Brazenkaine wrote:Did something happen to this guy that made him feel like he couldn't play it? did he loose his job? did his wife dump him? Did he decide a '57 Les Paul Gold Top would suit him better (he'd need more than a Woofe set would drum up for something like that).
Anyone who goes into the uilleann pipemaking business for the money is either a top-class chancer, or delusional.
Since I don't do it for the money, the thought of sets going to the highest bidder - or being resold thusly - is deeply unsatisfying. They are not a commodity item, so I think the usual economic balance of forces doesn't quite apply.
Given the marginal economy of the whole endeavour, it seems unlikely that they will become a commodity item anytime soon. A few makers (notably including Hevia in Spain) have tried a more "production line" approach, but it's not clear to me that they are finding a strong market for the resulting product.
I reckon pipes are a 19th century artisanal kind of product, so perhaps it makes more sense to view them in a similar light, commercially. I think of them as commissions. In that light, while I like the idea of being an equal opportunity maker, it does not seem so unreasonable to exercise some selectivity in who one takes commissions from. So far I have not felt the need to be so exclusive, but I don't begrudge those who have. This is, I suppose, rather the opposite of the model where one makes a set without a specific customer, then solicits bids. Unfortunately the correlation between those best equipped to pay and those best equipped to play is poor.
The notion of occasionally making a set for auction is an interesting one, and more attractive than an auction-only model.
I'm not fond of the auction concept. I enjoy a bargain and haggling just as much as the next guy...but when it comes to someone's handiwork...well....negotiation is just plain nasty. Who am I* to judge what another artisan's time and skill is worth? If I don't want to pay, or can't afford to pay...then I won't. But I sure as heck would never consider debasing their art by telling them it's not worth what they want for it. Again, just plain rude.
I'm with Bill on this one, this is NOT a get rich quick (or slow) business.
My idea for a different business model addresses MY preferences and aesthetics. I'm going to make the pipes that INSPIRE me. I've found that I cannot BEAR the burden of dozens of people trying desperately to be patient for their instrument. Ignoring the fact that I'm terribly behind on my orders due to factors out of my control as well as my own failures, I simply cannot bear the DEADLINE / OR ELSE feeling. I'd have to say that 98% of my customers have been wonderful and have been incredibly patient with me. It seems the better I get the longer things seem to take...flaws that I would never have noticed 5 years ago seem to shout at me! I personally feel every day and delay and these feelings directly conflict with the overwhelming desire to make the absolute best instrument for someone...no..not just someone, for the customer that has been so kind and patient.
I have to admit to being so very human and full of faults...I've had a few customers who have cancelled their orders in a very unappealing way...insulting myself and my wife and harassing my kids. These people won't ever receive anything from me. They've very effectively cancelled any relationship. On the contrary, the other 98% of my customers will be getting far more than they bargained for (in a good way...heh!) I take great joy in providing unlooked for gifts.... It may sound petty and unprofessional, but it IS human.
A pipemaker putting newly made pipes up for auction is not a new idea ,Geoff Wooff has done it with his "anniversary set " and I ,m sure he done well out of it !!
I think the whole idea of making pipes for only good pipers is a mistake,as Geoff himself admits of the 200 or so full sets he has made only a tiny percentage of them are actually being played. where as with Forment who will make pipes for anyone who is willing to pay for them, has a far larger percentage of his pipes being played .who,s to say that the piper that is turned down will not become a great piper !!
1. When I first began piping, TIM BRITTON, went out of his way..despite his HUGE backlog of orders, to help out a poor beginner and really set me up for success. It was an ugly stick of a chanter with no mounts..it was..as I recall us discussing it...a "kickaround chanter"...but it sounded GREAT and got me playing. Thanks Tim..you're OK for a bloke from Philly
2. I've had a couple of "famous players" approach me ...hinting at preferrential treatment...I was tempted - boy was I tempted, but my hands were in such a state I just couldn't* ...then again..if Liam were to approach me today, I'm not sure I could stay professional about the whole shebang.
This is a very PERSONAL instrument. I've stressed time and time again the importance of the relationship between the maker and the player...and I still do.
rorybbellows wrote:A pipemaker putting newly made pipes up for auction is not a new idea ,Geoff Wooff has done it with his "anniversary set " and I ,m sure he done well out of it !!
I think the whole idea of making pipes for only good pipers is a mistake,as Geoff himself admits of the 200 or so full sets he has made only a tiny percentage of them are actually being played. where as with Forment who will make pipes for anyone who is willing to pay for them, has a far larger percentage of his pipes being played .who,s to say that the piper that is turned down will not become a great piper !!
RORY
Well, in the end things didn't happen quite that way with the "anniversary set". In any case that was a one-off.
As for a larger percentage of Froment sets being played, I doubt there is hard evidence for this. Alain has made a *lot* of chanters. The point is, nobody wants to make instruments for someone who will not play and appreciate them, regardless of their skill level. It is of course gratifying to hear an instrument in the hands of a virtuoso, but it is also gratifying to see someone really appreciating having a nice instrument when they are learning.
I think it's perfectly fine and understandable pipemakers slip in people on the waiting list , especially in the case of young players who can't afford the wait.
