
Monzani from 1832 (#2332, writer’s collection). Figure 2-7
(p. 21) shows nine flutes, five of which are traditional
keyed flutes and four of which have the large holes
(collection of Stephen Preston). All but flutes B and I are
from the the second quarter of the nineteenth century.
Flutes A (Claire Godfroy) and B (Jacques Nonon--this is an
' example of Tulou's Flute PErfectionee15 made sometime after
1853) are typical of French manufacture. The Godfroy
demonstrates the French tendency towards simplicity, with
only a D-foot joint. The Nonon is Tulou’s answer to the
Boehm flute. It incorporates technical improvements but
retains many features of the older keyed flute. Both flutes
have small holes and a characteristically light, clear
sound. Flute C is made in Dresden by V. Liebel and flute D
is Viennese and is attributed to Stephan Koch. These
Germanic flutes are very heavy in construction, and the Koch
has several extra keys. The sound is a bit louder and more
penetrating than the French instruments, but still small
compared to the Nicholson flutes. Flute E is made in London
by Rudall & Rose but is not a large-hole flute. The
moderate size oval embouchure hole is typical of progressive
English flutes of the time; those by conservative makers
such as Monzani & Hill tend to be smaller still.

Flutes F through H are typical "Nicholson’s Improved"

flutes as manufactured by Thomas Prowse. There is

 

‘5 Jean Louis Tulou, Méthode de Flfite (Mayence: B.
Schott’s Sohne, 1835), 63.

23

considerable variation in the details of these flutes, and
only flute F incorporates all of Nicholson’s innovations.
These include an ivory-lined embouchure,16 excavations for
the left-hand index finger and right-hand thumb and a
flattening of the body to facilitate the glide. Details of

the excavations for the left-hand index finger and right-

hand thumb are shown in Figures 2-8 and 2-9 (pp. 24 and 25).
The latter is lined with sharkskin to improve the grip.

This modification reflects Nicholson’s penchant for having a
firm grasp on the instrument.17 The flattened fingerholes
are visible in Figures 2-6 (Prowse flute and 2-7 (flutes F
and G). Flute F from Figure 2-7 displays a series of
ornamental rings which often appear on the headjoint and
barrel of "Nicholson’s Improved" flutes.

The number of keys on the Nicholson flute is of some
significance. He is said to have played on a six-keyed
flute and to have opposed the additional long F and C
keys.18 If he did play on his father’s Astor, this older
flute would probably have had fewer keys.

The Preceptive Lessons and the School contain fingerings for
both the C and long F keys, showing that Nicholson fully
understood their use. In the School he states that music of
the present time (1836) requires a flute with seven keys
(the seventh would be the C key) and admits that many will

find the long F advantageous.19 Playing the examples of the

 

1° School, 6.

17 Ibid, 2.

19 Lindsay (1828-30), 2.
19 School, 6.

24

 

 

Figure 2-8. Detail, excavation for left hand.

 

Figure 2-9. Detail, excavation for right hand.

26

tutors suggests that Nicholson had evolved a technique of
sliding onto the short F key, which rendered the long F
unnecessary. He appears to have used the weaker-sounding
forked fingering in very fast passages where a clear tone
was not required,2° but in one instance he indicates a trill
using the short F key. This involves closing all the holes
of the flute with the fingertips and somehow trilling the
short F key with the side of the tip of the ring finger (the
F key is located between the tips of the middle and ring
fingers). Nicholson evidently could do this, but for others
he "despairs of ever hearing it executed with brilliancy."l
Such techniques must have seemed superhuman and still do.

Of the Nicholson flutes in Figure 2-7, flutes E and H have
eight keys, and flutes F and G have seven.

Not visible in Figure 2-7 is the weight of the flutes.
Nicholson argues against extra keys because of their added
weight, yet the Prowse flutes are made of very dense wood
and the keywork is of unusually heavy silver. An eight-
keyed "Nicholson’s Improved" flute from the 1830’s (Prowse
#3879, writer’s collection) weighs 486 grams while a
similarly equipped traditional flute from 1832 (Hill-late
Monzani #2332, writer’s collection) weighs 353 grams. An
earlier boxwood flute by Astor with five keys (ca. 1800,

writer’s collection) weighs just 280 grams. Only the

 

3° Charles Nicholson, Preceptive Lessons (London:
Clementi & Co., 1821), 3; School, 47.
'1 Preceptive Lessons, 43.

27

Germanic flutes, with their extra keywork and extended foot
joints, exceed the Nicholson flute in weight.

Flute I is a Rudall & Rose imitation of the Nicholson
model. The embouchure hole is not quite as large as in the
Prowse examples. This instrument represents a compromise,
being easier to play but lacking the full sound of the
Prowse flutes.

Lindsay credits Nicholson with popularizing several
features which are common to the Nicholson flute as well as
to many flutes of the period. These include elastic plugs
(round leather pads) found on flutes E-I, pewter plugs for
the low C and C# keys found on flutes 0-1, a metal-lined
headjoint and tuning slide found on flutes 0-1, and double
springs which improve the action of the keys” found on
flutes E-I.

There was no clear standard of pitch in England during
Nicholson’s lifetime. Adam Carse documents wide variations
in pitch among the various London orchestras from 1819 to
1838.23 A camparison of a number of English flutes from the
first half of the century suggests a general rise in pitch
throughout the period. The five-keyed Astor (ca. 1800,
writer’s collection) plays at about A=430. It appears that
the Prowse flutes were intended to play at about A=440.
Boehm flutes made after mid-century by Rudall, Carte & Co.

commonly play at or above A=450. Reginal Nettel confirms

 

’3 Lindsay (1828-30), 2.
33 Adam Carse, The Orchestra from Beethoven to
Berlioz (New York: Broude, 1949), 471.

 

 

that
in 1

A=45

atte
recov
has
of t)

head‘

 

 

 

 

 

Co.

and I

Playe
in F.
#378
diSt
this
The

fing
Cent
One-

keYS

28
that the pitch adopted by the Philharmonic Society of London

in 1813 was A=423.7, but by mid-century had risen to
A=452.5.14

The tuning slide, described in Richard Potter’s patent
of 1785,25 would have been a practical necessity. Nicholson
attests to the lack of uniform pitch standards by
recommending that the student learn transposition in case he
has to play more than a half-step above or below the pitch
of the instrument.2° Figure 2-10 (p. 29) shows two
headjoints made for the same Nicholson flute (Clementi &
Co., "Nicholson’s Improved," collection of Glennis Stout)
and pitched almost a half-step apart.

It appears that the Prowse flutes were intended to be
played with the tuning slide extended. This is illustrated
in Figure 2-11, (p. 30) and confirmed by T. Prowse flute
#3784 (writer’s collection), which has a line marked at a
distance of approximately one-quarter of an inch. Without
this extension these flutes play well above A=445.

The Nicholson flute requires the use of a number of altered
fingerings. During the late eighteenth and early nineteenth
centuries one key after another had been added to the simple
one-keyed flute, and the application and use of the various

keys was still being explored in Nicholson’s time. The

 

3‘ Reginald Nettel, The Orchestra in England
(London: Jonathan Cape, 1946), 244.

35 Patents fer Inventions. Abridgements of
Specifications Relating to.Music and Musical
Instruments (London: Office of the Commissioners of
Patents for Inventions, 1871), 16.

3‘ Preceptive Lessons, 81.

29

2::

t:::::::::

“gag-is

.e fizz...

.‘gza.

g“__=E__==§

.

................;,

 

 

Two headjoints for the same Nicholson flute.

Figure 2-10.

30

.ou:~m condosoflz no sewnsouxo opaam

uswcse

.fiHIN ousmwh

 

31

transition from the one-keyed flute to the various keyed-
flutes with small fingerholes presented few difficulties,
because the old and often easier cross fingerings remained
useable.27 With their extra venting, Nicholson’s large
fingerholes render the cross fingerings ineffective except
in fast passages. In addition, the Nicholson flute produces
harmonics and notes of the upper register with comparative
ease, making available a number of alternate fingerings
which were previously ineffective or impossible. A new
fingering system might have its advantages, but would
require effort to learn. Nicholson vehemently denies that
his flute requires altered fingerings,3° yet his system of
fingering is a featured part of the tutors.

A page explaining the nature and availability of
harmonic fingerings is included in the Cbmplete Preceptor
and the School.39 The musical examples of the Preceptive
Lessons feature extensive use of harmonic fingerings.3° For
example, in the tutors Nicholson gives a total of six
different fingerings for c3. These include harmonics of c1,
and f1, as well as the more usual cross fingering, and the

long C key.’1

 

3' "Compositions," 84. In this article Louis
Drouet, one of Nicholson’s greatest rivals, is
criticized for using these easier fingerings in the
pursuit of facility.

33 School, 6.

2’ Complete Preceptor, 76; School, 115.

3° Preceptive Lessons, 11, 15, 16, 19, 24, etc.

31 School, 45; Complete Preceptor, 69; Ibid, 10;
School, 45.

32

The ease of overblowing may also have led Nicholson to
exploit the use of octaves. This device (Figure 2-12) is
not new, but it is easier to produce on the Nicholson flute
and appears with frequency both in the tutors32 and in
Nicholson's compositions.33 The link between Nicholson’s

flute and his tutors could hardly be more direct.

  

written thus

p‘leyed '

Figure 2-12. Nicholson’s use of Octaves, School, 73.

 

3’ Complete Preceptor, 53. Preceptive Lessons,
12, 26, 35. School, 75.

33 Charles Nicholson, Twelve Airs with variations
(London: Clementi & Co., 1821), "Portuguese Air,"
variation 3; "Oh Nanny Wilt Thou Gang with Me,"
variation 3; "French Air," variation 5.

33
ALIGNMENT

A relevant bit of evidence appears in the Nicholson
model flutes produced by Thomas Prowse. One example
(Clementi-Prowse, ca. 1825, #3157, collection of Stephen
Preston) exhibits alignment marks between the joints (Figure
2-13, p. 34). These indicate that, starting from the head,
the top of each joint was to be turned.progressively
outwards (away from the performer). This relationship is
displayed by flutes F and G in Figure 2-7 (p. 21).
Particularly clear evidence for this alignment appears in a
flute which has the center section made in one piece instead
of the usual two. Figure 2-14 (p. 35) shows the shift in
alignment of the fingerholes between the left and right
hands. Figure 2-15 (p. 36) from the School shows the right-
hand fingerholes turned outward.

Nicholson fails to mention this joint alignment in the text
of his tutors. With the exception of a singular mention in
Lindsay’s Elements, Nicholson’s alignment of the body of the
flute seems also to have gone without notice in the other
flute tutors examined. As these tutors are all of a general
nature and the Nicholson flute was something of a specialty
item, the implication is that the usage of this particular
alignment was confined to large-hole flutes. Drouet, who
played a small-hole flute and opposed Nicholson on many
issues, actually describes the opposite practice, with the

right hand joint "being turned inwards a very little."3‘

 

3‘ Louis Drouet, Drouet’s Method of Flute Playing
(London: R. Cocks & Co., 1830), 1.

34

lll‘ll‘li

H

M.IJ;.

'
-.
'c
'

 

Figure 2-13. Clementi-Prowse flute, alignment marks.

35

   

u

Figure 2-14. T. Prowse flute, hand alignment.

36

.. .. £3.22; 3,,

m.:OMHO
SO
. CHDHE .
mHIN 0h
swam

..“/“ref?

 

37

Lindsay offers an explanation and some veiled criticism
of this alignment practice. Though he avoids direct
conflict with Nicholson, Lindsay’s comments here suggest
that he did not favor the large-hole flute. He first
explains that the recent trend towards large embouchure
holes has led to turning the headjoint inwards,

this inclination being considered best adapted for
receiving the whole column of air as it is passed
from the Embouchure, and also in the most

advantageous direction for a fine, full, and
resonant tone.35

Along with turning the headjoint in came a trend towards
turning the joints of the body outward. Lindsay explains
the practical purpose of this practice and reveals his

scepticism about the large finger-holes:

Again, it is not unusual to turn the holes of the
third joint outwards in a similar degree, as seen
in the sketch, [Figure 2-16, p. 38] but this the
author considers useless; unless, indeed, the
holes of the flute are of very large dimensions,
in which latter case the precautions may be
serviceable, inasmuch as they are thereby brought
more immediately under the soft, fleshy part of
the fingers, and consequently more likely to be
closely stopped.3‘

Lindsay’s explanation seems less than complete. As he
suggests, Nicholson’s joint alignment does allow the "soft,
fleshy part of the fingers" to cover the holes, but only

when other adjustments are made.

 

3’ Lindsay (1828-30), 14
3‘ Ibid.

38

Experiments with the Nicholson flute suggest a further
explanation, having more to do with posture and sound
production. In order for one to play comfortably, the right
elbow and forearm must be considerably elevated, thus
raising the ribcage and so facilitating breathing. This
serves to match the angle of the right hand to the position
of the flute body. While experimenting with this position
and the Nicholson flute, this writer experienced a
pronounced increase in focus, pungency, and volume of sound,
all quite consistent with Nicholson’s expressed ideal of
tone. This arrangement is effective only in playing the
large-hole flutes and does not appear applicable to other

types of flute.

 

 

 

'fliwreM“ IE 1‘ ""“3‘?” v'“‘*1‘31‘.:l{_l"’°'3""“"”"n

Figure 2-16. Flute alignment, Lindsay, Elements, 14.

While many tutors also recommend turning the headjoint
inwards, Nicholson’s alignment of the flute body is
exceptional. It simultaneously aids in covering the large
holes, prevents the "stooping" and "ungraceful" posture that
Nicholson opposed, and favors the characteristics of sound

with which he was associated.

39
POSTURE

Charles Nicholson appears to be the first prominent
flutist to establish a clear link between posture and
projection of sound. Prior to the nineteenth century, the
requirements for projection of sound were comparatively
modest and efficiency of breathing hardly an issue. With
the advent of public concerts, larger concert halls, and the
popular taste for virtuoso display came a concern for volume
and projection of sound. As Nicholson was uniquely
successful in this respect, his approach to posture and
breathing are both interesting and illuminating. Although
he does not address breathing as a separate topic, much can
be inferred from his tutors, from period engravings of
flutists, and from examination of surviving instruments.

Nicholson’s views on posture are the first topic of
discussion in the Complete Preceptor. In an essay, "On
Holding the Flute," He cautions that while some may deem
the subject trivial, holding the flute deserves the
student’s immediate attention. The most visible feature of
Nicholson’s concept is that the flute should be held
horizontally, not just for appearance but because

the Pupil will be enabled to preserve an equality

of Tone, which must be necessarily lost by holding
the Instrument in an oblique direction.37

 

3' Complete Preceptor, 3.

40

He goes on to recommend that the pupil stand while

practicing so that

by keeping the chest a little extended, and
avoiding an inclination to stoop, [the student’s
posture] will be more healthful, and at the same
time render his practice less irksome and
laborious than would otherwise be the case from
the practice of sitting in an inclined position.3°

Twenty years later Nicholson’s reasoning remained much
the same, but he gives greater emphasis to the mechanics of
breathing and the direct connection of posture and breathing

to sound production:

The position I recommend my pupils to adopt in
their practice, is to keep the head and body as
upright as possible; by which means the chest is
rendered more capable of expansion, and the
performer is enabled to produce a more full and
free tone than would result from a stooping as
well as an ungraceful posture.39

Nicholson’s approach to posture represents a departure from
previous practice in several respects, including body
carriage, angle of the flute, and hand position. This was
undoubtedly necessitated by the relative awkwardness of the
Nicholson flute. Illustrations from the frontispiece of the
School show the two contrasting approaches (Figures 2-17 and

2-18, pp. 41 and 42). These are later described in the
text:

 

39 Ibid.
3’ School, 1.

41

 

School, frontspiece.

Bad posture,

Figure 2-17.

42

 

School, frontspiece.

Good posture,

Figure 2-18.

43

The one showing the flute depressed, and a
distorted countenance in the performer, is far
from a caricature or exaggeration of the manner in
which the instrument is frequently held. I shall
therefore here make an observation, the truth of
which may be relied on, that the most elegant
position is invariably the best in the use of all
instruments, and merits the earliest and most
serious consideration of the pupil.‘°

That the first is not a caricature may be seen by a
comparison with Figure 2-19 (p. 44, from Monzani’s
Instructions, 1813). Among Nicholson’s immediate
predecessors, the predominant posture seems to have been
relaxed, with the ribcage lowered (causing the stomach to
protrude) and shoulders held slightly forward. In contrast,
Nicholson’s posture has the ribcage raised and the shoulders
held back. One has only to try a few deep breaths, first
with the sternum lowered and then with it raised, to
appreciate the effectiveness of Nicholson’s approach.

It may be surmised from Figure 2-18 that Nicholson’s
use of the word "horizontal" is relative rather than
absolute. Without mentioning Nicholson by name, Lindsay
reconciles this seeming contradiction and sets precise
limits as well,

. . . since a perfectly horizontal line of the
Flute would be difficult to preserve for any
length of time, because from too great an
elevation of the right arm, it would be attended
with considerable fatigue, this arm is generally
suffered to fall, to such an extent, that the
declination of the Flute may form an easy and

graceful angle of about 10, but certainly not more
than 15 degrees, from the horizon, as shown in the

 

‘° Ibid.

44

 

Figure 2-19. Frontispiece, Monzani, Instructions, 1813.

45

diagram. A very slight inclination of the head
will then counteract the effect of the angle, and
restore the parallelism of the lips.H

Nicholson’s general approach to posture appears to have
been quite influential, at least in his own country.

Popular English tutors before the Nicholson’s Complete
Preceptor (1816) make little or no mention of posture
whatsoever. These include the early editions of the popular
J. Wragg (from 1790) and Monzani (1801) tutors. Those
published after the Complete Preceptor often paraphrase if
not plagiarize some of Nicholson’s ideas on posture. This
distinctive horizontal position is advocated in the tutors
of Wragg (ca. 1828), Dressler (1828), Weiss (1829), Lindsay
(1828-30) and Alexander (1830).

Nicholson appears to have had little influence on the
continent. Most earlier writers seem concerned primarily
with matters of appearance or hand position. Discussions of
posture appear more frequently among Nicholson’s continental
contemporaries, perhaps reflecting a general trend.
Particularly notable is Tulou, who in his Methode (1835),
does make a connection between posture and ease or
difficulty of breathing. Still, his concern is more with
avoiding the difficulties created by bad posture than with
increasing efficiency beyond the norm. No direct connection
is drawn between posture and production of sound. In his

English-language Method (1830), Drouet addresses respiration

 

‘1 Lindsay (1828-30), 14

46

(meaning musical phrasing) at length and posture only
briefly, and he makes no explicit connection between posture
and tone production. In Germany, A.B. Furstenau advocates a
.horizontal position for the flute, but Figure 2-20 (p. 47)
from his Floten-Schule shows the chest and shoulders held
rather low, in distinct contrast to Nicholson’s posture in
Figure 2-18. Again, no connection between posture and
projection of sound is discussed.

The effect of Nicholson’s alignment may also be seen in
comparison of the position of the right elbow in Figure 2-18
with that in Figure 2-20. In Figure 2-18 the right-hand
tone holes are clearly visible, with the joint turned out
and away from the performer.

The connection of posture to breathing, and breathing
to sound production is now well established and may seem
obvious to today’s flutists. However, in Nicholson’s time
the idea was new. It produced a profound change in the

practice and aesthetics of flute playing.

47

 

Figure 2-20. Frontispiece, FGrstenau, Floten-Schule.

CHAPTER III

TONE QUALITY

In England, by the end of the eighteenth century,
opinion on the ideal'of flute tone had diverged into two
camps, amateur and professional. The split reflects the
disparate requirements faced by the two groups. Playing in
intimate settings, the amateur could afford to use whatever
sound he found pleasing. Larger halls, audiences, and
ensembles demanded increased projection from the
professional. This was accompanied by a rise in pitch and
the acceptance of brighter color.

John Gunn comments on this state of affairs in his
tutor of 1793, describing the two groups and their ideals.
The amateurs are presented as "pupils of nature." Their
model for tone is the female voice, with the ideal sound
being characterized by "softness, grace, and tender
expression." This viewpoint is reflected by Monzani, who in
1813 cautions the pupil to "avoid what is termed a reedy or
oboe tone on the lower notes."1 Gunn describes the
professional’s ideal as equality and fullness of tone, but
warns against "bold and warlike tones."3 He personally

advocates taking the best of both extremes:

 

1 Tebaldo Monzani, A New and Ehlarged Edition of
Mbnzani’s Instructions for the German Flute (London:
Monzani & Hill, ca. 1813), 7.

3 John Gunn, The Art of Playing the German Flute
(London: author, 1793), 1.

48

49

I have often smiled at the conflict of these
jarring opinions, when called upon to give mine,
and have given little satisfaction to either
party, by declaring that neither of them appeared
to me to be right; that it was like asking a
painter whether it were better for a picture to be
all light, or all shadow.3

Nicholson’s position in this controversy would seem
obvious. As Bate puts it, his "brilliance and power of tone
were the admiration of all and the despair of many."‘

Nicholson does stress the ability to play loudly,
particularly in the low register. He describes this in the
School:

The tone ought to be as reedy as possible, as much

like that of the hautboy as you can get it, but
employing the round mellowness of the clarionet.s

This is not the only or even the usual approach but is in
fact a special effect. Writing in 1892, Christopher Welch
terms this the "son plein, a quality of tone resembling that
of the clarionet."'

Quoted by Rockstro and repeated out of context by Bate,
Toff,’ and others, this one statement has given Nicholson a
modern reputation as a player of great volume and

questionable taste. This is misleading, because loudness is

 

3 Ibid.
4 Bate, 8.
5 School, 3.

' Christopher Welch, History of the Boehm Flute
second ed. (London: Rudall, Carte, and Co., 1892;
reprinted New York: McGinnis & Marx, 1961), 6.

