Comparison of High D Whistle Bores

[Terry McGee]

A lot of air has passed over the fipple since the list was last updated. I hope I've added everything we've since discussed.

----------------------------------------------
NOTES:
Entries take the general form: Brand and Model Name (Materials employed) (Bore diameter x Bell-to-blade length)
Because of the significant differences between them, Cylindrical Whistles, Untunable Tapered Whistles, and Tunable Tapered Whistles are listed separately.
Metric and Imperial measurements might be included, eg: Generation (Poly head, brass or nickel body) (0.46", 11.9mm x 10.48", 266mm)
References to Bracker can be traced to discussions at: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=84789
Whistles are listed in order of bore size. In order to help identify clusters and gaps, a single dash identifies any unpopulated 0.1mm (~0.004") increment.
Also included in the list are the standard sizes of K&S thin walled tubing, eg: 7/16" bore tubing (11.1mm)
Please feel free to advise any additional information about these or other instruments.

----------------------------------------------
CYLINDRICAL WHISTLES

Susato Kildare, Very Small Bore (ABS) High D, tunable (0.40", 10mm)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Reyburn [narrow bore?] D (10.9mm)
-
7/16" bore tubing (11.1mm)
Clare 2 piece (11.2mm)
-
-
[Bracker very narrow] Susato Kildare (11.5mm)
Jos. Morneault High D in Rosewood, tunable (0.45", 11.5mm)
-
Killarney (Brass), tunable (11.7mm)
Susato Kildare Small Bore (ABS) High D, tunable (0.46", 11.8mm)
15/32" bore tubing (11.9mm)
Generation (Poly head, brass or nickel body) (0.46", 11.9mm x 10.48", 266mm)
Feadog Mk 1 (Poly head, brass body) (12.0mm)
Burke Brass, Narrow Bore High D, tunable (0.47", 12mm)
Jerry Freeman Blackbird, (12.0 mm)
Tony Dixon (not sure what model), (12.0 mm)
-
Milligan (12.2mm)
Goldie (12.3mm)
Kerry Songbird (12.3mm)
MacManus (12.3mm)
OZ Delrin Vizor (12.3mm)
Reyburn high D (12.3 mm)
-
-
Silkstone D+, aluminium (12.6mm, 1/2" internal, 15.6mm external)
1/2" bore tubing (12.7mm)
O'Brien 3-pice High D in Granadillo, tunable (0.5", 12.7mm)
McManus High D in Blackwood, tunable (0.50", 12.7mm)
Dixon Cupro-nickel (Delrin head)
Alex Dewilde, Brass head with plastic fipple High D, tunable (0.50", 12.8 mm)
Setanta, Brass head and fipple High D, tunable (0.50", 12.8mm)
-
[Bracker mid range] (13.0mm)
-
-
Kerry Cobre (13.3mm)
-
17/32" bore tubing (13.5mm)
Walton's Mellow D (13.5mm)
Jerry Freeman Mellow Dog, (13.56 mm) [uses a newer Feadog head?]
-
-
-
Tilbury Aluminum D (14.0mm)
-
-
9/16" bore tubing (14.3mm)
Burke Wide Bore (14.3mm)
-
[Bracker very wide] 14.5
-
-
-
-
19/32" bore tubing (15mm)
-
Kerry Custom/MacManus (15.2mm)
-
-
-
-
-
-
5/8" bore tubing (15.9mm)
Kerry Busker Aluminum D (16.0 mm)

-----------------------------------

TAPERED WHISTLES, UNTUNABLE
Clarke D, tinplate, at sounding blade: 15.3 mm; 51.5 mm down (bottom of logo): 14.9 mm; 88 mm down (between the gold lines): 13.8 mm; 265 mm down (foot): 9.2 mm

-----------------------------------

TAPERED WHISTLES, TUNABLE
P.G. Bleazey High D in Mopane, tunable (0.37", 9.3mm at foot; 0.50", 12.8mm at middle joint)

[david_h]

Silkstone D+ aluminium 12.6mm internal, 15.6mm external.
UK made so maybe 1/2" internal. Paul Hayward also offered a narrow bore D "for those wanting a quiet whistle."

(digital caliper in my stocking )

[Terry McGee]

Thanks, david_h, edited in above.

