Email from Mike Burke, concerning lowD dimensions.

amar · Post by **amar** » Tue Oct 29, 2002 2:37 pm

Hi gang, here are the dimensions of his lowDs, EZ and Pro:

Top hand is almost the same:
EZ L1-L2-L3- 1.43in
Pro L1-L2-L3- 1.45 in
Bottom hand:
L4-L5- almost same about 1.15 inches
EZ L5-L6 - 1.7 inches
Pro- L5-L6- 1.80 inches
These are center to center spacings.

Cheers, Amar

Loren · Post by **Loren** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 4:27 am

Center to center spacing numbers are virtually useless to us as players - they do not tell the total stretch needed to cover the holes, nor do center to center numbers (without the accompanying holes sizes) tell us how difficult covering the holes will be.

Center to center distances are what the makers use to mark and drill holes, not what players should use to evaluate how difficult it may be to play an instruement - For that one needs either the center to center, plus the size of each hole (and then you do the math, pita), or you need the measuments of the distance between the top edge of hole 1 and the bottom edge of hole 3, and likewise for holes 4 and 6 - this gives you the total distance your fingers will actually have to stretch in order to cover all the holes.

It also helps to know the hole sizes so you can determine how difficult it may be to seal the holes (espcially if you have narrow fingers), but it's preferable to have the hole sizes with the edge to edge measurements, rather than with center to center measurments, because it save the trouble of doing a little math.

But again, center to center alone gives us little useful information, and I can't understand why whistle makers keep throwing those numbers out, although it would explain why certain makers have doggedly argued with me that their finger spacing is no longer than anyone else's, when measurments with the calipers clearly show that one has to stretch more to cover the holes of these instruments......

Loren

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Loren on 2002-10-30 05:36 ]</font>

Zubivka · Post by **Zubivka** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 7:52 am

Good point!
May I add that center to center can only be theoretical calculation, not practical measurement.
It's blueprint would-be, not life.
Like, you drill center to center on the bare tube, according to calculation, OK ; then, I (educatedly?) guess you enlarge the holes not concentrically, but this one a bit more up, this a bit more down, etc. And it's called hand-tuning. If you don't do it, you're better off stamping off the bloody holes wit a press.
And there's no way one can measure a ready whistle center to center. You can use a caliper for diameter, and spacing of holes top to bottom. Center to center will have to be calculated.
Let's forget about that oblong Susato's Lows second hole from bell, whichs seeems to be drilled tangentially, not radially, across the shaft. Eventhough I don't like this drilling at all (just can't seal the phoquing** 2nd hole on their Low D), there may be some interest in it. I.e. in a perfect world the most comfy holes would have to be elliptical not circular, especially if we're talking pipers' grip.

**Nothing rude with a French phoque, it's just our kind of a sea-lion.

plagon2000 · Post by **plagon2000** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 12:23 pm

My own experience has been that tube diameter is also a factor in covering holes and ease of playing. Larger bore Low D's are much less comfortable to play compared to a thinner bore instrument with similar finger spacings.

Bloomfield · Post by **Bloomfield** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 12:33 pm

On 2002-10-30 05:27, Loren wrote:
Center to center spacing numbers are virtually useless to us as players - they do not tell the total stretch needed to cover the holes, nor do center to center numbers (without the accompanying holes sizes) tell us how difficult covering the holes will be.

I don't understand. If I assume that the center of the hole will be under the center of my finger, and that covering a large hole is not a problem of stretch, then center-on-center measurement should be sufficient to get a sense of the strech. Edge-to-edge doesn't really help b/c the edge of my finger protrudes over the edge of the hole. With on-center measurments, I can put dots on a piece of paper and then center my finger over the dots to see how the stretch feel.

Or what am I missing?

Wizzer · Post by **Wizzer** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 1:17 pm

Let's forget about that oblong Susato's Lows second hole from bell, whichs seeems to be drilled tangentially, not radially, across the shaft. Eventhough I don't like this drilling at all (just can't seal the phoquing** 2nd hole on their Low D), there may be some interest in it. I.e. in a perfect world the most comfy holes would have to be elliptical not circular, especially if we're talking pipers' grip.

I do not have large hands and can cover the 2 hole on my Susato low D with out using a pipers grip. If you use Mary Bergin right had grip on the whistle and move it down you should have no trouble with covering the lower holes on a Susato. This grip also reduces the amount of finger stretch required to cover the holes.

