Blowing machine

[Tunborough]

I was taken aback by the "Comparison : Kerry Optima / Nightingale" discussion that some cylindrical whistles can be sharper in the second octave than the first. I wasn't aware that was possible. I know, I should get out more. If most tend flatter but some are sharper, it would suggest we could make some that are spot on. Any thoughts on what's going on here? viewtopic.php?f=1&t=114359

You can change the tuning balance between the octaves by narrowing the bore at the bottom of the whistle - a tapered body - or by narrowing the bore at the top of the whistle, at the head end. You may recall our experiment with the orange conduit flute with the cylindrical insert. Around the same time, Hans used the same technique to bring an unruly Killarney in line, viewtopic.php?p=1214527#p1214527

From the photos, the Kerry Optima has a head joint that is dramatically narrower than the main bore. That may be enough to over-sharpen the second octave, at least for some players.

I wouldn't give up on the cylindrical bore just yet. Cylinders are much easier to come by, certainly than Goldilocks tapers.

In addition to the head taper, I know that larger holes lead to a (relatively) sharper second octave. I can't say what other factors come into it.

[Moof]

I don't have anything to measure them with, but visually, some of the tone holes on the whistles that tend sharp in the upper octave look a bit smaller than on the ones that tend flat.

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/pnsp8dwo ... tmdl8&dl=0

It doesn't necessarily mean this is what's behind the difference, of course, there could be more than one factor involved.

[Tunborough]

That is informative. Definitely a strike against my hole-size hypothesis. I'd appreciate the corresponding comparison photo of the head ends. It wouldn't tell us what's inside, but it might give some clues. It could also show relative window sizes, which may also come into it. I know that a very small window, smaller than you'd want on a regular whistle, leads to a sharper second octave; I don't know when (size-wise) that effect comes into play.

[Moof]

Here you go. Two photos in one, which I've tried to make a bit lighter so you can see the detail on the black head.

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/a4xsdait ... v4ih3&dl=0

[Tunborough]

Well, at least we can say that window size isn't a big factor, since the Howard (flat) looks to have the smallest window; the MK Pro (sharp) may not have the largest window but it looks to have the longest.

If the silver insert visible below the MK Pro window extends some distance down the tube, it could definitely explain the sharper second octave on that whistle. The Goldie narrows a bit at the head, but only a little, and not very far down the tube. I can't tell what's happening inside the Goldfinch or Howard heads. It is possible that the head end of the Goldfinch is narrower than the main bore for a significant distance down the tube, while the Howard maintains the full bore a least some distance into the head.

[Moof]

On the MK, the silver inner sleeve goes all the way round the bore, but doesn't extend very far below the window. I can't measure it, but I'm pretty sure it extends downwards for less than a centimetre. It'd be surprising if it didn't affect the pitch, since everything seems to according to what I understand of this thread (not much!), but the main purpose of it seems to be to create the labium. The edge of it is precisely angled and very fine, almost like a knife blade.

The entire inner bore of the Goldfinch is the width of the narrower section just under the window, so in that sense it's more like the Howard. Presumably it has to be made with different thicknesses of plastic to create the sleeves where one section slides inside the other.

All the whistles are slightly different lengths, but in terms of hole positioning and length, the MK and the Goldfinch (the two sharp ones) are most alike. Quite a lot of difference between the Howard and the Goldie.

So I'd say we're ... exactly no wiser! Still, at least it keeps Terry pondering.

[Terry McGee]

Hurrumph, Madam. Cheeky wench!

I do reckon that, if there's any truth in the stuff you see in the press about challenging the brain slowing the onset of Dementia, those of us who confront the complexities of whistle and flute acoustics on a daily basis have very little to worry about. Assuming we don't simply wear out our brains trying!

I do wonder if just learning new tunes is enough to keep the brain from atrophying. I've just got on top of the opening march and the closing jig from the fascinating "Sheemore Ambush" suite. All done by listening (no dots), and involving unpicking many unfamiliar progressions of notes. It's great to think that people are still coming up with such terrific pieces, and that at age 75 they are still accessible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFirEMDQlYE The march starts at about 3 mins, the jig just before 9 mins.

[Nanohedron]

I do wonder if just learning new tunes is enough to keep the brain from atrophying.

I've always said as much. Strictly on the basis of wishful thinking, but that's good enough for me.

Great tunes!

[Moof]

Wishful thinking for me too, but I'll take it if it keeps even some of my marbles rattling.

Thanks for the link to the Padraig McGovern film, I hadn't seen it. He's a player and a half, isn't he! The music's fabulous too.

[Terry McGee]

Yeah, great tune-writing, great playing, but also stunning sounding pipes. (And well recorded!)

