I can’t believe I missed that, tucked away alongside the D regulator data and the Taylor stuff. [edited to add: I have not tried that data myself, nor have I played the W Rowsome C#. My curiousity is piqued now though, so I’ll see if I can arrange something next time I see Kevin…]
Also, knowing David’s own fine reputation, I would not hesitate to try his own C chanter plan which he has most generously included on the disk.
Good luck, I’m looking forward to hearing reports of your progress!
I think it may depend a little on how many numbers you re-type, and whether you do so ‘exactly’ or not. This sort of thing gets debated in software patent/IP circles as well. While clearly not an algorithm, the data arguably being protected is not the ‘original’ data, which as you say is not protected by copyright in this case, but the representation of that data. If you reproduce a large span of numbers to many decimal places, I think you re-enter the problem area.
Of course this is somewhat academic, if the person who collected the information has expicitly asked that conditions apply to its redistribution.
On my system the spreadsheet data shows up with only two decimal places. You’ll want to fix that if you see the same thing, since you want at least thousandths of an inch, and ten-thousandths will do no harm.
Perhaps this doesn’t happen for those of you using Excel, I am using StarCalc, and found that I had to copy the files to a writeable directory and re-format the affected cells.
Lifting things from other sources must be cleared with the owner. Google is cutting a deal with the leading libraries to gain access to their books (many in public domain but these happen to be in their possession). I, for instance, cannot cut a deal with Google to obtain the Harvard Libraries’ books, that would otherwise be in public domain, and go off to market with them.
Libraries, archives, and individuals have the right to control their own ‘stuff’. Also, individuals have a right to publish and control their own ‘stuff’.
A common edition of a Dickens classic, that is now in public domain and widely available due to its original distribution, causes mild or no concern (as long as one turns up their own copy to work from). Unique objects, say an unpublished Dickens diary or hand-written draft of one his works, do cause a ‘jam up’ when an owner has their own best interest in mind (assuming it supports their own mission and ambition) and not necessarily everyone else’s interest(s) but the law says that the owner gets to determine that.
Retyping numbers as long as that was based on your activity and not derived from someone else’s work product and activity would be OK. Getting permission to include their data is OK (and noting that data in whatever fashion is requested by its original author). If the weatherman on TV says it is 50 degrees and I, performing a broadcast role on radio, measure the same temperature outside, it is hard to argue with reality but if I, on radio, read the TV weather report verbatim with no temperature gauge nearby or officially sourced, people would have a problem with that.
By the way, someone on eBAY is/was selling tunes from sessions, recorded in Ireland, recorded with ‘permission(s)’. With the iPOD, hard drive model of sound recordings coming on strong, I would expect a lot to end up that way. There is a lots and lots of recorded music informally recorded over the past 25 years.
I would also like to have a go at a D chanter. I already have the outer shape done, but now I will have to make a reamer and I cannot find enough data for a good layout.
I am happy to buy the CD but is this really a good layout?
The size of the holes is also a bit of a worry. Is there no pipemaker willing to share some knowledge. I am doing this purely as a hobby. (successfully made a reed already).
I wouldn’t form the outside of a chanter before reaming - not practical! You’ll want to ream a larger billet, then turn the outside concentric with that.
Try Iris na bPiobairi (aka The Pipers’ Review) 1999 (spring, I believe) for detailed info regarding a Leo Rowsome chanter measured by John Hughes, in an article by Craig Fischer.
I don’t believe there’s any D bore data on the DMQuinn disc, but there’s loads of other stuff including concert pitch drones and regs. I highly recommend it for information and pointers on many pipemaking topics. You’ll also want to read up on reamer making - see David Quinn’s recent articles in the the same publication as above, i.e. Iris na bPiobairi/The Pipers’ Review.
regards,
Bill
p.s. - Ross is right regarding copyright as it applies to the content of data, i.e. the information itself, as opposed to details of its expression and formatting.
thanks for the info.
I did not form the outside to the minimum just made it round with plenty of timber left to turn it concentric (was a bit unclear I suppose)
The 14.25inches are 361.95mm. This does not match the dimensions that David Daye is quoting on his website with 362.5mm for the Rowsome chanter (which is originally from “As Measured by the Australian Pipemaker Craig Fischer
Published in The Pipers’ Review Magazine Nov. 1999”)
The conical shape actually starts at around 19-20mm (with 5.2-5.3mm diametre) from the top then more or less linear with a gradient of 1/44. So the length of the conical shape is around 342mm and the opening at the end has approximately and diametre of 13.1mm. (The actual dimensions of the measured chanter are slightly different as it is not linear towards the end, being about 13.3mm).
So I am a bit puzzled what the measurements above mean (with throat and bell).
I have decided now to make a reamer with a gradient for the radius(!) of 1/22 and give that a try. So in other words I will make the reamer starting at 5mm to 14mm over a length of 396mm (using the mentioned gradient).
I am pretty sure that the slight deviation from a straigth line is not intentional but either because of limited manufacturing ability or simply the age of the instrument. Having such slight variation from a straight line can hardly be empirical. Except the last centimeter where the hole is slightly bigger than it would be being linear.
