Humphrey Narrow Bore D Whistle Review

PhilO · Post by **PhilO** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 9:07 pm

The narrow bore comes with a guarentee that we'll sound just as good as Peter's clip, right?

Seriously though, I too would be interested in a few words of comparison between narrow and wide bore. Thanks.

Philo

jonharl · Post by **jonharl** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 9:48 pm

Even though I've recently sold a RetroFit head I'm getting a narrow bore next week. I like the idea that the mouthpiece is made from acetal and the whistle is light like a Generation. No doubt Gary patterned his design after John Sindt. Sindt set out to make a good Gen-like whistle. Maybe Gary's design is closer. The reviews have sure been encouraging.

blackhawk · Post by **blackhawk** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 9:54 pm

PhilO wrote:The narrow bore comes with a guarentee that we'll sound just as good as Peter's clip, right?
Philo

Like O'Keefe said, "Fingers not included." I wish they were.

raindog1970 · Post by **raindog1970** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 10:00 pm

TonyHiggins wrote:Gary, would you mind explaining the differences in sound, etc between your narrow and wide bore whistles?
Tony

The term I hear most often used in describing to wide bore whistles is 'mellow'.
I'm not sure that's the proper word, but I can't think of a better one!

The tone is different, but not strikingly so... the wider bore has a different resonance, but we're only talking about 1/16" larger diameter than the narrow bore.
Since window dimensions are based on the inside diameter of the tube, the window is slightly larger on the wide bore... which accounts for the slightly louder volume.
The windway is also very slightly wider, so the air requirements are a bit more... though I increase the windway length proportionately to the increase in width, which helps keeps the back pressure about the same.
One significant difference is in the feel of the whistle... a larger diameter may be better suited to someone with larger hands.
The finger holes are also very slightly larger, so half-holing is a bit easier on a wide bore whistle.
Narrow bores are more responsive, though the trade-off is that they are also more sensitive... which many people consider to be a plus.
Wide bores can be played more assertively, and actually must be played a bit more assertively in the upper register.
Narrow bores tend to have a sweeter upper register and a weaker bottom end, while wide bores tend to have a more solid bottom end and a harder to reach upper register... though if the proper length/bore ratio is maintained, neither version will be troublesome.
Hopefully I've done a fair job of explaining the differences between wide and narrow bores, and I'll gladly try and elaborate further if necessary... but for now I've run out of things to write!

TonyHiggins · Post by **TonyHiggins** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 11:43 pm

Sounds like the relative differences between Burke wide and narrow bore whistles. Makes sense.

Blackhawk, are you going to be in the area any time soon??? Like, before you go to Ireland? Can I try your whistle?

Tony

BoneQuint · Post by **BoneQuint** » Sat Jul 24, 2004 2:53 am

TonyHiggins wrote:Blackhawk, are you going to be in the area any time soon??? Like, before you go to Ireland? Can I try your whistle?
Tony

Mini-gathering! Pub? I was thinking of going to the O'Flaherty's session this Sunday in San Jose. I have a new Burke narrow-bore aluminum black-tip whistle you can check out. With C-natural thumb hole (fun experiment).

As long as I'm here, anyone going to Lark Camp? I am.

blackhawk · Post by **blackhawk** » Sat Jul 24, 2004 5:46 am

TonyHiggins wrote:Sounds like the relative differences between Burke wide and narrow bore whistles. Makes sense.

Blackhawk, are you going to be in the area any time soon??? Like, before you go to Ireland? Can I try your whistle?
Tony

You're welcome to come down during the week (I'm still working weekends) and try my whistle, Tony. Just don't get sticky fingers!

Azalin · Post by **Azalin** » Sat Jul 24, 2004 7:19 am

BoneQuint wrote:
Azalin wrote:About thanking Bloomy for something I didnt understand, well, I thanked him for taking the time to explain.
Just to be clear: your question about concertinas in no way indicated a lack of understanding.

By the way, thanks for the information about concertinas. I really don't know what I understand and what I don't understand at this point, there's just too much for my brain to process in one shot.

PS: It's safer to say I don't understand, to avoid tagalarasiga jumping the roof.