7 Rockstro, 608; Bate, 111-112; Toff, Mbdern
Flute, 38; Toff, Flute Book, 103.

50

only one feature of a complicated style. The reedy tone was
not Nicholson’s usual manner of playing but a special effect
which is difficult to produce and which therefore requires
some practice. Drawing from the remembrances of those who
had actually heard him play, Rockstro describes Nicholson’s
tone as being "occasionally hard in quality, yet it was
really noble in its general character."9 He undoubtedly
could and did play loudly on occasion, but this was only one
facet of a complex and varied style. In fact, Rockstro
offers a balanced image of Nicholson’s approach to tone,
commenting that

this popular artist had such a consummate mastery

over his instrument, that the effects of light and

shade which he was therefore able to produce were
truly marvellous [sic].9

As if to refute possible criticism, Nicholson cautions
in the School that the quality of sound should be of first
concern. He specifically warns against playing too loudly,

or "roaring, and also against the "hissing or whistling" of
embouchure noise.19 This suggests a degree of refinement in
matters of tone.
Welch suggests that Nicholson’s reputation as a
blowhard may owe more to his successors than to himself:
Nicholson, who could elicit every variety of tone

which the flute is capable of producing, is said
to have forced it out in a way never before heard,

 

9 Rockstro, 613.
9 Ibid.
19 School, 3.

51

and hence it was christened the "Nicholsonian"
effect." It is much cultivated by English flute-
players, and those who have strong lips are often
proud of being able to "thrash" the flute, as they
term it, and so make it heard.’1

Boehm states in 1871 that, "All Nicholson’s successors
had, more or less, a powerful tone, but they made a trumpet
of the flute.“2 The implication is that Nicholson did not
make a trumpet of the flute. He appears to have followed
John Gunn’s suggestion and adopted the best of the two
extremes of tonal concepts. Nicholson considers tone the
most important feature of flute playing.13 It is apparent
that he refers not just to the acquisition of a good sound,
but the controlled use of contrasting sounds. In the
Complete Preceptor Nicholson laments that flute players give
their attention to rapid execution, rather than

the varied modulation of Tone, so essentially
requisite to give a corresponding feeling and
effect, which a monotony of sound must ever fail
to produce: this variation or management of Tone,

it has been the Authors [sic] first and principal
study to obtain. . ..H

Any notion of Charles Nicholson playing loudly all or
perhaps even most of the time is simplistic and ultimately

incorrect.

 

11 Welch, 7.
99 Ibid, 218-219.

13 Complete Preceptor, 3.
19 Ibid.

52
EMBOUCHURE

A discussion of the tone of the flute inevitably leads
to the topic of "embouchure" and the related techniques of
sound production. These include control of dynamics, pitch,
and quality of sound (color).

In the Complete Preceptor Nicholson first describes a
very firm embouchure, with the lips "braced as much as
possible."15 This would produce a hard, focused sound in
the low register. The term bracing appears about the same
time in Alexander (1818)H and later in Dressler (1828).17

Nicholson does not limit himself to the reedy tone, but
also gives instructions for a contrasting soft tone. This
requires a different embouchure and approach:

To produce a soft, mellow, and round Tone, the
Lips should not be so well braced as in the former
instance, but rather project, the orifice being
formed from the soft or innermost part of the

Lips, and the breath directed obliquely into the
Flute as before, only much softer.1°

The Preceptive Lessons offer surprisingly little
comment on tone or embouchure. Citing "how very inferior
all written precepts are to oral instruction," Nicholson
offers a free lesson to anyone presenting himself with a

complete copy of the Preceptive Lessons.

 

15 Ibid, 4.

19 James Alexander, Alexander’s Complete Preceptor
for the Flute second edition (London: author, ca.
1818), 4.

1' Raphael Dressler, Dressler’s New and Complete
Instructions fer the Flute (London: R. Cocks & Co.,
1828), 7.

19 Complete Preceptor, 4.

53

The most complete treatment of embouchure occurs in the
School. There is evidence that Nicholson’s ideas developed
and changed over time. In describing basic sound
production, he suggests that "the lips must be first closed,
and a little drawn back, preserving as much as possible
their natural position free from distortion . . . the less
exertion used the better."19 This is a decided contrast to
the bracing mentioned in the Complete Preceptor (quoted
earlier). As Nicholson himself explains:

The old system of bracing the lips, producing an
elongation of the mouth, is for many reasons,
decidedly bad, as it renders the lips thin,

increases the difficulty of confining the
embouchure, and prevents an equal pressure.9°

Nicholson’s concern with flexibility of sound evidently
led him to adopt a looser embouchure which resulted in a
change in tone. In 1827 James commented on a general
improvement in Nicholson’s style and taste that had occurred
during the two previous years. Describing the new style as
"obviously remodeled," he says that Nicholson’s tone has
gained in richness and purity without losing volume or

power.21

 

19 School, 2.

99 Ibid, 3.

91 William N. James, "Mr. Nicholson," The
Flutist’s Magazine, 1 (1827), 44-45.

54
COVERAGE AND INTONATION

Details of the flute embouchure were and are difficult
to describe. One important feature which lends itself to
discussion is the coverage of the embouchure hole of the
flute by the player’s lower lip. This influences both tone
and intonation dramatically.

Nicholson describes covering one-half of the embouchure
hole22 in the Complete Preceptor. This is intended for the
traditional small-hole flute, as the Nicholson flute is not
mentioned and would not have been widely known in 1816.

This is also in conjunction with the braced embouchure,
which would tend to pull the lips against the teeth and away
from the embouchure hole, leaving it comparatively open.

There is great diversity among Nicholson’s
contemporaries on the issue of embouchure hole coverage.
This is a good indicator of concept of tone. A covered
approach suggests a focused sound and an uncovered
embouchure suggests the reverse, akin to that of Gunn’s
pupils of nature. The one-half rule is typical but not
universal. Some tutors recommend a much more open approach.
In London Keith suggests one-sixth coverage,99 and in Paris
Tulou advocates that a maximum of one-fourth be covered.H
This suggests a much lighter and less focused concept of.

tone than Nicholson’s.

 

39 Complete Preceptor, 4.

93 Robert William Keith, A New Complete Preceptor
for the Flute (London: author, ca. 1818-21), 10.

9‘ Tulou (1835), 4.

55

Covering one-half of a large Nicholson embouchure hole
is an entirely different proposition than doing so on the
traditional flute. In the School Nicholson is speaking
about his own instrument when he suggests that the pupil
cover "at least one-third or half the mouthhole."95
Covering half of the large embouchure hole requires that the
lips be somewhat relaxed and extended outward. This
relatively relaxed embouchure would allow greater
flexibility as regards intonation, dynamics, and ultimately
tone color.

The angle of the air stream has a critical effect on
tone color and is closely connected to embouchure coverage.
In discussing embouchure noise in the School, Nicholson
explains that harshness and noise result from blowing over
the embouchure hole rather than into it.99 He stresses the
role of the upper lip in reference to production of a strong
tone in the lower register. The upper lip is to be brought
as close to the blowing edge of the embouchure as possible,
so that "the breath may have as short a distance to pass
from the lips to the flute as possible."97 The air is not
to pass across the embouchure hole, but "the breath ought to
enter the mouth-hole in a vertical line."99 The extension
of the upper lip as Nicholson describes it would be
impossible with the bracing mentioned earlier. Because the

lips must advance over the embouchure hole, this vertical

 

35 School, 2.
39 Ibid, 3.
97 Ibid, 2.
99 Ibid.

56

approach to the air stream suggests a relatively relaxed
embouchure and a highly focused, pungent tone color.

The School includes engravings of the embouchures for
both loud and soft sounds. Figure 3-1a (p. 57) represents
the former,99 and some tension is visible in the corners of
the mouth. Figure 3-1b represents playing softly and shows
a more natural formation of the lips. There can be little
doubt that Nicholson’s embouchure would have been firmer
than that of his rival Drouet, who suggests blowing "without
making any grimace, noise, or distressing exertion."3°

Nicholson’s attitude towards intonation confirms his
flexibility of embouchure. Covering the hole produces a
harder, more focused sound and lowers the pitch. Nicholson
instructs that as one plays softer, the distance from the
upper lip to the mouth-hole and the opening of the flute’s
mouth-hole must be increasedfiH He advocates practice of
the swell from pp to ff’and back on each note to acquire "a
proper method of playing in tune."32 Uncovering the
embouchure hole favors a relatively soft and unfocused sound
and higher level of pitch. This approach to intonation
requires flexibility not only because the Nicholson flute is
inherently out of tune, but because the large embouchure
requires an exaggerated motion of the lips in order to
correct the pitch. Nicholson places responsibility for

intonation entirely on the player and not the instrument.

 

39 School, 4.

3° Drouet, Method (1830), 3.
31 Ibid, 4.

99 Ibid, 5.

57

 

Figure 3-1. Embouchure, School, Plate 2.

58

Good intonation is not difficult, "provided the ears of the
performer happen to be put on in the right place."33

Playing period instruments confirms that the Nicholson
flutes are extremely out of tune. The control necessary
just to produce acceptable intonation is prodigious. Anyone
who could master the instrument would have necessarily

developed a means of great tonal control and contrast.

VARIETY OF COLOR
Nicholson accords great importance to variety of sound,
which takes the form of dynamic contrast combined with
contrasts of tone color. The evidence suggests that
Nicholson and some of his English contemporaries were aware
of and exploited the possibilities of varied tone color to a
degree which far exceeded that of either their predecessors
or European contemporaries.
The European approach was much more conservative.
Drouet is direct and a bit defensive:
A fine tone does not depend on its loudness, or
greatness of volume. A large tone might be
offensive, and a weak tone agreeable. A tyro on

any instrument produces more noise than a finished
performer, but who will say that it is pleasant?3t

Tulou never mentions tone color directly, which in itself is
significant. He gives his opinion of such things with the

statement, "In the arts, with the flute especially, it is

 

33 Ibid.
3‘ Ibid, 2.

59

better to say: it is charming, than to say: it is
astonishing!"35 Fhrstenau simply states that one must not
expect a clarinet or trumpet sound, which is alien to the
flute.39 That a real difference of concept existed is
confirmed by a letter to the editor of The Flutist’s
Magazine (1827). The anonymous writer claims to have spoken
with Ffirstenau, who explained that "in Germany no flutist
would be tolerated who had not a very soft tone."97 In the
editor’s response to this letter, James claims that on
Fhrstenau’s recent tour of England he was converted to the
English ideal of tone and left the country with several
English flutes. In fact, Fhrstenau criticizes the various
English flutes and states that the London maker Saust is
copying his flutes from Ffirstenau’s Liebel flute (made in
Dresden).38 James’s record of biased reporting remains
intact. Ffirstenau does seem to have been sincerely
impressed with Nicholson, describing him as a genuine,
substantial flutist [ein wirklich trefflicher
FlStenspieller].99

Although Nicholson was well known for the loud, hard
color, he gives a detailed description of the production and
use of the soft sound in the School. This refers to more

than a change in dynamic. His precise wording is of

 

interest:
35 Tulou (1835), 1.
3‘ Fhrstenau (can 1826), 10.
9' Flauto, "M. Furstenau," The Flutist’s Magazine
1 (1827), p. 29.
39 Ibid, 9.

99 Ffirstenau, (ca. 1826), 9.

60

There is a soft, mellow, and delicious quality of
tone to be produced in the lower octave of the
flute, by forming the embouchure of the soft
internal portion of the lips: it is totally free
from reediness, and in some degree resembles the
most subdued tones of the clarionet. The muscles
of the face and lips must be relaxed, and the
mouth-hole about one-third covered, and brought
exactly opposite the embouchure, to receive the
column of air, which must be impelled into the
flute with moderate force. There may be a
considerable body of tone produced in this way,
and so totally different in its quality from that
treated in the early part of this article [the
loud, hard sound], that when it is introduced in a
slow movement, its effect is charming, and at once
relives [sic] the ear from monotony. The
embouchure may here be larger than the mouth-hole,
for as the lips are relaxed the breath will not be
impelled with sufficient force to produce any
unpleasant noise from passing over it.‘9

The flute naturally tends toward a hard tone when played
loudly and a Soft, diffuse tone when played quietly.
Nicholson’s statement that the soft sound can produce a
"considerable body of tone" implies the use of a tone color
independent of its natural dynamic tendency. Overcoming the
association of dynamic level with color represents a
significant achievement.

Nicholson does not give guidelines for the application
of different tone colors, but some specific inferences can
be made based on his use of alternate fingerings. Figure 3-
2 (p. 61) illustrates the notation and use of harmonics.

The fundamental note is indicated in small type, and special
cross-fingerings are indicated by the asterisk and by the

crossed circle. Harmonics require greater airspeed, which

 

4° School, 4.

61

produces a more intense sound. Cross fingerings must be
played softly and so are relatively subdued. The result is

a very subtle control of color, dynamic, and intensity.

Ir

 

Figure 3-2. Harmonics, Preceptive Lessons, 65.

By the second quarter of the nineteenth century, the
use of contrasting tone colors had achieved a degree of
currency in England. Nicholson’s influence is uncertain in
this respect, although a significant role may be assumed.

In 1826 James describes three types of tone color. The
first is "similar to the tone of the hautbois, or clarionet"
and the second is "the natural tone of the instrument, as
beginners always produce it.“1 The third is "of a metallic
and liquid character".‘2 The first two are strongly
reminiscent of Gunn descriptions of tone color, while the
last is similar to Welch’s "Nicholsonian effect."

Dressler also describes three types of sound. These
include the "pure and natural Flute tone," which should be
given the most attention, and the "sweet and mellow tone"
produced by pushing the lips forward and blowing gently.43
In describing a third variety, the conservative Dressler

takes aim at Nicholson:

 

‘1 James (1826), 147.
99 Ibid.
‘9 Dressler (1828), 7.

62

There is a kind of tone resembling the Hern,
produced on the lowest part of the instrument; but
as it renders the tone hard, and prevents a
flowing union of the notes, it would obviously
present an impediment to the student’s
improvement.H

A similar criticism was voiced by Monzani in 1813, that
the reedy low register caused an inequality in the high
register.‘5 An evaluation of Dressler’s criticism is
difficult today, because the precise nature and degree of
the Nlcholsonian effect is unknown.

This writer has not experienced the difficulties
suggested by Dressler or Monzani and suspects these may have
stemmed from the embouchure which Dressler advocates. This
has the lips braced against the teethU in a manner similar
to Nicholson’s early approach as described in the Complete
Preceptor.H The hard, reedy sound requires a control of
the lips which is difficult to achieve if they are tight.
The more relaxed approach advocated by Nicholson allows for
a very "reedy" sound while maintaining control and
‘flexibility of the lips.

While never a prominent feature, the actual use of
contrasting tone colors does appear in other English tutors.
One of Nicholson’s contemporaries, Charles Weiss, a German
who had lived in Italy before moving to London,‘9 merits

attention because his examples are very specific. He first

 

‘t Ibid.

‘5 Monzani (ca. 1813), 7.
‘9 Dressler (1828), 7.

‘7 Cbmplete Preceptor, 4.
‘9 Rockstro, 572-573.

urges the

qualities

63

pupil towards the "acquisition of the various

of tone, which resemble the Hautboy and the French

Horn"‘9 and then mentions something genuinely new:

There is one quality of tone, of which no one has
hithertoo [sic] made mention, in any method for
the Flute. It is too valuable, especially in slow
movements, to be passed over in silence. No other
Instruments produce sounds which can be compared
with these peculiar ones, and yet, they seem not
to belong to the Flute. In several of my works I
have introduced them under the name SONS CREUX
[hollow sounds] and the only idea I can give of
them without an instrument, is that of a round
hollow ball, which is imagined to be in the mouth.
This quality of mellow tones, when introduced in
passages, forms delightful pianos, which fall upon
the ear like echoes or music heard from some
distance.59

Weiss is describing the use of a vowel to influence the

tone color. The overall result is similar to Nicholson’s

use of the soft sound, but Nicholson never mentions the

conscious

use of the mouth cavity.

Although he is a German writing in English, Weiss gives

specific indications for the application of effects such as

"sons creux"51, "echo"59, "Sons aigus comme l’oboe"53

[sharp or

shrill like an oboe], and "sons pleins"5‘ [full

sound]. This is curious, because the French flutists Tulou

and Drouet show no interest in variety of tone color.

 

Book
3.

‘9 Charles N. Weiss, A New Methodical Instruction

for the Flute (London: Milhouse & Son, ca. 1821),
59 Ibid.
51 Ibid, 78.

93 Charles N. Weiss, Two HUndred Studies for the

Flute (London: Clementi & Co., ca. 1820), 27.

53 Ibid, 59.
5‘ Ibid, 29.

64

Weiss asks that a repeated E-flat1 be "pronounced with
such force & nerve as to give an idea of a French horn."55
While Nicholson’s use of tone color is subtle and musically
related, Weiss advocates parody.

A similar example of tone color manipulation appears in
Alexander’s complete Preceptor (ca. 1830). In successive
variations on a waltz, the flutist is instructed to imitate
a clarinet, a horn, and a trumpet.50

Although these writers do not represent a majority, by
the 1820’s there obviously existed an interest in varied

tone color on the part of England’s leading flutists.

ACOUSTICAL CONSIDERATIONS

The mechanics of tone production are closely tied to
the design of the instrument. The size and shape of the
embouchure hole, the material of the flute and the lining of
the headjoint all have a material effect on tone quality.
All of Nicholson's acoustical modifications to the flute
point towards greater clarity as well as volume of sound.

The sound of the flute is generated at the embouchure
hole, and even the smallest alteration in size or shape will
produce a noticeable change in sound. Nicholson advocated a
much larger embouchure hole than had been customary in
either England or on the continent.

English flutes made prior to the time of Nicholson have

comparatively small embouchure holes. Figure 3-3 (p. 66)

 

55 Weiss, Instruction (ca. 1821), 73.
59 Alexander (ca. 1818), 63.

65

shows the headjoints of six English flutes arranged from
left to right in approximate chronological order (all are
from the collection of Glennis Stout). Flute A is by Thomas
Cahusac (ca. 1782) and flutes B-D are by Richard Potter
(1782, ca. 1790, and ca. 1795). The Potter flutes have one,
four, and six keys respectively. A general trend towards
larger embouchure openings is apparent. The Cahusac has a
very small (7.71 by 8.60 mm.) embouchure typical of
eighteenth-century flutes and flute B has a slightly larger
embouchure (8.54 by 9.42 mm.). Flutes E and F are Nicholson
models, as may be discerned by the dramatically larger
embouchure holes (11.24 by 12.90 mm. and 10.08 by 11.87 mm.
respectively). Flute E is an early example of a Nicholson
flute sold by Clementi. The turned rings are particularly
associated with the Nicholson model.

Flutes A-E are made of boxwood, a comparatively light
and soft wood. Flute F is a Nicholson model made by Thomas
Prowse of cocoa wood. Nicholson prefers cocoa because "the
grain is closer, and the tone consequently more resonant."57
This flute also features an ivory-lined embouchure which
Nicholson strongly recommends, reasoning that the harder
substance retains a sharp edge better than wood.“9

Except for flute A, all of these examples feature a
metal-lined headjoint. Lindsay describes an "old fashioned

prejudice" against the metal lining, because the metal tube

 

57 School, 6.
59 Ibid.

66

 

Figure 3-3. English headjoints leading to Nicholson’s.

67

made the tone of the flute "hard" and metallic".59
Nicholson recommends the metal lining for just this
property, citing "great freedom and clarity to the tone."60
The Nicholson flute also differs from its continental
and traditional English counterparts. Figure 3-4 (p. 68)
shows the headjoints of nine flutes, seven of which date
from the second quarter of the nineteenth century. All
except flute G (from the writer’s collection) are from the
collection of Stephen Preston. Flutes A and B are typical
of French manufacture, with small and rather round
embouchure holes. The makers are Claire Godfroy and Jacques
Nonon. Flute B was designed by Tulou (his model
Perfectionée) and made sometime after 1853.91 Flute C was
made in Dresden by V. Liebel, and D is attributed to the
Viennese maker Stephan Koch. The two German flutes show a
tendency towards a square embouchure hole and they produce a
harder, more focused sound than the French instruments.
Flute E is English, by Rudall & Rose, but is not a large-
hole flute. The moderately sized oval hole is typical of
progressive English flutes of the time. Those by
conservative makers such as Monzani & Hill tend to be much
smaller. Flutes F through H are typical Nicholson models as
manufactured by Thomas Prowse. Flutes F and H feature the
ivory-lined embouchure hole. Flute F features a silver

plate for the chin which serves to protect the skin of those

 

59 Lindsay (1828-30), 2.
99 School, 6.
9‘ Tulou (1835), 63.

68

.mQHSHm mhspsoolsusouuusws on“:

.mu:«0npdu=

.4-" ounces

 

 

 

69

sensitive to the wood. Flutes G and H show the waisting
which is a feature of many Nicholson model flutes.92 This
is a narrowing of the outside of the head near the
embouchure which is reputed to aid in the production of low
notes.63 Flute I is Rudall & Rose’s version of a Nicholson
model. The embouchure hole is not quite as large as it is
in the Prowse examples.

Nicholson has little comment about the embouchure hole
other than to recommend the ivory lining.“ James admits
that the large embouchure hole allows for greater variety of
tone and easier production of high notes and harmonics, but
the difficulties are increased "tenfold".95 A similar
opinion is shared by Lindsay who cites the difficulties of
intonation.9° James also discounts the small embouchure
hole as producing only one sound and so recommends a medium-
size hole (as in Figure 3-4, flute E) for the average
player.°7 With the exception of the French flutes, all the
examples of Figure 3-4 have a metal tube lining the

headjoint.

 

‘9 Bate, 112.

99 James, Review of Bainbridge, The Flutist’s
Magazine (1827), 187.

9‘ School, 6.

95 James, Review of Bainbridge, The Flutist’s
Magazine (1827), 187.

99 Lindsay (1828-30), 2.

97 James, Review of Bainbridge, The Flutist’s
Magazine (1827), 187.

CHAPTER IV

EXPRESSION

In the three tutors Nicholson mentions numerous effects
or graces.l His usage implies a division into two broad
categories, embellishment and expression. The category of
embellishment clearly includes shakes (trills with various
resolutions), turns, and appoggiaturas. These are treated
in the following chapter. Expression includes what

Nicholson calls vibration and the glide.