Loren · Post by **Loren** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 1:23 pm

On 2002-10-30 13:33, Bloomfield wrote:
On 2002-10-30 05:27, Loren wrote:
Center to center spacing numbers are virtually useless to us as players - they do not tell the total stretch needed to cover the holes, nor do center to center numbers (without the accompanying holes sizes) tell us how difficult covering the holes will be.
I don't understand. If I assume that the center of the hole will be under the center of my finger, and that covering a large hole is not a problem of stretch, then center-on-center measurement should be sufficient to get a sense of the strech. Edge-to-edge doesn't really help b/c the edge of my finger protrudes over the edge of the hole. With on-center measurments, I can put dots on a piece of paper and then center my finger over the dots to see how the stretch feel.

Or what am I missing?

Take your piece of paper and use Mike's specs to lay out the dots for the bottom three holes. Now, draw 4mm diameter circles around each dot using a compass.

Repeat this process on another piece of paper spacing the dots at the same intervals, only this time draw 11mm diameter holes around the dots.

Now, place your fingers over each template, attempting to "Cover the Holes" as if you were playing a whistle. Perhaps you'll see what I'm getting at.

Loren

Michael Burke · Post by **Michael Burke** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 3:45 pm

Hi everyone,
I am reticent to enter this discussion, because
the main tenant being discussed is whether a particular way to measure tonehole spacing is most advantageous to whistle players evaluating whether a low whistle will be playable. Certainly, whether a whistle is suitable is an individual decision that must be made by players. I cannot as a maker tell anyone what they must like or how they will decide what they like.
I use the center to center method of stating tonehole position, because I consider it the most useful method of letting a customer know the position that the center of their fingers will occupy, as Bloomfield has stated very clearly. A method that would measure from the top of a tonehole to the bottom of another would be pretty confusing even if I wanted to draw it out on paper and try it, as he also suggested. With a center to center spacing and the tonehole diameter, you can quickly plot it out and make that chart to see if the reach seems extreme, I suppose. However, a flat piece of paper and a low whistle have very little in common, when actually trying to cover toneholes. As someone else pointed out, the diameter of the tube you are holding has a large effect on where you fingers actually end up falling on the whistle. Rolling the graph on a tube that has the same diameter would therefore be a useful way to see what it actually feels like to hold a whistle with those tonehole spacings and diameters. Add to this the fact that a heavy, out of balance low whistle is more difficult to hold and play compared to a lighter, well balanced one of similar dimensions, and you have another factor that will contribute to how easy the whistle is to play. In my whistles, I have a joint between the hands on the low D Pro and a joint between the bottom two toneholes on the low C and the EZ that allow the bottom hole to be rotated to the right (for right handed players), making the bottom tonehole much easier to cover whatever it's diameter. I have women customers that cannot play other low Ds that can easily play the EZ because of the feature, and the low C would be completely out of their league without that feature. I give full credit to Pat O'Riordan for this idea. Pat designed a low C for Joanie Madden and he used that rotating bottom joint.
I thought it so brilliant an idea, that I decided to incorporate it into my own designs.
So the idea that one can decide if a low whistle is easy to play by just the toneholes locations and sizes is an incomplete one. One must add weight, balance, tube diameter, and position of the toneholes to that equation.
Other factors that enter in are the tuning, transient response, breath pressure and volume needed to hit a note and other factors that make playing an instrument an enjoyable experience or a trial. The great thing is that every maker of low whistles I know about offers a trial period with a full refund. We all do this because makers know that a whistle may be just perfect for one customer and the next one may not feel it is what they want. Every whistle design is a compromise. Some toneholes are made too big or too small to make it possible for as many persons as possible to use them. Ideally, we would just do what Boehm did with the modern Silver Concert flute and make the toneholes very large and put keys on them so that even people with small hands can play them. But then the simplicity of the design would be lost and some techniques used in low whistle playing would be difficult or impossible. There are no easy answers. If there were, I would be offering the perfect whistle and so would every other maker. We all love excellence and want to be our very best.
For now, the process of evaluating whistles and making them too, is a work in progress. Let us consider therefore, all the factors we can, not just one aspect of the design like tonehole
spacings and dimensions, which though useful, are only one consideration among many.
I hope this helps a little.
All the best
Mike

Zubivka · Post by **Zubivka** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 3:52 pm

On 2002-10-30 14:17, Wizzer wrote:
I do not have large hands and can cover the 2 hole on my Susato low D with out using a pipers grip. If you use Mary Bergin right had grip on the whistle and move it down you should have no trouble with covering the lower holes on a Susato. This grip also reduces the amount of finger stretch required to cover the holes.

