Benefits of HEAVY/heavy wall whistles?

[Moof]

You could try a quenilla where you hold them out in front of you like a whistle. I've just started experimenting with them in C using birch drilled out with a 16mm bore, then coated with epoxy (reducing the bore to 15mm): they're only marginally heavier than a Generation C. Nice tone over two octaves, but not good enough to sell - coating of epoxy too lumpy and likely too thin in many places, but good enough to confirm that such a wide bore is viable. Next step is to make proper ones entirely out of craft resin, but they'll be heavier. One big advantage over a whistle is that you can play the second octave more quietly than the first octave if you want to.

Thank you, I've just listened to some clips. They have a really interesting, quite complex sound.

Certainly easier than a side blown flute from a manual handling point of view, though that might be where the 'easy' attributes end. I'll ask my friend, who's a composer - he might have a quena in his collection at least.

[Terry McGee]

Now, if you're advocating for quena, David, you can probably play them! When I started out making flutes back in Canberra in the late seventies, I became aware of a strong South American community there, and their musicians, some of whom played Quena. They lamented that they were a long way from home, and had difficulties obtaining instruments. Looked simple enough, I deluded myself, taking some measurements from one they reckoned was their best. Theirs were very much the traditional instrument made from bamboo, indeed, the bottom end featured a reduction in bore diameter in the form of a smaller hole through what would otherwise have been a closed node. Not an option for me, so I made one out of wood, following the general idea.

Well, wasn't I disappointed when I finished it, put it up to my lips and couldn't get a note out of it. Fortunately, I didn't hide my shame, I showed it to the young lady who was the main player of the instrument in the main local band. She admired its appearance, put it to her lips and played a storm. She was delighted. I was non-plussed. I tried it again, not a cracker.

I went on to make a number of them for the local players, but never got any further with playing myself!

Any secrets you can pass on? For example, are you conscious of where you are directing the air. Is it at the wedge shaped edge, or more downwards or other? And any secret to pressing it to your face? I couldn't seem to find a location where I could cover the end, while being anywhere near a place where I could blow in a credible direction. Maybe bony-chinned people shouldn't play Quena?

[pancelticpiper]

Also some makers of aluminium-tube low whistles and Irish flutes put a band around Hole 3 and/or Hole 6 to increase the wall thickness for the notes A and/or E (on a D flute or whistle).

And do you think that this is done to give some extra hole depth to be able to slant the hole downwards, or just done to "darken" the tone on those notes, pancelticpiper? Or for some other fiendish purpose?

It's still not thick enough for angled holes, I don't think.

My understanding is that it was mainly for tuning and ergonomic purposes, because the longer/taller chimney means the hole can be placed higher on the instrument for a given hole diameter.

Though there would be an effect on tone, I would think.

[pancelticpiper]

If I can manage to get nerve impingement with my shoulders easy and my hands in front of me, it's idiocy to think I'd last 10 minutes holding a flute!

Yes indeed the transverse flute is the least ergonomic woodwind.

On Highland pipes, whistle, clarinet, etc the head is straight, and shoulders, arms, wrists, and hands are all symmetrically aligned.

On transverse flute most players traditionally have used a compromise position with the head twisted a bit and shoulders, arms, wrists, and hands all out of alignment a bit.

Neck pain and hand cramping forced me and countless others to abandon flute.

In the "classical" flute world it's a well-known issue and several companies offer vertical headjoints for standard Boehm flutes, so the flute can be played with everything comfortably aligned.

[Moof]

Yes indeed the transverse flute is the least ergonomic woodwind.

In the "classical" flute world it's a well-known issue and several companies offer vertical headjoints for standard Boehm flutes, so the flute can be played with everything comfortably aligned.

That looks like great invention. I'm guessing it's not cheap, though?

I can't really thoil the cost of a new instrument just yet, as I've a decent collection of whistles and I get by on disability payments. Maybe it's something to look forward to when I finally reach pension age! I could buy a secondhand Delrin first to see if I can get anywhere near the beginnings of an embouchure; if I can't (my muscles can fatigue quickly because of a genetic thing), there's no point buying adaptations.

Now, if you're advocating for quena, David, you can probably play them!

I ... couldn't get a note out of it. I tried it again, not a cracker.

I suspected it might be really hard to play. Folk instruments have a habit of looking really simple, and turning out to be anything but!