VIBRATION

Nicholson’s vibration is a subtle shading of tone
produced by the breath, the fingers, or by shaking the
flute. It is first mentioned in the Complete Preceptor
(1816). Nicholson describes two techniques for producing
vibration, with the breath and with the fingers. The
Preceptive Lessons mention only the finger technique, and
the School describes three methods: breath, fingers, and
shaking the flute. The Complete Preceptor and School each
contain charts of vibration fingerings. Those from the
Preceptive Lessons are presented in the course of the

lessons.

 

1 Complete Preceptor, cover.

70

71

Briefly, breath vibration is produced

by a regular swell and modulation of the breath,
bearing some similitude to a state of exhaustion
or panting with a regular decrease or diminution
of the Tone. . ..3

This bears a superficial similarity to the breath vibrato
familiar to modern flutists. However, Nicholson’s
application of vibration suggests a very different musical

intent.

Fingered vibration may be produced by

a tremulous motion of the finger immediately over
the Hole, without coming in contact with the Flute
by the same motion, and in some instances with the
finger covering about one-half the Hole.9

The fingered vibration is the only form mentioned in
the text‘ or illustrated in the musical examples of the
Preceptive Lessons. Even airs like "Roslin Castle," which
has embellishments marked "exactly as he performed them,"s
contain only the fingered vibration. This suggests that
Nicholson had a strong preference for this technique.

The fingered vibration offers a particular advantage
for the purposes of this study. While the actual effect of
the breath vibration is subject to the player’s
interpretation, the effect of the fingered vibration is in

most cases dictated by the instrument and choice of

 

Complete Preceptor, 22.
Ibid.

Preceptive Lessons, 5.
Ibid. 65.

“.0”

72

fingering. It is therefore possible to reconstruct the
sound of Nicholson’s fingered vibration with a high degree
of confidence.

The third method of vibration as mentioned in the
School is by "a tremulous motion of the Flute." Nicholson
uses this to achieve higher speeds than are possible with
the breath technique alone.9 '

Nicholson’s vibration closely resembles an eighteenth-
century technique called flattement. Jacques-Martin
Hotteterre described this in his Principes of 1707. It was
usually produced by a motion of the finger, either at the
edge of the sounding tone hole or over an adjacent tone
hole. If all the fingers were occupied the flute could be
shaken to produce a similar effect.7 Quantz includes the
flattement among the essential graces in his versuch of
1752,° suggesting that the flattement by then was in general
use.

The flattement was used in England during the
eighteenth century, but appears to have died out about a
generation before Nicholson’s time. Writing in 1793, John
Gunn chronicles the waning popularity of the flattement in

eighteenth-century England:

 

9 School, 71.

7 Hotteterre, Jacques-Martin. Principles of the
Flute, Recorder and Oboe, (Paris: Christophe Ballard.
1707; trans. David Lasocki. New York: Frederick A.
Praeger, 1968), 66-69.

9 Johann Joachim Quantz, On Playing the Flute,
(Berlin: Johann Friedrich Voss. 1752; trans. Edward R.
Reilly, New York: Schirmer Books, 1966), 162.

73

There was formerly in use a numerous list of
graces, some with, and others without characters
to represent them, and now for the most part
discontinued. Among these was the dumb shake, on
stringed instruments, corresponding to what the
French call Flattement, and in our language, I
think, called Sweetenings, made by approaching the
finger to the first or second open hole, below the
proper note that is sounded , and moving it up and
down over the hole, approaching it very near each
time, but never entirely upon it; thus occasioning
an alternate flattening and sharpening of the
note, and like the dumb shake, producing a
trembling palsied expression, inconsistent with
just intonation, and not unlike that extravagant
trembling of the voice which the French call
chevrotter, to make the goat-like noise; for
which the singers of the Opera at Paris have been
so often ridiculed.9

For a twenty-year period after Gunn’s tutor, no mention
of vibrato-like effects appears in the English tutors
examined. Hadidian has suggested a parallel decline of this
technique in France based on the absence of the flattement
in Devienne’s Nbuvelle.Methode (ca. 1792).19

The immediate source of Nicholson’s vibration is
unclear. Fitzgibbon describes Nicholson as being
"practically self taught," James criticized his lack of
formal education, and according to Rockstro, he was
"decidedly old fashioned."H Nicholson himself is clear
that the Complete Preceptor owes a debt to the past, being

partly based on materials that his father had arranged for a

 

9 Gunn (1793), 18

‘9 Eileen Hadidian, Johann George Tromlitz’s Flute
Treatise: Evidences of Late Eighteenth Century
Performance Practice DMA Project, Stanford University,
1979, 387.

11. Fitzgibbon, 208; William N. James, "Mr.
Nicholson" (1827), 43; Rockstro, The Flute, 610.

74

tutor.*2 He also describes his father’s "peculiarity of
Tone & Modulation."13 Nicholson uses the term modulation
generally throughout the tutors, but refers to vibration
specifically as a form of modulation in the School.H
Assuming consistency of terminology, it seems probable that
Nicholson’s vibration was simply inherited from his father.
Regardless of its immediate origins, vibration was new
to Nicholson’s audience. A notice in the Quarterly.Musical
Magazine of 1823 credits him with the introduction of both
vibration and the glide.15 It may be either that the
flattement had been forgotten or that Nicholson’s usage was
somehow different. Vibration appears to be a timbral effect
while flattement is based more on changes of pitch.
Vibration begins to appear regularly in English flute
tutors after Nicholson’s Complete Preceptor. Wragg’s
venerable Flute Preceptor provides an interesting case.
Editions up to and including that of April of 1818 were
published by the author and contain no mention of
Nicholson’s innovations. The publication of Wragg’s 14th
edition in August, 1818 was taken over by Clementi &
Collard, who by then were marketing the "C. Nicholson’s
Improved" model flute.i° Not surprisingly, this edition

contains a new appendix describing vibration and the

 

13 Complete Preceptor, Introduction.

13 Complete Preceptor, Introduction.

1‘ Complete Preceptor, 22

15 "Compositions," Quarterly Musical Magazine, 5
(1823), 86.

1‘ Langwill, 141.

75
glide17. Lindsay (1828-30), Weiss (1829), and Alexander

(1830) all mention vibration in terms similar to
Nicholson’s.H A notable exception to this trend is found
in Dressler’s Instructions. He was a German living in
London, "master of the band of the 10th hussars," and "seems

indignantly to disdain every thing of frippery, or an

artificial character."19 Although he does address other
Nicholson innovations, Dressler conspicuously avoids mention
of vibration.’0

Nicholson’s influence in France seems to have been
negligible. In his English language Method Drouet
reluctantly concedes that "in trifling music . . . a
vibration may be used."21 There is no indication that he
ever used vibration himself.

It seems unlikely that Nicholson would have had more
influence in Germany. A.B. Fhrstenau’s Fl5ten-Schule (ca.
1826) contains no mention of vibrato-like effects, yet as
discussed by Jochen Gartner,92 Fhrstenau’s Die Kunst des
Flhtenspiels (1834) contains a detailed description of
Bebung. Ghrtner suggests that Fhrstenau was influenced by
Spohr’s violin techniques, but the similarities between

Nicholson’s vibration and A. B. Fhrstenau’s Bebung are

 

17 Wragg, J. Improved Flute Preceptor 14th ed.
(London: Clementi, Collard, Davis & Collard, 1818), 67.

18 Lindsay (1828-30), 30; Weiss, Instruction (ca.
1821), 61; Alexander (ca. 1818), 22, 42.

19 James, A Wbrd or Two, 237; Ibid, 235.

20 Dressler (1828)

’1 Drouet, Method (1830), 18.

’9 Jochen Gartner, The Vibrato (Regensburg:
Gustave Bosse Verlag, 1981), 32-34.

76

striking. Fhrstenau describes Bebung produced by the
breath, a trembling motion of the jaw or by tapping the
fingers. The usage of such techniques outside of England
warrants further investigation elsewhere.

In the Preceptive Lessons Nicholson compares vibration
to the sound of a glass.’9 A similar description appears in
the School:

[Vibration] ought to resemble the beats, or
pulsations of a Bell, or Glass, which will be
found to be slow at first, and as the sound

gradually diminishes, so will the Vibrations
increase in rapidity.34

The reference to a glass would have been obvious to a
contemporary reader. An article in the Quarterly.Musical
Magazine compares Nicholson’s vibration to "that species of
vibration which is particularly observable in the musical
glasses.“-7

Musical glasses possess two sorts of natural vibrato,
one resulting from the movement of the fingers around the

lip of the glass and the other from a prominence of

 

79 Preceptive Lessons, 5. Musical glasses were
first introduced to the London public in 1744 by
Richard Pockrich and later improved by Benjamin
Franklin as the "armonica" or glass harmonica.
Franklin’s rotating design did not supersede the
earlier type instrument, which remained popular in
England well into the nineteenth century. This
consists simply of a bank of glasses, tuned by
partially filling with water. New Grove Dictionary of
Music and Musicians, Stanley Sadie, ed. (London:
Macmillan, 1980), 12, 823-825. A number of recordings
of this instrument are currently available and
experiments at the dinner table are also enlightening.

7‘ School. 71.

75 "Compositions" (1823), 86.

77

harmonics that are out of tune and beat irregularly. The
latter "vibration" is heard at the end of a note, after the
finger is removed or after the glass has been struck. The
effect is exceedingly subtle and is obviously associated
with a diminuendo.

The analogy of the bell provides a similar example,
where the distuned harmonics produce a gentle beating that
can be heard to accelerate as the sound dies away. This is
usually a barely audible effect, just at the threshold of
perception. With both the bell and the glasses the effect
is timbral rather than pitch-related. This is entirely
consistent with Nicholson’s examples of fingered vibration.
As he says in the Complete Preceptor:

The effect of this Expression in Adagios and other
movements when the Pupil has become familiarized

with it, is inconceivably delicate and sweet, and
as such [is] worthy [of] every attention.3‘

Nicholson’s vibration is intimately connected to the
characteristics of the large-hole flute. Nicholson gives a
clue to this connection when he cites the large-hole flute
as as producing clearer vibration.27 This is possible
because the Nicholson flute has a brighter sound with
greater harmonic content, which in turn makes changes of
timbre more obvious. If vibration were pitch oriented, the
extra venting of the large holes would make it less

effective. By way of example, the vibration on 03 alters

 

79 Complete Preceptor, 22.
77 School, 6.

78
the pitch by less than a cent with a Nicholson flute. When

the same fingering is played on a Hill-Monzani (1832) the
pitch rise is about ten-cents and on an Astor (ca. 1800)
almost twenty. Nicholson’s vibration is a very subtle
effect which can only be realized on his flute. Even
playing it on a traditional keyed flute from the same period
amounts to a parody.

The vibration fingerings from all three tutors are
presented in Figure 4-1 (pp. 79-80). There is a high degree
of consistency among fingerings from the Complete Preceptor
and the School. The fingerings from the Preceptive Lessons
occasionally differ and yield a more subtle effect. This is
apparent for g sharp/a flat‘, a sharp/b flatl, and e2 where
a more distant hole is used. Because the musical examples
of the Preceptive Lessons are meticulously notated, these
may be taken as representative of Nicholson’s actual
practice.

When they do affect pitch, vibration fingerings tend to
flatten the pitch, although a few (notably those for c7)
raise it slightly. The average range of pitch change is
from one to two cents, with the maximum being about four
cents on e1. Several fingerings, most notably those for b1
and b flat’, have no discernible effect on pitch.

The speed of vibration varies with the dynamic level:

Vibration on the Flute ought to resemble that of a

Bell or Glass, the beats or pulsations of which
are never rapid at first,1but are governed by the

 

 

79

 

 

 

 

 

Complete Preceptor (1816)

CO

C 0
00.0003
e e

O 0
00.00000
0 O

O 0
00.00000
0 O

C 0
00.0008
e e

O O
0' I fi.&.0 00
e e
O 0
00.0093
e a
c .
00.0003
e e

O O
. ....O OO
O O

Preceptive Leaaona (1821):

e e
90.00.:
C O
O 0
00.0003
e e
O 0
00.0603
0 O
O O
OO
0e050e0

a o
000 .0 00% oo

o 0e.ooeooc
a e
O O
o 0 .0 0 o oo
0 O

O 0
00.0003
0 O

a o
...-.0.0 9 oo
o e
o o
....0000
e o

O
C C .. C 0.00
O O

«.mcc

.
CBeA F!
A ...

School $1836):

0 Oeaei 0.0.3

o e 0e‘ a 003
O 0

e 0 0.5 0 Once
. e e

O O
00 0.000 co
0 O
O O
00
oeeo..o&eo

e eeeo.o OeOooo
I IeIe.o 000000
a eeeoI eoOcoo
e eeeeI 000.3

. e o
e o oo
eee .0 e0
.

4?: finger shake (hole open)

0:

= finger shake (hole closed)

aver-

Vibration fingerings, Nicholson’s tutors.

Figure 4-1.

80

In. in.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complete Preceptor (1816):

. ..
000.00000
O o

0 o
a... 00.20.0t0 oo

0 0
000.0003
0 C

0 0
no 9 .0.0.0.0 oo
0 0

0 0 000.0 000000

Preceptive Leaaona (1821):

O 0
000.0003
0 O

I 0
000.000 3
O O

O 0
000.000 3
O O

O
000.000000
0 O

O
000.000000
0 O
0
000.000000
0 O

O 0
000.0003
0 O

0 0
000.0003
0 0

0 0
000.000 3
0 0

School (1836):

C 0
000.0003
0 0

O O
0 000 .0 000 3
O 0
0 000 .0 000 3
0 0 00.0 0 0000
0 0
0 0
0 000 .0 000 00
O O
0 000 .0 000 3
0 0 00.0 0 003
O O

0 0000.0 00003

0 0000.0 000000
0 0000.0 .000000
0 0000.0 000000

0 0000.0 000000

(cont’d).

Figure 4-1

81

strength of the Tone; for example, if your Tone is
full and strong, the beat should be slow, but
gradually increased in proportion as you diminish
the Tone.28

The example that accompanies this statement (Figure 4-
2) demonstrates the association of vibration with a
simultaneous diminuendo and accelerando. A similar example
appears in the School (Figure 4-3). The extremes of speed

depicted are without precedent.

-f 1" 1’19

 

Figure 4-2. Vibration, Preceptive Lessons, 5..

/

0’ - memssmsu semm‘wsv

    

Figure 4-3. Vibration, School, 71.

Nicholson suggests that this example be started with
the breath vibration and as the speed increases the player
must begin to shake the flute.99 In the current
reconstruction of eighteenth-century practice, the

flattement is treated as a graceful, comparatively slow and

 

*9 Preceptive Lessons, 5.
79 School, 71.

82

gentle ornament. The image of anineteenth-century virtuoso
rapidly shaking his heavy wooden flute is remarkable.
Experiments with the Nicholson flute suggest that the
fingered vibration offers better control of speed and
greater musical sensitivity, but is not available on every
note.
The chart of vibration fingerings in the School is

accompanied by the following statement:

The succeeding Scale of notes, is one in which

Vibration is the most effective, although by the

aid of the breath and tremulous motion of the

Flute, almost every note of the Instrument may be
similar[ly] influenced.’9

From this it appears that Nicholson intended all three
forms of vibration to sound alike. He seems to be saying
that the fingered vibration is the most effective but the
breath and "tremulous motion" may be employed when it is not
available.

Nicholson gives no clear guidelines for the application
of vibration. He does consistently notate vibration with a
wavy line (AVVVVO. The examples of the Preceptive Lessons
suggest an association of vibration with "slow and pathetic
airs" such as The Groves of Blarney (The Last Rose of
Summer), Auld Lang Sync, and Roslin Castle.31 Even so,
there are few instances that would allow the full range of

speeds described in the School.

 

39 School. 71.
91 Preceptive Lessons, 32, 40, 65.

83

Vibration is found at all dynamics from pp to ff,
occasionally in close proximity (Figure 4-4) but is most

often associated with softer dynamics and the diminuendo.

st . -
1:3." "m Dagger

«0.

      
 
 

iXDActo

e o ‘ . > J.>P > >\'

 

Figure 4-4. Vibration with varied dynamics, Preceptive

Lessons, 32.

The execution of the diminuendo requires some time.
Consequently, vibration often appears on points of relative
repose and frequently on the penultimate note of a phrase

ending on a weak beat, as in Figure 4-5). Vibration is

ilwoenee

 

Figure 4-5. Vibration before a cadence, Preceptive Lessons,

60.

found on final cadences only when a prolonged diminuendo is
appropriate (Figure 4-6, p. 84). The combination of
vibration with the diminuendo serves to release musical
tension within the phrase. This differs from the modern
practice where the speed of vibrato reflects increased

musical tension.

84

     

7<$

     

:>fif’ cahuh l Ila

Figure 4-6. Vibration on a cadence, Preceptive Lessons, 10.

There are several examples of vibration in moderate
tempi. Because of their limited duration, the diminuendo
and particularly the accelerando would be less effective.
The example of Figure 4-7 is unusual in that the vibration

occurs in a rhythmic passage.

ANDANTH.

5": I '. - \M
— ’. ‘ . .

 

 

ilii.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4-7. Vibration in a rhythmic context. Preceptive

Lessons, 68.

. Nicholson demonstrates a preference for individual'
‘pitches and vibration fingerings regardless of the key in
which they occur. Foremost of these is cl, which he employs
throughout the examples of the Preceptive Lessons. This is
demonstrated in a version of Aileen Aroon which Nicholson
presents without embellishments, confirming the essential

nature of both vibration and the glide (Figure 4-8). The

85

symbols over the vibration marks in this example refer to

specific vibration fingerings.

'41 1 1.32.». .4300.»- ”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4-8. Aileen Aroon, Preceptive Lessons, 10.

Twice in the Preceptive Lessons Nicholson uses a
pattern of accents that may be viewed as a slow version of
vibration. The first of these is coupled with a trill
(Figure 4-9). Nicholson instructs that the trilled note be

played as if it were three accented quarter notes. The

 

Figure 4—9. Trill with accent, Preceptive Lessons, 57.

notation of this breath accent is consistent with a later
example of breath vibration from the School seen in Figure

4-3. As the speed increases, the symbol changes from a

86

series of accents to the usual wavy line. This suggests
that the slow breath vibration might be considered a
separate device. There is an obvious similarity between
this technique and aspiration as described by Dressler99 and
discussed here in the chapter on articulation.

In the second example (Figure 4-10) Nicholson confirms
the dichotomy between the slow breath accent and fingered

vibration by superimposing both devices on the same note.

Ir trifle-

  
 

 

 

> 2'
P WW~ are.

Figure 4-10. Vibration with accent, Preceptive Lessons, 65.

GLIDES

The glide was evidently well established in late
eighteenth-century Germany. In his 1791 Uhterricht Tromlitz
idescribed it in detail and lamented its overuse.9t In his
Fl6ten-Schule (ca. 1826), Fhrstenau offers a description of
cultivation of tone [Ziehen] and issues the standard warning
against overuse.95 He also cautions against use where the

flute is accompanied, suggesting that the device is best

 

9* School, 71.

99 Dressler (1828), 8.

9' Hadidian, 141-143, 267-271.

99 Fhrstenau, Flhten-Schule (ca. 1826), 22.

87

used in unaccompanied introductions and cadenzas.36 He does
not notate the glide, but refers the pupil to his exercises
and to specific places where the glide may be applied.

Smith has documented the absence of the glide in French
tutors from the late eighteenth and early nineteenth
centuries.37 The glide does not appear to have ever been
popular among the French. Drouet mentions it disparagingly
in his English.Method (1830).39

There is no mention of the glide in English sources
prior to Nicholson, yet circumstantial evidence suggests
that its practice was well established in early nineteenth-
century England. In 1808 a London flutemaker, W.H. Potter
(not to be confused with the better known Richard Potter)
took out a patent for sliding keys,39 which Rockstro
presumes were to facilitate the glide.‘9 That a flute maker
designed a mechanism to produce glides and thought it
valuable enough to patent suggests that the technique was
very much alive. Simple tutors might omit an advanced
technique, but omission of the glide in several substantial
tutors, including Beale’s Complete Guide (2nd edition ca.
1815 and 3rd ca. 1821), Keith’s Complete Preceptor (ca 1818-

21), and Wragg’s Improved Flute Preceptor (editions prior to

 

3° Nicholson does use the glide with
accompaniment. The highly embellished "Roslin Castle"
appears with chordal accompaniment in Nicholson’s
"Fantasia No. 1" (London: Clementi, Collard & Collard,
1821).

37 Smith, 71-79.

’9 Drouet, Method (1830), 18.

99 Abridgements, 53.

‘9 Rockstro, 272.

88
1818) is puzzling. It may well be that the glide was taken

for granted until Nicholson’s use made it an issue.

The first English mention of the glide appears in
Nicholson’s Complete Preceptor (1816) where he states that
he has "long adopted" the glide and recommends it "as well
worthy the pupil’s practice and attention."‘1 As with
vibration, Nicholson is credited with having introduced the
glideH and again appears to be responsible for popularizing
the effect.

In the Complete Preceptor and the Preceptive Lessons
Nicholson seems to be selling the idea of the glide, giving
basic instructions and other details of execution while
praising its effect."3 In the School he cautions that the
glide should be used judiciously.H This warning occurs
with regularity in other tutors,‘5 confirming that the glide
was subject to abuse.

As described in the Complete Preceptor:

Gliding is produced by sliding the finger forwards
gently and gradually from off the Hole, instead of
suddenly lifting it, as generally practiced; by
which the preceding note will have the effect of
being imperceptably led into, or incorporated with
its next or succeeding note. For example, suppose
the note to be F#, with G Natural following, by
gently sliding the first finger of the right hand

forward from off the Hole, it will lead by a sweet
swelling gradation into the note of G. The same

 

‘1 Complete Preceptor, 21.

‘9 "Compositions," 86.

‘9 Complete Preceptor, 21; Preceptive Lessons, 5.

44 School, 70. V

‘5 Dressler(1828), 48; Lindsay (1828-30), 30;
Furstenau, Flotenschule (1828), 22.

89

effect may be produced in various instances with
equal delight.‘6

The "sweet swelling gradation" suggests that the glide is
normally associated with a crescendo.

