Sweet Sweet Prototype!

I’ve been playing this whistle now for three days, almost exclusively, and it definitely has the potential to supplant my Burke as my primary whistle! I wrote Ralph asking if I could share my experiences with the board and he agreed.

At session last Wednesday I was offered the opportunity to play one of Ralph’s newest whistles, and I have to say it is truly a pleasure.

Physically it bears only the vaguest resemblance to the old Sweetheart whistles. The headjoint is longer and sleeker, the mouthpiece doesn’t have the recorder look or feel; it is pared down, mostly straight and the area that rests on the lower lip is longer and narrower. There is no mistaking this for a recorder, though he kept the sexy bulge where the headjoint meets the shaft of the whistle.

The windway and blade were redesigned too. The windway is curved, and I’m told it slopes up toward the blade, which is also curved. The plug in this is not wood, but some sort of plastic. I believe it will be made in delrin in the future.

While redesigning a whistle, why not change the bore too? Right? Its a conical bore, and the hole size is a bit, but not radically different from the Sweetheart. The heart and S, and identifying number are in their familiar places on the shaft.

The sound is fantastic! Absolutely marvelous! Round, honeyed, clear with a small amount of (what I call) chiff. The lower end, especially the bottom three notes, are stronger than before, and the upper end is MUCH mellower. I’m getting a clear Cnat with oxxooo and oxxxox, and half-holed, and I can pop from one register to the next easily.

The high G and A are very pleasant and not piercing, but I still need to gird my loins and push for the B. There is more back-pressure throughout than a Burke, for instance, but less than an Overton. The volume is comparable to my Burke, but I haven’t checked it out with equipment nor have I checked it against my tuner yet. (I’ll get around to that this evening, I think, but Ralph is fanatical about tuning and I have no doubt that my findings will support his craftsmanship)

I know someone is going to ask about the wood, but I’m not sure if I got cocobolo or another type of rosewood. I tried out about 7 of these whistles in three materials, and am working with one that I pretty much selected randomly. Tomorrow I think I’ll take it to session and see how it fares in a smaller group.

Anyway, thanks to Ralph and his son Walter for letting me try out this phenomenal new instrument. It is so different from the old Sweetheart that I’m hoping they come up with a new name with which to dub it!

There IS another prototype out there. I wonder if whoever has it cares to weigh in with his opinion? (ROFL to think of him withholding an opinion!)


\


Tyghress
…And I go on, pursuing through the hours,
Another tiger, the one not found in verse.
Jorge Luis Borges

[ This Message was edited by: tyghress on 2002-10-26 09:55 ]

Thanks for the review of this spanky Sweetheart prototype – any chance you could post a picture?

I second that–picture, please!

:slight_smile:

Um, could someone host a pic? I can take it, but I don’t think I have a way to link it.

[ This Message was edited by: Tony on 2002-10-27 01:00 ]

Pictures are online…
prototype whistle
small:
http://216.110.145.161/tyghress/Img_1s.jpg
large:
http://216.110.145.161/tyghress/Img_1.jpg

size comparison w/ standard sweetheart
small:
http://216.110.145.161/tyghress/Img_2s.jpg
large:
http://216.110.145.161/tyghress/Img_2.jpg

Tyghress: It’s a conical bore whistle? 'Cause I can’t detect a taper in the body. Not that the outside would necessarily have to be tapered…

It’s a pretty exciting development if it is. I was hoping that the Wilson would have a conical bore, but for some reason they didn’t do that.

Have you ever heard Walt Sweet play the Swiss piccolo? He’s quite a talented guy!

Jim is right: It sure doesn’t look like the bore is conical…

Loren

Wow, my eyes must really be going (or else they’re just playing tricks on me) because I seem to see a subtle taper to the whistle. :confused:

~Larry

On 2002-10-27 06:25, madguy wrote:
Wow, my eyes must really be going (or else they’re just playing tricks on me) because I seem to see a subtle taper to the whistle. > :confused:

~Larry

Hmm, well…I suppose it’s the highly visible wood grain that is throwing some of us - don’t know who though. The grain could be creating an illusion that the whistle body is tapered, or not, when the opposite is true.

It’s also possible that the internal bore is tapered, while the whistle exterior is not, but I highly doubt that, for a variety of reasons.

Surely someone will have the answer for us.


Loren

The no-brainer approach:

I held a ruler up to my monitor - yep, the taper is ever so slight, but it’s there. And yes, I ignored the flare at the tuning joint.

On 2002-10-27 06:52, Raymond wrote:
The no-brainer approach:

I held a ruler up to my monitor - yep, the taper is ever so slight, but it’s there. And yes, I ignored the flare at the tuning joint.

Gee, why didn’t I think of that??? :wink:

~Larry

Ruler? What’s that?

Loren

Hmm. Maybe the supposed ‘taper’ could be caused by that ever slight shadow?

I’m not sure if measuring with a ruler is a valid way of judging whether it’s tapered or not, you see, I have the feeling that the bottom end of the whistle is closer to the ground than the section which is being held, thus creating the illusion that the bottom is narrower…ahhh, physics is everything, and everything is physics.:slight_smile:

[ This Message was edited by: amar on 2002-10-27 08:00 ]

The best way to judge a whistle, tapered or not, nice or not, etc …

… is to submit to WhOA !!!

I have submited quite a while ago, am this close (index and thumb nearly touching) to buying a Burke lowD, I just don’t know which to get yet…


damn typos

[ This Message was edited by: amar on 2002-10-27 08:14 ]

On 2002-10-27 06:19, Loren wrote:
Jim is right: It sure doesn’t look like the bore is conical…

Loren

It is conical. 1) Ralph told me so, and 2) I can take the snugly fitting shaft, turn it around and fit it back into the headjoint loosely. Of course that doesn’t mean much for the interior, but I don’t have calipers.

Anyone have any idea of another way to show the conical bore?

I just took a pice of mini graph paper and slid it along the interior diameter. I still cant give you measurements, but I can say that with the paper I can see a definite difference.


Tyghress
…And I go on, pursuing through the hours,
Another tiger, the one not found in verse.
Jorge Luis Borges

[ This Message was edited by: tyghress on 2002-10-27 09:27 ]

Thank you for settling our wee bit of confusion here! :wink:

~Larry

Thanks for the pics, Tyghress. It definitely is much nicer looking than the recordery-looking models.

:slight_smile: