Rogge macht well tempered sackpfiefen?

Uilliam · Post by **Uilliam** » Fri Sep 19, 2003 1:43 pm

djm..fraid I havnae cloooo,Royce will probably know! :roll:

Tony..If I could change my ears I would as I have to wear hearing aids,injured my ears many moons back in an explosion at work so that isnae very helpful..Still it didnae stop Bethoven did it!!
I am all for djm's suggestion,that way we can see once and for all who is sh*t whom!!!
Slan go foill
Liam

djm · Post by **djm** » Fri Sep 19, 2003 1:46 pm

Tony, change my ears? My don't seem to want to come off. Not sure if they're sewn on, or maybe just crazy glue ....

djm

Tony · Post by **Tony** » Fri Sep 19, 2003 2:00 pm

OK, all kidding aside. Someone on the whistle forum found an online spectrum analizer. I'll search and post the like here (should I find it) though the results will vary from computer to computer and pipes to pipes the only true way to test this is all in the same place using the same equipment.

Liam, this is slightly off topic but try this sound test. Turn off your hearing aid and rest the reedcap on your chin or the bone behind your ear. Listen the the internal sounds produced that don't come thru the chanter. Harsh sounding isn't it? The guys who bug (mic) chanters in the reedcap using the Barcus-Berry flute microphone often complain that a bugged chanter sounds nothing like one with an external microphone.

Tony · Post by **Tony** » Fri Sep 19, 2003 2:05 pm

Here's the link to the analizer:
http://www.visualizationsoftware.com/gram/gramdl.html

Here's the post on the whistle board with visual samples:
http://chiffboard.mati.ca/viewtopic.php ... bf4e8ed80a

Lorenzo · Post by **Lorenzo** » Fri Sep 19, 2003 2:33 pm

Here's the difference between a "just" and "even" temperament 4th:

Fourth = just/1.33333 vs. even/1.33483 . For all pratical purposes that's a difference of .00150, certainly not a 20% (or 1/5th) difference.

http://www.phy.mtu.edu/~suits/scales.html FOR THE FACTS

With piano strings, "equal" and "just" are so close that an "equal" 4th is only about one beat off (wah) in five seconds from "just." Virtually perfect but not quite. That's so close that if I were to compare the two strings (just vs. even) seperately against the dominate 4th below, not 1 in 100,000 musicians could tell the difference. And, perhaps only the best of the piano tuners could tell which one was perfect and which one was off. It's so close that nearly all tuners (blind included) need a machine to measure the difference.

So, if your pipes drones and chanter reeds are SO steady that temperature, humidity, flexibility of the cane, and bag pressure, and difference from one reed to the next will not vary or bend the pitch that much...well you know what I mean.

Just do the arithmetic. I know by listening that I can't tell the difference without concentrating extrememly hard, in an otherwise totally silent environment, for that one beat in five seconds (an even temperament 4th).

Anyone have a more accurate description of "just" vs. "even" temperament? (here's a tissue paper Kevin...

)

Calum · Post by **Calum** » Fri Sep 19, 2003 3:21 pm

Umm, have a look at the second table you posted there and have a listen to the two scales done together. If I ever turned up at a band practice with my chanter as far apart from the band as those two scales are from each other, I'd be told to go away and get the thing tuned, if not to go home.

The fourth is pretty close - the third and fifth are further adrift.

It's worse for us GHB players, with a flattened seventh, which is miles adrift from a well tempered scale, and we also have this historical thing where we had a sharp fourth to get a good pair of pentatonic scales on G and A. It's not as sharp as that now, though many players still tune it sharper than you might expect.

Certainly in competition, most competitors would give up any hope of a prize with drones beating at five seconds.

Cheers,
Calum

Kevin L. Rietmann · Post by **Kevin L. Rietmann** » Fri Sep 19, 2003 4:31 pm

Uilliam wrote: Has anyone undertaken to do a scientific analysis on the difference between Cane/Elder and the much maligned composite reeds on drones?
I suspect this is all romantic sh*t.
The size of the bore is what matters most as long as the bore is wider in the reed than the seat on the drone ye will get the required turbulation of air within the tube to get the sound.Fact is it is much easier to get the required size every time on the composite than the cane/elder,especially for the treble drone.So unless there is some scientific proof to dispel composite reeds as inferior to cane/elder you are free to imagine ye are getting a buzz or whatever,or its more traditional blah blah blah,but don't pontificate about them being better!!!
As for not liking Rogge ye are entitled to yer opinion but I am getting a little tired of hearing ye going on about Brad(who?) Angus.
He is not particularly well known over here and his constant elevation to the rank of super maker by yersel makes me wonder how much is he paying ye?
After all ye do his website,ye lie for him on this forum(remember EBay)and ye constantly plug him....Has Brad(who?) Angus got ye onto this forum solely as a commercial gimmick to boost his image?
Self promotion through another is how I see it and enough is enough. :roll:
Slan Agut
Ulliam
PS thanks for the link to the smilies.

