It is currently Tue Nov 24, 2020 8:51 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 44 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2017 6:55 pm
Posts: 10
Location: Plymouth, UK
I was not suggesting it was indeed a fajardo wedge but suggesting its very similar. Fajardo wedges are use to correct intonation and indeed does have an effect on tone unlike this perturbation mod. Apologies for the confusion. As for the taper, it was referencing the flue and not headjoint :poke: . A wider bore headjoint is another way to help bring intonation in line. I have never seen a stepped cylinder flue. “With the right headjoint, a cylindrical whistle or flute doesn't have to be flat in the second octave” yes indeed!
What Hans has done is the opposite approach to a wider bore headjoint by interrupting the node instead of the antinode of the fundamental.


The mention about concentrating on getting the second octave best in tune instead of the first octave comes from a discussion I had about intonation tuning and my thoughts on ensuring the second octave is best in tune is a matter of Auditory psychoacoustics where the ear does not identify out of tune notes in lower frequency note than higher notes. Have a read up about Auditory Psychoacoustics, it's a very interesting subject. There are soo many instruments that have poor intonation and I know for a fact that all too many makers concentrate on getting the first octave in tune instead, on instruments with poor intonation, this is not the way to go in my eyes (not all makers are the same). That is the least acceptable scenario since it does make you have to push far too much to get the second octave in tune on a poorly voiced instrument, it's easier to blow the first octave in tune than the second on instruments with poor intonation in many cases.

“I have a whole roll of Irish whistles which are not flat in the 2nd octave, but produce every note from the low bell note up to the 6th in the 2nd octave in tune, using a relatively even breath. Yes of course you have to change your breath to switch octaves but there's no "pushing extra hard" to get an inherently flat 2nd octave in tune. (I don't buy whistles like that.)”

Yes, you have most probably purchased instruments that are better tuned in the second octave and a tapered windway helps here. Window width as well as L/B ratio plays an important role with regards to how an instrument performs in both octaves. That is how much room you have in both. Hans has said that he needs to push second octave higher notes extremely hard to play them in-tune on his Killarney and is correct in saying it is common to cylindrical bore whistles.

“The disadvantage to having the 2nd octave flat is that it exacerbates the already-present volume differential between the octaves, because you're "blowing out" the 2nd octave and underblowing the low octave to keep them in tune to each other.”

That's another reason why I suggested concentrating on getting the second octave in tune as opposed to the first octave.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2017 6:55 pm
Posts: 10
Location: Plymouth, UK
Quote:
And I will add that they're all out of tune kids.
Not one been made that isn't.
Get over it and start playing.

Aint that the truth! :thumbsup: :waah:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 12:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2020 11:15 am
Posts: 1
Location: Zaragoza, Spain
[Thread revival. - Mod]

Hello! I´m new here and first of all I want to thank every one of you for such an interesting conversation. I was a silent reader of this forum for a while and finaly decided to register to thank hans for the information about this "tuning insert". I´m trying to make some low whistles out of pvc tubing (following famous Guido Gonzato´s tutorial) and I did a couple that don´t sound that bad for my taste. My problem was tuning - as I´m not an experienced whistle player the difference between two octaves was sometimes 30-35 cents. I tried to make some "tipple wedge" type inserts but was not satisfied as they changed sound a bit too much for my taste. https://ibb.co/rvCyBxP
In search for the solution I found this topic and tryed to recreate this cylindric insert out of pvc tubing. https://ibb.co/W6TDsJW
As for my ears the result was much better, although my variant needs further modifications because low notes started to sound weaker and now tend to flip an octave. None the less I want to thank hans again and everyone on this forum. It´s always a pleasure to be here.
https://ibb.co/7SNw9Fm


Upd: changed images


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 1:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 7:25 am
Posts: 4794
Location: WV to the OC
oleorezinator wrote:


they're all out of tune kids.
Not one been made that isn't.


That is not the case with most of my whistles.

For example, on my Colin Goldie Low D I can play up the scale from Bottom D to high B and every note is "needle straight up".