In the Preceptive Lessons Nicholson describes the glide
as "one of the most pleasing expressions of which the
Instrument is capable"‘7 and adds a cautionary note about
pitch:

The pupil should be careful to let the Note to
which he glides be quite Sharp, as the Tone, in

ascending so gradually, causes it to appear
generally Flat.‘9

He further notes that the glide is

produced by sliding the Finger or Fingers gently
off so as to gradually uncover the hole or holes,
instead of lifting them up suddenly.‘9

This gives some idea of Nicholson’s sensitivity and
flexibility in matters of pitch. Being "in tune" was
important, but precisely what that was is open to
interpretation.

The discussion in the School (1836) offers additional
details:

The fingers of the left hand ought to be drawn off
towards the palm of the hand, and those of the

 

‘9 Complete Preceptor, 21.
‘7 Preceptive Lessons 5.
‘9 Ibid.

‘9 Ibid.

90

right forced forward, or the hand raised so as to
remove the fingers by slow degrees from the
holes.59

Also:

When more fingers than one are employed to produce
this charming effect, their movement must be
simultaneous.”1

Experiments with the Nicholson flute show that the
obvious approach of moving one finger at a time does not
work particularly well. It is better to move the hand as a
unit, as Nicholson recommends. The holes may be opened in
sequence by sliding the hand at an angle. This suggests
that while the glide may have been executed without haste,
it would not have been excessively protracted.

The "sweet swelling" effect of the crescendo described
in the Complete Preceptor is reiterated in the School where
Nicholson also allows for the glide to be combined with a
decrescendo:

The highest note where the glide is marked should
generally be forced; but should it be marked
piano, by attending to the observations on playing

piano or subduing the tone, the effect may be
produced, and perfectly in tune.52

 

59 School, 70.
57 Ibid.
57 Ibid.

91

Nicholson’s use of the term "forced" may be
misleading.53 He probably means a gentle breath accent,
which is not inconsistent with the glide as charming and
exquisite. This is virtuosity of musical expression, not a
show of facility.

The glide appears in several English tutors published
after Nicholson’s Complete Preceptor (1816), including those
by Alexander (ca. 1821)t5‘ Weiss (ca. 1821), Dressler (ca.
1828), and Lindsay (1828-30).55 Dressler and Lindsay in
particular provide additional information about the glide,
shedding further light on Nicholson’s practice.

Dressler (ca. 1828) gives a relatively original
description of the glide, including a few new details:

Gliding is performed in, ascending, by sliding the
finger gently off the hole; and in descending; by
gradually covering it. The intervals most

susceptible of this ornament are those between the
middle F# and G, and between the upper C# & D.

These two half-steps represent a remarkably limited set

of possibilities, yet Dressler cautiously states:

The effect of the Glide is excellent in
places where it is suitable; communicating, if
used with discretion, encreased [sic] feeling and
passion to melodies of an expressive character.50

59 See discussion of Nicholson and Lindsay’s use
of this term under articulation, p. 163.

5‘ Alexander (ca. 1818), 56.

95 Lindsay (1828-30), 30.

’9 Dressler (1828), 48.

92

He then warns:

But, some performers become so enamoured of it,
that they can scarcely pass from one note to
another without gliding; producing a mewing;
monotonous effect, almost unsupportable.

The student cannot be too much cautioned against
the acquisition of so vicious a habit.57

Lindsay (1828-30), as might be expected, gives the most
complete summary. Several new details emerge:
If the lower note be firmly struck with the

Tongue, the effect of the Glide will be improved
by contrast.59

This does not seem compatible with the "soft and
graceful" effect Nicholson describes. One would expect to
find accents marked at the beginnings of glides and these
are not present in Nicholson’s tutors. Yet Lindsay clearly
did take Nicholson as his model:

The GLIDE is often practised by Mr. Nicholson, in
his Adagios, with remarkable effect; and, however
much certain witlings have attempted to throw
ridicule upon it, it is an expression certainly
well worthy the cultivation of all who wish to

give that true pathos to a performance, which
never fails to reach the heart.59

Lindsay makes the usual suggestion of playing the upper
note sharp and then describes what appears to be a glide

with crescendo:

 

57 Ibid.
39 Lindsay (1828-30), 30.
59 Ibid.

93

Additional power and pathos may occasionally be
thrown onto this Expression by a slight increase
in the column of air which produces it.°°

If this is an unusual approach for Lindsay, the
examples discussed above demonstrate that the glide with
crescendo is not unusual for Nicholson.

The Nicholson flute is peculiarly adapted to the
performance of the glide. The large fingerholes are more
tolerant of covering and uncovering,“l making the glide
easier to control.

Several of the Nicholson type flutes examined exhibit a
flattening of the wood around the tone holes, most often
those of the right hand. Figure 4-11 (p. 94) shows the
fingerholes of T. Prowse, "C. Nicholson’s Model" flute with
large fingerholes and typical flattening of the right hand
tone holes. This aids in sliding on and off the holes.

The origin of the flattened fingerholes is unclear. In
describing a habit to be avoided, Nicholson gives a possible
clue:

There is also an articulation of the fingers;
these should be lifted and not drawn off the
flute: the performances of those persons who have
accustomed themselves to the latter mode are
languid and unsatisfactory to the ear. It is easy
to tell by the appearance of the flute (if it has
been long in use), if this is the way the fingers
are removed from the instrument, as the holes
become quite round at the edges. The flute of a
friend of mine, an old professor, was so much

rubbed down, that it became quite out of tune; and
from its appearance I could scarcely imagine it

 

‘9 Ibid.
91 School, 6.

94

 

Figure 4-11. Flattened finger-holes, Prowse flute #3784.

95

was possible that the fingers could have had such
an effect on so hard a substance as cocoa wood:
but such was the fact. The fingers should come as
freely from the holes as the keys do. In
concluding this article, let it be remembered that
articulation depends greatly upon tone, for if the
latter is not clear, it is quite impossible the
former can be effective.62

The glide is consistently notated in all of Nicholson’s
works by a double slur (5::§). Only seven of the musical
examples of the Complete Preceptor contain the glide99. It
occurs with greater frequency in the Preceptive Lessons,
particularly in those examples like Roslin Castle which
Nicholson notates "exactly as he performed them."H This
suggests that Nicholson may have employed the glide more
frequently than is generally indicated. No glides are found
in the musical examples of the School. Even compositions
like Nicholson’s Twelve Favorite Airs with variations (1821)
and Select Melodies, with variations (ca. 1819) demonstrate
a modest use of the glide.

The selection of notes that may be incorporated into a
glide is limited by the technique of the instrument. The
holes uncovered must fall into a direct sequence, and the
keys may only be used in certain combinations. The
selection of usable intervals can be expanded somewhat by
the use of harmonic fingerings:

If a glide be marked from C or C# on the 3rd
space, it must always be fingered as the lowest C

 

'7 School, 64.
99 Complete Preceptor, 35, 39, 40, 41, 44, 54, 66.
9‘ Preceptive Lessons, 65.

96

or C#. If from the C 2nd ledger line above, it
must be fingered as the Harmonic of F, with the
second finger of the left hand down. If from D,
or D# on the 4th line, the first finger must be
down.65

Nicholson gives an example showing "some of the most
effective Glides on the Flute."°° This is reproduced as

Figure 4—12.

VERY Slow
- e 5*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4—12. Glides, School, 71.

An examination of the musical examples of the
Preceptive Lessons reveals a variety of practices. The
glide is found most frequently in slow, "pathetic" airs,
like "Aileen Aroon," "Ar Hyd Y Nos," "Within A Mile Of
Edinburgh Town," "Cease Your Funning," and "Roslin
Castle."97 Figure 4—13 from the Preceptive Lessons shows

typical use of the glide in an Adagio movement. The glide

 

‘5 School, 70.
99 Ibid.
‘7 Preceptive Lessons, 10, 25, 57, 63, 65.

97

generally leads from weak to strong beats, although this is
not a rule. The glide upward is typically followed by

downward motion.

. an an Y was."
.0 'en reaeione .
”it; _-~ ‘- .— . . - t.

l -
I7”

   
 

Aeee'to"

 

 

Figure 4-13. Glide in an Adagio, Preceptive Lessons, 25

Glides occur in all dynamic ranges (Figure 4-14, p. 98)
and are frequently associated with the crescendo, as seen in
Figure 4-15a, b, and c (p. 98). Less common is the glide
with decrescendo which moves from strong to weak beats
(Figure 4-16, p. 98). This combination did not escape
critical notice. With his usual generosity of spirit, W. N.
James urges Nicholson to "leave his die away glides to love
sick maidens."°9

The glide is never directly combined with vibration,
but the glide leading to vibration is relatively common, as
seen in Figures 4-13 (above) and 4-17, p. 99). In this last

instance, the glide seems to imply a slight ritardando

 

‘9 William N. James, "Mr. Sedlatzek," The
Flutist’s Magazine; and Musical Miscellany, 1 (1827),
85.

98

f;—

   
 
     

\\

‘0' It. p1.) a.

Figure 4-14. Glide with varied dynamics, Preceptive

Lessons, 57.

m

 

 

717

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

VLJ.)

 

 

Figure 4-15.

Glide with crescendo,

Preceptive Lessons, 35,
60, and 65.

    

.' ‘=,_
dfilyifiap

Figure 4-16. Glide with decrescendo, Preceptive Lessons,

62.

99
before the end of the phrase. It is possible that extra

time was routinely taken with many glides.

Aonoxo

 

Figure 4-17. Glide leading to vibration, Preceptive

Lessons, 77.

The glide may encompass more than two notes. Figure 4-
18 includes a glide of six notes spanning the interval of an
octave.‘9 It is possible to make the individual pitches
heard by a pause on each note. Figure 4-15c contains a
glide without intervening notes, spanning the interval of a
minor sixth. This is an exceptional example, and the effect

is dramatic.

 

Figure 4-18. Glide, six notes spanning an octave,

Preceptive Lessons, 57.

 

‘9 The notation is ambiguous regarding the start
of the glide on c sharpz. This can be executed if the
first hole of the left hand is first closed. Figure 4-
14 shows a glide from the c sharp2 harmonic, suggesting
that this would have been a normal part of Nicholson’s
practice.

100

There are several occurrences of the glide in moving
lines. Figure 4-19 illustrates a quick glide occurring in a

waltz. Assuming a slight delay for the glide, the effect is

 

Figure 4-19. Glide in a moving line, Preceptive Lessons,

41.

to interrupt an established tempo so as to prepare for the
end of the phrase. Another example occurs at the end of a

"Bollero" marked Allegretto (Figure 4-20).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4-20. Glide used to interupt an established tempo,

Preceptive Lessons, 33.

A striking device is the combination of a glide and
grace note, shown in Figures 4-19 and 4-21 (p. 101). The
effect is quite different from that of the slow glides, but
still rather charming. The pattern of gliding up to a note

and moving quickly down is quite common, as seen in many of

101

these examples. In many cases a slight hesitation in

passing through the glide seems implicit.

 

Figure 4-21. Glide with grace note, Preceptive Lessons, 57.

Nicholson emphasizes the ascending glide. Since it is
easier to draw the fingers off the flute to raise the pitch
than to push them onto the holes to lower the pitch, a
preponderance of ascending glides is to be expected.
However, a descending glide is not impossible and a few
examples occur in the Preceptive Lessons. The first of
these (Figure 4-22) occurs in an Adagio and involves moving
the first two fingers of the right hand onto the flute while
opening the short F key with the third.

3): .

3:33“ . 'f“§~\\ , 9L.

      

   

    

f;-

Figure 4-22. Decending glide, Preceptive Lessons, 10.

One may play this passage with relative ease by laying the
fingers across the flute rather than sliding. A second

example (Figure 4-23) is extraordinary. It shows a glide

102

that rises a minor sixth and descends a minor second in a
single gesture. This example represents extremes of
difficulty for the performer and the listener as well. The
effect is not particularly pleasant, even to the most

sympathetic ear.

 

Figure 4-23. Ascending and decending glide, Preceptive

Lessons, 57.

As Nicholson uses it in the tutors, the glide is a
delightful and effective means of expression. The writer
has performed several of Nicholson’s pieces for a variety of
audiences, and the response to the glide is generally
fascination rather than revulsion. Familiarity may breed
contempt. The "sweet" effect is based on controlled
deviation from a clearly established pitch. If the glide
”were added to an already out-of-tune performance, the
audience response would be entirely predictable. In the
hands of an enthusiastic amateur, the glide would have been
fearsome indeed. From the available evidence, it appears
that the glide may have fallen victim to its own popularity.

However, the final disappearance of the glide wasdue

not to abuse by amateurs but to the inventive mind of a

103

German flutist. Boehm’s flute covered the holes with keys
which rendered the glide impractical. The man responsible

did not mourn the loss:

Although the proper portamgnto di_ygcg, namely the
gliding over from one tone to another while
speaking two different syllables, is adapted to
the human voice alone, and consequently seldom
seems good and appropriate on string instruments,
yet it is sometimes desired to imitate it upon
wind instruments with tone holes. On account of
defective execution, however, the effect is often
repulsive and suggests "cat music" on the house
tops, rather than a beautifully sung cantilena.7°

 

7° Boehm, 157.

CHAPTER V

EMBELLISHMENT

As described by Nicholson, embellishment appears to
differ from expression in musical intent. The category
specifically includes the shake (with ornamented
resolutions), the turn, and the appoggiatura. While
Nicholson uses all of these devices in a sensitive and

expressive manner, they are more the stuff of bravura

display.

SHAKES

The general topic of trills or shakes has been subject
to extensive research and debate, a review of which is well
beyond the scope of this study. The special nature of the
shake (or trill) as played on the pre-Boehm flutes has been
described by Smith.1 She notes that shakes played on the
one-keyed flute are highly variable in both color and
intonation, and that the widespread adoption of the keyed
flute after the turn of the nineteenth century allowed for
"easier, clearer, more in tune, and more brilliant" shakes.’
The discussion here will be limited to those features that
are unique to the flute and to the Nicholson tutors in
particular.

While other English instruction books, from the many

anonymous turn-of-the-century tutors to Lindsay’s Elements,3

 

1 Smith, 64-71.
Ibid. 70.
3 Lindsay (1828-30), 89.

104

105
use the terms shake and trill interchangeably, Nicholson
uses the term shake exclusively. He defines it as "an
alternate reiteration of two notes comprehending an interval
not greater than one whole tone, nor less than a semitone."4
In spite of this straightforward definition, Nicholson
treats the shake expressively, exploiting it in combination
with both the swell and accelerando.

Nicholson’s discussion of the shake is limited. He
describes it briefly in the Complete Preceptor and at
greater length in the School. In addition to the textual
commentary, each of these tutors contains examples showing
how various shakes are to be realized. In the Preceptive
Lessons there is no direct discussion of the shake, and only
examples of specialized fingerings appear.

In the tutors Nicholson emphasizes the cadential shake,
and mentions the passing or transient shake only briefly.
Much may be inferred about treatment of the shakes from the
musical examples in Nicholson’s tutors and by comparison
with contemporary tutors by other English authors.
Information from these sources suggests that Nicholson
treated the shake as an expressive device and took
considerable liberties with ornamental resolutions.

For the purposes of this study, the shake may be
divided into three component parts: approach, body, and
resolution. Nicholson generally approaches the shake from

the upper note. This first appears in the charts of the

 

‘ Complete Preceptor , 21

106

Complete Preceptor, where all shakes are shown starting on
the upper note. The plain shake is illustrated as written
and as played (Figure 5-1). It is indicated here by the tr

abbreviation and is approached from the upper note.

 

 

 

 

Figure 5-1. Plain shake, Complete Preceptor, 20.

The Preceptive Lessons do mention specific shake
fingerings, but their performance is not discussed. The
notation does not specify that the shakes begin with the
upper note; such basic knowledge could have been assumed on
the part of the reader.

The School contains a considerable amount of detailed
information on cadential shakes. Nicholson still approaches
the shake from the upper note, but mentions that "a
difference of opinion has long existed whether the shake
should commence with the lower or upper note."5 There is no
discussion of the merits of either side and Nicholson does
not defend his position. When compared to Nicholson’s
discussions of articulation, fingerings, and tone quality,

whether to begin the shake on the upper or lower note does

not appear be a pressing issue. In 1828 Lindsay states that

 

5 School, 81.

107
the shake is played both ways with equal frequency.6 Drouet

comments that it is necessary to mention that the shake
begins with the upper note.7 This ambivalence suggests that
the English were not sensitive to the shake as a dissonance.

One might expect the first note of a shake to be
stressed in a way similar to that of the appoggiatura.
Nicholson never addresses this topic directly, but
inferences may be drawn from descriptions of two exceptional
examples. In one instance Nicholson warns that if the shake
is interrupted for a breath, the accent should be avoided
upon restarting the shake.° In another case he describes a
shake preceded by a series of the same two notes, saying he
would still start the shake with the upper note but would
not accent it.9 All this suggests that a shake is normally
accented.

The specific length of the upper note is problematical:

The preparation of a shake and its resolution may

vary, as will be seen by my arrangement of the
general scale of shakes . . . .19

In the School, Nicholson’s "general scale of shakes"
shows the preparation as a grace note (always of eighth note
value), giving no indication of its actual length. He does

state that:

 

Lindsay (1828-30), 90.
Drouet, Method (1830), 23.
School, 80-81.

Ibid, 81.

Ibid, 82.

COO-IO

108

If the shake is difficult, it is better to sustain
the note, and only commence the shake when there
is certainty of its completion.11

This confirms that the upper note could be prolonged at
the discretion of the performer. Nicholson offers little to
confirm or disaffirm the sort of precise rhythmic values
(one-half or two-thirds the value of the main note)
typically associated with eighteenth-century practice.

He is clear that after the approach, the shake is to
continue uninterrupted into the resolution:

A worse effect can scarcely be conceived than

making a shake too short, and then having to dwell
upon the note to sustain the time.12

The speed of the shake is not always constant. Figure
5-2 shows a shake that accelerates. This may also be

combined with a diminuendo:

In adagios I frequently commence the shake very
slow, and as I decrease in tone I increase in
rapidity.l9

#

  
 

 

 

writteh. . play

Figure 5-2. Shake with accelerando, Complete Preceptor, 21

 

1‘ Ibid.
‘3 Ibid.
13 Ibid.

109

There is an obvious similarity between this practice and the
performance of vibration as described in the School.H A
modern flutist would probably associate an accelerating
shake with a crescendo. Nicholson’s usage suggests a very
different and more delicate handling of the shake.

Examples of a swell combined with a shake occur in the

Preceptive Lessons: in bar 30 of "Roslin Castle“5 and bar
36 of "Peaceful Slumb’ring"1°. Lindsay describes the
practice of combining shake, accelerando, and swell at a
cadence.17 The shake was clearly viewed as an expressive
device.

Two broad types of resolution occur in the Nicholson
tutors, simple and ornamented. The most usual of these is
the simple two-note turn, as seen in the fingering charts
from the Complete Preceptor. There is a curious discrepancy
which is dependent on the specific instrument played. The
fingering charts for the one-keyed flute show shakes without
resolution, while those charts for the six-keyed flute are
shown to resolve with a turn. Exceptions to the latter are
shakes on Cl and C#1 for which the notes of resolution are
not available. There is no obvious reason for this
inconsistency, although less may have been expected from
owners of the old-fashioned flutes.

One assumes that all shakes of any length would

normally have been given at least a simple two-note

 

1‘ Ibid, 71.
15 Preceptive Lessons, 65.
19 Ibid, 72.
17 Lindsay (1828-30), 90.

110

termination. Dressler states that the resolution is
understood19 and Alexander suggests that the shake is
generally resolved, at the performer’s discretion, and that
the resolution is omitted when a shake occurs on short
notes.19
The second type of shake resolution is typically more
involved. The subject of ornamental resolutions is
exhaustively illustrated in the School:
When a shake is marked at the termination of a
solo, adagio, or plaintive air, various
resolutions, such as turns and cadenzas, are
occasionally introduced. I have therefore
supplied the amateur with abundance of these, and

their selection, adoption or rejection, must
depend upon his own judgement.29

The accompanying "general scale of shakes" contains no
less than 205 examples of shakes with ornamental resolutions
of varying complexity.

While a detailed discussion of ornamental resolutions
is well beyond the scope of this study, a few observations
are merited. Nicholson suggests transposing the examples
for practice,’1 and it appears that he intended these
examples as formulas to be learned and applied to other
works. There is some redundancy, particularly with the

simpler examples that are merely transposed. The

 

19 Dressler (1828), 27.

79 Alexander (ca. 1818), 19
79 School, 82.

91 Ibid.

111

construction is generally based on simple scales (chromatic
or diatonic) and arpeggios.

Nicholson briefly mentions the character of shakes
executed in rapid passages (in contrast to cadential

shakes):

In a spirited and brilliant composition the shake
should be as rapid and the tone as clear and
penetrating as possible, and the turn or
resolution equally as rapid as the shake.39

The emphasis on "clear and penetrating" tone acknowledges
the general adoption of the keyed flute. Such a statement
could not be made about the one-keyed flute with its uneven
and out-of-tune shakes.

Nicholson never mentions by name what other English
writers (including Gunn, Alexander, Dressler, and Lindsay)23
call either the passing or transient shake. This is simply
a shake played quickly in a moving line. Nicholson offers a
single example of this type of shake and its realization
(Figure 5-3, p. 112). He indicates that although it was
usually played as a triplet figure, it could be played as a
group of five notes "if the performer has flexibility of
finger equal to the execution."H This hints at Nicholson’s
technical prowess; only the triplet realization appears in

the tutors of Dressler, Drouet, Lindsay, and Tulou.33

 

97 Ibid.

9’ Gunn (1793), part 2, 5; Alexander (ca. 1818),
47; Dressler (1828), 27; Lindsay (1828-30), 94.

9‘ School, 82.

95 Dressler (1828), 27; Drouet, Method (1830),
24; Lindsay (1828-30), 94; Tulou (1835), 38-39.

112

h- '- ~ ..
‘ .
.\ [mange “ill?“ :15 I: i. sener.uy ‘ A, A
llme_ :— ' played thus, a '-

Figure 5-3. Passing shake, School, 82.