I am teaching a sixteen year old girl at the moment who got a Wooff C practice set two years ago. I taught her elder sister, now a lovely piper, for years and she got hooked on Mick O Brien's music, being already a superb whistleplayer, a lovely step dancer, a great harper and fine piano accompanist (these youngones can be disgusting if they start young). Playing nearly two years now she's absolutely brilliant gorgeous relaxed player. I play a tune, any tune, through twice and she quietly analyses it, third time around she plays along, I only need to teach a few finer points. Can anyone object to young people like that getting preferential treatment, at that age you can't keep them waiting and they are the future of piping. And that is not even to mention the satisfaction of seeing your work being done justice.
Peter Laban wrote:Can anyone object to young people like that getting preferential treatment, at that age you can't keep them waiting and they are the future of piping.
A very good point, not that I need one to agree with... preferential positions on 'the list' are solely the business of the pipemaker and the client.
In the long run, any production model a pipemaker chooses should be based on their need for sanity, time to make the pipes the best they can and the freedom required to go about their vocation... among other reasons. It is up to the customer to decide which set of pipes they want, and then agree to whatever stipulations or terms the pipemaker presents.
I agree with this wholeheartedly. The contract between the maker and the buyer is completely between them and these are good examples of a maker's freedom in the transaction. If the maker chooses to help out anyone (young or old*), then God bless 'em! It is completely their prerogative to do so (and other customers have no right to complain or get "pissed off").
Recall that this post was originally about a client's prerogative to sell (or do something else) with the instrument after he or she has purchased it.
The example of mutilating the instrument is moot, because the question is not whether the buyer has a right to do this, but whether he or she has a right to have the maker repair it under these circumstances. I think that anyone in their right mind can answer this question without much trouble.
It appears that my proposition that the maker has much freedom in the transaction, while the customer has little, is borne out. Within the context of the original posting, I still contend that this discrepancy taken to the extreme of the former objecting to the latter re-selling the item purchased is unethical, especially in the light of the "rights" the seller has throughout this relationship.
* All this talk about young people seems overwrought with sentimental connotations that appeal to the emotions. It would be nice if arguments in this debate avoid this self-congratulatory rhetoric and stick more to philosophical rigor in answering the original question. (Although we all applaud your efforts to assist and educate these dedicated young people!)
As Peter reminded me back on page one, the original post also involved the maker selling their pipes to the highest bidder once they were finished making the instrument. I think that would do more harm to the instrument, its players and ultimately their survival.
The idea of selling a set on to the highest bidder only works because supply for sets of such quality and in such a price-bracket is sorely lacking. Further more, I would guess that such an auction market would be self-defeating in the long run, as there is only a limited number of people willing to pay $15K for a set of pipes, so that the next batch, even of the same value, might only go for $10K, the next for $7K, etc. There is a limited number of people seeking sets, and only a few of them can afford the prices pipemakers charge, let alone double that amount.
Instead of weeping over one person making a one-off profit on a resale as if all resales would fetch such a price, I think we would get far more participation if we went back to bitching about pipemakers'regular prices.
djm
I'd rather be atop the foothills than beneath them.
All this talk about young people seems overwrought with sentimental connotations that appeal to the emotions. It would be nice if arguments in this debate avoid this self-congratulatory rhetoric and stick more to philosophical rigor in answering the original question. (Although we all applaud your efforts to assist and educate these dedicated young people!)
I don't think this is overwrought at all. A situation has occurred where middle aged people with plenty to spend but without much of an outlook of ever becoming really serious players jumped into the market throwing big wads of cash at makers and clogging up waiting lists. This drove up prices and waiting times making it very hard for people in Ireland to acquire pipes for budding players and also making it hard to afford buying a decent instrument for all family members. The same thing happened for (parents of) concertina players. I know families with several children playing having a hard time affording decent concertinas and pipes for the family. Another angle is ofcourse that these young players are the future of this music, whether you like it or not, a middle aged guy from California or where ever who is going to play as a hobby is never going to be much part of the living tradition while these young, local children are the music's lifeblood, they'll be the future custodians who are in the process of taking their place in the whole process. Now if you want to stick to philosophical rigour, factor that in.
Please explain to me what this has to do with a customer's right to sell an instrument after they've purchased it in full?
Maybe you need to set down some of those wunderkinder and loosen up that flag you've wrapped yourself in. I think you're cutting off the flow of blood to your head a bit...
I have been making uilleann pipes for 20+ years. During that time I have sold sets to people who were not good or promising players. Some were clueless, in fact, and from the get-go the likelihood of the instrument being well-used was very small. This troubled me, and still does to some extent. But I console myself by thinking that it is likely that the instrument will outlast the first owner - should last for generations, in fact - and might someday fall into the hands of someone with the inclination & talent to put it to good use.
So on one level I am making a set of pipes for a specific customer. On another level I am trying to make a set that will last a very long time. When I think of pipe design I ask: is it robust? Easy to reed? Does it have clarity? Is it repeatable?
And like Reedbiter, I would like to give my regards to Tim Britton, who was very kind & generous to me when I was beginning to make pipes. I probably would have given up in frustration without his assistance.