[David Cooper]

Now, if you're advocating for quena, David, you can probably play them!

I saw a group called Yuraj Marka at the Edinburgh festival perhaps 30 years ago and they let me have a go on all their instruments afterwards, which was totally unexpected - super bunch of people. The quena's holes were so big that I couldn't cover them all properly, but the sound it produced was astonishing. You can't buy that kind of quality from a distance, so I finally had a go at making my own last year and I've gradually worked out through making a host of tiny modifications how to get them more or less right, and also how to play them properly. One interesting thing about the shape of the wedge is that you can stick blu-tack along the sharp edge to blunt it and it still works: some configurations where the edge is replaced by a more vertical wall make it sound like a standard flute. The thing I've struggled most with is playability when switching between the lowest and higher octaves, because finding a position that works for both is hard, but the angle of the wedge seems to have a role in that. For the low octave, you try to blow a jet of air down the internal surface of the wedge, while for the higher octaves you aim it up the external ramp of the wedge. You probably want both surfaces aligned with where you can blow the jets from a fixed position, but that may vary from one player to the next, so at the moment I'm just trying to find the best angle for me. I'm finally getting somewhere with this and can now play the quena as fast as I can with whistles, but there's still room for improvement as one of the worst quena's I've made is the most playable. (It sounds terrible due to its octagonal bore - it was a materials test to see if flutes can be made entirely out of epoxy.)

...the bottom end featured a reduction in bore diameter in the form of a smaller hole through what would otherwise have been a closed node.

I'm still trying to work out what impact that restriction at the end makes. It may affect the notes of the third octave, but it's hard to tell as I'm moving the holes quite a bit to reduce the amount of stretch needed, and on the standard size quena in G I'm using fingers 1, 2 and 4 on each hand to cover the holes instead of 1, 2 and 3 - this turns out to be easy to adapt to as you can treat fingers 3 and 4 as a single unit and move both at the same time, so it doesn't affect the playing of whistles either, and you adapt easily to both systems when half-holing. I have to use non-standard fingerings for lots of the 3rd octave notes though, so moving the holes away from traditional locations is disruptive.

Well, wasn't I disappointed when I finished it, put it up to my lips and couldn't get a note out of it. Fortunately, I didn't hide my shame, I showed it to the young lady who was the main player of the instrument in the main local band. She admired its appearance, put it to her lips and played a storm. She was delighted. I was non-plussed. I tried it again, not a cracker.

Well, often when I've made little adjustments to the wedge I've had to relearn how to blow to get sound out of the instrument - I often think I've destroyed it with a tweak which leads to the next attempt to play it generating nothing but hiss, but then find a new position that works, and sometimes it's an improvement, while other times it's worse. I often have to shorten that end of the tube so that I can have another go at reshaping the ramp, and the pitch of the quena gradually goes up due to this shortening as I improve it, which is why I always start with it half a tone flat, and all the tone holes a bit flatter still. Once it reaches the right pitch, I stop and just accept that that's as good as that one will get, then I tune all the holes properly. Each time I gain a better idea of what to start with on the next one. Unfortunately, I've never had a good quena to copy the shape from, so it's taken a lot of experimentation.

Any secrets you can pass on? For example, are you conscious of where you are directing the air. Is it at the wedge shaped edge, or more downwards or other?

I suspect the jet should travel parallel to the internal or external wedge surface, but I have no way of measuring what's actually happening. The distance you blow towards it from can vary, but seems to be better closer in where the jet is less turbulent, just so long as you don't get too close and block the window excessively. I've discussed this with one of the top quena makers (Domingo Uribe) and there don't appear to be any hard rules about it - different players prefer different geometries, so a lot of it may depend on mouth and lip shapes and muscle structures. Ideally you make an instrument for a specific player, though if you go for the average player you'll get something most people are happy with, and that suggests something around 10mm window width, 8mm window length, but beyond that the information becomes hard to get firm answers on, so I have to go by my own experiments. I suspect a ramp angle of 40°may be close to optimal with both ramp surfaces (internal and external) at 20°, but any of those values could easily be out by 10. If you have figures for yours based on the best instrument the South American players had, I'd love to hear them.

And any secret to pressing it to your face? I couldn't seem to find a location where I could cover the end, while being anywhere near a place where I could blow in a credible direction. Maybe bony-chinned people shouldn't play Quena?