 

 

 

The passing shake is exceptional because it starts
directly on the principal note, and as Dressler points out,
it is the only shake that does not require a resolution.75
This figure generally (though not always)37 occurs in a
descending line,9° preceded by the upper note. By starting
on the principal note one avoids repeating the upper note
and also simplifies the finger technique. Weiss considers
the effect the same as the turn, except that the shake
"requires to be attacked with nerve."39 In contrast,
Alexander shows the passing shake beginning on either the
upper or the lower note.3°

Nicholson illustrates a prepared shake (Figure 5-4, p.
113), which begins with written grace notes and starts below
the principal note. Taken alone, the first four notes of
this example constitute an inverted turn,’l suggesting that
the prepared shake is a composite of the inverted turn and

the shake. The prepared shake is not mentioned by name in

 

7‘ Dressler (1828), 27.

97 Ibid.
39 Weiss, Instruction (ca. 1821), 46.

39 Alexander (ca. 1818), 47.
3‘ Ibid.

113

the other Nicholson tutors, but a similar example using the

same terminology does occur in Alexander (ca. 1818).32

,Phrrsaxn'ssszsa

In -"’*

 

      

_————-_—_—-0—‘———.——_

 

 

Figure 5-4. Prepared shake, Complete Preceptor, 20.

According to Drouet, the specific notes preceding the
shake do not matter. He considers any of these to be
preparatory.99 By this logic, any shake preceded by grace
notes could be called a prepared shake.

Nicholson addresses the realization of these groups of
grace notes in the School:

When a principal note is preceded by two or more
small notes, they are generally glurred, and

played with rapidity, this however is not an
invariable rule.9t

Nicholson’s rhythmic notation of grace notes makes his
intentions clear.‘ Although he does not discuss the issue,
one presumes that these figures are played on the beat.
Alexander gives an example which supports this

interpretation (Figure 5-5, p. 114).

 

37 Ibid. 50.
99 Drouet, Method (1830), 22.
9‘ School, 70.

114

f-

1 . .* . '
’7’!"- tun small mitt-x llltts,§ are pin} t'tl quit it thus, E

Figure 5-5. Grace notes played on the beat, Alexander,

Complete Preceptor, 54.

The Complete Preceptor includes one example of a three
note shake which alternates above and below the principal
note, producing alternating seconds and thirds (Figure 5-6).
This shake is also unusual because it starts on the
principal note. Nicholson, Alexander, and Weiss mention

this shake favorably.35

 

 

 

 

 

. i - r . . ’ 9 i
u— m- - u m ..- e...- ...- n.-
- | - A I A I L L_ ‘ =-_I-—-’-—_-l==;
’d I l A_ I l ‘T - “Q ‘__—I--_.—_...-—_0-..~——.—~-'
l I “eh—*‘- .7 ——-;.—__:——:::::_ t
9’ written. plaéed. _
’ i 1

 

Figure 5-6. Shake above and below principal note, Complete

Preceptor, 21.

The symbol used in the Complete Preceptor to indicate
this shake does not appear for the same purpose in any of
the tutors examined. The symbol does reappear in the School

where it indicates an unrelated type of turn.99 Alexander,

 

35 Complete Preceptor, 21; Alexander (ca. 1818),
76; Weiss, Instruction (ca. 1821), 47.
9' School, 79.

115

Lindsay, and Weiss37 give examples of this shake that are
marked only tr. With no special notation, one presumes that
this shake would be applied at the performer’s discretion.
A fully notated example of this shake does occur in the
Preceptive Lessons.38

Lindsay describes this shake in some detail. He
suggests that it is only appropriate on a tonic that
descends to the leading tone and therefore produces the
interval of a minor third between the upper and lower notes.
This gives the shake a subdued character. The keys of C, F,
G, D, A, E, and E flat major are specifically recommended.
Lindsay considers the major third "too harsh to be endured
by even the most uncultivated ear."39 Nicholson’s example
in the Complete Preceptor starts and ends on the same note.
An example in the Preceptive Lessons starts and ends on the
same note, but does eventually resolve a half-step
downward.‘° None of the sources consulted gives this shake
a name.
Another example from the Complete Preceptor illustrates a
melodic figure combined with a shake (Figure 5-7, p. 116) in
a form of bariolage. This "is produced by Shaking the G,
and at the same time articulating the four notes clear and

distinct."H Nicholson recommends it "because of its

 

37 Alexander_(ca. 1818), 76; Lindsay, 91; Weiss,
Instruction (ca. 1821), 47.

99 Preceptive Lessons, 65.

39 Lindsay, 91.

‘9 Preceptive Lessons 65.

41 Complete Preceptor, 21.

116

 
   

. played. . . . T

Figure 5-7. The shake combined with a melodic figure,

Complete Preceptor, 21.

impressive and delicate effect,”2 revealing that he seldom
omits this particular device where the shake is sustained.‘3
Nicholson does not discuss the beat, but since it
appears in several contemporary English tutors, it is
mentioned here in relation to the shake. Beale describes it
as "the reverse of the Shake, but without the turn."H He
gives one example that combines the beat with a shake and
swell.‘5 The beat is also mentioned by Wragg,H and
Keith.47 The absence of the beat in more substantial tutors
after 1821 including those of Lindsay, Alexander, and
Nicholson suggests that the beat was going out of fashion in
England. The beat had appeared in anonymous tutors
including Thompson’s New Instructions, London (ca. 1810) and

the New Instructions published by Preston (ca. 1801).H

 

‘7 Ibid.

‘3 Ibid.

44 John Beale, A Complete Guide to the Art of
Playing the German Flute third ed. (London: D’Almaine &
Co., ca. 1821), 14.

49 Ibid.

‘9 Wragg (ca. 1818), 9.

47 Keith (ca. 1818-21), 8.

4° New Instructions for the German Flute (London:
Preston and Son, ca. 1801), 10; Thompson’s New

117

These basic tutors were copied freely, and the beat
continues to appear well into the nineteenth century in
verSions such as A New and Complete Flute Preceptor (ca.
1840)."9 Ffirstenau mentions the device by its now common
name, the mordent.5°
Since the use of conventional fingerings often produces
awkward or impossible motion, special trill fingerings have
been employed at least since Hotteterre (1728),51 These
fingerings are often simpler in execution but function at
the expense of intonation and tone quality. By the
nineteenth century, uneven and out-of-tune shakes were
considered the greatest weakness of the one-keyed flute.
The added keys improved both the tone and intonation of
shakesfi"2
Nicholson’s use of the shake is of interest because he
appears to fully exploit the capabilities of the keys. As
James says of Nicholson:
His shakes are, in general, regular, brilliant,
and effective, and possess the rare quality (which

is not the least of their beauties) of being
perfectly in tune.-79

A progression among the different types of flute may be

seen in the fingering charts for shakes in the three tutors.

 

Instructions for the German Flute (London: Thompson,
ca. 1810), 8.

‘9 A New and Complete Flute Preceptor (New York:
Firth and Hall, ca. 1840), 11.

5° Fhrstenau (ca. 1826), 21.

51 Hotteterre (1729), plate 2.

57 Ffirstenau (ca. 1826), 9.

53 James, A WOrd or Two (1826), 157.

118

The Complete Preceptor includes a "Scale of Shakes" for the
one-keyed flute and another for the six-keyed flute5‘. By
1816 the one-keyed flute would have been old fashioned,
particularly for a serious student or professional.
Nicholson probably included the information on this
instrument to broaden his potential audience. The fingering
chart for the one-keyed flute is simplified, with only a
limited range of notes and few enharmonics included. The
chart for the six-keyed flute shows an extended range and
includes more enharmonics. The flutes illustrated both have
the traditional small finger and embouchure holes.

The Preceptive Lessons include an annotated scale for
the six-keyed flute55 and discuss various fingerings as
successive key signatures appear. The C and long F59 keys
are specifically mentioned. Although considered an opponent
of these keys,~77 Nicholson took account of their usage.
Special fingerings for the large-hole flute are included in
the Preceptive Lessons!"8

In the School, the subject of the shake occupies a
complete chapter. Here the fingerings from the School
include the use of C and long F keys,99 indicating the
eight-keyed flute and presumably the large-hole Nicholson

model.

 

5‘ Complete Preceptor, 23-24; 25-27.
55 Preceptive Lessons, 6-7.

59 Ibid. 7, 34, 43.

57 Lindsay (1828-30), 2.

59 Preceptive Lessons, 34, 51, 66, 78.
59 School, 86.

119

Some of Nicholson’s fingerings create shakes in which
the upper note is quite sharp. A glaring example appears in
the shake from e2 to f-sharpz. The regular fingering for
this interval requires that only the middle finger of the
right hand move, and the intonation is good. No special
fingering would seem necessary or even desirable in this
case. Surprisingly, in all of his tutors Nicholson
indicates that this shake should be performed by moving the
index finger of the right hand.99 On the Nicholson flute,
this produces an f-sharp9 that is forty cents sharp.
Charles Weiss specifically mentions this fingering as an
"old incongruous principle" requiring "merely a well-tuned
ear to discover the error."H

While individual notes may be humored, the interval of
a shake is difficult for the player to alter. Although the
example cited is an extreme case, Nicholson does seem
generally to prefer sharp fingerings for the shakes.
Because his playing was celebrated for its accuracy of
intonation, it must be assumed that Nicholson's approach to
fingering produced results that were acceptable to both
general audiences and leading critics of the day. It is
difficult to ascertain whether this was due to Nicholson’s
extraordinary control or a to very different ideal of

intonation on the part of his listeners.

 

‘9 Complete Preceptor, 24; Preceptive Lessons,
66; School, 88.
‘1 Weiss, Instruction (ca. 1821), 14.

120
TURNS

In the Complete Preceptor and the Preceptive Lessons,
Nicholson includes examples of the turn but does not explain
them. His only discussion of the turn is a brief mention
found in the School. In the absence of any terminology in
Nicholson’s tutors, Lindsay’s nomenclature will be used
here. Lindsay first divides turns into two broad
categories, plain and inverted.

Lindsay describes the character of the plain turn in
some detail. Since a modern reader may conceive of the turn
as a quick and accented figure, Lindsay’s description is of
interest. He explains that the plain turn serves to
"connect, enliven, or give smoothness to intervals." It is
generally played with a subdued tone, and "requires to be
lightly, neatly, and distinctly executed.”2 Ascending
passages constitute an exception. In this instance the turn
may be played forcefully, serving to add energy and
excitement. There is an obvious similarity between this
figure and the passing shake. In quoting examples from
Berbiguier, Lindsay suggests that whether indicated as turns
or shakes, such passages would by realized identically.

The plain turn may begin on either the upper note,
which produces a four-note figure, or on the principal note
which requires five notes. When the turn begins on the
upper note it is played quickly and on the downbeat. In

Lindsay’s terminology this is a plain turn, before the

 

9’ Lindsay (1828-30), 95.

121

note63 (Figure 5-8). His use of the term before does not
appear to be literal; the turn still begins on the downbeat.
The musical effect is accentual, as the turn does not lead
to another note. When it begins on the principal note the
turn may be delayed. In this case it is termed a plain turn

after the noteH (Figure 5-9). Plain turns that begin after

the principal note serve a connective function. A range of
small variations in the basic patterns is possible, but
these few forms will serve to describe the turns found in

Nicholson’s tutors.

 

 

 

Figure 5-8. Plain turn before the note, Lindsay, 95.

 

 

 

Figure 5-9. Plain turn after the note, Lindsay, 95.

 

93 Ibid.
9‘ Ibid.

122
The first type of turn illustrated by Nicholson is (in

Lindsay’s terminology), a plain turn before the note. This
is indicated by the standard turn symbol placed directly
over the principal note (Figure 5-10). A second example
demonstrates the convention of placing a sharp beneath the
symbol to indicate a raised lower auxiliary (Figure 5-11).
The School contains one example showing this plain turn,

both as abbreviated and realized (Figure 5-12, p. 123).

 

 

 

\Vfiflen

 

Phqed

Figure 5-10. Plain turn, Complete Preceptor, 20.

 

 

 

 

Figure 5-11. Turn with accidental, Complete Preceptor, 20.

Both the Complete Preceptor and the School show the
symbol directly above the principal note. The placement

probably indicates that the turn is to start immediately.

123

written.
Tues

hit the Not .

played

 

 

fir II

it.
a.
:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'D

Figure 5-12. Plain turn, School, 79.

Nicholson does not explain this and it is not clearly
indicated in any of the musical examples from his tutors.
However, the convention is supported by Beale (ca. 1815 and
ca. 1821), Wragg (ca. 1818), Keith (ca. 1818-21), Weiss (ca.
1821), and Lindsay (1828-30).95 Neither Gunn (1793),
Alexander, (ca. 1818), nor Dressler (1828)“9 make mention of
it.

Tulou (1835) states that formerly the turn began on the
upper note and that some still play it that way.97 It would
appear from this and from its infrequent appearance in
Nicholson’s examples that the use of this particular form of
turn was declining.

The type of turn appearing most frequently in all of
the tutors from this period is the plain turn after the
note. The significant feature of the notation in Nicholson,

Lindsay, and the others is the placement of the symbol after

 

9’ Beale (ca. 1815), 14; Beale (ca. 1821), 14;
Wragg (ca. 1818), 9; Keith (ca. 1818-21), 8; Weiss,
Instruction (ca. 1821), 46; Lindsay (1828-30), 95.

9‘ Gunn (1793), part 2, 5; Alexander (ca. 1818),
17; Dressler (1828), 23.

‘7 Tulou (1835), 36.

124

the principal note. There are two examples in the Complete
Preceptor (Figure 5-13) which show this turn realized in two
rhythmic contexts. In the first example the turn occurs
between notes of equal rhythmic value and is realized as a
four-note group. The second example shows the turn played
on a dotted note. Here it is realized as a triplet followed
by a longer note taking the last third of the principal
note’s value. This approach to dotted notes is confirmed by

Lindsay who describes the turn as "a little Triplet".69

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 5-13. The plain turn after the note, Complete

Preceptor, 20.

Nicholson’s use of the slash with the turn symbol in
Figure 5-13 and elsewhere is problematical. In the Complete
Preceptor, the horizontal figure with a slash appears
frequently, as do fully notated examples of the plain turn
after the note. The ordinary turn symbol without a slash
appears only rarely. In the Preceptive Lessons both symbols
appear regularly. Figure 5-14 (p. 126) shows the two
symbols used together in the same piece. Some distinction

is clearly intended, but there is little evidence in

 

‘9 Lindsay (1828-30), 112.
79 Lindsay (1828-30), , 112.

125

Nicholson’s tutors to support any particular interpretation.
The notation of turns in the School is entirely inconsistent
with that in both the Complete Preceptor and Preceptive
Lessons. Figures 5-15 (p. 126), from the Complete
Preceptor, and 5-16 (p. 126), from the School, show similar

examples but use very different symbols. Because the School

was published in New York rather than London, it seems
reasonable to attribute these inconsistencies to the
engraver rather than Nicholson.

Lindsay79 and Keith71 describe a convention whereby the
slash replaces the sharp, indicating that the lowest note of
the turn should be raised a semitone. Figure 5-17 (p. 127)
illustrates the use of both this and the ordinary turn
symbol. Lindsay notes that this convention is not widely
understood. He suggests that the "best construction" of the
turn requires this raised note and without it the turn
"would often be harsh and disagreeable."72 One suspects
that the lowest note of a turn might have been adjusted
regardless of the notation.

If Nicholson were aware of this convention, his
application of the two turn symbols is at best erratic.
Figure 5-18 (p. 127) shows a turn from the Complete
Preceptor with the slash, and yet the lower note is already

a half-step below the main note and cannot be raised.

 

79 Lindsay (1828-30), , 112.
71 Keith (ca. 1818-21), 7.
73 Lindsay (1828-30), 95.

126

Figure 5-19 (p. 127), from the Preceptive Lessons, shows a

similar example.

 

Figure 5—14. Turn symbols, Preceptive Lessons, 64.

Written
EXZ
Plated f

 

Figure 5-15. Turn symbols, Complete Preceptor, 20

 

AND‘NT a . m /—\ fl
1 . - ‘ fl . a
c. .."" =' ‘ ==- e: a 1"— _-===-=—=_fil
- — —
WI‘ Ill en . :6, —~-- --——-a--=-——
V 7 '
EXAMPLE 9] ~ A /'_\ .7 _\ A
‘ A _.. .. . . A
'1 U I N -I—--‘ ..g--- --—-e--—&-..P-we=aa earn—-a--I-:_ I l

=—-__,---- e-—--—_—-.-:' lune n.4- rn-—--—-e--- ._l
afterlhc N010 :r ul -_ -‘===—===l:.- =-——_I———.ai
played. _ . ‘ .. A bl”
-eeIe-_ 5 u—e--—— .wi Iie d!u——-e—
‘E‘== —_-==- a==-— n I|'—I:II men--e-—_:—_-I— .
==tum f-===_—_L‘V/1\:§i

5': ————--.-==-—-——

HT'I‘he CI in the Ten oa‘ht elwaye ‘0 be [legend with the ’ aheke key.

C , Ilnoe‘

Figure 5-16. Turn symbols, School, 79.

 

 

 

 

Figure 5-17. Turn symbols, Lindsay, 112.

 

 

Figure 5—19. Turn with slash, Preceptive Lessons, 28.

128

If Nicholson’s slash does not indicate a raised note,
one other alternative emerges. There is a commonality of
rhythm between the realized examples of the Complete
Preceptor and the one example from the Preceptive Lessons.
The turns of Figure 5-18 show the four-note grouping as seen
in the first example of Figure 5-13 rather than the three-
note group that Lindsay suggests is usual for the turn with
dotted note. Nicholson indicates this turn without the
slash in the second example of Figure 5-13. It may be that
the slash indicates that the turn is to be played evenly, in.
a four-note grouping, and the absence of the slash indicates
a three-note grouping. However, an examination of the
musical examples from the Complete Preceptor and Preceptive
Lessons does not reveal any obvious or consistent patterns
of application. With so few realized examples, any
conclusions about Nicholson’s use of the slash must be

tentative.

 

VWfiflen

 

. 1“ he. .
31-”; . 3 fl

. _

  

P131“?

Figure 5-20. Inverted turn, Complete Preceptor, 20.

The turn may begin below the principal note. Lindsay

calls this the inverted turn. Nicholson illustrates this

129
device without identifying it (Figure 5-20). His symbol

here, like Lindsay’s, is vertical. Lindsay notes that this

turn is associated with sad or tender emotions, is generally
played piano, and that it is seldom abbreviated.73 Monzani,
Wragg, Shade, Lindsay, and KeithH all indicate the inverted
turn with some type of vertical symbol.

The vertical symbol does not appear in the musical
examples of either the Complete Preceptor or the Preceptive
Lessons, although the pattern of the inverted turn is
incorporated into one cadential resolution from the former
(Figure 5—21, p. 130). The inverted turn notated with grace
notes appears with regularity in the Preceptive Lessons and
the School. Ornamented versions of this turn also appear
with some frequency in both tutors. Two variants are shown
in the four examples from the Preceptive Lessons (Figure 5-
22, p. 130). This configuration is found most frequently at
cadences.

Nicholson’s use of turn symbols is erratic in the
School. In Figure 5-23a and b (p. 131) he employs the same
symbol to illustrate both the direct turn on the beat and
the inverted turn. However, reference to the placement of
the symbol can provide some guidelines. As established
earlier, the location of the symbol over or after the
principal note determines whether the turn is to be played

on or after the beat. Nicholson explains in the School

 

'3 Ibid.

7‘ Monzani (ca. 1801), 8; Wragg (ca. 1818), 14;
Shade, 12; Lindsay (1828-30), 95; Keith (ca 1818-21),
7.

130

that, among those turns that start directly,

the choice of a

plain or inverted turn is determined by context.

0

:3

        

h-
§

Figure 5-21. Inverted turn incorporated into a cadence,

Complete Preceptor, 74.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A.
B.
b'lrlrlr ’?
c 1 .1 1 I
u “‘3‘3 > :> -:
1" {PM .3211.
D- I- ’ ‘ _.

Figure 5-22. Inverted turn with ornamentation, Preceptive

Lessons, 60, 62, 65,and 77.

131

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

written. 1; z
5 F ‘
Tun . A 1 _
h“ ‘hCNO‘ - t' % - $ . _
played F 5 1' I: 1 1
L _‘ 1 v r
. 5 l
A
\\ riuen. . i
I 1 L
- , T
played. I 1 1
I 1

 

 

 

 

Figure 5-23. Use of turn symbols, School, 79.

When the principal note is followed by a higher note, a
plain turn is appropriate. If the principal note is
followed by a lower note, an inverted turn is in order.75
This system reduces several possibilities to just three
and would appear to cover many situations reasonably well.
Although Nicholson makes no note of this, a similar system
had been described by Dressler (1828).75 Such a simplified
approach might have been convenient for both amateur or
professional flutists. This system is rendered unnecessary
in the exercises and pieces of Nicholson’s tutors. Although
inconsistent in form, the turn symbol always appears after
the principal note, indicating the plain turn after the
beat. The inverted turn is consistently notated with grace

notes.

 

75 School, 79.
7' Dressler (1828), 24.

132
THE APPOGGIATURA

Nicholson mentions the appoggiatura only briefly in the
Complete Preceptor. It is introduced under "GRACES or
ORNAMENTS of EXPRESSION," and is simply said to take one-
half the length of the principal note.H This statement is
accompanied by the examples shown in Figure 5-24 (p. 133).
These are instructive because Nicholson notates the grace
note with the correct rhythmic value and realizes it
accordingly. This literal rhythmic notation appears to be
consistent throughout Nicholson’s tutors and those
compositions examined. The fifth bar of the first line
shows the realization of octaves notated both as grace notes
and as double stops. This is a standard technique in the
works of Nicholson and other flutist-composers of the
period.

Appoggiaturas generally appear without comment in the
Preceptive Lessons. Many of the appoggiaturas in the
musical examples are marked with an accent (Figure 5-25, p.
133) suggesting that some emphasis on the dissonance was
expected. In conjunction with an unusual example, Nicholson
cautions the reader to play the appoggiaturas "with great
delicacy,"78 suggesting that an accent might be expected.

The School includes a brief essay in which Nicholson

defines the appoggiatura simply as "a small note preceding

 

77 Complete Preceptor, 20.
’3 Preceptive Lessons, 25

133

one of ordinary size" and acknowledges the dissonant nature

of the appoggiatura by calling it a "note of suspension."79

Wri t‘ten

Play ed ~

 

 

 

Written

 

 

 

 

 

qued

 

 

 

Written

 

 

 

Played.