[Terry McGee]

And can I remind anyone who has supplied the data so far that some have asked for an indication of Speaking Length, which, for ease of measurement we are taking as the length from the start of the "blade" to the far end of the whistle. In mm, inches or both!

[Tunborough]

On the matter of Q factor ... It turns out that the WIDesigner estimation of Q factor is dependent on one of the calibration parameters, the beta factor or "jet spatial amplification coefficient". This is an attribute of the mouthpiece that we haven't yet connected to any measurable feature of the mouthpiece geometry. It doesn't affect the maximum frequency for a note, where it breaks into a higher register, but it does affect the minimum frequency for a note, where it drops into a lower register. I can't simply calculate Q factors for a whistle with a 12 mm bore, then change the bore to 13 mm and calculate Q factors again, because a larger-bore mouthpiece might have a different beta factor.

Still pondering what might be useful.

[Terry McGee]

One of the things I'd be interested in, if you get that far Tunborough, and if the system can handle it, is what happens when you thicken the body walls from say the 0.3mm tinplate to say 3mm in timber (whatever we think we need for strength). Do we need to adjust the taper, or can we get away with making the holes bigger, moving the holes up, undercutting, all of the above, or what?

Ah, and in "moving holes up", when do you run into problems moving the top hole so that it's no longer well placed to be the speaker hole for oxx xxx? I note it's already higher up than halfway. Is that because the impedance of the window area is higher than the impedance of the open far end?

Oh, and what do we have to do about including a tuning slide? Clearly we need some cylindrical bore at the head end. Given that the Clarke bore seemed to flatten out at around 15mm for the first 50mm or so, that shouldn't present a problem?

Oh, and the one I've already talked about - is there any need or merit in the bore flaring out at the bottom like conical flutes do?

Oooh, so many questions! I'll probably think of more....

[Tunborough]

One of the things I'd be interested in, if you get that far Tunborough, and if the system can handle it, is what happens when you thicken the body walls from say the 0.3mm tinplate to say 3mm in timber (whatever we think we need for strength). Do we need to adjust the taper, or can we get away with making the holes bigger, moving the holes up, undercutting, all of the above, or what?

As far as tuning goes, I can say that if we could fit a Feadog head to a brass tube and a 3 mm wooden cylinder, the wooden cylinder would give us a bit more of a problem with a flat second octave. The finger holes would have to be larger (no surprise), but could be in about the same positions.

[Terry McGee]

As far as tuning goes, I can say that if we could fit a Feadog head to a brass tube and a 3 mm wooden cylinder, the wooden cylinder would give us a bit more of a problem with a flat second octave.

Hmmm, my experience also. I came across some suitably sized poly irrigation pipe and made a simple whistle from it. Sounded good, but examining the tuning showed it was dipping down at the top of the 2nd octave more than a similar whistle with thin brass walls.

That kind of makes cylindrical bore unattractive for wooden whistles, doesn't it, just like it does for simple flutes. If you are going to go to all that trouble to make a lovely looking wooden whistle, strengthened with rings and fitted with a tuning slide, you really need to go the extra mile and make it conical. Well, that is if and when we prove that that is going to work!

On that front, anyone have a conical thick-walled whistle (say wood, poly, other?) within grasp? Good tuning?

The finger holes would have to be larger (no surprise), but could be in about the same positions.

OK.

I was interested to notice that when I compared a Killarney whistle (11.7mm bore) with my seriously tweaked old Soodlums (13.4mm bore) the hole positions were pretty much identical, as were the overall lengths. I imagine though that a comparison between a thin-walled cylindrical bore and say the Clarke's tapered bore would show a compression to overall length and location of holes?

[stringbed]

This is a wholesale replacement for a post that I've just deleted rather than edit beyond recognition.

That kind of makes cylindrical bore unattractive for wooden whistles, doesn't it, just like it does for simple flutes. If you are going to go to all that trouble to make a lovely looking wooden whistle, strengthened with rings and fitted with a tuning slide, you really need to go the extra mile and make it conical. Well, that is if and when we prove that that is going to work!

I own a wooden whistle by Roy McManus that is not bested in overall quality by anything else at hand for comparison. It's got a cylindrical bore and nothing that I might regard as an optimizable performance trait that I would expect to be better if it were tapered.