That's something I find uncomfortable too, so I'm thinking of putting in a plate to cover the lower half of it, perhaps with the top of the plate curving inwards so as not to get in the way of the lower lip. They have a plate on the bigger quenachos which the chin can't block without such assistance, but it's extra work having to add pieces to an instrument where the normal manufacturing process is entirely subtractive. You do have to press the end of the quena in hard enough to plug any leaks because the slightest gap will turn the sound to hiss, and that pressure pinches the skin under the lower lip between the hard end of the instrument and the base of your teeth, which is far from ideal - it limits the amount of time I can play the instrument in a session, and you don't want to go around with a red ring on your lower face where the skin's been crushed. A plate should resolve that.

[Moof]

I'm thinking of putting in a plate to cover the lower half of it, perhaps with the top of the plate curving inwards so as not to get in the way of the lower lip. They have a plate on the bigger quenachos which the chin can't block without such assistance, but it's extra work having to add pieces to an instrument where the normal manufacturing process is entirely subtractive. You do have to press the end of the quena in hard enough to plug any leaks because the slightest gap will turn the sound to hiss, and that pressure pinches the skin under the lower lip between the hard end of the instrument and the base of your teeth, which is far from ideal - it limits the amount of time I can play the instrument in a session, and you don't want to go around with a red ring on your lower face where the skin's been crushed. A plate should resolve that.

On your prototypes, might a silicone ring work instead if you can stick it on well enough? It would look a bit rubbish, but it doesn't really matter when you're actually working on another aspect of your design. If you can find any the right diameter, they might help seal the gap and provide a cushion for your skin.

If you think it might work, try looking on eBay for silicone hair ties (sometimes described as endless bands in the listings). They're cheap, light, flexible, and surprisingly strong. I use them as a sort of superior elastic band, for everything from fastening lightweight things to wheelchair frames to making an extra fixing point around the tuning slide for my low whistle harness.

[David Cooper]

On your prototypes, might a silicone ring work instead if you can stick it on well enough? It would look a bit rubbish, but it doesn't really matter when you're actually working on another aspect of your design. If you can find any the right diameter, they might help seal the gap and provide a cushion for your skin.

Something flexible like that might turn out to be best. I'm going to experiment first with craft resin though (food-safe epoxy) as it'll integrate better, but also, while it's setting you can modify it the the exact shape you need during the short time when it's no longer sticky but is still soft; if it goes up too high I can just compress it down a bit, and if it doesn't bend inwards enough, I'll be able to push it to the right shape just by playing a few notes on it. That might also help other players get their lower lip to the optimal position and make a single design suit more people. I think all the work in adjusting for different notes is done by the top lip. Come to think of it, that'll make it more like playing a regular flute, so restricting the movement of the lower lip may be beneficial by preventing it from warping into unsuitable shapes. It may be that extra freedom that makes it harder to find the right way to get a note out of a quena.

[Moof]

Something flexible like that might turn out to be best. I'm going to experiment first with craft resin though (food-safe epoxy) as it'll integrate better, but also, while it's setting you can modify it the the exact shape you need during the short time when it's no longer sticky but is still soft; if it goes up too high I can just compress it down a bit, and if it doesn't bend inwards enough, I'll be able to push it to the right shape just by playing a few notes on it.

Yes, something that yields a bit sounds good, though you'll know better than me from actually playing it!

My composer friend says he's played a quena (he seems to have played most things with the exception of brass), and if he hasn't got one in his instrument store, he can probably find me one to try. Sounds like I might need to borrow it for quite some time...

[Terry McGee]

Oh dear. All these problems with flutes - enormous stretch, bent wrists, twisted necks etc. And these problems with quenas - blocking the end while trying to form a jet. I can see the attraction of outsourcing responsibility for jet forming to the whistle's windway. If only we could learn to point them in the right general direction! (I'm looking at you, moulders of plastic heads!)

I'm suddenly reminded of the late Professor Neville Fletcher's notion that we should make recorders and whistles with "slightly directable" windways (my words, but his notion). The windway would naturally point in the direction that gave the best results at the low end of the range. Perhaps held in that position by some light spring pressure? Then as you approach the upper end, you would raise or lower the body (I can't remember what effect he was aiming for) which would "bend" the windway relative to the ramp. He imagined it would quickly become one of those subconscious actions like instinctively redirecting the jet while playing the flute to favour the upper octave.