 

Figure 5-24. Appoggiatura, Complete Preceptor, 20.

 

Figure 5-25. Accented appogiatura, Preceptive Lessons, 32.

 

79 School, 69.

134

He describes two species of appoggiatura: superior and
inferior. The former occurs either a whole— or half-step
above the principal note, and the latter occurs a half-step
below. Nicholson reiterates in the School the one—half rule
for note length and adds that the appoggiatura takes two-
thirds the value of a dotted note.

There follows a set of examples (Figure 5-26) that
generally support the rules for note length, but several are
atypical. The first appoggiatura in the Adagio takes one-
half the value of the principal note, which is then cut
short by a rest. This is a only one illustration, but it
implies that Nicholson’s phrasing may have been more
distinct than the notation would otherwise suggest. The
appoggiaturas in the second, sixth, and eighth bars of the
Allegretto receive three-fourths the value of the principal
note. These long appoggiaturas exceed the one-half rule,

but are consistent with the musical effect of creating

 

 

 

 

   

suspense .
Emu" as. A
o
.. , . -1&- J; P h . . ,gf“° (’_‘WS T
“rltten. " .. ‘ '
..<
Played.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 5—26. Appoggiatura, School, 69.

135

Nicholson indicates that the rules are not to be
applied strictly:
As the ear is gratified by being kept in suspense,

the Appoggiatura (particularly in slow plaintive
Melodies) should seldom be hurried.°°

The suggestion that the appoggiatura "should seldom be
hurried" indicates a flexible approach to rhythmic value.
Nicholson’s concern appears to be more with creating musical
suspense than observing pedantries. The one-half and two—
thirds rules appear to involve minimum lengths rather than
precise values, and the appoggiatura could be held longer at
the performer’s discretion.

The appoggiatura might be combined with other devices.
Nicholson mentions that an appoggiatura leading to the last
note of a phrase or melody should be prolonged and combined
with a glide, while the tone is subdued to a whisper.”1
This suggests a particularly expressive treatment.

Nicholson stresses accuracy of rhythm in fast movements
and warns against playing the appoggiatura before the
beat.82 The three examples from the School in Figure 5-27
indicate that a rounding of the rhythm of the appoggiatura
into triplets is particularly to be avoided.

Nicholson does not draw a clear distinction between
appoggiaturas in different tempi, but Alexander gives

examples showing the appoggiatura played long in slow

 

3° Ibid.
91 Ibid.
33 Ibid.

136

‘\ .-\
1:.- ‘ PA - ‘\ ..g {2‘ A K

. - -I“—__.- --—- —-—‘ l'_-_ "5‘ I
“ I’INCII . 'mM_——-i——_—-\ —-—.- II-——.. —- ; I
Elfin-*-_‘__—-_‘—‘ -=--— m-EI
,lUl-I‘_—— a—‘_ --—-—-=—- I

(N -\ ,—\

"a R \

 

 

Played correct ly. 1'“-.. --— “533:1:1E=r=_=l=:—-—-:85§‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

.-. :-
A __ .
[neon-feet Iy. ‘ i=2; -==:=_m-==-:-—'-'-l- I." —- -.-I
. {6;}: —F-—_——-==—-—\-.q-I‘-\- -—'

 

 

 

Figure 5—27. Appoggiatura, varied tempi, School, 69.

137

movements and short in fast movements.83 This principle is
not inconsistent with Nicholson’s examples.

Considering that his compositions and exercises consist

largely of embellished melodies,

it is surprising that

Nicholson warns in the Preceptive Lessons against the

overuse of embellishment,
the "unadorned melody" is
greatest latitude for the

Embellishment is optional

suggesting that in slow movements
most pleasing and "affords the
most refined ERpression."°‘

while expression is not.

Nicholson’s conservative attitude may well have been a

reaction to criticism. As one reviewer lamented:

Mr. Nicholson does as much with his flute, in
point of execution, as we suppose can possibly be
done; and a great deal more than ought ever to be
attempted, beyond the precincts of the school, by

a man of judgement and good taste.95

In his English-language.Method (1830) Drouet warns

against "embellishments, vibrations, glidings, &c."86 He

admits their effectiveness in "trifling music," but
considers them injurious to "good music" as composed by
Haydn, Mozart or Beethoven.87
Whatever the cause, Nicholson appears to have modified
his performance style between 1825 and 1827. Lindsay

describes a radical change in style, commenting that:

 

53 Alexander (ca. 1818), 49.

9‘ Preceptive Lessons, 11.

‘5 Senex, "The Concerts," The Harmonicon, 1
(1823), 73.

0‘ Drouet,.Method (1830), 18.

37 Ibid.

138

To him we now look without fear, for a classical
and correct taste. That blameable superfluity of
notes, and propensity to flourish, of which we
before spoke as having discredited his
performances, he has wisely abolished; and we now
see in him, the model of first rate excellence.88

In reference to symphonic works of the "German
masters," an obituary cites Nicholson’s "manly simplicity of
style, and just conception of the author’s meaning, an
effect which we do not expect ever to meet with again."89

Nicholson appears to have answered his critics successfully.

39 James, "Mr. Nicholson," (1827), 44.
99 "Concerts," The.Musical WOrld, 6 (1837), 58.

CHAPTER VI

ARTICULATION

Articulation practices as they relate to the flute in
early nineteenth-century England have not been extensively
studied. Nicholson describes four distinct types of single
tonguing and associated notation: staccato (notated by
dashes), single tonguing (round dots), "legato staccato"
(slur over round dots), and legato (slur). In addition
there is double tonguing, triple tonguing, and aspiration.

An examination of English flute tutors from just after
the turn of the century reveals that decisions relating to
articulation were largely in the province of the performer.

Nicholson demonstrates an increased respect for the
composer’s intent and a considerably more detailed approach
to the notation of articulation than his immediate
predecessors or contemporaries. By the time of the School
(1836), the role of the composer in indicating articulation
was becoming established, with Nicholson as an advocate. In
order to understand his place in this transition, an
examination of those English tutors immediately preceding

and contemporary to Nicholson is essential.

PERFORMANCE PRACTICE

Flute tutors from the turn of the century onward
contain tables demonstrating various patterns of
articulation. The intended function of these tables appears

to change between the turn of the century and the time of

139

140
Nicholson’s School (1836). In early tutors the tables are

guides for interpretation. The patterns are intended to be
applied by the performer to works of music. In Nicholson’s
tutors the patterns are for practice purposes, in order to
acquire facility. As applied to pieces, articulation is to
be performed as written by the composer.

Monzani’s Instructions of 1801 include a table showing
thirty-six combinations of tongued and slurred notes.1 This
table is

not for amusement, it will teach how to tip
properly passages of every description without
attending to the usual marks: Slurs, dots &c.

which is [sic] introduced in music without meaning
or effect.2

Monzani means that the performer should apply these
patterns of articulation and ignore any printed
articulation. A similar table appears in his New and
Enlarged Edition (1813). Here he defends the performer’s
prerogative, "composers not being always aware of the
Peculiar Articulation belonging to the flute’.”

Beale’s second edition (ca. 1815) reproduces
essentially the same table but with a more tactful
rationale, saying that the modes are "necessary in certain

passages and often left out in the Engraving.“I Whatever

 

1 Monzani (1801), 10-13.
3 Ibid, 10.

3 Ibid, 19.

C

Beale (ca. 1815), 45.

141

their reasons, flutists seem to have little regard for the
composer’s indication of articulation early in the century.
The most complete example of this approach to
articulation was published in English about 1827 by
Berbiguier as A Complete System of Articulation for the
Flute. Part one contains 60 patterns of single tonguing
with suggestions for their use (part two contains 28
examples of double tonguing). These suggestions presume
that the performer will decide where to apply each pattern.
In his Instructions of 1828, Dressler alludes to a new
variety of articulation practice and the decline of
systematic articulation:
In this work I have not given any fix’d rules for
Tipping and Slurring, as authors will very
frequently Tip and Slur similar passages quite
different in order to vary the expression of the
Music, and the Learner will find by his paying
attention to the Tips and Slurs in this work or
other music of superior composition, that he will
be able to obtain a more tasteful mode of

articulation, than by binding himself to any fixed
rules.5

In Nicholson’s tutors, the articulation tables appear
to serve a different purpose. The Complete Preceptor
includes an abbreviated table with nine modes of
articulation.6 The brevity of these examples suggests a
reduction in importance. The Preceptive Lessons include
another table with eleven modes. The reader is specifically

instructed to apply these articulation patterns to several

 

Dressler (1828), 11.
9 Complete Preceptor, 17.

142

of the exercises,7 but there is no hint that the performer
should depart from the careful notation found in the various
airs and melodies. Instead, Nicholson occasionally cautions
the student to play these pieces exactly as written.8

The School contains a table of thirteen modes of

articulation, each given a name. (All three tables are

reproduced in the Appendix.) Nicholson instructs that these
modes of articulation be "practiced daily" and applied to a
series of exercises.9 Again, there is no mention of
applying the patterns to musical examples.

In all of Nicholson’s tutors the articulation tables
are meant for practice and application to specific studies.
They do not appear to be intended for application as rules
to works of music. The notated articulation in the musical
examples is quite specific and contains more variety than
the simple application of articulation tables would allow.
Nicholson uses varied articulation for musical purposes. He
frequently disrupts an established pattern before starting a
new phrase or just before a cadence. In Figure 6-1 shows a
pattern of slurs broken by three separate notes in the

fourth and fifth bars.

 
    

O

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 6-1. Varied articulation, Complete Preceptor, 31.

 

7 Preceptive Lessons, 17, 23, 36, 37, 39, etc..
0 Ibid, 38.
9 School, 64.

143

Figure 6-2 shows two patterns of articulation separated by a
slur in bar two. In both examples the altered articulation
appears to imply a slight ritardando. In reference to a
Capriccio, Nicholson warns that the marks of articulation
"must be strictly adhered to, or the desired effect will be
lost."1° This detailed and discriminating approach suggests
that articulation had become a means of musical expression

rather than a mechanical device to be applied arbitrarily.

 

 

I ' \ A
I ‘ \ ' "\ "\ O ' . t4. .... n / .‘ ,—. A f 4‘
‘L'- n- ‘x-- ‘— r- [1“ : ..- E . - . -
cam-Es: 5..-£53355”??? saga-steals; ., 55-42%
\ \- \3 \§ / -: -- _‘ _ gx‘ .\\\

Figure 6—2. Slur separating patterns of articulation,

Preceptive Lessons, 70.

In the School Nicholson describes and endorses a

general movement towards notated articulation

so essential is it [articulation] in the
estimation of all modern composers, that little is
now left to the discretion of the performer,
various marks being placed over the notes and
passages by which the intended eXpression is
indicated; and unless strict attention be paid to
them by the performer, the most simple but
beautiful compositions may be destroyed. This
becomes very conspicuous in trio, quartet, or
orchestral playing, where the same passage is
frequently given successively to the various
performers; and if the accent and notes of marked
articulation are not the same, the beauty of
imitation, and the intention of the composer, are
lost.12

 

1° Preceptive Lessons, 68.
13 School, 13.
13 School, 13.

144

Nicholson’s concern for the intent of the composer is a
significant departure from the near disdain of Monzani
twenty-three years earlier. Nicholson appears to be
relatively unique in his concern for the accurate notation
of articulation. In 1828 Lindsay is still able to say that
"the great art consists in knowing when properly to apply

the various articulations."13

NOTATION

The common marks of articulation encountered in the
Nicholson tutors are dots and slurs. The interpretation of
slurs is self-evident. This is referred to as legato in
most of the English tutors examined. The use and meaning of
dots in early nineteenth century English tutors is
inconsistent and occasionally contradictory. Two types
appear, the vertical line or dash and the round dot or
point.1‘ These can appear either alone or in combination
with the slur. A distinction between the two forms of dot
is not drawn in English flute tutors until the 1820’s,
although circumstantial evidence suggests a distinction was
intended earlier.

The use of the dash and point is not new to nineteenth-
century England. Quantz described the interpretation of

dots and strokes in 1752:

 

13 Lindsay (1828-30), 39. The author cites
Berbiguier’stethod (1827) as the original source for
this statement.

1‘ N. Swaine, The YOung.Musician or the Science of

MUsic Familiarly EXplained (Stourport: G. Nicholson,
1818), 25.

145

. . . those notes with strokes must be played with
completely detached strokes, and those with dots
simply with short strokes and in a sustained
manner, so a similar distinction is required when
there are slurs above the notes.15

English tutors from just after the turn of the century
are particularly erratic in their notation of articulation.
Monzani (1803) allows only two extremes of notation, legato
(slurred) and staccato (tongued),17 which are notated as the
slur and dash. Some musical examples are fully notatele
while others are completely unmarked.u The second edition
of Wragg’s Preceptor (1806) carries notation similar to
Monzani’s, but round dots occur in a set of preludes at the
end of the tutor.3° No comment or explanation is given.
The round dots appear simply to represent a different
typography.21 In Monzani’s Instructions of 1813, both the
dot and the dash appear regularly, though only once on the
same page.22 No distinction is suggested in the text. The
equivalence of the two markings is confirmed by Swaine (ca.

1818), who asserts that both markings mean staccato, are

 

15 Quantz, 223.

1° Hadidian, 21.

17 Monzani (ca. 1813), 24-25. The author gives
circular definitions, defining legato as the opposite
of staccato and vice versa.

1‘ Monzani (1801), 7, Example XIV, "Bugle Horn
Quick March". The musical examples are numbered
separately from the text.

19 Ibid, 9 (Example XVII, "March").

3° Wragg (1806), 62.

3‘ These preludes follow an "Appendix" and
presumably represent an addition to the first edition.
As such the inconsistent typography is not surprising.

3’ Monzani (1813), 65.

146

equivalent, and are to "have a smart articulate effect,
detached one from another distinctly."23

Beale’s second edition (1815) is similar to Monzani’s
in employing the dash for most examples, but a few dots
occur. In one instance an Andantino with round dots appears
on the same page as a Mbderato with dashes.3‘ An Allemand
has the dash for the first stanza and the dot for the
second. Beale’s third edition (ca. 1821) has new engraving
and new musical examples. While the dash still
predominates, the dot occurs sporadically.25 All this
suggests two possibilities: either the engraver was sloppy
or some distinction was intended.

Both marks occur in Alexander (1818), even in the same
example.25. While no explanation is given, Alexander’s
examples derive from other composers’ works and one suspects
the notation was copied along with the various musical
examples. Dressler (1828) uses the round dot exclusively,
but again without explanation.

The first clear explanation of the two markings is
given by Lindsay (1828). He considers that both dash and
point indicate staccato, but "the upright marks are to be
played more decidedly Staccato than the round dots.”37
Lindsay defines the round dots as representing normal

staccato. The dash therefore represents something more

 

’3 Swaine (1818), 25.

3‘ Beale (ca. 1815), 23.

*5 Beale (ca. 1821), 42, 44,48.
3' Alexander (ca. 1818), 72.

3' Lindsay (1828-30), 31.

147

separated. Alexander considers both marks as staccato and
like Lindsay suggests that the dash is to be played shorter
than the dot.28

Nicholson’s interpretation of the dots does not
entirely agree with that of his contemporaries. In the
Complete Preceptor, Nicholson cites only two degrees of
articulation, "slurred" and "tipt."39 The latter is
indicated only by a dash (as seen in the first table of
Appendix A). Most examples in the Complete Preceptor are
fully marked. Both dots and dashes occur in the Preceptive
Lessons, again without explanation. This articulation table
(also reproduced in Appendix A) shows slurs or round dots in
all but the last example, which combines slurs and dashes.

Under this table Nicholson cautions the student to give
notes full value, "particularly in Staccato Passages". His
example shows eighth notes with round dots and warns against
"falsely" playing them as sixteenths separated by sixteenth
rests.3° This is inconsistent with instructions by Wragg,
Riley, Dressler, and Lindsay, which specifically state that
staccato should be played one-half the written note value.31
Nicholson seems to be ignoring convention.

Figure 6-3 (p. 148), from the Preceptive Lessons,
contains round dots and dashes together, confirming that

Nicholson does intend some distinction. The Preceptive

 

3° Alexander (ca. 1818), 15.

39 Complete Preceptor, 17.

3° Preceptive Lessons, 4.

31 Wragg (1806), iii; Riley (ca. 1811), 12;
Dressler (1828), 16; Lindsay (1828-30), 31.

148

'I’RELUD'E -
ANbAI‘I’I. '

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~ ,, ’P a» '

(w l rummmw . Emmi» Lou-me 42m.)
Figure 6-3. Points and dashes, Preceptive Lessons, 83.

Lessons were meant for advanced players and Nicholson
evidently felt an explanation unnecessary.

A clear, if slightly contradictory rationale finally
emerges in the School. The discrepancy appears to stem from
Nicholson’s interpretation of the dot. He describes this
not as a form of staccato, but as an indication of normal
single tonguing, in which "the tone is to be sustained." He
further explains that staccato is indicated by the dash. An
accompanying example shows that Nicholson’s staccato is
given one-half the written value32 just as the other sources
cited above. The articulation table that follows (see
Appendix C) confirms that round dots represent normal single
tonguing and dashes represent staccato.

There is no clear consensus on the interpretation of
staccato marks among Nicholson’s best known European

contemporaries. Ffirstenau gives an example which shows the

 

3' School, 62.

149
dash [Strichl and round dot [Punkt] as interchangeable.33

Only the round dot {point}H appears in Tulou’s Méthode.
Surprisingly, Drouet states, "The notes that are marked with
[a] round dot ought to be attempted with less dryness than
in the first example [the dash]."35 This is at least
compatible with Nicholson’s approach. In his Articulation
for the Flute, Berbiguier illustrates both forms of dot and
suggests a distinction similar to Nicholson’s.3‘

The early flute specialist Stephen Preston has
suggested, based on eighteenth and early nineteenth-century
sources, that the dot may indicate that the notes are to be
played equally, without agogic accents.37 If this is true,
then Nicholson’s use of the dot to represent normal
articulation represents a transition from the eighteenth-
century practice of baroque swing and inegale to modern
equality of articulation. Confirmation of this trend will
be found under the discussion of syllable usage in double
tonguing, where it will be seen that John Gunn rejects
Quantz’s syllables precisely because they promote
inequality.

From 1803 to 1818 only the slur (or legato) and dots
(staccato) appear in English flute tutors. An intermediate

or "mezzo" staccato is mentioned by Keith (ca. 1818-21).

 

33 Furstenau, Floten-Schule (ca. 1826), 8.

3‘ Tulou (1835), 9.

35 Drouet,.Method (1830), 24.

3° Tranquille Berbiguier, A Complete System of
Articulation for the Flute (London: Wheatstone & Co.,
ca. 1827), 1.

37 Stephen Preston, telephone conversation,
January 28, 1990.

150

This is to be notated as a slur over dots and "differs only
from the Legato by the note being a little more distinct."38
Alexander (ca. 1818) presents an "Andante Amoroso" by
A. Ireland which contains the slur over round dots. In a
footnote, he explains that this notation is called "Mezzo

Staccato" and that "the notes should be played in one breath

a little short and distinct."39

Dressler (1828) also mentions the slur over dots, which
is to be "articulated very gently and smoothly with doo.“‘°

None of these writers makes a claim to invention.
Indeed, Quantz described the identical notation in 1752."1
It seems likely that previous authors simply neglected to
mention this "fine distinction".

The same effect appears as item 12 in the articulation
table from the School. Nicholson terms it "The Legato
Staccato". The technique involves playing "as legato as
possible." There is a tongue stroke, but "without a
cessation of tone." He suggests that this articulation is
found "in the compositions of all modern classic writers.”2
The implication is that a neglected technique had been

revived.

 

33 Keith (ca 1818-21), New & Complete Preceptor,
15. This author has a connection to Nicholson. In
1829 he joined in partnership with Prowse, the
manufacturer of "C. Nicholson’s Patent Flute".
Langwill, Index, 89.

39 Alexander (ca. 1818), 55.

‘° Dressler (1828), 16.

‘1 Quantz, 75.

‘2 School, 64.

151
TECHNIQUES
The techniques of staccato and legato staccato are
performed by a stroke of the tongue. Nicholson’s essay on
"Articulation" in the School is revealing in several
aspects. He considers the subject second in importance only
to tone, because "brilliancy and accent depend on its
application.“3 His description of tongue motion and
placement is cogent:
The first articulation to acquire is Single
Tonguing; it is produced by placing the point of
the tongue against the roof of the mouth near the
gum, and then pronouncing the syllable too; in
doing this, the tongue will be instantly released
from that position, and, by its action, the breath
will be impelled with considerable force in the
flute. This requires a vigorous action of the
tongue, consequently the pressure of it to the
roof of the mouth must be as firm as possible.
This articulation should be practised on one note,
until the pupil can strike the breath into the

flute and produce a tone instantly. Care must be
taken that the tongue does not touch the teeth.H

Nicholson’s description of tongue placement is similar
to Gunn’s, but the emphasis on force and pressure is new.
The last sentence is clearly meant to distinguish
Nicholson’s traditional English approach from the French.
Here and elsewhere, he loses no opportunity to distance
himself from their practice. The French pronunciation of
teu (as advocated by Drouet)‘5 positions the tongue further

forward in the mouth than the English too. Of teu, Drouet

 

‘3 School, 62
“ Ibid.
‘5 Drouet, Method (1830), 2

152

makes clear, "When I speak of this syllable I always mean
its French pronunciation."u By this approach the tip of
the tongue touches between the teeth or even between the
lips. Walkiers states that, "The blow of the tongue is made
against the teeth and at the opening of the lips.”7
Berbigieur is slightly more conservative, saying, "It is
here necessary to remark, that the syllable tu as well as
the syllable du should be pronounced with the tongue behind
the teeth; strongly touching the palate for the tu, and
slightly for the du."H In reference to detache, Tulou
states that, "one strikes the tongue on the edge of the lips
without going out . . .."49 Furstenau advocates a similar
approach,“0 although with the syllable 75.5! Nicholson
criticizes this European approach first on practical
grounds:
Moisture on the lips is generally produced by the
habit of protruding the tongue between them.
There is no necessity for the tongue coming in
contact with the lips at all; on the contrary it
ought to be particularly avoided; for I have met
with many pupils who have given false support to

the under lip with the tongue, the instant it has
been withdrawn for the purpose of articulation,

 

46 Ibid. , A
47 Eugene Walkiers,.Methode de Flute (Paris:
author, ca. 1829), 13. Le bout de la langue etant pose

contre les dents et a l’ouverture des lévres.