Patrick O’Riordan discusses the design decisions he made when developing his own cylindrically bored wooden whistle in a video, landing on the segment about the alternative tapered form here. Without in any way suggesting that there is nothing to be gained by testing tapered designs, are there any makers of wooden whistles who currently implement them?

[Terry McGee]

I own a wooden whistle by Roy McManus that is not bested in overall quality by anything else at hand for comparison. It's got a cylindrical bore and nothing that I might regard as an optimizable performance trait that I would expect to be better if it were tapered.

Patrick O’Riordan discusses the design decisions he made when developing his own cylindrically bored wooden whistle in a video, landing on the segment about the alternative tapered form here. Without in any way suggesting that there is nothing to be gained by testing tapered designs, are there any makers of wooden whistles who currently implement them?

Great video of Patrick, thanks stringbed. Seems to have been a very warm and likeable individual.

I'll pass on the question of modern makers of tapered wooden whistles - I'm too far out of date to know.

We know that cylindrical thin metal whistles tend a little flat at the top of the 2nd octave, even if you let them tend a little sharp at the top of the 1st octave. The theory and some experience suggests that a thicker walled cylindrical whistle will tend flatter at the top of the 2nd octave, even if allowed to tend sharper at the top of the 1st octave. I'm hoping that a tapered bore would offset that - if not why bother? Unless perhaps the tapered bore brings benefits other than tuning?

I would have hoped that all of this was "known", and perhaps it is - I just don't know where to look!

[stringbed]

I had actually overlooked the tapered Bleazey at the end of the current list. The question thus becomes if other makers produce similar wooden instruments.

My personal suspicion is that wall thickness constitutes the primary (and obvious) relevant difference between metal and wooden whistles. I haven’t noticed any extensive utilization of the latitude that affords for undercutting. This can, in turn, introduce an element of chambering in the bore, so there’s lots to be tested with wooden-bodied instruments.

[Terry McGee]

Causeway whistles entry added, plus some new data-points on Window Length....
----------------------------------------------
NOTES:
Entries take the general form: Brand and Model Name (Materials employed), "tunable" or "fixed", (Bore diameter x Bell-to-blade length) [Window Length]
Because of the significant differences between them, Cylindrical Whistles, Untunable Tapered Whistles, and Tunable Tapered Whistles are listed separately.
Metric and Imperial measurements might be included, eg: Generation (Poly head, brass or nickel body) (0.46", 11.9mm x 10.48", 266mm)
References to Bracker can be traced to discussions at: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=84789
Whistles are listed in order of bore size. In order to help identify clusters and gaps, a single dash identifies any unpopulated 0.1mm (~0.004") increment.
Also included in the list are the standard sizes of K&S thin walled tubing, eg: 7/16" bore tubing (11.1mm)
Please feel free to advise any additional information about these or other instruments.

----------------------------------------------
CYLINDRICAL WHISTLES

Susato Kildare, Very Small Bore (ABS) High D, tunable (0.40", 10mm)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Reyburn [narrow bore?] D (10.9mm)
-
7/16" bore tubing (11.1mm)
Clare 2 piece (11.2mm)
-
-
[Bracker very narrow] Susato Kildare (11.5mm)
Jos. Morneault High D in Rosewood, tunable (0.45", 11.5mm)
-
Killarney (Brass head & tube, poly stopper and cover), tunable, (11.7 x 270mm) [4mm]
Susato Kildare Small Bore (ABS) High D, tunable (0.46", 11.8mm)
15/32" bore tubing (11.9mm)
Generation (Poly head, brass or nickel body) (0.46", 11.9mm x 10.48", 266mm) [5.1mm]
The Dannan Causeway (Poly head, brass body) (0.46", 11.9mm)
Feadog Mk 1 (Poly head, brass body) (12.0mm) [5.2mm]
Burke Brass, Narrow Bore High D, tunable (0.47", 12mm)
Jerry Freeman Blackbird, (12.0 mm) [4.15 mm]
Tony Dixon (not sure what model), (12.0 mm)
-
Milligan (12.2mm)
Goldie (12.3mm)
Kerry Songbird (12.3mm)
MacManus (12.3mm)
OZ Delrin Vizor (12.3mm)
Reyburn high D (12.3 mm)
-
-
Silkstone D+, aluminium (12.6mm, 1/2" internal, 15.6mm external)
1/2" bore tubing (12.7mm)
O'Brien 3-pice High D in Granadillo, tunable (0.5", 12.7mm)
McManus High D in Blackwood, tunable (0.50", 12.7mm)
Dixon Cupro-nickel (Delrin head) (12.8 mm bore) [4.5 mm]
Alex Dewilde, Brass head with plastic fipple High D, tunable (0.50", 12.8 mm)
Setanta, Brass head and fipple High D, tunable (0.50", 12.8mm)
-
[Bracker mid range] (13.0mm)
-
-
Kerry Cobre (13.3mm)
-
17/32" bore tubing (13.5mm)
Walton's Mellow D (13.5mm) [5.5mm?]
Jerry Freeman Mellow Dog, (13.56 mm) {uses a newer Feadog head?} [4.2 mm]
-
-
-
Tilbury Aluminum D (14.0mm)
-
-
9/16" bore tubing (14.3mm)
Burke Wide Bore (14.3mm)
-
[Bracker very wide] 14.5
-
-
-
-
19/32" bore tubing (15mm)
-
Kerry Custom/MacManus (15.2mm)
-
-
-
-
-
-
5/8" bore tubing (15.9mm)
Kerry Busker Aluminum D (16.0 mm)

