What is the purpose of the taper in rolled staples?

[nwhitmer]

I had my first lessons in reedmaking from Tim Britton using tube staples. This was in 1983.

It seemed pretty obvious to me from the start that the reed & chanter are a system; the design of one shapes the design of the other.

When I began to make chanters I consciously tried to make a chanter which would work well with reeds which used tube staples. At that stage of the game, say 1990, I was more concerned about something that played in tune than something which had a fabulous tone. My ideas about good tone have become a bit more refined since then.

Back then, I read and heard people say that the internal volume of the reed & staple is very important to enable an in-tune chanter. CHasR expresses this idea on this thread. Less often heard at the time was the idea that the shape of the internal volume, that is, the shape of the inside of the reed & staple, are critical. If anything, I have come to believe that the shape is more important than the internal volume. For example, if the "purpose of the staples' taper is to approximate the continuation of that cone" then why do some chanters work best with reverse taper staples?

There are too many variables in chanter and reed making for me to have many fixed ideas about theory. If a particular setup works well, fair play. Study it, copy it as need be. I still make chanters designed for tube staples. If I am asked to reed a chanter which requires a rolled staple, I'll give it a shot with a rolled staple.

I think rolling staples requires another step, and another level of commitment for the reed maker. Also, Pipewort's comment "There are two constraints that might inhibit a lot of folk. A) what dimension of mandrel should be used and; B) Getting a mandrel made" is not to be disregarded. If one orders a set from a member of the "rolling fraternity" will a mandrel be included?

Nick Whitmer

[mke_mick]

For what it's worth, here's one amateur's perspective. As others have explained quite well, it's self-evident that some chanters work best with staples made from cylindrical (pre-squashing) staples whereas others demand a conical staple. Conical-staple mandrels are definitely harder to make for yourself.

I enjoyed early, immediate success using Britton's method, with hobby-tube staples, to re-reed my Sky chanter. I've repeated the trick using different reedmaking methods (all using hobby tubing). But on my Seth Gallagher chanter, only a dimensionally accurate conical staple yields proper tuning across both octaves.

Regarding mandrels, I think Pat Sky's book says you can make a mandrel for conical staples by chucking a piece of drill rod of the appropriate diameter into an ordinary power drill, and grinding it at the correct angle against a vise-mounted file. But it's hard to get a straight taper that way, since the rod wants to bow quite a bit: my attempts have mostly ended up with bullet-shaped profiles. The staple-mandrels Seth makes appear to be made of especially hard steel, turned on a metalworking lathe.

Mandrels for forming hobby-tubing staples are beveled, not (uniformly) tapered per se, which can be done with a handheld file or a grinding wheel, relatively quickly. It's just a matter of knowing the correct dimensions relative to the chanter you're re-reeding. Even so, I just use the ones Tim Britton sold me.

So my advice is to stick with professionally-crafted mandrels. I haven't had any problem obtaining these so far!

Note: David Quinn's book "The Piper's Despair" has a wealth of information about reed, staple, and mandrel dimensions for a variety of chanter makers/styles.

Regards,
Mick

[Lorenzo]

But on my Seth Gallagher chanter, only a dimensionally accurate conical staple yields proper tuning across both octaves.

And on his website, Seth says that only conical staples will work for his chanters even though tubes will get you close. I think his chanters are a Rowesome copy.

http://www.uilleann.com/reeds.html

[rorybbellows]

Some people seem to be under the impression that tubing staples are going to make all chanters sound the same and is the first step to some kind of standardisation . I dont see that at all ,tubing staples just make reeding a chanter a little easier and thats it.

RORY

[Kevin L. Rietmann]

I used to make conical mandrels with an electric drill and a bit of thick leather held on the lap; a C clamp would hold down the on button on the drill so you wouldn't cut off the circulation you get in the thumb with 15 minutes of pressing. Worked OK but I look at the results now and it's all a bit janky, as they say.

Couple years ago I bought one of these used:



Making mandrels on a lathe couldn't be easier, make a conical piece to fit in the tailstock, drill out a bit of that the same diameter as the OD of a bit of drill rod, thicker than what you want the mandrels be, make the bit of rod stick out perhaps 1/2" or 1 cm; hollow that drill rod out of a bit in turn. Glue in place. You use this to receive the other end of the drill rod you make mandrels out of. When you're done you'll have a short slug at the end of the mandrel blank which you saw off. Works great, to say nothing of all the other applications a mini lathe has, I've made plugs for all the stocks for instance, for maintenance purposes.

My Jet cost me $300. I see simpler/cheaper models on CL off and on for even less. Very handy item.

[uillmann]

Should experimentation require it, one may choose to make a staple rolling mandrel that is longer than the staple, which allows for cutting the trapezoidal blanks slightly wider or narrower and rolling the cones a little larger or smaller as needed.

[Ted]

I have used a single tapered mandrel as you described to roll all tapered staples. If the larger end doesn't close on the mandrel, I insert a smaller cylindrical mandrel in the staple and close the seam over that. I bought a number of used dental tools with tapered handles of various tapers that I press into service as needed.

[Lorenzo]

A couple years ago David Daye posted a video on Youtube demonstrating how to roll copper staples...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z22ilJowH3E

[learnthegrip]

Surprised by the lack of response to Geoff Woof's offer to hold a reed making class. I didn't respond because I expect that if it were to happen it'd be too far away for me to travel.