Thanks for the personal attacks, Royce. I do all this sh*t for Brad out of friendship and admiration for all the work he puts into his pipes, pure and simple. I haven't gotten anything out of it except personal satisfaction, which is enough for me.
I didn't "lie" about anything on Ebay. I deliberately didn't tell any of you about that set in the hopes it would keep the selling price down so I could buy them myself. Judge me accordingly if you so choose. If you're still referring to that gag about the epoxy in the bores you are one sad sack of potatoes, dude.
I've stated what I think of Rogge sets already. I'm sure he makes excellent composite drone reeds, which is an indication to me right there of their strengths and weaknesses.

Lorenzo · Post by **Lorenzo** » Fri Sep 19, 2003 4:52 pm

Calum wrote:Umm, have a look at the second table you posted there and have a listen to the two scales done together. If I ever turned up at a band practice with my chanter as far apart from the band as those two scales are from each other, I'd be told to go away and get the thing tuned, if not to go home.

The 4th in the second table shows that F above C, for all practical purposes, is zero...perfect:

just/348.83 vs. equal/349.23 +0.40

That means 000.40.

And, this .40 beyond the 000 hundredth is nothing but what a machine could measure. On pianos, the 3rd is off the most, the fifth is only slightly worse than the 4th on the "even" temperament.

It would truely be remarkable if, with all the variables, any bagpipe 4th was perfect, ie, 000.00 difference (not to mention the tiny grain of 000.40). Reeds, bores, toneholes, pressure can't really be compared to the stability of a tightly wound metal piano string in stable temperature conditions.

I don't know how the GHB drones are tuned (low drone and two a 5th above?) Drones should be perfect and easily accomplished. Yes 3 beats in 5 seconds would be virtually perfect but not quite in the "even" temperament. But, no one is talking about drones within themselves, it's the chanter against itself, or against one stable drone. Most GHB players I've heard...the upper note is always WAY flat. I asked one of the worlds best about that one time, Iain McDonald (formerly with Ossian), who use to stop by frequently. He said it was just a tradition to be off. He said it could easily be tuned up to pitch, and many are including his.

What I'm saying is that if the chanter plays a 3rd, 4th, or 5th, or even 7th above the drone, and it sounds in tune to everyone, with the tiny fraction (in hundredths) of a difference between "just" and "even" it could be either one and no one could really ever tell.

I hear upper Es that are off, even by the likes of Brian McNamara, and it doesn't mean his chanter is tuned "just" or "even" it's just far enough off that it's way off beyond either...it's a reeding problem. And so it is with many of the reeds I have for my chanter. Some are spot on all the way in good conditions, some reeds are not.

Royce · Post by **Royce** » Fri Sep 19, 2003 5:21 pm

Calum wrote:Umm, have a look at the second table you posted there and have a listen to the two scales done together. If I ever turned up at a band practice with my chanter as far apart from the band as those two scales are from each other, I'd be told to go away and get the thing tuned, if not to go home.

The fourth is pretty close - the third and fifth are further adrift.

It's worse for us GHB players, with a flattened seventh, which is miles adrift from a well tempered scale, and we also have this historical thing where we had a sharp fourth to get a good pair of pentatonic scales on G and A. It's not as sharp as that now, though many players still tune it sharper than you might expect.

Certainly in competition, most competitors would give up any hope of a prize with drones beating at five seconds.

Cheers,
Calum

It's more noticeable with GHB because of the higher pitch and more complex waveform. I always think of the problem as deviations in cents. I use a standard chromatic tuner (even temperement) as a reference but then you have to decide whether to standardize on D or A. That fifth is spread about 2-3 cents if I recall. The third then, F# is spread by a whopping 5 cents or so, which is rollingly out of tune. So you have to flatten F# quite a bit.

When it comes down to it, there are about three mathematical intervals you could tune Cnat without "beats," and call it "just." But UP aren't really just tempered anyway, they're played in what's called "Paddy Temperment" which is something close to just, F# is dead onto drones, G is dead onto drones, A is dead onto drones, then, in case I've forgotten, there are two positons at least you could tune E and call it "just" without beats, but you are restricted by the instruments octave E problems to usually setting low E about at an even temperment, sharpish to UP ears but dead-on to chromatic tuners, and at the flatter or bluesy tuning in the upper octave of the two (maybe more) "Just" tuning postitions.