-----------------------------------

TAPERED WHISTLES, UNTUNABLE
Clarke D, tinplate, at sounding blade: 15.3 mm; 51.5 mm down (bottom of logo): 14.9 mm; 88 mm down (between the gold lines): 13.8 mm; 265 mm down (foot): 9.2 mm [4.6 mm]

-----------------------------------

TAPERED WHISTLES, TUNABLE
P.G. Bleazey High D in Mopane, tunable (0.37", 9.3mm at foot; 0.50", 12.8mm at middle joint)

[Terry McGee]

I had actually overlooked the tapered Bleazey at the end of the current list. The question thus becomes if other makers produce similar wooden instruments.

There's a discussion of who makes tapered/conical whistles at viewtopic.php?f=1&t=113826&sid=3f74731a ... 75301d2da1. I haven't delved into it yet....

My personal suspicion is that wall thickness constitutes the primary (and obvious) relevant difference between metal and wooden whistles. I haven’t noticed any extensive utilization of the latitude that affords for undercutting. This can, in turn, introduce an element of chambering in the bore, so there’s lots to be tested with wooden-bodied instruments.

Heh heh, thus my hope that Tunborough can make some inroads with WIDesigner, before I blunder in with a hardware attempt!

[Tunborough]

Turns out, there is no optimum bore.

A whistle is balanced when performance at the top end is the same as at the bottom end, and it looks like the Q factor is a great measure of that balance. A wide bore favours the Q factor at the bottom end, and a narrow bore favours the Q factor at the top end. But the length of the window, between the windway exit and the blade, also matters.

One of the great things about Guido Gonzato's low-tech whistle design is that changing the length of the window is very easy. I knew that a long window favoured the bottom end, and a short window favoured the top end, but I didn't know how that manifested in the WIDesigner model. An experiment last night with a low-tech whistle body showed that the WIDesigner beta factor depends on the window length. Earlier I mentioned that the beta factor affects the Q factor, so that is the connection. It isn't enough to change the window length in the model, because the beta factor has to change as well; I don't yet know by how much. A longer window means a larger beta factor which favours the Q factor at the bottom end, and a shorter window means a smaller beta factor which favours the Q factor at the top end.

There are probably limits at the extremes, but you can have equally balanced whistles with wide bores and long windows, or narrow bores and short windows. By rights, our table of bores also needs to list the window length of each entry.

Get out the digital calipers, folks.

[Terry McGee]

Very good, Tunborough. And are we also interested in Window Width? I imagine as defining the "openness" of the window they might both act on Q?

If so, what about the following model entry, and example following?

Brand and Model Name (Materials employed), "tunable" or "fixed" (Bore diameter x Bell-to-blade length) [Window Length x Width]

eg: Killarney (Brass head & tube, poly stopper and cover), tunable, (11.7 x 270mm) [4 x 7mm]

(Note the subliminal hints - round brackets implying tubing, square brackets implying a window. So subtle, so nuanced....)

Any other changes or suggestions to the model entries at this point? While players are all out buying themselves some calipers....