Recorder Home Page

Click to return to Recorder Home Page

Original Recorders, Makers & Collections

Compiled by Nicholas S. Lander

Introduction

This is an index of some of the many original recorders in a number of American and European collections, both public and private. It currently holds details of 1,328 instruments, 336 makers and 246 collections. Details of further instruments remain to be added. Three complimentary databases contain details of Instruments, Makers and Instrument Collections. Their operation is (or should be) self-explanatory. To submit corrections, additions and observations please email me (see below). Although not relational, there are links between Makers and their instruments and between Collections and the instruments they hold.

As time allows, supporting databases of Technical Drawings, Photographs and References will be integrated with the others. Meanwhile, the latter are presented as a bibliography below.

A number of museums now provide online catalogues of their collections. These sites are accessible via the Collections database and contain a wealth of data on their holdings additional to that presented here.

A unique resource is the Renaissance Recorders Database maintained by Dutch recorder maker Adrian Brown which contains critical measurements and other details of 196 surviving instruments from that period drawn almost entirely from Adrian's own research. A critical commentary and a summary of this data is available in Brown (2005a & b).

An enumeration of the work of some 200 woodwind instrument makers may be found in Young (1993). Accounts of recorders in European collections have been given in a seminal article by Marvin (1972). Van Acht (1992b) has catalogued technical drawings of recorders from collections in Berlin, Edinburgh, London, New York, Nuremberg, Oxford, Paris, The Hague and Vienna. Bouterse (2001) provides extensive data and images of specimens by Dutch makers. Darmstädter & Brown (2006) have catalogued the renaissance recorders at the Sammlung alter Musikinstrumente in Vienna and provided a wealth of measurements and other technical detail. Haynes (2002) has assigned nominal and performance pitches to many surviving original recorders. Griscom & Lasocki (2003) give further references. These and many other articles and books have been consulted in compiling the present database. Where conflicts occur, data published by the holding institution has generally been preferred over that in the literature, although pitch data from Haynes (loc. cit.) and Brown (2005a&b) has been preferred over other sources.

Haynes (2002) gives details of the nominal and performance pitch of 365 of the recorders detailed in the present database. His practice was to assume in principle that all recorders considered by him were pitched in either F or C except voice flutes in d' and those recorders that would end up in pitches beyond the range of two semitones above or below these nominal pitches. Performance pitch data assembled by Haynes was gathered from named sources who were aware that the information they provided was for use in a longitudinal comparative study involving instruments from many different families. However, for the renaissance recorders catalogued by Brown (loc. cit.), the latter's practice of giving the nominal pitch relative to A440 has been maintained here. For these essentially consort recorders Brown (2005a) places considerable emaphasis on the difference between nominal and sounding pitches, the reasons for which are explained by Heyghen (2005b) and Brown & Lasocki (2006).

A number of items noted in the sale catalogues of auction houses have been included. Doubtless in some cases these will duplicate entries elsewhere in the database. This cannot be avoided.

The Comité International des Museés et Collections d'Instruments de Musique (CIMCIM) maintains a list of Technical Drawings of Musical Instruments in Public Collections of the World, in connection with a cooperative project to microfilm technical drawings of musical instruments held by 25 participating museums. This list, prepared by Rob van Acht of the Hague Gemeentemuseum, includes 50 drawings of recorders which are now available on microfiche. Information on price and availability of these microfiche is available from CIMCIM or from MMF Publications.

Observations

Some preliminary observations from this survey will be of interest. There are records of 7 garklein, 53 sopranino, 193 soprano, 504 alto, 201 tenor, 209 basset, 44 bass, 8 contrabass and 2 subcontrabass recorders. A number are unassigned as to size. There are 5 columnar recorders in existence: 2 altos, 1 tenor, 1 basset and 1 bass.

Amongst the records there are 364 boxwood recorders, 148 ivory, 97 maple, 62 plum wood, 34 unidentified fruitwood, and 2 marble recorders. Details of materials are not always noted in museum catalogues.

Makers represented include Bressan (77 examples), J.C. Denner (54), Bassano family (53), Oberlender I (35), Gahn (34), J. Denner (28), Rippert (24), Schell (24), Schrattenbach family (20), Boekhout (21), Hotteterre family (21), Haka (21), Stanesby Jr (21), Mahillon (18), Heitz (17), Rottenburgh family (15), Stanesby Sr (13), Beukers (13), Aardenberg (12), Steenbergen (12), Kynseker (13), Anciuti (10) and G. Walch (10). There are 211 recorders by unknown makers.

I note that some 125 examples detailed in this database date from the 19th century, mostly by unknown makers. MacMillan (2007) has published a checklist of over 122 19th-century recorders, ranging from 68 instruments whose makers can be precisely identified through a number of anonymous instruments to a fascinating series of unusual developments in recorder making. Of the 122 instruments listed by MacMillan (2007) … 9 were made at the turn of the 19th century, and 113 were made between 1800-1905. A signficant number of the latter are copies made for exhibition purposes or of questionable date. Inevitably he has missed a few examples, some of which are cited in his earlier paper (MacMIllan 2003).

Finally, there is a striking absence of 20th and 21st century recorders in the various public museums. There are very few von Huene (9) or Morgan (3) instruments, for instance! The sorry result of this is that the collections themselves are little more than fossils and the continuing development of the recorder is likely to be imperfectly documented by concrete examples in generations to come. This neglect should be addressed by seeking donations of instruments from players and makers, supplemented where possible by strategic purchases.

Databases

References