Chiff and Fipple Forums

I'm curious to know what patterns of finger vibrato others use for their Low Ds or similar keys. Of course the make of whistle will affect what works best. So, to begin with, I'll share what I'm currently using though I'm very open to criticism and better suggestions:

Goldie Low D medium blower
Vibrato on E Tapping edge of B3
F# Tapping edge of B3
G Tapping B2
A Tapping B1 or edge of T3
B Tapping B1 or edge of T3
C Tapping B1 (using OXX OOO fingering)
C# Tapping T2 (using OOO XXX fingering)

I just don't think of it like that, Mike. I just do whatever feels contextually right, which (for me) may be single or multiple fingers closing holes or merely shading them by hitting the whistle body at an angle. Only rarely do I use tips on the edge of the hole, though I might for Es.

Mikethebook wrote:I'm curious to know what patterns of finger vibrato others use for their Low Ds or similar keys. Of course the make of whistle will affect what works best. So, to begin with, I'll share what I'm currently using though I'm very open to criticism and better suggestions:

Goldie Low D medium blower
Vibrato on E Tapping edge of B3
F# Tapping edge of B3
G Tapping B2
A Tapping B1 or edge of T3
B Tapping B1 or edge of T3
C Tapping B1 (using OXX OOO fingering)
C# Tapping T2 (using OOO XXX fingering)

Depends on how strong I want the beats to be, I guess. General rule of thumb, for me, is to skip two holes below the last closed hole and rapidly close and open trillwise the third hole down. Kind of like what you'd do for a proper trill, just further down the tube so you don't actually produce a trill!

So, for C#, I skip holes 1 & 2 and waggle my finger over 3. For G, I'd skip holes 4 & 5 and waggle on 6.

Skipping one hole is also a potential technique, though you'd need to be ware of a cross-fingered trill being produced.

Other techniques work as well. For example, you can't very well skip any holes for a finger vibrato on E. I would use a 1/6- or 1/8-hole technique (like 1/2-holing but with much less of the finger hole covered) on hole 6. Just enough shading to give the primary tone a bit of wobble but not enough for a half-tone or quarter-tone trill. Though that in and of itself might also be something to try. Some of the music I write does in fact rely on such quarter-tone variation at certain points in the scale. Good technique for me, perhaps not so much for Irish "Traditional" Music.

I might also use the 1/8-hole technique further up. For example, on G, I might not skip any holes and just slightly shade hole 4.

Another technique to try so far down, and really obligatory on a large whistle, is to just waggle the whole whistle around a bit. A kind of lip vibrato. For a smaller whistle (high d and up), try the 1/8-hole waggle down at the end of the whistle. In many respects, the end of the whistle is just as good as having a 7th finger hole. The end can be shaded, half-holed to give a good low C#, trilled, vibratoed, etc.

General caveat #1: some or all of the above techniques may or may not be kosher among Orthodox I"T"M folks.
General caveat #2: your whistle may vary --- the above may not work well on your individual whistle, they may on the other hand be brilliant solutions! Know thy whistle and all will be well kind of thing.

Since this topic comes up fairly often here, and since it's easier to show than to describe in words, I made this video a while back showing four different approaches to doing vibrato on a Low Whistle

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK9RmMnDuPA

2nd octave D use LH1 to trill.

Thanks for your replies, guys. I'll try to experiment more. Richard, I'd seen your video long ago but forgotten about it. Thanks for reminding me.

You're welcome!

Mikethebook wrote: Vibrato on E Tapping edge of B3
F# Tapping edge of B3
G Tapping B2
A Tapping B1 or edge of T3
B Tapping B1 or edge of T3
C Tapping B1 (using OXX OOO fingering)
C# Tapping T2 (using OOO XXX fingering)

As I demonstrate on that video there are two basic methods of finger vibrato (or more accurately flattement)

1) partially closing or "shading" one or more holes

2) fully closing one or more holes.

#1 can be done on the notes emitting from all six holes.

#2 can be done on the notes emitting from holes 1 through 5.

Back in the day you'd often see older players moving all three lower-hand fingers as a unit, shading all three lower holes, for vibrato on A, B, and C. As I show on the video you can change the finger-angle to change the intensity of the vibrato. (I usually use two fingers, B1 and B2, rather than all three.)

Fully closing holes gives a vibrato that sounds more uilleann-like, for example fully closing & opening Hole 6 for F# and G.

