What is a Rowsome Style Chanter

[rorybbellows]

Telecasters sound nice but just because they can sound louder than a classical guitar doesn't mean they are better.

Its not about volume its about charater with attitude ,lets face it,NBD are the eunuch's of the piping world.

RORY

[maki]

Rowsomewhat

Bensdad for the win!

[pancelticpiper]

Yes Rory that's a positive view of the process.

This reedmaker guy was encountering neo-chanters which didn't work nearly as well as the originals.

Of course modern pipemaking has advanced leaps and bounds since the 1970s.

Thing is, when I started playing nearly every piper I was listening to was playing an old Rowsome original. So, right or wrong, the sound of these Rowsomes became for me "what a chanter should sound like". The idea of a new maker "improving" a Rowsome seemed as ridiculous to me as somebody painting over portions of a Van Gogh to improve it.

Michael Hubbert decided to go a different route, a non-Rowsome route, and his chanters sound amazing.

[rorybbellows]

Of course modern pipemaking has advanced leaps and bounds since the 1970s. .

Hopefully it will continue ,the last thirty years or so really have been a golden period for all things Uilleann piping.

RORY

[Kevin L. Rietmann]

Flutemakers went through a process of slavishly reproducing old instruments, many of which had funky tuning, to put it mildly. As I understand it few do that any more. Partly this was because the originals were built with different ideas for fingering in mind, akin to how to how Leo's pipes were meant to play sharp of A=440.

My idea of a good concert pitch set with volume would be basically a louder Coyne, beautiful to see and hear, which I think has been done about twice? I like Leo's pipes partly out of sentimental value, frankly, they aren't the greatest thing imaginable for tone, and some of the construction could be really crude.

[JR]

It seems like standard practice to 'rush' a Rowsome chanter too.

I asked Leo's daughter Helena about it last year and she was strongly under the impression that rushing was intentional and part of the process for Leo. I had previously believed it was to do with bringing the pitch down to modern A=440.

Any thoughts on this?

[Kevin L. Rietmann]

Leo had rushes in his own chanter. He seems to often have been sharp of 440 anyway. As for his customers' instruments you'd have to ask them, never heard if their chanters came with stuff in the bore. Martin Kerrigan sounds like someone who'd know about that - he's said to be an expert in getting Leo's sticks working.

Taylor chanters are also said to work best with rushes. Who knows. This all sounds a bit like received wisdom. I know some Taylors or copies that have popped up over the years have had rushes in the bore - and often have reeds with reverse taper staples, so it probably isn't all hogwash in that case.

When I got started with pipes I was told Leo's early work was more desired - it was based more on his fathers' designs, which were basically copied from the Taylor Willie used to get started with building louder CP stuff. Laters Leo sets were more experimental in nature, thus tended to be hit or miss.

[Murk]

If it's any help I've got a Rowsome chanter on order from Joe Kennedy, and he was quite clear that it comes with a rush for tuning purposes as well. I'm excited to see and hear what it can do in person! When I spoke with Joe over the phone he seemed very enthusiastic about the design.

[Ceann Cromtha]

If it's any help I've got a Rowsome chanter on order from Joe Kennedy, and he was quite clear that it comes with a rush for tuning purposes as well. I'm excited to see and hear what it can do in person! When I spoke with Joe over the phone he seemed very enthusiastic about the design.

What does this maker's rush look like? Is it a wire or a guitar string bent at the bell end or is it something more unique?

[flutefry]

Just got a concert chanter from Joe yesterday- the rush is copper wires twisted together, kept in place by a U-shaped bend at the bottom to hold it in place by friction. Great tuning and response right out of the box, and that before adapting to its new humidity and temperature.

Hugh

[Murk]

Just got a concert chanter from Joe yesterday- the rush is copper wires twisted together, kept in place by a U-shaped bend at the bottom to hold it in place by friction. Great tuning and response right out of the box, and that before adapting to its new humidity and temperature.

Hugh

Awesome! How would you describe the tone? Any pipers or videos you can point to that do it justice?

I'm very excited for mine!

[Ceann Cromtha]

Just got a concert chanter from Joe yesterday- the rush is copper wires twisted together, kept in place by a U-shaped bend at the bottom to hold it in place by friction. Great tuning and response right out of the box, and that before adapting to its new humidity and temperature.

Hugh

Thanks, Hugh. Is the idea to wrap a little more wire under notes that need to be flattened, or to do so my reducing the length of the wire bundle by looping it differently?

[flutefry]

I will get more details tonight-my schedule has prevented me from playing it for more than a few minutes. I haven't taken the rush out to see what issues the rush is fixing, and thus how the rush is set up to solve them. I'll report back. Happy to make a sound file and send it to anyone who sends me their email.

Hugh

[misterpatrick]

Anyone care to comment on Froment's take on the Rowsome style chanter. He was mentioned in the original post and I haven't read about the evolution of his chanter designs.

[pudinka]

I'm just curious, since the subject is up...if a quality maker - goes out of his/her way to make an "exact" copy of a particular chanter - seeing it as worthy of the effort because it is arguably "the best" know example but then has to insert rush(es) up the bore to make it work (assuming the reed is suited and equally good) properly/perfectly...why bother with making an "exact" copy?

If the rush becomes as important as the perturbations of the bore (among other factors) wouldn't a perfect copy of a perfectly balanced rush be required to recreate the same perfect chanter? In reality, if all rushes are different - a loop here, a section of guitar string with a bit of wax there, a matchstick in the bell, black tape to shade a hole, etc., wouldn't this allow for a bit of abstraction in the copy since our stool apparently has to have at least three legs to stand? Why bother to make the bed in the morning if you're going to mess it up again in the evening?

Are there any quality makers out there who work by purposefully not trying to copy the best chanter?

Does anyone know if other "classical" woodwinds require similar devices for fine tuning as UP's seem to require?