Ditto my old Killarney high D (not the newer one as I said).

And as I've said I've played a number of Reyburn whistles in various keys and they've all been spot on.

I think people who imagine that whistles are out of tune by necessity must not have

1) bought the right whistles

2) learned how to fix not-right whistles.

Now there is a caveat! When I say the whole scale of a whistle is in tune I'm always referring to the G Major scale, the scale with C natural. To me that's the natural scale of the whistle (no pun intended).

For sure C# is an outlier, at least it is in my opinion. It lays outside of the whistle's normal scale, to me, and I think that makers who ruin C natural and in some cases even ruin the vented Middle D in order to make C# in tune to equal temperament are misguided. If having an in-tune C# and a messed-up C natural are the ideal for you, we will have to disagree on the nature of an ideal whistle.

_________________
Richard Cook
1978 Quinn uilleann pipes
1945 Starck Highland pipes
Goldie Low D whistle


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 5:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:54 am
Posts: 726
Location: Bischberg/Bavaria/Germany
To comment on the question.
I stopped my experiments with inserts to manipulate the tuning of the 2nd octave as I think it influences the sound too much. So I now make the holes larger, which will also sharpen the 2nd octave. The length of windway and window will also have an influence. With some experimenting I am pretty happy with the tuning even without any inserts.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 03, 2020 4:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 10:15 pm
Posts: 644
Location: Seattle, WA
I tried the bore restriction technique described on my own line of whistles (coming this fall) and found that it really added some harshness to the bell note, and weakened it quite a bit, even with knife-edge margins on both sides. I used a bore’s length of tubing, but I’m going to try half a bore’s length and experiment with positioning. Mine don’t really have much of an octave disparity, but I was trying to see if I could make the high octave even sweeter, since a feature of these is a bold low octave and sweet high octave.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 03, 2020 5:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 2:59 pm
Posts: 1136
Location: Southwestern Ontario
What thickness are you using for your insert? I would recommend 0.5 to 1 mm, no thicker; for length, try starting around 10% of the bore length and go up or down from there.

I wonder if the top of the insert is interfering with airflow under the sounding blade. Perhaps a semicircular insert, that doesn't reduce the bore immediately downstream of where the window is.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 03, 2020 5:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 10:15 pm
Posts: 644
Location: Seattle, WA
Tunborough wrote:
What thickness are you using for your insert? I would recommend 0.5 to 1 mm, no thicker; for length, try starting around 10% of the bore length and go up or down from there.


Just the standard 0.014" thick brass tubing. I honestly didn't notice much of an effect on the high octave with a full bore's length, so 10% seems pretty low, but maybe positioning is more of a factor there.

The airblade cut idea is quite interesting. I'll try that as well.

Update: I'm not in my friend's shop so I can't part off a shorter section of tubing, but I did try the same 0.5" insert in the D tube instead of the Eb, and it had a much lower effect on the sound and seemed to have a bit more obvious effect in the high octave. Really curious to slice some of these up now. Anyone know what's up acoustically here? Is the insert at the node or whatever of some standing wave? Reading up on instrument physics but it's slow going.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 03, 2020 5:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 2:59 pm
Posts: 1136
Location: Southwestern Ontario
MadmanWithaWhistle wrote:
Just the standard 0.014" thick brass tubing. I honestly didn't notice much of an effect on the high octave with a full bore's length, so 10% seems pretty low, but maybe positioning is more of a factor there.
A full bore's length isn't what we want. It's the expansion of the bore between the headjoint (with the insert) and the main body of the whistle that changes the balance. As for positioning, if I were trying a semicircular insert, I'd start with it right at the top, against the fipple.