4° Berbiguier, Articulation (ca. 1827); Tulou
(1835): 8.
4’ Tulou (1835), 8. . . . on frappera la langue

sur le bard des lévres sans la faire sortir. . ..

5° Ffirstenau, Fldten-Schule (ca. 1826), 13. "The
tongue must be brought so near the lips that by this
the exit of the air is obstructed".

51 Ibid. 19.

153

tone has either entirely ceased or become very
feeble.52

As if technical considerations were not enough,

Nicholson attacks the musical result as well:

The greater number of pupils who come to me have
either been taught or have acquired the bad habit
of placing the tongue between the teeth and
withdrawing it to produce an articulation, this is
merely allowing the breath to escape, the effect
of which in articulation is feeble and
inefficient; indeed, so far from the tongue
protruding between the teeth, its action ought not
to have the slightest influence on the lips or the
embouchure.53

Nicholson’s objection to the European approach as
"feeble and inefficient" suggests that his own articulation
may have been rather heavy-handed. Nicholson obviously
brought a strong degree of personal bias to the issue. One
might expect him to exaggerate differences between himself
and his rival. While strongly recommending the practicing
of hard articulation, Nicholson does not advocate its
invariable use:

I am a great advocate for the acquirement of the
utmost force in tone and articulation, knowing how
easy it is at all times to subdue both; those who
practise otherwise will want vigour and brilliancy
in their execution, and in the attempt to obtain

either will be almost certain of playing too
sharp.54

 

5’ School, 4
53 Ibid. 64
54 Ibid.

154

Nicholson was evidently trying to achieve the widest
possible range of effect.

Also, a modern reader’s interpretation of force or
forcing is likely to be quite different from Nicholson’s
intent. Clues to this can be found in Lindsay’s and
Alexander’s tutors.55 Both authors use the term to describe
a gentle breath accent, not a hard or explosive articulation
with the tongue.

Experiments with early nineteenth-century flutes and
both tongue placements suggest several observations. The
forward placement of the tongue does preclude the most
explosive of attacks, in accordance with the French opinion.
The traditional flute of the period (with its small
embouchure hole) lends itself to a gentle and precise
articulation. The larger embouchure hole of the Nicholson
flute requires higher airspeeds to operate than the small
hole found on French and conservative English flutes. As a
result it is possible to strike a note with "utmost force"
on a Nicholson flute without producing quite the distorted
sound one might expect. A soft, clear attack is
correspondingly difficult to produce on the Nicholson flute,
and comparatively muddy articulation is difficult to avoid.
Anyone learning the Nicholson flute would need to invest
considerable time and effort to achieve a clear

articulation. Nicholson recommends an ivory-lined

 

55 Lindsay (1828-30), 97; Alexander (ca. 1818),
65.

155

embouchure,56 which does seem to mitigate some of the
difficulties brought on by the large embouchure hole.
Overall, Nicholson’s choice of syllable and tongue placement
appears to be as much an adaptation to his instrument as an
expression of musical taste.

In his first two tutors Nicholson has remarkably little
to say on the subject of syllable usage in single tonguing.
In the Complete Preceptor he suggests too or tee,57 and the
subject is not even broached in the Preceptive Lessons. The
School contains detailed remarks and also recommends too.59
There is an air of controversy about this, and Nicholson
seems defensive of what appears to be an ordinary practice.
In order to gain perspective, it is necessary to examine
syllable usage in England leading up to and contemporary
with Nicholson’s School.

Prior to Nicholson’s time, the choice of syllable seems
to have aroused little interest among English writers. John
Gunn describes syllable usage and tongue placement in
England as of 1793:

The usual and best method of tonguing in general,
is by that action of the tongue against the
palate, which pronounces the letters t and d; the

former is more strong and spirited, and the latter
more soft and precise.59

 

5‘ School, 171.
57 Complete Preceptor, 4.
59 School, 62.
5’ Gunn, Art (1793), 13.

156

Very little appears in subsequent English tutors
regarding choice of syllable and specific techniques of
single tonguing. Those silent on the subject include the
popular and much copied "Florio and Tacet" (1801),°° as well
as Wragg (1806), Monzani (1801 and 1813), and Kuffner (ca.
1820).

When an English tutor does specify a syllable it is
usually too. This is found in the many editions of wragg’s
Improved, and Beale’s Complete Guide,“1 which in this
respect is patterned after wragg's Improved. It appears
that in early nineteenth—century England, the choice of
syllable for single tonguing was simply not an issue.

When Nicholson approaches the subject in the School, he
advocates only the syllable T’oo.H The use of Gunn’s softer
"d" syllable is not forgotten:

I must here observe that I have heard and read of
various syllables being used to soften the effect
produced by the syllable too, but I know the
articulation produced by it can be rendered as
soft and mellow as by any other; and this is

affected by merely relaxing the action of the
tongue and subduing the tone.‘3

Nicholson recommends variation of a single technique
rather than application of different techniques. He does

not proscribe the use of soft articulation. Gunn was still

 

3° New Instructions for the German Flute (London:
Preston and Son, ca. 1801).

'1 Wragg (1806), 2; Wragg (1818), 2; Beale (ca.
1815), 3; Beale (ca. 1821), 3.

‘3 School, 62

‘3 Ibid, 64

157

influential during Nicholson’s time--he was heavily quoted
by Swaine (1818) and Lindsay (1828)°‘-—but the stimulus for
Nicholson’s stance almost certainly came from across the
English channel.

During the second quarter of the nineteenth century
English flutists felt the influence of the French in general
and of Louis Drouet in particular. As described by Lindsay,
Drouet’s celebrity in England was based largely on his
extraordinary articulation.°5 Drouet advocates tea for
staccato and deu for "notes marked decidedly less
Staccato."H Berbiguier’s Articulation offers the
Anglicized tu and du.°' Nicholson’s friend Thomas Lindsay
sums up diplomatically: The syllable too is best, but "the
syllable doo, which is softer, is considered preferable, by
those writers who are nice in such distinctions."°3 By the
second quarter of the century Nicholson is clearly in the
minority, and the implication has been made that he may not
have been nice in such distinctions.

During the period of Nicholson’s tutors, double
tonguing appears to have come into vogue as a means of

bravura display. Double tonguing is something of a special

 

‘4 Swaine (ca. 1818), 39-45; Lindsay (1828-30),
5-7.

‘5 Lindsay (1828-30), 96.

5° Ibid. Some measure of the immediacy of this
issue may be seen in the spread of information. Drouet
first describes the teu and deu articulations in his
French language.Méthode of 1827, p. 78. Lindsay
translated some of it for part two of his Elements
(1830). In the same year Drouet issued his own English
language Method, with the same information, pp. 24-25.

‘7 Berbiguier, Articulation (ca. 1827), 1.

69 Lindsay (1828-30), 38

158

effect, closely related to single tonguing, and particularly
associated with the flute. The technique relies on the
alternation of two different syllables, one produced with
the tip and the other with the back of the tongue. This
results in a rolling motion, allowing two notes to be

articulated with each cycle of the tongue. Smith gives an

excellent overview of this practice in the eighteenth and
early nineteenth centuries.‘°

The technique of double tonguing was established in
England well before Nicholson’s time. Gunn recommends it
for practical reasons: the usual articulation (single
tonguing) is inadequate and double tonguing allows for
greater speed. This gives "brilliancy and articulation to
rapid divisions.”7° Riley (ca. 1811) commends double
tonguing to "every one who wishes to play with spirit and
execution in the Allegros."'1 The reason is that difficult
or impossible passages are made easy.

Double tonguing was not universally accepted. In 1813
Monzani, who was first flute at the Italian opera, bluntly
warns that "in whatever way it is done, the Effect is
equally bad, as it Produces nothing but a disagreable [sic]
confusion, which precludes the Performer from giving either
neatness or expression to the Passages."72

Nicholson was severely and perhaps unfairly criticized

for his technique of double tonguing. He first addresses

 

‘9 Smith, 44-47.

7° Gunn, Art (1793), 14.
71 Riley (ca. 1811), 16.
73 Monzani (1813), 19.

159
this in the Complete Preceptor, where he defends it for its
utility and musical effect. He alludes to criticism, saying
that "some Professors on this Instrument, have not
recommended this Embellishment as necessary,"73 but he
expresses confidence "that a more general exercise of it
alone is wanting, to insure its universal adoption.” This
prediction would soon come true.
In 1821 Charles Weiss gives a candid depiction of the
double tonguing in use:
I have often had an opportunity of playing in
public before a numerous audience, that I am
perfectly aware of what pleases the generality of
amateurs. I have very often been agreeably
surprised at the sudden change and attentive
contenance [sic] of the auditors, when, after a
soft and expressive slow movement I have
introduced an Allegro passage or a Variation in
double tonguing. The rapidity and neatness with
which those passages can be executed in using the

above articulation produce a sort of astonishment
even in Professors.H

The real value of double tonguing is its ability to
amaze and astound. That this technique could astound even
professors suggests that, if the method was old, the
application was new. Nicholson confirms this and describes
the acceptance of double tonguing which he had predicted in
the Complete Preceptor:

Double tonguing is an articulation which has had
its full share of abuse and condemnation, but like
other innovations on the "good old style of flute

playing," it has carried conviction by its
utility: its advantages are now freely admitted,

 

73 Complete Preceptor, 19.
7‘ Weiss, Instruction (ca. 1821), %.

160

and clearly developed by the vast improvement
which has taken place in flute playing within the
last few years; for certainly our predecessors
were totally unacquainted with the "railroad
speed" displayed in the performances of the
present generation.75

The apparent growth in the popularity of double
tonguing seems linked both to a rise in technical ability
and to a trend towards the bravura among Nicholson and his
contemporaries.

Nicholson is also responsible for a standardization of
the notation of double tonguing. In discussing intermediate
articulation (mezzo-staccato), which he notates by a slur
over dots, Lindsay endorses a new convention:

Mr. Nicholson and others, in their recent
Compositions, have employed this latter mode of
marking the articulation [the slur over dots], in

quick movements, when they intend the Double
Tonguing to be used;--we shall do the same.H

The notation of double tonguing prior to this
convention is quite inconsistent. The musical examples of
Wragg’s 14th edition (1818) provide an interesting example.
The engraver uses the dash for all the original musical
examples. At the end of the tutor there are a few musical
quotations from Drouet, Nicholson, and others. One of
these, an excerpt from Drouet’s variations on "God Save the

King,"77 contains an obvious example of double tonguing,

 

'5 School, 63.
7° Lindsay (1828), 31.
77 Wragg (1818), 72.

161

notated by the point over thirty-second notes. Examination
of Drouet’s original edition78 reveals this to be a faithful
copy of the fifth variation. A few of Nicholson’s
Variations on "The Blue Bells of Scotland"'° are also
reproduced, complete with original (and in this case)
inconsistent notation.8° Here Nicholson notates double
tonguing by a slur over dashes. The engraver appears to
have copied the notation literally, without regard for
consistency between examples.

It should be mentioned that Nicholson generally
distinguishes between legato-staccato and double tonguing by
the type of dot used. The round dot and slur are associated
with legato-staccato while the dash and slur are generally
associated with double tonguing. This is consistent in the
Preceptive Lessons, the Appendix, and the School (double
tonguing in the Complete Preceptor is marked simply "DT").$l
There is usually little difficulty in identifying double
tonguing from context, even without specific notation.
Double tonguing is associated only with fast tempi and the
legato-staccato is not. In reference to an unmarked example
in the Preceptive Lessons, Nicholson confirms: "The author

would generally Double Tongue such passages.”32

 

’3 Drouet, "God Save the King" (Vienna: Diabelli,
n.d.).

79 Nicholson, "The Blue Bells of Scotland"
(London: Clementi & Co., 1821).

8° Wragg (1818), 70.

91 Complete Preceptor, 64.

8‘ Preceptive Lessons, 17.

162

Charles Nicholson’s choice of syllables for double
tonguing is perfectly ordinary. He simply acknowledges
common practice when he advocates too-tle in the Complete
Preceptor, Preceptive Lessons, and School.83 Surprisingly,
Nicholson’s choice of syllables became the center of a
controversy. It is therefore useful to examine the
practices of Nicholson’s predecessors and contemporaries.

Gunn describes a transition at the turn of the century.
An eighteenth-century practice of "common double tonguing"
employed the syllables diddle, which had been described by
Quantz and recommended because the result is unequal.9‘
Gunn now rejects these syllables because the action and
reaction of the tongue are not equal and instead suggests
teddy or tiddy.83 This movement towards more equal
articulation represents a significant stylistic development
leading into the nineteenth century.

The syllables too-tle appear in several late eighteenth
century anonymous tutors, including those published by
Longman & Broderip and Thompson.“ Those early nineteenth
century English writers who endorse too-tle include Wragg,
Beale, Keith, Riley, Kuffner, Alexander, Weiss, and

Lindsay.°7 Dressler advocates too-tle for slow double

 

33 Complete Preceptor, 18; Preceptive Lessons, 5;
School, 63.

9‘ Quantz, 74.

’5 Gunn (1793), 14.

5° New Instructions (London: Longman & Broderip,
ca. 1780), 13; Thompson’s New Instructions for the
German Flute (London: Thompson, ca. 1780-1810?), 8.

8' Wragg (1806), 14; Wragg (1818), 14; Beale (ca.
1815), 16; Beale (ca. 1821), 16; Riley (ca. 1811),
16; Francesco Kuffner, New Instructions for the German

163
tonguing, but loo-dle and doo-dle for higher speeds.88 In

the Complete Preceptor Nicholson mentions te-tle tee te for
a "distinct expression"09 and in the Preceptive Lessons he
suggests dig-ga, tuc-ca, and tit-tle as possible
alternatives.9° These are neither recommended nor mentioned
subsequently.”1 Nicholson’s use of too-tle could hardly
have been more in the mainstream of English flute playing.

When Nicholson comments on double tonguing having "had
its full share of abuse and condemnation"92 he may have
referred to criticism aimed at his own technique. Nicholson
was severely criticized by W. N. James in A Wbrd or Two for
his choice of syllables. James’s offensive begins on a
general note, claiming that the "too-tle" syllables are used
by "some masters" and the result is "Babylonish gabble."93
The attack eventually becomes direct, with James accusing
Nicholson of always using double tonguing for rapid staccato
and asserting that Nicholson's choice of syllables is
incorrect.H

Drouet had earlier created a sensation in England with
the rapidity of his double tonguing95 and James claimed to

have a special knowledge of Drouet’s technique. In the

 

Flute third ed. London: author (ca. 1820), 9;
Alexander (ca. 1818), 87; Weiss, Instruction (ca.
1821), 86-87; Lindsay (1828-30), 98.

’3 Dressler (1828), 48-49.

89 Complete Preceptor, 19.

9° Preceptive Lessons, 5.

9‘ Di-ga may be of interest in that it anticipates
the modern usage of d and g syllables.

93 School, 64.

93 James, A Word or Two (1826), 123.

94 Ibid, 158.

95 Lindsay (1828-30), 96.

164
collection of Tony Bingham there is a copy of A Word or Two
bearing an anonymous and undated margin note on page 165,
where James confidently proposes territory as the secret of
Drouet’s facility:
All this is incorrect--Minasi (the most celebrated
of Drouet’s Pupils) states that when he studied
under Drouet D. never interfered or made any
suggestions as to his tonguing--the passage was to
be done & if done neatly it mattered not to Drouet
what syllables were used--M. says the syllables
Drouet himself used were teu—tu, Leg tu--this

method some can readily adopt but others will find
it difficult--much depends on the tongue.

At least one anonymous Englishman was wise to James.
Four years after A Word or Two, Drouet published his English
Method. In it he discusses several syllables, finally
advocating deu reu" and thereby publicly exposing James as
a fraud. The discrepancy between James and Drouet is
politely mentioned by Lindsay, who ascribes it to
speculation on the part of James.97 Annand calls it an
"ignis fatuus of Mr. James's imagination" and an "error, or
a barefaced attempt at imposition."9° Whatever the truth of
the matter, James's vitriolic criticism of Nicholson cannot
be taken at face value. Evidence from the tutors suggests
that despite the criticism, Nicholson’s technique of double
tonguing is conventional.

Double tonguing is only effective for groups of notes

which are multiples of two; groups of three notes require

 

9‘ Drouet, Method (ca. 1830), 15.
9' Lindsay (1828-30), 100.
9' Annand, 16, 17.

165

an alteration of the basic technique. Nicholson suggests
"too-tle too" in the Preceptive Lessons, and School.99 The
Complete Preceptor contains only too-tle.”o There is no
special explanation, and the technique is not given a name
in any of Nicholson’s tutors. Other contemporary English
tutors which mention too-tle too include Keith (ca 1818~
21),101 Beale (ca. 1815 and ca. 1821), and Alexander (ca.
1818). Dressler (1828) gives this the name still
recognizable to modern flutists: triple tonguing.‘°3
Another technique that received little attention from
Nicholson is aspiration. This refers simply to starting a
note with a vowel so that there is no tongue stroke. Smith
has documented that the technique was well established in
the eighteenth century.”3 Aspiration is not widely
mentioned in early nineteenth-century English sources.
Direct reference occurs in Dressler’s Instructions (1828)
under, "On Tonguing and Aspiration." He describes its
production
by means of the syllable hoo, in place of the
action of the tongue; its effect resembles that of
the [glass] harmonica, and gives a beautiful
delicacy of expression in smooth and plaintive

melodies, where the gentlest action of the tongue
would injure the effect.104

 

99 Preceptive Lessons, 19; School, 67.
10° Preceptive Lessons, 4.

1°1 Keith (ca. 1818-21), 16.

1°” Dressler (1828), 87.

1°3 Smith, 41-42.

1°4 Dressler (1828), 8.

166

Dressler claims precedence only in having described

aspiration, not in its invention. In 1830 Lindsay comments:
Another mode of articulating we had almost
forgotten: it consists in a mere forcing of the
note, by means of the syllable "hoo," instead of
the usual action of the tongue, and in some
slurred passages, where marks of emphasis are
attached to the notes, may be advantageously
applied. Mr. DRESSLER, who claims the merit of
having first explained this, calls it
’articulating by'ASPIRATION,’ and observes that
’its effect resembles that of the Harmonica, and
gives a beautiful delicacy of Expression in smooth

and plaintive melodies, where the gentlest action
of the tongue would injure the effect.1°5

Lindsay speaks here about something common enough to be
overlooked, not a new or controversial technique.

Nicholson never mentions aspiration, but a footnote in
the Preceptive Lessons suggests he used it matter-of-factly.
In reference to a "Bollero" with rapid triplets, Nicholson
suggests that he would play them by "blowing the first and
articulating the following two." This is an extraordinary
technique which requires a clear attack be produced entirely
by the breath. There is nothing comparable to this in any
of the sources examined.

A less dramatic but related technique for re-
articulating a single note appears twice in the Preceptive
Lessons106 and appears to be related to Nicholson’s
vibration. This is indicated by multiple accents over a

single note, as shown in Figure 6-4 (p. 167).

 

105 Lindsay (1823-30): 97.
10‘ Preceptive Lessons, 57, 65.

167

 

Figure 6—4. Breath accent, Preceptive Lessons, 57.

In the School, Nicholson mentions a curious
articulation practice which is not recommended:
There is also an articulation of the fingers;
these should be lifted and not drawn off the
flute: the performances of those persons who have

accustomed themselves to the latter mode are
languid and unsatisfactory to the ear.1°7

There is an obvious similarity between this
articulation and the glide. The difference between the two
techniques must have to do with duration and frequency of
use. The glide is presumably slower and used with

restraint.

APPLICATION TO NICHOLSON’S COMPOSITIONS AND EDITIONS

A detailed examination of the notation in Nicholson’s
compositions is well beyond the limits of this study, but
the Twelve Favorite Airs published by Clementi in 1821 and
the Select Melodies of Goulding, D’Almaine, Potter & Co.
(ca. 1819-23) are consistent with the notation described in

the School. The earlier National Airs (ca. 1815) are

 

107 School, 64.

168

generally consistent, although double tonguing appears to be
indicated with dots. Examples of staccato are infrequent.
Many works, such as the Beauties (ca. 1784-1835) are
difficult to date. This particular example contains only
the dashes, suggesting either an early date or perhaps a
stodgy engraver. The notation described in Nicholson’s
tutors does seem generally applicable to his other works.

In spite of statements supporting the composer’s
notation of articulation, Nicholson freely edits other
composers’s articulations in the Passages. This is a
collection of excerpts from flute concerti, duets, and trios
by composers including Kreith, Schneider, Krazinsky,
Hoffmeister, Vern, De Call, Berbiguier, Devienne, Muller,
Burrowes, and Tulou. These are intended as "Studies for the
Flute, Arranged with Marks of Articulation, Expression &
Fingering.”‘“°

Nicholson’s articulation is the featured selling point
of the Passages. Works by eighteenth-century composers
(such as Hoffmeister) may have originally lacked
articulation markings. This is not the case with
Nicholson’s contemporaries. Figure 6-5(p. 170)109
represents the original notation from Schneider’s Three
Duets. This has detailed marks of articulation. Figure 6-6
(p. 170) is Nicholson’s version from the Passages. Here

Schneider’s articulations are freely altered. The variety

 

10° Passages, cover.

‘09 George Abraham Schneider, Three Duets for Two
Flutes, op. 32 (London: Clementi, Banger, Collard,
Davis & Collard, ca. 1810-1818).

169

of articulation used by Nicholson is remarkable. Where
Schneider uses only two patterns (either all tongued or
slurred in groups of four), Nicholson uses three different
patterns in just three bars.

Both forms of dot appear throughout the Passages, and
articulation markings are detailed to the point of
confusion. Figure 6-7 (p. 171) shows another example from
Schneider’s original edition and Figure 6-8 (p. 171)
presents the corresponding measures from Nicholson’s
Passages. The lower markings appear to be Nicholson’s while
the upper markings are faithful to Schneider’s original.
This suggests an almost scholarly approach on Nicholson’s

part.

