B Pipes Playing in Bb

[Lorenzo]

Lately I've been wondering what Bb pipes sounded like (falling lower and lower). So, just guessing, I made a longer reed for my Hunter/Lawrence B set, partially filled the upper sections of a few tone holes, shoved a small roll of card up the bell, added some weight to the drone reeds, and somehow it played perfectly in Bb...with one slight change in fingering: the Es. Saved me from buying a set just to hear the difference...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azwTL01JWGo

[Ted]

At the length and bores of the big flat sets, the pitch can be made flatter or sharper than the pitch advertised. Forty years ago an 18 inch chanter was sometimes referred to as a B flat stick. In reality most 18 inchers played somewhat sharp of B flat and the pitch more referred to them being flat of B rather than B flat by modern pitch standards. Brad Angus once copied a historic full set with an 18 inch chanter which was returned to him because it was sharp of modern B flat. Unless the guy was playing with a fixed pitch instrument I thought his expectation was unwarranted. If the set played in tune with itself I would have been happy. Brad reeded one of these sets to play in A. With a bit of futzing with reeds, waxing holes and rushes a B can get to B flat as Lorenzo points out. I have repeatedly posted that sets being made in pitches (B flat, B, C and C#) is a modern phenomenon. Some have done a better job than others in making sets play at the called pitch based on the modern convention of A440. Some historic sets may be forced into playing at modern ideas of pitch easier than others.

[Fergmaun]

I have done this with my Rogge B chanter playing in Bb and also my Rogge DNB chanter playing in C#.

Cheers

Ferg

[Mr.Gumby]

Saved me from buying a set just to hear the difference...

I am not so sure a shorter chanter tuned down will give you the same tonal effect as a longer chanter. You may have to buy a Bflat yet.

[Lorenzo]

Unless the guy was playing with a fixed pitch instrument I thought his expectation was unwarranted. If the set played in tune with itself I would have been happy.

I agree. I use to wonder what was meant by the description "this chanter is most comfortable just south of B" or "that's where this chanter seems to want to be." And how many instruments would be "fixed pitch" for a Bb chanter anyway?

[Lorenzo]

Saved me from buying a set just to hear the difference...

I am not so sure a shorter chanter tuned down will give you the same tonal effect as a longer chanter. You may have to buy a Bflat yet.

Good point. And that raises other questions. Doing the same thing to a B chanter of another maker would likely give different result. And where does a maker know at what pitch a chanter sounds best after boring (could be a little sharp or flat). Chances are the only time a chanter will sound best is when the maker voices it to the best reed before it leaves the shop.

This particular chanter sounded better to my ears as the pitch was lowered. Why does a longer reed change the built-in tone of the chanter? Maybe I'm simply liking the lower pitch? I wonder just how different a longer chanter by the same maker would sound? That would certainly correct the fingering on the Es.

On this chanter only 4 of the 8 tone holes were narrowed, or 5 if you count the exit hole. The reed alone has changed the pitch, mostly. If reeds dimensions are critical, I also wonder how much softer cane would change the tone. Lots of variables...and I don't really know.

I bought 4 B chanters just to get them side by side to figure it all out. I liked certain things about each one even though I felt the J. Kennedy had the closest tone to what I was coveting.

[Ted]

I know of one duo where the piper had an 18" chanter that liked to be 20 cents sharp of B flat and was playing with a friend who had a B flat concertina tuned at modern pitch. He was not happy with his attempts to drop the pitch of the chanter. I joked that it might be better to have the 'tina tuned 20 cents sharper.

[Sam L]

Saved me from buying a set just to hear the difference...

I am not so sure a shorter chanter tuned down will give you the same tonal effect as a longer chanter. You may have to buy a Bflat yet.

That's definitely true - not necessarily the bit about buying more chanters! They become more cello like the longer they go, regardless of the absolute pitch. Interesting though. Sounds more muted and less rich than an actual Bb as far as I can tell from youtube.