It was always the case in my early days in the music that we'd be making excuses for the pipes - playing, sound or both. That all started to change around the time of Liam Óg O'Flynn, but I'd argue that Pádraig McGovern has taken it further. Indeed, when I thought it would be worth trying to pick up the jig tune on the whistle, I grabbed a handful of whistles of various pitches, hoping I just might have the right one. The sonority of the pipes had me assuming it was a flat set, but turned out to be modern pitch (a D set). Modern pitch was derided and avoided in my early days as "far too strident". Clearly, there's been some impressive development!

Which brings us back to our current situation with the whistle. We're still making excuses aren't we. A bit weak at the bottom. Rather shrill at the top. Tuning a little dodgy. Not bad until it clogs. <insert favourite excuse here>

I found the Sheemore Ambush a bit of a musical inspiration. I tend normally to spend too much time making, not enough time playing, so it's been good having something tugging me in the other direction. But maybe also something of a technical inspiration. If they can pull all the disparate parts of such a complex instrument as the pipes into one high-performing whole, surely we can further our understanding and mastery over the "simple whistle"!

Back to the "Ambush" for a moment. The tune starting at 7:54 might sound familiar. It's a nod to Percy French's "Eileen Óg", a.k.a. "The Pride of Petravore", which gets a mention in the account of the ambush. But the sneak has popped it up into Gminor. Just to tip us whistle players off his scent....

[RoberTunes]

Just a comment about first/second octave tuning as related to window, tube and tone hole design;
as a musician, I'd far prefer a whistle that demands more air in the second octave, as long as some things remain reliable:

1) tuning between octaves. While playing, I don't want to have to fight noticeable intonation drift or be so forced into excessive high/low air flow
demands that playing the whistle becomes very limited in possibilities. I MUST be able to remain fluidly focused on the music
and not the quirky limitations of the instrument. I gladly adjust to instruments to discover what each design can do, I refuse to be hamstrung by them.
2) note and tone quality remain consistent and don't go too quiet in the low octave or get raspy in the high second/third octave.
Fortunately good/excellent quality whistle makers have nailed this. No-one expects a fourth octave, but the full second
octave and some notes in the third should sound pretty much as the same instrument making the first two octaves, and not a toy,
a lost cause or a frustrating compromise that makes some notes just an embarrassing and expensive non-starter.
3) Volume: I'm not really concerned about volume, but a range of volume would seem important. Point being, that for practice,
performance and recording, the support of microphones makes volume far less important than overall full-range
performance, reliability and versatility. I've never been too concerned about the Session Vs Narrow-Bore difference, except
that in some cases the Session-design whistles have more expressive range. By contrast, sometimes reviewers comment
that the Narrow-bore whistles by the same maker as a Session whistle in the same key, play a little more easily or reliably through the
full range of notes, which for a musician at any level, is an important consideration. But the Session option, the louder whistles,
with extended expressive range, can be a critical factor, depending on what the musicians wants. Whistle makers who put in the time to
explore design options, produce whistles that work very well in both Session and Narrow-bore options. Easy enough to find.

So give me a whistle that's reliably musical, that works like a pro in 2.5 octaves and I don't care how demanding it is.
From there, I can focus on my own preferences for tone, expressive dynamics, price, key, etc.
Apologies for mentioning microphones, because from many threads on The Session discussions website, I know that mics used
in pub sessions can be a source of problems instead of solutions. Dang.

[Terry McGee]

Woah! I'm reminded of the old definition of a Gentleman - a chap who can play 2.5 octaves on a treble D whistle, but chooses not to!

I just played up to third octave G on a selection of whistles, and I can do it, but I get really dirty looks from the cat. I'd be happy enough with good musicality up to 2nd octave B, and being able to hit up to third octave D in the very few tunes I play that go beyond that.

But good points there, RoberTunes. We certainly don't want to be in the business of humoring crook notes. That might be feasible on baroque flute in the Adagio movement, but not in Irish music at dance speed!

I'd be interested to hear which treble D whistles you feel fit your criteria. Particularly the more robust "session" style.

[Terry McGee]

Now, I'm puzzled. I've always assumed that the cylindrical brass tube whistles we are all familiar with are based on readily available thin-walled tubing, eg as sold in hobby outlets. K&S seem to be one of the major brand names. But when I look at my old Bb Generation, I find it appears to be based on 39/64" OD tubing (OD 15.5mm, ID 14.8mm), which doesn't appear to be readily available. Did Generation have their own tubing drawn? Are there other whistles with the same tubing?

[Moof]

I assumed they would have it drawn, as the optimal whistle bore might not be optimal for much else, but I can't claim to know!

Anyway, I stumbled across this the other day:

https://tinyurl.com/bdew69aw

I haven't seen one with a mouthpiece quite like that before. The body does appear to have a slightly conical bore, but I don't know what the 3 stamped on it means. It looks as if the damaged joint might leak a lot of air, so it's an interesting but probably not functional whistle.

[Nanohedron]

Anyway, I stumbled across this the other day:

https://tinyurl.com/bdew69aw

I haven't seen one with a mouthpiece quite like that before.

Looks like a flageolet, but it's the first metallic one I've seen.