Geoff, I doubt if you'd be able to do one in Portland, but if you were to give a class within affordable travel distance I'd be first in line! I wonder if it would be possible to teach reed making on Skype. You could charge the going rate for piping lessons. Obviously the very important tactile element would be missing but I imagine you'd be able to tell a lot by watching someone working on a reed.

Ken

[geoff wooff]

Surprised by the lack of response to Geoff Woof's offer to hold a reed making class. I didn't respond because I expect that if it were to happen it'd be too far away for me to travel.

Geoff, I doubt if you'd be able to do one in Portland, but if you were to give a class within affordable travel distance I'd be first in line! I wonder if it would be possible to teach reed making on Skype. You could charge the going rate for piping lessons. Obviously the very important tactile element would be missing but I imagine you'd be able to tell a lot by watching someone working on a reed.

Ken

I have discussed this idea with Gabriel McKeagney, thus of putting such an event on in Southern California.

You are correct Ken , that the hands on, being there, doing it and seeing it and hearing it, is, I think, very important.

I have had a response also from one of the London based pipers... that is a little closer to home for me! At the moment I am still guarding my health ( only 16 months since I had a Stroke) very carefully and I am disinclined to travel , especially Flying.

However, I envisage a specialised course, just concentrating on Scraping the reed head.. not dealing with all the other reedmaking issues... this will be enough and perhaps THE most important part of the job to impart to others on a one to one basis.

Thanks for your interest Ken and best regards,
Geoff.

[donpiper]

Here is a link to a video by ausdag showing him playing 2 chanters with a reed
he made on a tubing staple, one of which normally takes a rolled staple.
sounds pretty good to me if a bit sharp of A440 (about 30-40 cents by my estimation).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jr2vRViZ ... 2qcm3A5xbw

He says he used a longer staple to compensate for reduced diameter.

cheers,
Donpiper

[tompipes]

You can hear the difference alright. His own chanter sounds lovely and sweet. Sharp overall but in tune with itself.

The Jefferies Rowsome copy doesn't seem to like the hobby tube staple as much.
The second octave is relatively flatter than the first which is typical of Rowsome chanters and their close copies with a tube staple.

[ausdag]

Thanks for posting the video, Donpiper.
Thanks Tommy for your postive comments regarding my chanter.

Just to follow up. After having some responses through other avenues stating that the Jefferies chanter sounds sharp in the 2nd octave and others saying it sounds flat in the second octave, I have just tested both chanters again with my digital tuner which, short of posting another video for visual proof, I can truthfully say that perhaps the less than ideal tuning up of my drones to match the sharper second chanter clouded the results a bit. Digital tuner showed that:

a) my chanter is playing spot on A440 although given that I recorded on a day of 36 degrees C temps and 80+ humidity, it may have sharpened a tad.

b) the Jefferies chanter also shows a perfect octave between 1st and 2nd octave A and a slightly sharper 2nd octave B compared to 1st ocatve B. There is however some flatness in the 2nd octave G. Is that a result of tubing staple that a rolled staple would fix? Is it not the case that in the course of normal conversation it is recognised that Rowsome-style chanters by their nature tend to play flat in the second octave G, rolled staple or not? Apart form that, second octave C# and 3rd octave D are well in tune.

Cheers,
DavidG

[Lorenzo]

Nice playing David! And good looking work on your reed and chanter. I agree the Jeffries does seem a little flatter in the upper octave, the A anyway. I would be interested in holding the upper E, F#, and G against in-tune drones on both chanters, not so much notes above the high B. Some of the variables would be things like 1)the ease with which you can jump to in-tune upper notes against the drones with med-to-light bag pressure, 2)how in-tune some of the upper harmonics are, 3)what fingering is required for certain in-tune lower octave notes like Cnat, 4)comparing a rolled staple to a tube staple in the same stick on other Rowsome type chanters. 4) comparing rolled and tube staples on chanters that don't require rolled staples, 5)what type of cane is used (Cal, Medir, AU, etc.), 6)what happens when key holes are drilled in a chanter (which probably doesn't matter). I'm just thinking there must be critical reasons why reed makers have preferred rolled staples in certain chanters...and how they arrived at their conclusions. I suppose nothing is conclusive in these kind of experiments since reed makers often use the term, "rolled staples for those chanters that need one." You may have two chanters that don't need a rolled staple...and BTW, Rowsome chanters did vary quite a bit...even the copies from one to the other. Also, it would be interesting to campare staples in flat sets.

[ausdag]

Thanks Lorenzo for your comments on the reed and my chanter. You're correct, nothing is conclusive, and nor do we have enough hours in a day to really get down to the nitty-gritty comparisons. Indeed there are an awful lot of variables and as you say, perhaps I have a Rowsome-style chanter that does like tubing more than others. If I have the time I might do a more visual comparison with the tuner to show the variances in tuning over the octaves, particularly the lower hand notes. But that will have to wait now; I have unfinished reamers waiting to be honed.

edited to add:

I guess the other issue to take into account here is that I am taking a reed that is tailored to my own chanter and trying to play it in a chanter with quite different specs. Now it remains to make a tubing reed specifically tailored to the Jefferies chanter where a few adjustments to the taper and ID could well iron out the tuning issues.