[benoit trémolières]

I'm completly convinced that a chanter without its original reed is like a stringed instrument with strings and part of the fretboard missing.(not to mention the bridge!).
All you can deduce about key and tuning is guesswork.
The only undisputable difference is about the tone.
Whatever reed you can make, a short and wide bore wont play the same than a longer and narrower one.
All the acoustic calculations does'nt mean anything as long as they are neglecting the reed (AND THE STAPLE!!!), or just considering it as a valve or a resonator.

I'm afraid i''m always repeating the same things...

[geoff wooff]

I'm completly convinced that a chanter without its original reed is like a stringed instrument with strings and part of the fretboard missing.(not to mention the bridge!).
All you can deduce about key and tuning is guesswork.
The only undisputable difference is about the tone.
Whatever reed you can make, a short and wide bore wont play the same than a longer and narrower one.
All the acoustic calculations does'nt mean anything as long as they are neglecting the reed (AND THE STAPLE!!!), or just considering it as a valve or a resonator.

I'm afraid i''m always repeating the same things...

Yes, I agree with this too especially your last sentance Benoit.... which is why I do not post comments so much these days from fear of repeating myself, fear of repeating myself, repeating myself, repeat, repeat and repeat.

Although chanters can be made to play sharper or flater , by Reed ( recipe) adjustments , there is a happy point where everything works best.... sometimes this is discoverable more easily if one has the drones and regulators too.

If a chanter appears to want a very odd reed then perhaps the problem is more one of the perception of a person trying to make the chanter play in a pitch that it was not intended for.

[Tunborough]

All the acoustic calculations doesn't mean anything as long as they are neglecting the reed (AND THE STAPLE!!!)

I've been working on acoustic calculations for several years. I haven't tackled reed instruments yet. I dearly want to, but when I do I'll take Benoit's statement, echoed by Geoff, as fundamental truth.

Even with whistles, you can't calculate tuning without taking the mouthpiece into account. Fortunately, you can get pretty close with a few basic parameters for the mouthpiece. I'm hoping for (but not confident of) a similar situation with reeds: if we have the reed in hand, we can characterize (most of) its effect on tuning with a few parameters.

And Geoff ... if you're repeating yourself, I haven't gotten tired of it yet.

[benoit trémolières]

The most interesting scientific thing i've ever seen about the subject (Taking account of my very poor scientific level) is this:

http://www.tuftl.tufts.edu/musicenginee ... n_reed.pdf

probably known by most of you.

What I get out of these experiments is that, if the staple can probably be parametred like the bore (as a resonator), the head of the reed behavioring is folllowing completly different rules.
It appears that for every note, the vibrating shapes of the blades are taking complete different paterns.
I can't help comparing these results with Chladni figures.

And in my own experience, I can testify that, acting on these shapes by changing the parameters of stiffness repartition, you can modify the tuning of the scale.
A bit like if weighting a string at particular points.
But if I come back to your last assertment, I can say either that I'm working since years, just to definy what has to be considered as a parameter or not !
Knowing that all of them are tightly linked together, and there's nothing you can apply on one without interfering with others, you'd suppose finaly that acousticians tackled the problem by the easiest end...

Just an exemple:
Supposing that the staple acts like the rest of the bore, the eye apperture is of crucial importance (What every reedmaker can see daily as an evidence).
But as soon as you applie the tiniest change in its mesurement, the whole basement of the head is modified, with considerable consequences.
Then you can never know exactly what is responsible of what!

The problem, to me, seems to be that, contrarily with other woodwind instrument's mouthpiece, the shape head is constantly changing in playing.
It can be compared with sort of a sound board, coupled with a resonator ( the staple and bore).

In my opinion, empiricism has not tell its last word, and for a long time...

[Lorenzo]

All very interesting, but I like the highly sophisticated, and scientific method, called trial and error best!

Yesterday I tried this same reed in my Kennedy B chanter, and it also played in Bb w/o filling any tone holes. I did narrow the exit hole though, very slightly. This low pitched reed thing was all just for fun. Going to my main 3/4 set now, everything in B as it should b. If anyone needs a fine B chanter, or a great 1/2 B set, I have some extras...