I happen to like the piccolo…I think it goes back to marching band (in my youth, in college, I got $50 for marching in local parades with a community band every Sunday).
Marching with a piccolo seemed the best choice for instrument to carry 2 miles in heat and humidity (certainly better choice than my friend who played tuba)…light, small, though I hated the lyre (a wooden under the arm thing that I kept dropping).
Fast forward too many years and I still enjoy the piccolo…the portability allows me to always travel with a musical instrument…I mean, you can always find room to pack a piccolo case. And, that means I can play in varied settings from sitting in with a jazz group, playing salsa or just playing reels, jigs and dance melodies for myself. There are some that say the piccolo is hard to listen to; shrill, without color…which can be true depending on the player and the instrument.
And so…begins our tale:
Disregarding my orchestral piccolo (a very nice August Hammig) I am left with three traditional piccolos; all ‘D’ piccs, made from grenadilla wood with a tapered body and cylindrical head:
A Hamilton w/o keys
A Peter Worrell 6 key
A London Improved 6 key
Pictures may be found here: https://app.box.com/s/f4ycdvx3jpj4ij8hlob9
The 1st observation is the size of the Worrel; fatter body than either of the other two.It also has a bubble head joint w/o tuning slide. The Hammy also has larger holes for #2 and #5.
Another striking difference is the Hammy embouchure hole. More oval than either of the other two, both of which have the same embouchure cut. Also, the Hammy and the London both have metal-lined heads, where the Worrel is wood.
From a fingering perspective, the Hammy is easiest, due to the absence of keys. I find the London the hardest to finger…it take a bit of practice to get the fingers to fall “just right”…where the spacing and body size tend to make the Worrell a bit more forgiving.
The Worrel has a darker piccolo sound; there appears to be more color from the lower partials…which gives a darker tone. Not as full as I’d like in the middle register, but very strong in the bottom octave. One peculiarity is the higher end of the range. The top end is really no higher than a D, and the tone starts to fall off from C up…C# is very bad and demands cross-fingering that is impossible to play.
The London has a beautiful sweet sound. Hits the core tone, with clarity around each note. Very nice range, up to high F, and the tone stays eve4n and strong throughout the range, down to the low E…where tone starts to fall off. The ley work is crisp, though predictably, playing some the altered tones can be difficult, not due to keywork, more to player fumble.
The Hammy sound is in-between the London and Worrel; none of the three piccs has a shrill character, but I would call the London the sweetest sound, Worrel the darkest and the Hammy in the middle. It does not have the range of the London, but is better than the Worrel, up to a high E.
All three piccs have their own peculiarities in intonation. The Hammy probably the most consistent, followed by the Worrell, with the London the strangest.
All in all, I would probably rate the London the highest; sweetest tone, and every other disadvantage I’ve mentioned can be overcome by practice. The Hammy comes a close 2nd. A fun little piccolo to play with a lot of character, but the absence of keys reduces the flexibility for me somewhat. The Worrell, in 3rd place, but should not be thought of as a loser…it’s still relatively new so the wood can probably open up a bit.