14 thou, 0.36 mm, might be on the thin side, but you work with what you got.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 03, 2020 5:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 2:59 pm
Posts: 1136
Location: Southwestern Ontario
Reading this again... when you say "full bore's length" and 0.5", were you talking bore diameter? I meant 10% of the full length of the whistle.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 03, 2020 6:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 10:15 pm
Posts: 644
Location: Seattle, WA
Tunborough wrote:
MadmanWithaWhistle wrote:
Just the standard 0.014" thick brass tubing. I honestly didn't notice much of an effect on the high octave with a full bore's length, so 10% seems pretty low, but maybe positioning is more of a factor there.
A full bore's length isn't what we want. It's the expansion of the bore between the headjoint (with the insert) and the main body of the whistle that changes the balance. As for positioning, if I were trying a semicircular insert, I'd start with it right at the top, against the fipple.

14 thou, 0.36 mm, might be on the thin side, but you work with what you got.


Tried the semicircle in one of the tubes I haven't cut short yet, slightly reduced the rattle, but not by much. Again, I'll have to re-test with shorter inserts when I see my friend again. Currently my "tuning slide" is just how far on the tube the headjoint is. I typically have them play in tune 3mm out, since most people will need to tune flat, not sharp. However, this does create a cavity between the bore immediately after the airblade and the bore of the body tube.

I feel like I'm going to end up just declaring this as "splitting hairs" from a design standpoint, but the experimental data will certainly be interesting. I like the tone of these so much that anything that alters it, even a bit, is not appealing. I might be able to move the tuning slide further south on the whistle to get away from the airblade, since the effect seems most concentrated there. I'm also testing a larger-holed design as well which will help with the octave, and I find those just sound better anyhow.

I meant "A length equal to the diameter of the bore"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 03, 2020 7:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 2:59 pm
Posts: 1136
Location: Southwestern Ontario
MadmanWithaWhistle wrote:
I'll have to re-test with shorter inserts when I see my friend again.
...
I meant "A length equal to the diameter of the bore"
Try longer inserts. Like maybe an inch for a high D, or 2" for a low D. I'm really interested to hear what comes of this.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 03, 2020 7:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 10:15 pm
Posts: 644
Location: Seattle, WA
Tunborough wrote:
MadmanWithaWhistle wrote:
I'll have to re-test with shorter inserts when I see my friend again.
...
I meant "A length equal to the diameter of the bore"
Try longer inserts. Like maybe an inch for a high D, or 2" for a low D. I'm really interested to hear what comes of this.
[quote="Tunborough"][quote="MadmanWithaWhistle"]I'll have to re-test with shorter inserts when I see my friend again.
...
I tried an inch-long piece in my wider bore D, and it really fuzzed out the tone. The headjoint is not yet optimized for 17/32, but it played much better without the insert, sadly. I'm still curious for other approaches to this. I went for the plastic-head-on-a-metal-body design simply because it emulated the old Gens and is dead simple, but it would be an easy matter to incorporate some kind of perturbation further south on the head and shorten the body tube, I just don't yet have the acoustical knowledge to inform where and what I might do. This will likely make production a bit more expensive, though.

I did some other tests with the body tubes I have currently - my design incorporates a "shoulder" that both keeps the tube from being inserted too far and matches the diameter of the bore. I noticed that without any gap (due to pulling out the body tube for tuning) the whistle played even sweeter than normal, but when it was pulled out, the faint beginnings of a rattle started creeping in, possibly due to the slight cavity left from pulling out the tube (could also just be the extra length). I tried just filing the top of a normal body tube to a knife-edge margin, and noticed a moderate improvement, not as good as no gap at all, but better. As you say, the head is really the critical area for forming the sound, so perhaps moving the tunable portion down could lessen the effect. I wish there were a way to do a minimum disruption tuning slide like on a flute, but it's just not feasible at this scale.

I have done a number of other experiments during this project, including airblade angle, windway height and offset, undercut angle, window length, and blade position in the airstream. After I release them in the fall, I'll post a series of results (mostly qualitative, sorry) on how the different dimensions affect the tone.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 30, 2020 6:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2019 3:29 pm
Posts: 6
Hi there! Sorry to revive the thread, but does anybody know if this issue is also present on Lír whistles?
Thanks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 44 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.130s | 12 Queries | GZIP : On ]
(dh)