Blade width VS Bore width

Whistle
1

I see a lot of mentions of a whistle’s air efficiency, air volume requirements (for different keys, especially low ones), general loudness, and volume differences between first and second octave. Many whistles have a blade and windway width just about as wide as the bore (diameter of the tube).
I’m wondering if anyone has any examples of whistle designs where the blade is quite obviously not as wide as the bore, and the windway is therefore also not as wide as the bore. Most windways and blades I see are as wide as possible.

A narrower windway and blade (vs bore width), would be more air efficient, but also risk reducing volume. But the right blend of window design with blade and windway could still create a whistle that was highly responsive, while still having a more efficient, less air requirement, mouthpiece. I know there would be performance tradeoffs all over the place, as you change one thing, other things change. But narrowing the blade, compared to the bore, or narrowing the windway, compared to the blade or the blade AND bore, well, just being curious about these design options.

Any particular whistle models seem to illustrate any of these options, and are there any comparisons that would illustrate the issue? :confused:

2

Abell soprano whistles have a relatively narrow windway and blade width, unless the design has changed in recent years, which I doubt. Of course there are several Abell copies by various other makers as well - I’ll leave it to others to name them if they like, though I haven’t taken the calipers to any of them to see how exact they are.

That said, looking at blade width alone won’t get you too far towards the goal of finding air efficiency in a whistle that also plays well, although Abell soprano whistles are pretty thrifty in the air efficiency dept, if not in price, and they play extremely well too.

3

O’Riordan whistles as well, if you can find one and are willing to pony up for it.

4

I’ve made a few whistles, and some have had a more narrow windway. The volume is just too low. And the tone is usually under whelming as well. But the tone problems could be a lot of other things. But when its too quiet it feels like the tone is automatically weaker.

I find the key is to have a wide windway, but not make it too tall. Like MK and Goldie, and Reyburn low D. Reyburn low D has a wider windway and bore than the MK low D, and even takes more push to hit the higher notes, but they use similar air. And this is where I loose my love for burkes. I love my burke A, but low F and lower the windway is really wide and really tall. So it just uses so much more air than it needs to.

I believe a larger bore needs a wider windway for the same volume. So one way to help with air efficiency is to use a smaller bore. Which will hurt the low end, but this can be countered by making the lip farther from the windway. To a certain point.

5

Loren mentioned O’Riordan whistles. They have a narrow blade that is flat, and a ‘D’ shaped windway that narrows in height as it reaches the opening, an isn’t restrictive at all. The same construction was used by David Boisvert in his Greenwood whistles. Compared to the mouth of a Grinter that is quite wide and curved, you might expect O’Riordan and Boisvert to have a soft voice, but they are anything but.

6

O’Riordan and Boisvert have a clever way of making a tapered wind way. I have not seen a Grinter. I have found a few Generation whistles to have taller wind way exit then the blow end, due to the way they cool maybe? This causes the air stream to be erratic and play awful. I find that Feadog whistles have a straight wind way with a slight taper from the mouth end to a slightly smaller exit. (bernoulli’s principle) ?

7

High end recorders have quite a lot going on in the windway, some of which you can see, much though would be difficult to observe without meticulous measurement and some disassembly. Many aspects of a fipple flute headjoint can be manipulated, so looking at one or two in isolation isn’t necessarily going to give a good indication of performance.

These instruments can be dead simple, which typically yields significant flaws in performance, or rather more complicated, which raises costs. Shocking…..

8

This is largely academic, but I’ve spent a lifetime in the pipe organ (which are largely whistles) business. I’ve had a few conversations with Pat O’Riordan and correspondence with Michael Copeland about organ pipes as they relate to whistles, and have done a quick and dirty analysis on an O’Riordan ‘D’ whistle ‘Wilderness’ model I have here.

Without too much blah blah blah, pipes are scaled from a system called ‘normalmensur’ by which the diameter of pipes is reduced by 1/2 on the 17th note. This is only a reference point, as the ‘scaler’ of any given instrument will no doubt stray from this dramatically according the size and acoustics of the room where the organ will live. Basically - larger scales = larger sound. Variations in material, wind pressure, etc., will occur, as will ‘mouth width’ and cut-up (blade height) depending on the timbre desired.

The diameter of this whistle is 12.7mm. The mouth width is between 1/5th and 1/6th of the circumference. The cutup, or blade height is 1/2 (or nearly so) of the mouth width. In the organ world, that would a VERY small diameter with a narrow mouth, and somewhat normal cutup for the narrow mouth. It’s also what gives Pat’s work its distinctive sound.

IF this were an organ pipe, it is, at its bell note, 20 notes smaller (-20) than ‘normalmensur’, or very, VERY small. However, playing the overblown open c# (2 octaves) above the bell note enlarges the relative scale to +3 since the diameter doesn’t change. If you cut away the ‘overlength’ of the whistle to a dead length of that same note, the scale would be even larger by at least a few notes. As you ascend the scale, the relative increase in scale requires you to blow harder (perceived as ‘backpressure’ I suppose), which naturally follows the ascending line of western music as we think of it.

In short, this tiny instrument goes from an amazingly small pipe to a considerably large one in 2 octaves, without a physical change in voicing of the same mouthpiece/fipple.

Conclusion: Pat O’Riordan said that anyone can bore holes in a tube, and he was right. But to make a single tube perform as a whistle should, in my very humble opinion, is nothing short of magic. That said after having voiced countless thousands of pipes in the past 42 years from 32’ long to about 1/8”.

Feel free to roll your eyes at this, just don’t say something to make me feel bad, please.

9

Hi Reggie! Good to see you here. Love them O’Riordan whistles!