Cayden · Post by **Cayden** » Sat Jul 24, 2004 9:06 am

Following the off topic discussion for an instant, at:

http://www.concertina.net/forums/index. ... wtopic=477

a discussion on the tuning of an old Wheatstone concertina, one of the tunings mentioned:

1/4 comma meantone, given A as a zero point:

D# -20.5
G# -17
C# -13.7
F# -10.3
B -6.9
E -3.4
A 0
D +3.4
G +6.9
C + 10.3
F + 13.7
Bb +17
Eb +20.5

talasiga · Post by **talasiga** » Sat Jul 24, 2004 10:41 pm

Bloomfield wrote: ...........................
(a) A thanks B ... ergo A's redundant question; or
(b) A doesn't understand B ... ergo A's redundant question.
Which did you say?
......................

Well this is what I said:-

talasiga wrote: You are thanking him for an explanation
you didn't seem to understand.
Ergo your redundant question.

Although it contains a syntactical error
it does not mean I do not know the meaning of ergo.
I wrote it in haste.
So as not to encourage any more wanking pedanticism
I have rejigged the statement:

VERSION 1:-
Although you are thanking him for the explanation,
you didn't seem to understand it.
Ergo your redundant question.

VERSION 2:-
You do not appear to have understood Bloomfield's
explanation,
although you thanked him for it.
Ergo your redundant question.

VERSION 3:-
I have often noticed
you and he in each other's pocket.
Here is another chance to gang up again!

Azalin · Post by **Azalin** » Fri Aug 27, 2004 10:00 pm

Well, I got my Humphrey narrow bore "D" whistle today, and gave it a try, played for like an hour in the park and maybe an extra half an hour at home. I'm really impressed with the whistle cuz it seems to be playing the way I would like a whistle to be playing, which means not too loud but not too quiet, doesnt go crazy in the second octave and doesn't require much air. The whistle is very responsive, and seems to react differently to breath pressure or hole covering as I'm making it awfully squeek from time to time, but I'll adapt.

My favorite whistle is (used to be?) the tweaked O'Briain but it's so quiet that I'm playing it mostly at home or in quiet sessions, but as soon as there's a little noise I'm using my Burke narrow bore, which is okay but is sometimes too loud for a quiet-to-a-little-noisy session. I think the Humphrey whistle is a whistle I'll be using much more in sessions, instead of switching between my O'Briain and Burke all the time. Anyway!

The only thing that I might have to struggle with is the fact that you need to push the high G, A and B a bit to keep them in tune, or else they're going to flat. Well, this when you tune the first octave to be tuned at average breath pressure. Also, the CNat seems to be going sharp with the 2 fingers cross fingered, much more in tune with the 4 fingers cross fingered position, but I don't do that (only StevieJ does, hehe!). But I will try to adapt my breath pressure, won't be that hard.

I'll have a better idea in a few days, but I agree with most of what people said about the whistle, it's a mightly piece of brass!

glauber · Post by **glauber** » Sat Aug 28, 2004 6:03 am

I still love my Humphrey whistle (mine is widebore). It has now repolaced the O'Briain as my favourite. (Oh the humanity!) I went on a day trip and took only the O'Briain and that was OK, it's a fine whistle, but when i came back hme to the Humphrey... oh so nice!

Bloomfield · Post by **Bloomfield** » Wed Sep 29, 2004 10:19 am

Benefitting from the recent blues-harp revival that is sweeping across the West Coast, I've just gotten a Humphrey narrow-bore D in just temprament.

I had a chance to try one a few weeks ago (and let me assure all of those who've listened to Peter's clip, it's not the whistle

) so I knew what I was getting. I am delighted. The sound and the just intonation are very sweet and it has that gentle yet emotionally touching quality that the great Generations have. The sound is a bit more focused than what you'd find in good Generations and does not have the edge that Oaks and Feadogs have. It is rounder. Compared to the Sindt, the sound is richer. Sindts tend to have a cooler perhaps even harsher sound in the second octave (and I don't mean screechy). The Humphrey's doesn't, its sound is very warm and pleasing across the board.

In terms of how it plays---and this is preliminary, I've had it for less than 24 hrs---it does take some breath control, and Peter has it right in calling it a "whistle-player's whistle." You want to be able to alter your breath pressure to back off here and there and push a bit harder in other places. Transitions take more care than they do on the thick-bored highenders. That makes the Humphrey a subtle whistle and a joy to play because you can work with it, bringing out some feeling I think. Since I've been drawn to the Generations and Feadogs more and more in the past two years, this suits me and it is a great pleasure to play the Humphrey and to feel it come alive.