Sigh, we could go on. Clamping the lips tighter on the windway narrows it? Or perhaps that happens automatically when you lift or lower the body? Hmmm, lengthening the window length by tensioning the buttocks? What other resources have we available to us?

[pancelticpiper]

When I started out making flutes back in Canberra in the late seventies, I became aware of a strong South American community there, and their musicians, some of whom played Quena. Theirs were very much the traditional instrument made from bamboo, indeed, the bottom end featured a reduction in bore diameter in the form of a smaller hole through what would otherwise have been a closed node.

That's an excellent description of traditional Kenas. Yes the bore is more or less like an upside down Boehm flute, cylindrical but with a curved restriction at the bottom, ending in the node, where a hole is drilled through.

We have large Bolivian and Peruvian communities here too, and there are loads of excellent players.

I got really into Andean music for a while and was jamming with some of those guys regularly.

Kenas are very finicky. Luckily when I wanted to buy one there were loads around to try, and I found one that had an exceptionally easy 2nd octave. I can play that one just fine, but few others.

I made a few Kenas out of PVC pipe and I found that it's extremely difficult to get the cut of the notch just right. That's the heart of the thing, the cut of the notch.

Looked simple enough, I deluded myself, taking some measurements from one they reckoned was their best. I made one out of wood, following the general idea.

Wooden Kenas are popular in Bolivia and Peru, especially among professional players. They're finely crafted instruments from African Blackwood and tropical rosewoods. The ones I've handled have the bore restriction at the bottom just like the cane ones.

Here's a guy who makes them https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cM3Wn9dD5aI

The standard Kena (Spanish, Quena) is the same pitch as an Irish mezzo G whistle, but also popular is a bigger one called Kenakena (Spanish, Quenacho) that's the same pitch as an Irish D flute or Irish Low D whistle.

I made a couple Kenakenas from PVC pipe with the six holes of an Irish Low whistle or Irish flute, when cramping ended my fluteplaying days. I never got the voicing quite right, but it would be the perfect thing for somebody wanting the advantages of a flute (dynamics, ability to change tone-colour, etc) with a vertical whistle-like instrument. (BTW the Kena has a thumb-hole, not for the flat 7th but for the octave of the bell-note.)

[SimpleWhistler]

I started out with a Clark, then got a Dixon DX005. Both are very light, and sound "light" to me. Then I got a Wild D and it took me a while to get used to the weight. Then I was able to get a Killarney in D and that is what I'm playing mostly now. The weight of the Killarney seems to be between the Clark and Dixon and the Wild.

I don't have measurements for any of them but the Wild appears to have the thickest wall (it's definitely the heaviest). The Dixon appears to have the largest inner diameter.

Interestingly, I've found the Wild to be the one most in tune with itself. It seems like it does take the most air especially in the second octave.

Although I am mostly playing the Killarney at the moment, when I pick up any of the others I've come to appreciate them more. I think it's just the little things that make each of them different, the amount of air required, the playing characteristics, the differences in tone, etc.

[SimpleWhistler]

Now that I think about it, I said the Wild appears to have the thickest wall but actually it may be the Dixon. However, the Dixon is plastic and so is much lighter in weight.

[RoberTunes]

Lots of great info in this thread!
I like the idea of the Goldie with the customized tone hole depth. That's a parallel to the idea of adding a wall around the window to improve tone; it's the idea of considering how the outside of the whistle can be adjusted to improve the whistle, after the mouthpiece, tube material selected and tube have been designed.

Consistency of quality in the molded plastic mouthpieces is purely a matter of corporate attitude and business model. That determines the standards set for quality of output to be accepted, the consistency range tolerated. Factors in play at the factory would be original machine design, quality/type of plastic used, speed of manufacturing, level of quality control in the factory in terms of observation and regular testing, and quality control as attention on the metal mold apparatus and quality of materials used, to assure it's still all within accepted tolerances. Obviously, some companies are very slack in applying quality control and some lack of attention allows a range of inconsistency to consistently get to the market, and the corporate attitude is "just sell it to 'em, we're at the pub, we don't have time for unimportant complaints". Another factor in play, though it may often be absent, is the feedback from the market; do sales continue well, are buyers complaining enough and directly to the manufacturer, is superior competition in the marketplace a threat to sales, is the technology available to improve operations, etc. If you ask me, the quality whistle makers still have a long way to go to penetrate the musical instrument market consciousness and the "big box" retailers around the world. People who know little about whistles may often have the idea that Generations, kazoos and the $10 ocarinas are the only such things made, and WHAT an illusion!