At any rate I give it a try and will report back once it is finished… The worst that can happen is that I waste my time. But then I will have learned something new and therefore it won’t be wasted time…
keaaudio, your not far away with your measurements, along as the taper is 4.80mm to 13.50mm over 370mm in length you will not be far away, then a throat length of 18.5mm - 19.00mm, from the top of the chanter down to the throat 5.18mm -5.25mm which ever size you choose, then start the bore taper, it might take you a few go’s to get your chanter right, I use a 5mm long drill to centre bore the chanter blank, then, step boring will move alot of the wood before you start the reaming process,try not to open the bell end of the chanter bore more than 13.25mm when you ream it out, aim at getting the throat correct it is more importantant than the bell, you can work with a bell size of between 12.90mm-13.20mm on a concert D chanter, but if the throat is wrong you have problems with the upper notes and reeding problems, I have found most good chanters have throat sizes of between 5.10mm-5.30mm, aim around the 5.20mm-5.25mm throat size and you will not be far wrong, all the best with your venture.
Joe, I’d roughly agree with stew, except that I’d step bore large-to-small. You’ll need to make a couple of piloting bits to make sure the smaller bores start out concentric to the big ones.
If you go small-to-large, the larger bores tend to follow the smaller ones at a tangent, i.e. not at all concentric. If you are using homemade D bits to step drill then you can put 5mm pilot noses on them and use stew’s method (except that I’d use a smaller pilot bore, unless I drilled it with something that left a really good finish, since 5.00mm is pretty close to your final 5.20). Long twist drills are apt to give problems and would not be the best way to go.
For expediency if you’re just making one chanter, you could step bore without taking measures to ensure concentricity, but you’d then have to leave a very large margin for error and do a much bigger share of the cutting with your reamer(s). Multiple short reamers are better than one long reamer since you can control them better and they are easier to make accurately (and other reasons).
When you start to discover the problems with your design, and you want to experiment further, it has been suggested that you can refine it by making small reamers to remove wood from specific spots along the bore. You can find those spots by using wax or blu-tack on a thin rush, and moving it up and down the chanter until you find the spot that makes the problem worst; removing wood at that point may make the problem better. (There’s no magic answer to where those spots ought to be, since they depend on the reed, chanter, tonehole sizes/positions used, and preferences of the player).
I use 5mm x 12" long airoplane drills bits Bill, because I got a load for a dollar each from the USA on ebay a couple of years back, if I remember right something like seventy in total, I finish the last few inches of the chanter bore with three extra long 4.8mm x 16" drills bits I picked up cheap, I centre bore a chanter at a speed of around 200rpm -250rpm, I use ten drills in turn when centre boring a chanter blank, 6-8 milimetre for each drill bit then I allow each drill bit end in turn to cool on a metal plate, they do the job very well, there’s not much drift, maybe a couple of mil at most from the centre to the other end, then I step drill the chanter bore,from the smallest to the largest drill size, 5.5mm up to 10mm in 0.50mm steps, then I use a roughing out reamer, then a finishing reamer which straighten and cleans the whole chanter bore to the finished spec, I find its no good rushing the job at this stage , I take plenty of time at the reaming process, I’ve learnt by my mistakes, its not as easy as it sounds reaming a chanter. all the best.
thanks a lot for this info, this is very helpful.
I will endeavour to drill 4.5mm with a D drill and then work my way up as Bill recommended. I have worked on a reamer for the whole length and I will try it out.
The 5mm guide a the tip of the d drills is a good idea (at least sounds good). So I will make some of those.
cheers and thanks again
PS: I had a look at some Oboe blogs and since this instrument is very similar it is very interesting what they say about the design. They also say that the wood does make a difference in the sound which appears to be logic, considering that the timber resonates at higher frequencies and adds harmonics that way. They say softer timbers give you a sweeter sound. Did you make similar experiences?
I have some NZ and Australian hardwoods as well as blackwood (which I will not touch yet until my drilling technique is good enough)
I my self don’t like black wood, it gives to strident a sound for me, blackwood was used more for mouth blown bagpipes its copes with moister much better than ebony or boxwood along with more of the softer woods, I still think ebony makes the best chanters in sound and finish, but its heavier on the tools, but thats only my opinion. all the best with the venture.
Actually my recommendation would be drill large to small, using piloting bits which you’d have to make separately. It’s not hard to make them though.
As for timber, note that the timber in a woodwind does not resonate appreciably, and it doesn’t add harmonics; it’s more a matter of subtracting harmonics. The harmonics originate in the reed motion itself; certain harmonics are reinforced by the resonances in the air column, and others may not be; which are, and which are not, and to what degree, is determined first and foremost by the shape of the air column. Terms like “sweeter” can be very misleading since no two people seem to agree on what they mean. It is true that softer timbers generally introduce more damping, which removes more harmonics and can cause resonance peaks to reduce in magnitude and broaden. Overly soft wood can cause excess turbulence and/or have porosity, both of which rob the waveform of energy and soften/dull the sound. In general, more damping also causes flattening of pitch. One person’s “soft” or “warm” tone is another’s “dull”. Avoid timber that does not have fine grain or which has any appreciable degree of porosity. You should be able to draw a hard, persistent vacuum on a thin walled bored piece of wood, if you intend to make a woodwind instrument from it, unless you plan to impregnate or coat it somehow (in which case your tone will be determined more by the coating or impregnating agents).
, I take plenty of time at the reaming process, I’ve learnt by my mistakes, its not as easy as it sounds reaming a chanter. 
all the best.