Bore Data?

Uilleann Pipes
1

The recent discussion on rights to reproduce bore data had me wondering why there is so little accurate bore data openly available.

As someone who is having a go at pipe making on a hobby basis (no sounds have yet been produced) it is frustrating.

It seems anyone wanting to learn the knowledge and skills has more of an uphill struggle than it should be. Things are better now with the web (especially C&F and it’s generous participants), The Sean Reid Society Journals and David Quinn’s cd rom, than nearly 20 years ago when I first fleetingly considered pipemaking.

As a parallel example, many if not most of the worlds top steel string guitar makers started out by making copies of Martin guitar (many of them have never stopped). Plans are plentiful (and copyrighted by the drafters) and Martin guitars have very generously never pursued a copyright claim. You know if you have the skills to turn the plans into an instrument, you will not have wasted your time. A solid starting point has allowed many great talents to develop.

You can buy uilleann plans (or look at photos on the net), where the external detail is good enough to make your pipes look good but why is there no accurate, reliable (tried and proven) bore data for a set of pipes openly available?

David

2

Have you not bought Mr Quinn’s CD? It has a bunch of bore data on it.

djm

3

I have, it is an amazing wealth of information and it should be bought by anyone interested in pipes.
Also, hopefully without causing embarassment, I would say David Quinn is a most generous and helpful man but if I can quote from the CD insert without infringeing copyright:

“Bore Data (selections: don’t get your hopes up)”

David

4

Martin Guitar certainly patents its designs and if it distributes or licenses its drawings, certainly copyrights them, too.

Pipemaking has always been a business. Over the centuries, many pipemakers have been known for their ‘secrets’. The explosion of interest in the past 25 years seems to be changing that. The internet/jet-flying/info age is seeing a lot of activities accelerated quite a bit.

There is enough data and pointers to source material for anyone to start pipemaking just in this message board archive.

5

I think the point that DMQ is trying to make is that it is difficult to nearly impossible to reduce the complex bore of a very good UP chanter to a simple set of numbers. (Mr. Quinn, please chime in here if I’m off the mark.)


No E

6

Where does one acquire this DM Quinn CD Rom from?

DavidG

7

DavidG,

I bought mine directly from DMQuinn, if you PM him I’m sure he will sell you one. It is definitley worth getting.

David

8

The Sean Reid Society discs have what may be slightly better starting points for old flat sets; for instance the DMQ disc (which is, by the way, excellent) is notably lacking in data for Coyne, Harrington, Kenna, Egan i.e. the big 4. I think that’s what David meant (likewise, please correct if I’m wrong).

The SRS discs have some data from Coyne, Harrington, and Kenna. It’s still not quite the Holy Grail compilation of pristine chanters, but there’s good info there.

Personally, of published data, I would suggest trying:

concert pitch: Leo Rowsome data, made for Martin Talty/meas by John Hughes, as published in Iris na bPiobairi/The Pipers’ Review Summer 1999 by Craig Fischer

flat:

B, ‘Possible John Coyne’ chanter as measured by John Hughes and published in SRS v1, in the ‘Reconstructing Chanter Reeds’ article;
B Harrington drones as published in SRS v2 by Pat Lyons and Craig Fischer

C: Kenna set as described in SRS v2 by Ken McLeod

There’s also an O’Mealy C chanter described in SRS v2, and if you look closely you may be able to extract some C Egan data from that same article, where it is presented in part for comparison.

AFAIK there’s nothing yet published in C# other than the Harrington data on DDaye’s site.

If you succeed in making a good chanter from any of these plans, you may find it easier to get more data passed to you privately after that.

Bill

9

Some pipemakers have spent years tweaking there chanters to get them play as good as they can, I don’t think while they are earning there living from this craft they are going to give there
dimensions to just anyone and every one, :confused: but they would probably give a basic measurement of a D chanter, example,

Leo Rowsome concert D chanter, Length 14.1/4"or 14.25" inches.
Throat 5.10-20mm Bell,13.10-.20mm

reed seat internal, length to throat, 8mm down to 5.20mm, over18.00mm.

The Flat chanters bore are smaller, Throat 3.70mm up to 4.0mm,
Bell size usually around 11.30mm, over most flat chanters, :really: but some can go up to 11.70mm at the bell.,

Chris Bayley, gives dimensions for the Leo Rowsome concert D drone’s, free on his web site, and they work well enough, made to them dimensions,

Kevin Scott’s bagpipe workshop page gives details how to make a reamer,and drilling a chanter blank & stock. :astonished:

Wilbert Garvins book,The Irish bagpipes, is also quite helpful.

