(And other challenges).

In the short time I spent with the baroque flute, I have developed a fresh perspective on not only the baroque flute but on the learning curve that comes with a new instrument. It is a humbling experience to approach a piece that you have performed on flute, and then come to it with a different flute and feel as though you’re a total beginner! It adds a new appreciation for the students that I teach privately who, at times, are overwhelmed by the fingerings that have become second nature to me. It was a new experience to have different fingerings for octave notes. Although of course the modern flute has different fingers for E2 vs E3, and A2 vs A3, the baroque traverso has few notes that can simply be overblown. A natural, G natural, and F natural are some of the only fingerings that can be overblown. This was especially challenging for chromatic notes, such as G# (which appears in abundance in the Allemande) that have a new fingering for the lower and upper octave. 

The distance between the keys also took time to adjust to, and even in my final recordings it was quite apparent when my right-hand ring finger was not reaching the last hole. The lack of complete covering the holes, and possibly the position of the headjoint, also made the tuning sound off. While I understand the baroque flute is pitched lower, the recordings sound low and flat throughout. Similar to the feeling of going from a bass flute to a C flute, it was a relief to pick up my modern flute and feel more at ease. With that being said, the earthy and mellow sound of the traverso is beautiful, and I would love to spend more time with it in the future. 

 

One of the elements that stood out immediately while I was learning the cross-fingerings of the traverso was the noticeable color change between notes. Notes within the scale of DM, the natural scale of the traverso, sound bright and projected. It makes sense because the air is less disrupted as it travels through the instrument, producing a fuller sound, as opposed to cross-fingerings that lose some of its momentum as the air filters through the open holes. 

After reading The Traverso Project, a brilliant website dedicated to helping novices learn the fundamentals of the traverso, I discovered that often these tonal differences, similar to the tonality changes in modes of the baroque era, are deliberate choices made by the composer. Because that is the tone that is expected to be produced, and a more muffled timbre could evoke melancholy or mystery, it is likely that composers such as Bach composed with specific keys in mind. A Minor, the key of Bach’s flute Partita, uses a host of cross-fingers; G#, C natural, among others. This produces a hollow tone that lends the entire piece a character of subdued searching and pondering.

If you’ve been following along with the notion of “six holes and a pinky key,” you’ll likely have arrived at the conclusion that raised and lowered pitches (sharps and flats) and created using cross-fingerings, and you would be right! Before studying a fingering chart for the baroque traverso, I was under the impression that key slides would introduce chromatic notes; for example, that you would finger a G natural and slide your third finger to half-cover the third hole in sound a G#. The reality is that sharp and flat notes are possible by covering specific holes completely. In fact, according to the Tutz fingering chart by The Traverso Project, there are no notes that require finger slides. In this sense, finger slides on the modern flute are truly an extended technique: they did not seem to exist (or at least, were not formally considered a legitimate fingering) during the baroque era. Below is the fingering chart that I referred to.

• 

A unique aspect of traverso fingerings is that no fingering chart from the era is exactly the same. According to The Traverso Project, a baroque centered flute blog, this is due to the differences in individual players and their physiology. Whereas modern flutes are calibrated to a tuning standard that could be easily adjusted by pulling or pushing the headjoint, baroque flutes were much more subjective for each note. Depending on the air pressure, speed, the weight of fingers on holes, etc, the pitch could be different. I experienced this when I came across pitches that sounded significantly lower than others, even though I had the correct fingering.

For me, it is this sensitivity that makes the traverso so challenging. It takes consistently of air speed to a new level, because it impacts pitch more significantly than a modern flute. I account this to the lack of aids (extra keys) which emphasizes precision and true mastery. I also have a newfound respect for traverso performers, especially those who perform Bach’s works. Particularly in the Partita in A Minor, the use of sharps and flats is extensive. Not only are the fingerings challenging, but the range is demanding; the Partita explores the highest note possible on traverso, a third octave A natural. As opposed to the modern flute, which regularly plays in the extended range, any note in the third octave of the traverso is a true challenge.

(And other observations).

Initial impression: it’s so light! And made of wood! And comprised of four parts (headjoint, first three holes, the second set of three holes, and pinky key) instead of three, which I later learned offers the player much more flexibility with positioning and therefore comfort. And comfort, from the perspective of a player accustomed to the ergonomically designed modern flute, seemed the least of concerns.

Upon assembling the baroque traverso for the first time, I was immediately surprised at the seemingly tremendous distance in between keys. There was so much distance that I couldn’t fathom how one could navigate tricky fingering passages… until I reminded myself that the musicians of the baroque era knew nothing else. The traverso seems like a cross-breed between a recorder and a modern flute. Because the instrument is completely open-holed with no key covers, it seemed like all of my nightmares from removing my right-hand ring finger flute from my modern flute, magnified by ten times. The finger accuracy necessary to sound the right pitches — and even more so to have acceptable pitch on pitches — is astounding. I found myself thinking how convenient and foolproof the metal flute seems compared to the baroque flute. The sound is more responsive overall, and precise. There is less room for pitch ambiguity when there are more keys to ensure the proper sounding of a pitch. For reference, compared to the baroque traverso’s total holes of six, the modern flute has eighteen holes and fifteen keys that one can physically press down. This doesn’t include extra gizmos such as a C# trill key, etc. And this isn’t mentioning the conveniently engineered mechanisms that coordinate certain keys to others; for example, when the first key is pressed, it links to the small key to its left, which stabilizes the B natural. As there are fewer mechanisms on the baroque traverso, it’s up the performer to have precise technique and a flexible embouchure. 

• 

• 

Welcome to Hello Baroque Traverso, where classical flutist meets the traditional baroque flute for the first time! 

Thanks to a friend’s generosity, I have had the pleasure of playing on a baroque traverso for a few days, learning the basic fingerings and getting a feel for how flutists played in the 1600s. I wanted to document a collection of thoughts, observations, resources, and recordings to share. It was surprising to me that despite my over ten years of playing experience on a modern (metal) flute, endeavoring to play the baroque traverso felt like I had been learning a brand new instrument; which in some regards, I was. Check out the Research tab to learn a brief history on the baroque traverso, listen to some prominent performers, or head to Media to listen to my attempts at playing short excerpts on the baroque traverso.