I had a Tony Dixon DX006 recently, in the key of D, and was really impressed with the strength/type of plastic used and the very fine precision in the design; the windway and blade and sliding/tuning were extremely well made. Many other whistle makers use some kind of high quality plastic, Delrin, etc., and use high quality, precise methods that produce reliable playability. Attitude of the owner. I imagine that if the unreliable cheap D whistles had improved quality control, so their current best whistles became their consistent product instead of a rarity, the price increase per whistle would be well UNDER $1 per whistle, maybe more like $0.05 when considering they press them out by the thousands.

Flute weight; I've played flute for decades and haven't been bothered by the weight, for hours on end of playing, BUT that may be due to two considerations: 1) the left arm is held close to the chest with the elbow down, so there's little lifting up action going on, and 2) the left hand holds the bulk of the flute's weight, while the right hand is used more for a little balancing and next to no effort applied, in that regard. Imagine lifting a 20-pound dumbbell. When half way up, the arm applies a lot of effort to maintain that position. But when at the top of the range, the muscles of the arm are almost relaxed, and the shoulder muscles take over to simply keep the weight in position. Same with a flute. Left arm position has a lot to do with long-term effort and associated fatigue and comfort. Don't push the left elbow out away from the chest! Flute players can also do shoulder exercises and lots of stretching of the arms and shoulders, to help build up strength and endurance. It doesn't take much weight to do that, try some 15 or 20 pound dumbbells and lift them in various ways through a lot of repetitions and wide range of motion, to work the shoulders and biceps and build up circulation/endurance; a parallel to the exercise of playing the flute.

Maybe this idea of the tone hole depth being customized is something that better whistle makers will further develop, as well as the window wall?

[Terry McGee]

So, I had this really good idea. (Oh how I wish I had a dollar for every time I've said that!) Let's find out what happens when we thicken the wall of a whistle. Yeah, I know, Tunborough can probably model that with one stroke of the keyboard. How could I do it easily? That's where the alleged "good idea" kicks in.

I still have that pair of Walton's D whistles that cost $5.00 each at the local op-shop. I figured one could be the Control and the other the Test Piece. The Control is left as is, the Test Piece I would artificially fatten up by slipping some irrigation tubing over its tube. The irrigation tubing was a pretty tight fit, so I made the job easier by cutting it in two pieces, Left Hand and Right Hand. And warmed it with a hot air gun to make it softer and more pliable. Wasn't too hard to get them into place.

So now my Test Piece could only play Low D, as the irrigation tube covered all the holes. Using the Control whistle as a guide, I jabbed a needle into where I thought each hole should be, successfully. Then followed up with the No 11 Scalpel Blade, cutting a diameter, then a cross, then a square, and finally running around each of the holes using the underlying brass as my guide. Doesn't look great, but it plays again. And to put some numbers on it, both whistles have a bore of 12.07mm. Control has an OD of 12.85mm, Test Piece an OD of 15.33mm. Control wall thickness therefore 0.39mm, Test Piece 1.63mm. Just over 4 times thicker walls.

So, first task was to check the effect on tuning. Logic suggests that the notes produced by the finger holes will be a bit flatter than the Control whistle. And so it turns out. I elected to use the same head on both tubes to prevent any variations in heads fooling with us. Pressed fully in on the Control whistle, I got low A about 10 cents sharp and 2nd octave A around 20 cents flat. Pressed fully in on the thickened whistle, low A was 20 cents flat, 2nd octave A 60 cents flat.

So, pretty much as expected, we see a flattening effect of about 30 cents at A in the low octave, and a little more in the second octave. But it's also alerted me to the fact that the tuning in these whistles is pretty poor as new, see below. Which complicates comparisons. Pause to think.....

Code: Select all

Note	Control
D5	15
E5	10
F#5	-2
G5	19
A5	-2
B5	7
C#6	8
D6	17
E6	0
F#6	-18
G6	1
A6	-26
B6	-24