On my whistle I get a cool effect by keeping fingers down on Hole 5 or Holes 5 & 4 while closing & opening Hole 6, while playing B for example. I show that on the video too.

pancelticpiper wrote:finger vibrato (or more accurately flattement)

Thanks for the word of the day!

pancelticpiper wrote:finger vibrato (or more accurately flattement)

I don't think it's necessarily more accurately flattement. For sure it is for baroque flute and recorder (where I first encountered it), but fingered vibrato seems a perfectly logical and acceptable term for its use in non-French-speaking trad.

Thanks, Richard. very helpful.

Peter Duggan wrote:

pancelticpiper wrote:finger vibrato (or more accurately flattement)

I don't think it's necessarily more accurately flattement. For sure it is for baroque flute and recorder (where I first encountered it), but fingered vibrato seems a perfectly logical and acceptable term for its use in non-French-speaking trad.

Now, I know you're going to like this, Peter ...

... being picky - really, REALLY picky - I don't think the term "fingered vibrato" is quite right. To me, that would imply a breath vibrato supported by some action of the fingers. On the other hand (as it were ), "finger vibrato" seems entirely appropriate to me as a term for what we do in trad, in the English speaking world. The latter conveys, to me, vibrato produced by the action of the fingers, and not just supported by the action of the fingers, as the former appears to suggest.

benhall.1 wrote:Now, I know you're going to like this, Peter ...

... being picky - really, REALLY picky - I don't think the term "fingered vibrato" is quite right.

Ha, I hadn't even noticed I'd changed it... thought I was quoting Richard! So, yes, I sort of agree, though you'll find plenty of references either way and I can't say it bothers me that much which we use.

To me, that would imply a breath vibrato supported by some action of the fingers.

Interesting... why? Try reversing that to 'blown vibrato' and ask yourself if there's any reason to assume a finger vibrato supported by some action of the breath!

Think you might still have an argument for flattement if you want to be picky about which side of the note's affected (pitch-wise), but even that's probably still contentious depending on instrument and technique for other methods. So my main 'objection' to flattement for trad remains that it feels as imported as acciaccatura, appoggiatura (yes, I know from this site they were used by Leo Rowsome!) etc.

Might just add that I'm now doing 'proper' lip vibrato on my trombone, which is arguably the standard method on brass.

Peter Duggan wrote:

benhall.1 wrote:To me, that would imply a breath vibrato supported by some action of the fingers.

Interesting... why? Try reversing that to 'blown vibrato' and ask yourself if there's any reason to assume a finger vibrato supported by some action of the breath!

I agree with you about the use of the term "flattement", Peter.

Returning to my point (but just briefly - it's not THAT interesting a point! ), I don't think it works to compare the term with "blown vibrato", which wouldn't make any sense to me at all. I can;t quite see how you would produce a "blown vibrato", whereas breath vibrato means something entirely different. At least to my mind. The thing about "fingered" or "finger" is that the first is a qualifier, an adjective; so, with "fingered" the main word is "vibrato", and then you're saying that it's qualified in some way, in this case by the actions of the fingers. With the term "finger vibrato", those two words make up one, whole noun phrase, to me. It's the type of vibrato, rather than vibrato which has somehow been modified.

Well, it makes sense to me, at any rate ...

benhall.1 wrote:The thing about "fingered" or "finger" is that the first is a qualifier, an adjective; so, with "fingered" the main word is "vibrato", and then you're saying that it's qualified in some way, in this case by the actions of the fingers.

Well, I think adjectives work! Like 'grown', 'sawn' or 'steamed' timbers on a boat, where they're all timbers but the adjective, in describing the act of shaping them, is ultimately also the verb identifying the method of production. Likewise 'welded joint', 'glued joint', 'cast key', 'forged key' etc. In every case the main word is the second but the first (yes, qualifying the second in some way!) describes what's been done. 'Finger vibrato', 'fingered vibrato'... both work for me, and you can treat either as a compound noun.

That said, none of this would have come about if I hadn't misquoted Richard!

Would be it be pedantic to ask for clarification about the nature of the sound? A quick web search suggests that breath vibrato moves the pitch either side of the note but finger vibrato moves it to a lower note and back again.

Since its a foreign word I may be miss-guessing the etymology, but the term flattement seems a handy term way of remembering that it's not the same effect as breath vibrato and makes the note a bit flatter.

And at this point does being pedantic matter?