Ebay is a good place to obtain long drills, I’ve got plenty from there,and cheap too, good for woodturning lathes also,my Record lathe cost £50,mine you the chuck cost me £170, :frowning: but I have made a couple of sets of drone,s and three chanters, and the last chanter I made is spot on,some woodturning lesson will also be a great help to anyone thinking of having a go at making
Irish bag pipes, A two year course certainly helped me. :thumbsup:


Hope this may help anyone fancing having a go at making a half set. :wink:

10

For people on the fast track, you could measure the pipes that are currently being made. Froment, Wooff, Quinn have some 60+ years experience at the game between them.

11

These designs may not be patented, but I don’t feel good about recommending this. While measuring living makers’ work for purely educational purposes seems OK, I have a problem with ‘copyists’ using that data for commercial purposes without consent.

Many may differ, but I don’t think that’s nearly enough data to make a Rowsome ‘copy’ of a bore, let alone toneholes. Even Rowsome bores are not straight tapers. With a range of 0.1mm in the throat, that’s a pretty broad approximation.

Bill

12

I had heard, but am not sure of the veracity of it, that someone had sent a Kirk Lynch set to P-land to copy, and that is why some of their newer sets are actually playable. If you are planning to learn pipemaking I think copying from the best available would be a good place to start, whether new or old, but from there I would expect a true artisan to develop their own version afterwards.

djm

13

A straight reamer taper from, 13.20mm down to 5.20mm over 345mm will give as good as any taper,to start with,for a concert D chanter bore, the tone holes will then have to be worked out and drilled to size to bring the chanter into tune with its self,but with any chanter being copied,you need a good one to start with,its no good copying Shi—, :open_mouth: you also need to know how to make a reamer,with a perfect straight edge, I didnt say it was easy,but I have done a lot of home work,and I know what will work and give a reasonable fished chanter without having to under cut and use rushes to get the instrument in to tune. :tantrum: then the chanter has to be reeded up,and from then, the chanter is only as good as the reed in it. :really:

14

Could’nt have said it better myself, DJM

From research and reading piper interviews.. Almost every pipemaker started with a good Copy of an instrument they admired…

15

I think David Quinn says it best in his Winter 1999 Interview with Wally Charm, Page 2 The Piper’s Review Vol XVIII No 1…

Wally ask’s .. Do you have suggestions for people who want to start making pipes??? Maybe an important piece of information you would like to pass on??

David Said “Quote” I think that measuring is very important.. Measuring instruments that work well and measuring what we make to make sure that it conforms..

16

Wally also asks … Quote, Would you find a very good set of pipe and measure them carefully??

David Said " Quote, Yes, that’s the best thing to do; and then keep your eyes open to see what’s in front of you..

I think this is great advice from (David Quinn) in my opinion the best living pipemaker alive today…

17

“Steady Texasbagpiper” especially on the last line,but I like,
the great advice bit. :wink:

18

:smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :wink:

19

It’s a basic principle of IP law that you can’t protect data. You can use copyright to protect articstic expression, and patents to protect inventions. There are all sorts of subsidiary rights, that vary from one jurisdiction to another.

Yet the scientific knowledge above, and the facts beneath, are immune.

What this means in practice is that if you publish on your webpage a facsimile of someone’s bore measurements, you might be at risk (e.g. for infringing a ‘typographical design right’ in countries where these exist). But if you retype the numbers, you’re clear.

For example, I copied the following measurements from a late 18th century manuscript in the National Library of Scotland (Adv MS 5.2.25)

‘flatt pipe chanter length 16 1/10 inches’

Sound hole 3.6
little fin 5.8
6th 6.8
5 8.2
4 9.3
3 10.3
2 11.6
1st 12.7
back hole 13.3

I suspect, from the date, that this refers to a pastoral pipe chanter rather than a union pipe, but comments are welcome

Ross

(disclaimer: I am not a lawyer)

20

Thanks to those that have posted on this topic.

The recommendations to reliable sets of data are most welcome and have helped show a clearer way forward.

Bill, there are very detailed measurements of Kevin Rowsome’s Willie Rousome C# on David Quinn’s CD. It even goes so far as to give the dimensions for the 5 reamers you would need to build to complete the bore. (Thanks David and Benedict)

Given that it seems to be set out so unambiguously and also glands high rating of this chanter on the Vintage Chanter thread, I am tempted to try this as a first chanter (although still working on C drone…currently making pipe bender). Would you or anyone else mind passing an opinion on this data?

David