30 dollar train wreck

[Dibbs]

Personally, I feel bore smoothness makes a perceptible difference as do most (all?) instrument makers but I've never experienced it personally or seen any studies.

In Acoustical aspects of woodwind instruments p11 Nederveen states

"The velocity of sound in the tube is slightly different from that in free space because of the action of friction and heat exchange of the air with the wall.  In practice this causes a damping and a change in frequency."

Friction is obviously greater if the surface is rough so, on the face of it, one would expect bore smoothness to affect both tone and intonation.  However he later (p15) calculates the thickness of the boundary layer to be ~0.05mm at 1000Hz.   He calculates this purely from the viscosity and density of air.  There is no "roughness" parameter. 

I don't know what to make of that.  Maybe the calculation assumes a perfectly smooth bore surface because the roughness effect is considered negligible but he states no such assumption.

[Airflyte]

So plastic Bundy's and Vito's technically have the best bore surfaces "teamed up" with inferior bore dimensions?

[modernicus]

When looking at bores, what is acceptable for condition. I mean ideally a mirror smooth bore with zero holes/deviations or grain separation is the target.

Are mirror smooth bores acoustically superior over grainy ones?

I have to ask as I have my doubts.

IIRC it was the opposite.

[windydankoff]

Again I point out that the bore, after seconds of play, is coated with condensation which then presents a new surface to the bore.

I put a barrel with a rough bore onto an upper joint with glossy bore, then played it and pulled off the MP. Looking down the bore, the condensation looks the same on both surfaces. Therefore, I'm not concerned with bore texture.

Your observations may vary. So much is subjective ... like when I clean and polish the outside of my flute, it ALWAYS sounds better. Really? (I don't think so.) But I believe it, therefore it is.