Robert Patterson wrote:
Hello, all.
Andrew Stiller's instrumentation book says 2% of piccolos have an
extended low range of c# and c-nat. If the player has an instrument with
an extension, I would like to write as low as c#, but of course I will
have to provide ossias that don't go below d.
My question is, in the intervening ~25 years since Stiller wrote his
book, has the percentage changed? Is it one particular maker that
provides the extension? Does it affect the playing characteristics or
the sound?
Any information about piccolo extensions is welcome.
I would put Andrew's percentage of 2% of piccolos having an extended
range as very high.
Of all the flute/piccolo players I know and all the piccolos I have ever
repaired (30 years working as a professional band instrument repair
technician) I have never ever seen a piccolo with a range below D.
http://epplerflutes.com/flutes.html#piccolo is the only link I could
find (I admittedly didn't follow all the links Google returned for my
search "piccolo +low C#")
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6259010-description.html may explain
why there aren't more piccolos with such extensions -- perhaps makers
didn't want to risk patent infringement lawsuits.
--
David H. Bailey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
