I'm a professional concert flutist (modern Boehm flute), but I'm completely new to the world of 3D printing. Since I don't own a printer myself, I'll be having the parts printed by a local service, so I'd really like to get things right on the first attempt rather than paying for multiple prints.
Although I'm new to 3D printing, I'm not new to historical performance practice, so I'm particularly interested in how closely these models reproduce the playing characteristics of original Baroque instruments.

I'm getting ready to print my first Baroque traverso, and I'd love to hear from anyone who's actually built and played one of these models.

Over the last few weeks, I've been reading quite a bit about the acoustics of historical flutes, bore geometry, airflow, and the challenges of getting good results with FDM printing. I'll be using an FDM printer and I'm still deciding between regular PLA and ABS, although I'm leaning toward PLA because of its better dimensional accuracy, especially for the conical joints.

One thing that's important to me is keeping each flute at its original historical pitch rather than scaling the model. I'd rather preserve the original bore proportions, finger spacing, and overall acoustic design than force everything to A = 440 Hz.

After looking around, I've narrowed it down to these three free models.

1. Robbert Wijne (reconstructed by Jomalier Figueroa)

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/film4q84jxz2d12do7qmx/ADUBPwhBY5pqDYdWPsa8Ajw?rlkey=xuajuz2wrx62uiqgdk6qlzdxx&e=1&dl=0

From what I've read, this seems to be one of the most FDM-friendly traversos available. People often mention that the embouchure is fairly forgiving and that it has a focused, stable sound. Since it's designed for A = 415 Hz, I intend to print it at its original size.

For anyone who's built this one, how well do the forked fingerings behave in the first octave? Did everything work well straight from the print, or did you end up making any adjustments?

2. Naust Traverso (Gubbledenut / Jeff Wulf)

https://www.printables.com/model/1721709-naust-traverso-flute

This one really caught my attention because of its early French design and the darker, warmer sound people describe. I also like that it's intended for the lower historical pitch (around A = 400–410 Hz), so I don't plan on scaling it either.

This is the model I've found the least information about. If anyone here has printed or played one, I'd love to hear your thoughts. How does it compare with the other printed traversos in terms of tone, response, tuning, and overall playing experience?

3. C. Bizey, Paris 1740 (Lautenburg / Jeff Wulf)

https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:4572430

This is probably the most attractive model of the three, and I like the later Baroque design with its stronger upper register. The STL also appears to include the historical undercutting around the tone holes.

Since the refined paid CAD version of the Bizey 1740 is no longer available on Gumroad, I'll be printing the free version from Thingiverse instead. For those who have built it, how much manual adjustment to the tone holes was needed to achieve stable historical intonation?

My current printing plan

At the moment I'm planning to:

• print vertically with 100% infill and 5 perimeters;
• wet sand the bore from 400 to 800 grit;
• apply a very thin sealing coat inside the bore (probably acrylic varnish, or possibly linseed oil if I experiment with Wood PLA).

I'm trying to improve the surface finish without noticeably changing the bore dimensions.

Since I'll only be printing one of these, I'd really appreciate your recommendations. If you had to choose just one, which would you pick, and why? I'm mainly looking for the best balance between historical sound,tuning, printability, and ease of setup for a first build.

I'd also appreciate any advice on the traditional D#/Eb key, especially regarding the spring and pad arrangement. I'm currently considering using EVA for the pad, but I'm open to better alternatives if you've had good results with other materials.