170

 

 

Figure 6-5. Marks of articulation, Schneider, Three Duets,

Duetto One, 2.

Flnuln Prim" DUETTO. I. ”00‘ 2 .

I. 2: ’4.” ..-‘ 1
— -“ .l-—-——-_ .
- l-J =----:-_-—=_ a

    

I
I
‘—

- ’1 —‘ m
- == '- ...-=— ,
--‘- la=-= ===== L:-
....fi

Figure 6-6. Nicholson’s editing of Schneider, Duetto One,

Passages, 11.

171

m —-———-—'———

~'__-

..Jn .1.— ‘
.ll-----I_A----‘.

I
I hi!

I_.Jl-4 .4.—

I‘d

m
u
u
n
-
_
n
.u

—--—-I_AI-

 

Three Duets,

Schneider,

Marks of articulation,

Figure 6-7.

6.

Duetto Two,

'4' n-- I l I I n I‘l------‘--

  

.... ------.l‘-_——.—— -
.l|_———_—-—— 3....-
, —_-—

 

.
.
_
.
-
fl
—
-
.
.
m
_
n
.
.
—
I
-
_
.

  

l—--———--I-—- ‘—
—-------—7 ,,- ' , "
- "_—’

 

Duetto Two,

3 editing of Schneider,

holson’

Nic

Figure 6-8.

12.

PaSSages,

172
CONCLUSION

Charles Nicholson has been remembered as a loud flute
player of questionable musical taste. Since he was a
controversial figure, contemporary sources must be read with
care. Based on direct investigation of the tutors with the
appropriate flute in hand, this study has revealed a complex
performance practice based on control and contrast.

Nicholson’s specialized techniques are intimately
associated with his modified flute. Although difficult to
play, it was ideally suited to his purposes, allowing
incomparable flexibility in matters of pitch, timbre, and
dynamic. In many respects it represents the ultimate
development of the keyed flute. With this instrument
Nicholson was able to exploit tone, vibration, the glide,
ornamentation, and articulation for maximum musical effect.
His use of these devices represents an extension of the
expressive capabilities of the flute: Nicholson did not
just play loudly but emphasized the expressive use of tone.
His pursuit of contrast also included the use of varied tone
colors, and his altered fingerings expanded both the tonal
and technical possibilities of the instrument. Nicholson’s
vibration produces a remarkably subtle effect, and he uses
the glide not as an abstract ornament, but rather as a means
of musical expression. Much of Nicholson’s expressive
musical language was eliminated with the adoption of the

Boehm flute.

173

Nicholson lived during a period of change and
transition. His vibration represents the continuation of a
baroque practice side-by-side with innovations in sound
production which foreshadow modern practice. Subtleties of
articulation were being explored as responsibility for
articulation was moving from the performer to the composer.
The nature of ornamentation was also changing. Nicholson’s
use of the shake reflects a melodic rather than harmonic
conception, and his flexible approach to rhythmic values of
the appoggiatura emphasizes its expressive nature.

Nicholson was criticized for excesses in his
performances and responded with a dramatic revision of his
style. In this study he emerges as an innovative and
resourceful musician, deeply concerned with the pursuit of

musical expression.

APPENDICES

Date:

ca. 1780
1782
ca. 1790
ca. 1795
ca. 1800

1804

1822

. 1825

ca. 1825

pre-1827
ca. 183?
ca. 183?
ca. 1830
1830

ca.

1832

ca. 1832

APPENDIX A

Flutes referred to in

Maker:

[Thomas] Cahusac
[Richard] Potter
[Richard] Potter
[Richard] Potter
G[eorge] Astor & Co.
G[eorge] Astor & Co.

Clementi & Co

V . Leibel

Clementi & Co.
(Thomas Prowse)
#3157

Rudall & Rose #3981
Stephan Koch (attr)
[Claire] Godfroy

Rudall & Rose #2969
Rudall & Rose #??8

Hill-late Monzani
#2332

T[homas] Prowse
#3784

Origin:
London
London
London
London
London
London

London

Dresden

London

London
Vienna
Paris

London
London

London

London

174

this study.

Description: Collection:
1 key, boxwood Stout

1 key, boxwood Stout

4 keys, boxwood Stout

6 keys, boxwood Stout

5 keys, boxwood Spell

8 keys, boxwood worthen
8 keys, boxwood Stout

Nicholson’s Improved
two headjoints

nine keys, cocus

seven keys, cocus
Nicholson’s Improved

8 keys, cocus
14 keys, cocus
4 keys, cocus
8 keys, cocus
8 keys, cocus

8 keys, cocus

8 keys, cocus
Nicholson’s Improved

Preston

Preston

Preston
Preston
Preston
Preston
Preston

Spell

Spell

APPENDIX A.(cont’d.)

ca. 1832 T[homas] Prowse
#3785

1834 T[homas] Prowse
#3879

ca. 1855 [Jacques] Nonon

ca. 1875 Rudall, Rose, Carte,

& Co. #6738

Locations:
Cullowhee, NC;
Worthen, Boston.

175

Umfibn

mekm

Tfinfis

hwan

Stephen Preston, London;
Glennis Stout, Ann Arbor, MI;

8 keys, cocus Preston
Nicholson’s Improved
cocus, 6 keys Stout
Nicholson’s Improved
Tulou’s Flute Preston
.Hfldbctkmée
8 keys, cocus Preston
Nicholson style

Eldred Spell,

Douglas

APPENDIX B

Chronological list of flute tutors

Dates are often approximate.

British:

1731 Anon. The Modern Mas. Master. London: Schott
(reprint).

1756 Anon. The Compleat Tutor for the Fife [and flute].

1787

1793

1793

1801

1806

1809

1810

1810

1810

1813

Leicester Fields: David Rutherford.

Arnold, Dr. New Instructions. London: Harrison & Co.

Gunn, The Art of Playing. London: Author.

Wragg, The Flute Precept. Opus III, 9th ed. with

additions. London: Author.

Monzani, T. Instructions for the German Flute. London:

Monzani & Cimador.

Wragg, J. Improved Flute Preceptor. London: Author.
Wragg, J. Improved Flute Preceptor. London: Author.
Anon. New Instructions for the German Flute. London:

Preston and Son.
Anon. The Complete Tutor for the German Flute. Dublin:
J. Delany.

Anon. Thompson’s New Instructions for the German

Flute. London: Thompson.

Anon. New and Complete Instructions for the German

Flute. London: Preston.

176

177

APPENDIX B (cont’d.)

1813

1815

1815

1816

1817
1818

1818

1820

1820

1821

1821

1821

Monzani, T. A New and Enlarged Edition of Monzani's
Instructions for the German Flute. London: Monzani &
Cimador.

Beale, John. A Complete Guide to the Art of Playing
the Ger. Flute. 3rd ed. London: Goulding, D’Almaine,
Potter & Co.

Keith, Robert Wm. A New and Complete Preceptor for the
German Flute London: Keith.

Nicholson, Charles. Nicholson’s Complete Preceptor.
London: Preston.

Nicholson, Charles. Passages. London:J. Power.
Swaine, N. The Ybung.Musician. Stourport: G.
Nicholson.

Wragg, J. Improved Flute Preceptor. London: Author,
1818 (August).

Kuffner, Francisco. New Instructions for the German
Flute. 3rd ed. London: Author.

Weiss, Charles N. Two Hundred Studies fer the Flute.
London: Clementi & Co.

Alexander, James. Complete Preceptor for the Flute.
2nd ed. London: J. Alexander & Mr. Townsend.

Anon. A New Preceptor. London: Clementi & Co.

Beale, John. A Complete Guide to the Art of Playing
the German Flute.(3rd ed) London: Goulding, D’Almaine,

Potter & Co.

178
APPENDIX B (cont’d.)

1821 Nicholson, Charles. Preceptive Lessons for the Flute
London: Clementi & Co.
1821 Weiss, Charles N. A new.Methodical Instruction Book

for the Flute. London: Author.

1825 Nicholson. Appendix to Nicholson’s Preceptive Lessons.
London: Wessel & Co. .

1825 Wragg, J. Improved Flute Preceptor. London: Clementi,
& Collard.

1826 James, W. N. A word or Two 0n the Flute. Edinburgh:
Charles Smith & Co. (reprint by Tony Bingham, 1982).

1827 Berbiguier. A Complete System of Articulation for the
Flute. London: Wheatstone & Co.

1827 Dressler, Rapheal. New and Complete Instructions for
the Flute. London: R. Cocks & Co.

1828-30 Lindsay, Thomas. The Elements of Flute Playing.
London: Author.

1829 Walkiers, Eugene. Methode de Flute. Paris: Author.

1830 Anon. New & Complete Tutor for the German Flute.
London: George Shade.

1830 Drouet, Louis. Method of Flute Playing. London: R.
Cocks & Co.

1843 Annand, William. A Few Words on the Flute. London: L.

Cook (for the author) 1843.

179
APPENDIX B (cont’d.)

French:

1728 Hotteterre, Jacques-Martin. Principles of the Flute,
Recorder and Oboe. Paris: Christophe Ballard. 1707.
Translated by David Lasocki. New York: Frederick A.
Praeger, 1968.

1759 Mahaut.Nouvelle.Méthode.Paris: M. De Lachevardiere.
(reprint, Geneva: Minkoff. 1972). s

1804 Hugot et Wunderlich. Method de Flute du Conservatoire.
Paris: Conservatoire de Musique.

1819 Berbiguier..Methode Pour la Flute. Paris: A. Cotelle.

1827 Drouet, L.. Methode pour la Flute. Anvers: A Schott.

1835 Tulou. Methode de Flfite Mayence: B. Schotts. (reprint,
Marion, IA: Boland. 1937; and draft of English trans.

by Boland).

German:

1752 Quantz, Johann Joachim (trans. Edward Reilly) On
Playing the Flute. New York: Schirmer.

1791 Tromlitz, Johan Georg (trans. Eileen Hadidian)
Unterricht. Leipzig: Boehme. 1791; DMA, Stanford
Univ., 1979)

1801 Mfiller, August Eberhardt (trans. Margaret Lichtmann)
Elementarbuch. Leipzig: Peters; DMA, Boston Univ.,
1982.

1810 Leroy (le Roy. Eugene) Floten-Schule fur die ersten

Anfanger Braunschweig: np.

180
APPENDIX B (cont’d.)

1823 Bayr, Georg. Practische Fldten-Schule. Wein:
Tranquillo Mollo.

1826 Furstenau, Anton B. (trans, by Rife) Floten-Schule.
Leipzig: Breitkopf & Hartel, .

1830 Kreith, Carl. Schule far die Flote. Wein: Bermann.

American:

1811 Riley, Edward. Riley’s New Instructions for the German
Flute. NY: E. Riley.

1819 Anon. A New and Complete Preceptor for the German
Flute. Utica: William Williams.

1821 Meline, Florant. The Modern Flute Professor. New York:
Author.

1822 Hastings, T. Flute Melodies. Utica: Wm. Williams.

1825 Anon. A New and Complete Preceptor for the German
Flute. Cincinnati: N. & G. Guilford & Co.

1826 Robinson, Alvan, Jr.. Flauto Traversiere, or
Instructor of the German Flute. Hallowell, Maine:
Glazier & Co.

1830 Blake, G.E.. A Complete Preceptor for the German
Flute. Philadelphia: Author.

1838 Anon. Flute Instructor. Glazier & Masters: Hallowell.

1875 Nicholson. Charles Nicholson’s School for the Flute.

London: Howard & Co.

APPENDIX C

ARTICULATION TABLES FROM NICHOLSON’S TUTORS

Complete Preceptor, 17-18 .

nm‘mu-‘u'r Ht'DH‘ m ARTICULATION)

The _l'u|lowiug are '1in.

 

 

 

ThiI lut Articulation will he found was! fenernll; adopted in modern
Music. and .Ihen executed with precision haI I neat nu! IliItiIIcII. 'ffrct; and

uh ‘Inateriully promotes ‘l fncillty of Execution. l ItrmIg-ly recommend the

 

 

This Articulation iI useful in many-cad".

.181

182

Appendix C (cont’d.)

‘- ..

 

Th‘ Pullouing' Articulation is lK’I‘Illllll nml hutch in modern use.

 

 

 

 

In the following Pnssuge- -I should recommend the Pupil to introduce the.
Double TIIngueing. not only' on III-count of the f. ility/ai'i'onled in its execution
. - but from the hrillinnt r-Iu! 'pirited et'l'I-.It uniformly produced in its intmcluctiuu' !u
[M ‘an'l'fi of I siInil-I 'l nnt Ire \hlch uo‘ utlur mode of Afllflll'llloll in cnpfble of.

 

j “es; MWWWWE

..I _._'_-

    
 

"uslsfisW—Ugfi

a“ I? ma
Wgfigflwfiggfllfm

 

183

Appendix C (cont’d.)

Preceptive Lessons, 4.

 

 

 

 

 

BI.- careful, in playing the Scales, that each Note shall have its preper length of
' t

time, and not played as I have oflen heard them, thus;

 

 

be observed throughout the whole Scales, particularly in Staccato Passagea, such as

u" follow/mg éfifim Whit II itl't‘ IIllI II l'ulsa ly played thus: ‘w‘qh‘m. qul

 

 

 

 

184
Appendix C (cont’d.)

School, 63-64.

AR'I‘ICL'LA'I'IOS

. Sins le - tongue ins.

    

 

 

 

.lacgalo, slurred in fours.
I

 

 

 

 

ffft’;—::— --.. , I. lgg=mg=u --=u--=:- ...: . =_: J.
:{Ip’m' '53 '1'.— ‘25:: - _,....- ' a Leah—"wag

’ " rr'

0. .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘ Counter- tipping.

 

 

 

 

 

 

  
  
   
   
 
 

 
    

 

    

-J== _ -
r‘:=:---'--".==.=-.z-;.-.

 

 

 

 

to. Slur three and tip one.

Appendix C (cont’d.)

It. 'l‘ip one and slur tlIrI-e

 

 

I"/',"

“d.:.-l.
f-.,.I.

1.). Double Tongu ein 5.
I ' l '

185

AKIICULATtux.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

B IBLIOGRAPHY

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Flute Tutors and Music

Alexander, James. Alexander’s Complete Preceptor for the
Flute. 2nd edition. London: author, [1818].

Beale, John A Complete Guide to the Art of Playing the
German Flute. 3rd edition. London: D’Almaine & Co.,
[1821].

Berbiguier, Tranquille. A Complete System of Articulation
for the Flute. London: Wheatstone & Co., [1827}.

Drouet, Louis. Drouet’s.Method of Flute Playing. London: R.
Cocks & Co., 1830.

Drouet, Louis. "God Save the King." Vienna: Diabelli,
[1829].

FUrstenau, Anton B. Floten-Schule. Leipzig: Breitkopf &
Hartel, (ca. 1826].

Hotteterre, Jacques-Martin. Principles of the Flute,
Recorder and Oboe. Paris: Christophe Ballard. 1707.
Translated by David Lasocki. New York: Frederick A.
Praeger, 1968.

John Gunn, The Art of Playing the German Flute. London:
author, 1793. Reprint. Marion, Iowa: Jan Dockendorfer
Boland, n.d.

Keith, Robert William. A New Complete Preceptor for the
Flute. London: author, [1818-21].

Kuffner, Francesco. Francesco.Kuffiner’s New Instructions for
the German Flute. 3rd edition. London: author, [1820].

Lindsay, Thomas. The Elements of Flute Playing. 2 vols.‘
London: author, 1828-30.

Monzani, Tebaldo Instructions for the German Flute. London:
Monzani & Cimador, [1801].

Monzani, Tebaldo. A New and Enlarged Edition of Monzani's
Instructions fbr the German Flute. London: Monzani &
Hill, [1813].

New Instructions for the German Flute. London: Preston and
Son, [1801].

New Instructions. London: Longman & Broderip, [1780].

186

 

 

187

Nicholson, Charles. Appendix to Nicholson’s Preceptive
Lessons. London: Wessel & Co., 1825.

------ "Blue Bells of Scotland." London: Clementi & Co.,
1821.

----- . "Introduction and Favorite Irish Air GRAMACHREE, with
Variations and Coda." London: Clementi & Co., 1821.

----- . Nicholson’s Complete Preceptor for the German Flute.
2 vols. London: Preston, 1816.

----- . Preceptive Lessons. 10 vols. London: Clementi & Co.,
1821.

----- . School for the Flute. 2 vols: New York: Wm. Hall &
Son, 1836.

----- . Selection of Passages. London: J. Power, 1817.
----- . Social Pieces. London: Clementi & Co., 1829.

----- . Twelve Airs with Variations. London: Clementi & Co.,
1821.

Quantz, Johann Joachim. 0n Playing the Flute. Berlin: Johann
Friedrich Voss. 1752. Translated by Edward R. Reilly.
New York: Schirmer Books, 1966.

Raphael Dressler, Dressler’s New and Complete Instructions
for the Flute. London: R. Cocks & Co., 1828.

Schneider, George Abraham. Three Duets for Two Flutes, op.
32. London: Clementi, Banger, Collard, Davis & Collard,
[1810-1818].

Thompson’s New Instructions for the German Flute. London:
Thompson, [1780-1810].

Tulou, Jean Louis. Flute Method.gpnpublished translation by
Jan Boland of Methode de Flute. Mayence: B. Schott’s
Sohne, 1835.

Ventzke, Karl and Hilkenbach, Deitrich. Boehm WOodwinds.
Frankfurt: Verlag Das Musikinstrument, 1982.

Warner, Thomas E. An Annotated Bibliography of WOodwind
Instruction Books, 1600-1830. Detroit: Information
Coordinators, 1967.

Weiss, Charles N. A New.Methodical Instruction Book for the
Flute. London: Milhouse & Son, [1821].

188

Weiss, Charles N. Two HUndred Studies for the Flute. London:
Clementi & Co., [1820].

Wragg, J. Improved Flute Preceptor. 14th edition.London:
Clementi, Collard, Davis & Collard, 1818.

Wragg, J. Wragg’s Improved Flute Preceptor. 2nd
edition.London: author, 1806.

Books, Dissertations, and Theses

Annand, William, A Few WOrds on the Flute. London: author,
1843.

Bate, Philip. The Flute. London: Ernest Benn Limited, 1975.

Boehm, Theobald The Flute and Flute Playing. 2nd edition.
Translated and revised by Dayton C. Miller. CLeveland:

Dayton C. Miller, 1922. Reprint. New York: Dover,
1964. .

Carse, Adam . The Orchestra from Beethoven to Berlioz. New
York: Broude, 1949.

Carse, Adam. Unsical Wind Instruments. London: Macmillan,
1939. Reprint. New York: Da Capo Press, 1975.

Eagle, David. A Constant Passion and a Constant Pursuit: A
Social History of FlutesPlaying in England from 1800 to
1851. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Minnesota,
1977.

Fitzgibbon, H. Macauley. Story of the Flute. London: Walter
Scott, 1914.

Gartner, Jochen. The Vibrato. Translated by Einar W.
Anderson. Regensburg: Gustave Bosse Verlag, 1981.

Hadidian, Eileen. Johann George Tromlitz’s Flute Treatise:
Evidences of Late Eighteenth Century Performance
Practice. DMA Project, Stanford University, 1979.

Hartman, Donald H., Pedagogical Practices Relating to the
German Flute in England from 1729 to 1847, DMA Thesis,
Eastman School of Music, 1961.

Humphries, Charles and William C. Smith. Music Publishing in
the British Isles. London: Cassell and Co., 1954.

189

Jacobsen, David. Charles Nicholson (1795-1837): His
Influence on Flute Performance, Manufacture, Pedagogy
and Literature. DMA Thesis, University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign, 1982.

James, William N. A Wbrd or Two on the Flute. Edinburgh:
Charles Smith & Co., 1826. Reprint. London: Tony
Bingham, 1982.

Langwill, Lyndesay. An Index of Musical Wind Instrument
Makers. 6th ed.. London: author, 1980.

Nettel, Reginald. The Orchestra in Ehgland. London: Jonathan
Cape, 1946.

Patents for Inventions. Abridgements of Specifications
Relating to MUsic and.Musical Instruments. London:
Office of the Commissioners of Patents for Inventions,
1871. Reprint. London: Tony Bingham, [1987].

Rockstro, Richard Shepherd. The Flute. 2nd edition.London:
Rudall, Carte and Co., 1928.

Smith, Catherine. "Characteristics of Transverse Flute
Performance in Selected Flute Methods from the Early
18th Century to 1828." DMA Project, Stanford
University, 1969.

Toff, Nancy. The Development of the Mbdern Flute. New York:
Taplinger, 1979.

Toff, Nancy. The Flute Book. New York: Charles Scribner’s
Sons, 1985.

Welch, Christopher History of the Boehm Flute. 2nd edition.
London: Rudall, Carte, and Co., 1892. Reprint. New
York: McGinnis & Marx, 1961.

Articles

Arthur, J. The Mbdern Art of Flute Playing. London: Willis &
Co., 1827; as quoted in "Flute." The Harmonicon, 5,
(1827): 14.

Bell, Kenneth. "Flute Playing in Britain: Stylistic Origins
and Developments." Pan, The Journal of the British
Flute Society 17 (1989): 12-19.

"Compositions for the Flute.’ Quarterly MUsical Magazine and

Review 5 (1823): 82-88.

"Concerts." The Musical WOrld 6 (1837): 57-58.

 

 

190

Flauto [pseudo.]. "M. Furstenau." The Flutist’s Magazine 1
(1827): 29.

"Flute." The Harmonicon 5 (1827): 14.

Hogarth, George. "Musical Instruments. The Flute." Musical
World, 3 (1836).

James, William N. review of William Bainbridge,
Observations on-the Cause of Imperfections in Wind
Instruments, The Flutist’s Magazine; and Musical
Miscellaney, 1 (1827): 183-188.

James, William N. "Mr. Nicholson." The Flutist’s Magazine 1
(1827): 41-46.

James, William N. "Mr. Sedlatzek." The Flutist’s Magazine;
and MUsical Miscellany 1 (1827): 85.

Senex [pseudo.]. "The Concerts." The Harmonicon 1 (1823):
72-73.

"I7'1l‘l‘fllllllfl'lllfl'7“