Now, this seems quite interesting! Maybe just the thing I need to feel more comfortable with a low C (let alone my irrational dream of a low Bb!). However, I just don't know what is a Mary-Bergin-right-hand-grip

Please do answer, I'm sure I'm not the only one around to admit his ignorance of MBRHG. Links, description, photographs welcome !

_________________
BbZH

(edited for tyipng dysleixa)

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Zubivka on 2002-10-30 16:54 ]</font>

Loren · Post by **Loren** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 5:11 pm

Sheesh Louise Mike! Sure there are many factors to consider, but we're just talking about finger stretch for the moment. My comments were not for, or against, any whistle or maker, but simply an effort to get across the following fact:

Two wistles with the same center to center hole spacings, but different hole diameters, can have significantly different reach requirements. And, in fact, a whistle with sligtly closer center to center measurments but larger holes, can actually have a longer stretch than a whistle with wider center to center measurments but smaller holes.

I'll not yield to anyone on this issue: Having owned/played nearly 200 whistles, a large percentage of those being Low Whistles, and having actually measured same, I know beyond a shadow of a doubt, from my own experience, that the center to center measurement does not give any where near as accurate an idea of how difficult or easy it will be to make the stretch on a given whistle - the best measurement for that is the edge to edge measurement that I described previously.

Nobody is suggesting one shouldn't try a bunch of different whistles and decide for themselves, but if people want some idea what the real world stretch is going to be like on a whistle, then an edge to edge measurement, preferably with hole sizes, is the best tool we have.

On a different subject:

I'm glad to hear you're on the mend Mike, and best wishes for a continued and speedy recovery. You're much loved around here, as elswhere I'm sure, so it's good to know you're feeling better and healing.

All the best,

Loren

chas · Post by **chas** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 5:58 pm

On 2002-10-30 18:11, Loren wrote:

Two wistles with the same center to center hole spacings, but different hole diameters, can have significantly different reach requirements. And, in fact, a whistle with sligtly closer center to center measurments but larger holes, can actually have a longer stretch than a whistle with wider center to center measurments but smaller holes.

I wouldn't call it a longer stretch, but they can definitely be more difficult to cover -- Water Weasels are the classic example. WW's have about the same hole spacings as other whistles in the Bb-to-F range, but they have a wider bore and thicker walls than others, so the holes are enormous. I instinctively play the Bb with a piper's grip, which I never do with a Gen Bb.

I'll not yield to anyone on this issue: Having owned/played nearly 200 whistles, a large percentage of those being Low Whistles, and having actually measured same, I know beyond a shadow of a doubt, from my own experience, that the center to center measurement does not give any where near as accurate an idea of how difficult or easy it will be to make the stretch on a given whistle - the best measurement for that is the edge to edge measurement that I described previously.

I don't think an edge-to-edge measurement is any more useful than center-to-center. I think you need both C-to-C (or edge-to-edge) PLUS hole diameter. I also think that, as Mike and possibly others pointed out, tube diameter is very important in determining whether one can hold a low whistle.

Loren · Post by **Loren** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 6:28 pm

Sorry Chas, you're wrong. However I'm not interested in endlessly debating the subject. People can choose to believe that I know what I'm talking about, or not, I really don't much care at this point.

Go by whatever measurments burp your turtle.

Loren

CDon · Post by **CDon** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 7:59 pm

On 2002-10-30 16:52, Zubivka wrote:
I just don't know what is a Mary-Bergin-right-hand-grip

Please do answer, I'm sure I'm not the only one around to admit his ignorance of MBRHG. Links, description, photographs welcome !

I'm with Zubivka... What is this 'Mary-Bergin-right-hand-grip', Batman? Course, He and I may be the only folks on the block not to know.

Bloomfield · Post by **Bloomfield** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 8:04 pm

Right hand on top. Holes covered by finger tips, not pads. Left hand below, angled at the wrist.

Wandering_Whistler · Post by **Wandering_Whistler** » Thu Oct 31, 2002 6:18 am

On 2002-10-30 21:04, Bloomfield wrote:
Right hand on top. Holes covered by finger tips, not pads. Left hand below, angled at the wrist.

That's crazy! She'll never get to be a good player with a grip like that!