B is usually well flat of even temperment and even flatter than just in the lower octave, to compensate for a sharpish upper B. This can be 10-20 cents off an even temperement scheme, flat in the lower octave, and almost the same sharp in the upper octave.

C# is usually whatever you can get it to be and you're helpless after you've faked in your Cnat.
Royce

Calum · Post by **Calum** » Fri Sep 19, 2003 5:30 pm

The traditions of personal tunings on the GHB is a complex subject; there are bands that traditionally have always tuned their fourths and sixths flat; some players (Gordon Duncan being the worst) tune their high As flat as a very flat thing that's just been run over by a steam roller. Low and high G are also favourites for being 'personalised'. I won't even mention the piobaireachd G.

That said, they're all rock solid consistent between performances; there's one Gold Medallist who gets accuracies of <1 cent on every note, despite the fact that his fourth, fifth, sixth, and octave are all off in reference to what would be in tune with the drone.

Drones on the GHB are just octave and octave on the keynote. The bass has a very strong harmonic fourth, which throws some people with good ears for pitch.

To an extent, we're talking about different things. Uilleann pipes are played with constantly varying pressure on the bag and this has far more immediate influence on the pitch than anything else, so any discussion of what it's 'meant' to be is pretty much moot. The GHB, OTOH, is supposed to be rock steady, and when you're playing piobaireachd, even the slightest out-of-tuneness is clear and obvious.

It's common to hear people remark at band competitions on the pitch difference between two bands who are pitching not more than a couple of Hz apart. Band members are generally expected to be able to maintain a chanter within a couple of Hz from day to day, by ear.

Cheers,
Calum

Uilliam · Post by **Uilliam** » Sat Sep 20, 2003 2:00 am

[quote="Kevin L. Rietmann [/quote]

Thanks for the personal attacks, Royce. I do all this sh*t for Brad out of friendship and admiration for all the work he puts into his pipes, pure and simple. I haven't gotten anything out of it except personal satisfaction, which is enough for me.
I didn't "lie" about anything on Ebay. I deliberately didn't tell any of you about that set in the hopes it would keep the selling price down so I could buy them myself. Judge me accordingly if you so choose. [/quote]

Fair enough Kevin,its hardly a personal attack,more of an observation and a direct question/s which ye have answered ,allbeit with a personal swipe at me,(pot calling the kettle black!!).
I am glad ye have said it is all sh*t (your above quote) I agree with ye there, but ye cannot say ye didnae lie when quite patently ye did.Ye told us all quite a bit about the set all of it negative so how can ye say in above quote that ye didn't.Oh yes the Gag,!!is that the new term for lying where ye come frae??
Come off it sonny ....
Can we hear a little less of Brad(who?)Angus now perleeeez????
"It's a far better thing that I do now etc etc etc..."

Liam

Royce · Post by **Royce** » Sat Sep 20, 2003 5:36 pm

Kevin L. Rietmann wrote:
Uilliam wrote: Has anyone undertaken to do a scientific analysis on the difference between Cane/Elder and the much maligned composite reeds on drones?
I suspect this is all romantic sh*t.
The size of the bore is what matters most as long as the bore is wider in the reed than the seat on the drone ye will get the required turbulation of air within the tube to get the sound.Fact is it is much easier to get the required size every time on the composite than the cane/elder,especially for the treble drone.So unless there is some scientific proof to dispel composite reeds as inferior to cane/elder you are free to imagine ye are getting a buzz or whatever,or its more traditional blah blah blah,but don't pontificate about them being better!!!
As for not liking Rogge ye are entitled to yer opinion but I am getting a little tired of hearing ye going on about Brad(who?) Angus.
He is not particularly well known over here and his constant elevation to the rank of super maker by yersel makes me wonder how much is he paying ye?
After all ye do his website,ye lie for him on this forum(remember EBay)and ye constantly plug him....Has Brad(who?) Angus got ye onto this forum solely as a commercial gimmick to boost his image?
Self promotion through another is how I see it and enough is enough. :roll:
Slan Agut
Ulliam
PS thanks for the link to the smilies.

And then Kevin replied:

"Thanks for the personal attacks, Royce."

Anyone (not Kevin of course) notice that I didn't write the quote Kevin was crying about?)

Royce

Kevin L. Rietmann · Post by **Kevin L. Rietmann** » Sun Sep 21, 2003 12:55 am

Wow.

Uilliam · Post by **Uilliam** » Sun Sep 21, 2003 2:12 am

Royce I'm sure Kevin knew what he was doing.../ a new term has entered the uilleann pipe terminology....Royce or Roycism...so to do a Royce,or be called Royce is a term of ...well???....erm "endearment"!!

Slan go foill
Liam

geber · Post by **geber** » Sun Sep 21, 2003 2:41 am

I'd say you Royced that one Liam!!!