Burke vs Copeland

Whistle
1

Hi all!

I just wanted to share with you that I finally have my Burke Low D. My first Burke and my first Low whistle!!! I really love the sound and the way it plays. Whatever you play on it sounds great. I guess that’s what a good whistle does.

The next day I received a message that the Copeland Low D I ordered months ago was also ready to ship. What excitement!

But now I’m not sure about the Copeland anymore. They both aren’t cheap but probably worth every penny. Having them both means that I can’t buy another whistle for a while. I want whistles in other keys and having them both would mean two whistles in the same in key. Friends and family don’t understand WHOA (I’m not sure that I really do) but having whistles in different keys at least makes sense.

Can anyone tell me more about the difference between a Burke Low D and a Copeland Low D. What does a Copeland sound like. People who have both, when do you play the Copeland and when do you play the Burke.

I would appreciate your opinions!

Many thanks!

2

Hi Curly,

Forgive me for smiling at your predicament. WhoA is a dangerous addiction, even in the early stages.

I’m sure you’ll get a variety of opinions and recommendations on the two brands. But other people’s recommendations regarding musical instruments are like other people’s opinions of movies - some people will love things that you find awful, and vice versa.

Buying a relatively expensive instrument that you haven’t tried is a risk. Buying one when you haven’t tried one of the same model or the same make is, IMO, foolishness.

So here’s my suggestion: make up your own mind. Get the Copeland, try both whistles for a while, and then sell the one you like least. You’ll be able to sell it easily, and you may well be able to get what you paid for it from someone who doesn’t want to wait.

There’s a risk of course - you’ll appreciate them both for different reasons and be unwilling to part with either… :wink:

3

Indeed, you’ll be able to sell the
Copeland for more than you paid for it,
if you wish, on account of the
waiting list. But I don’t think you will
sell it. Personally I like the
Copeland low D far
better than any other low D whistle
I’ve ever played.

4

I will add that the two whistles sound very different from each other. Take Steve’s advice and try them both for a week before you decide. I think they may have a return time limit for a refund so you don’t have to worry.
Enjoy,
Tony

5

Yes I see what you all mean. But I wasn’t looking for opinions about what to do, or whether or not to buy it. Whoa made that decision for me I’m afraid.

I was interested in people’s opinion about the Copeland. My only reference to a good whistle (I’ve played many) is the Burke Low D I now have.

I drive people crazy talking about the Burke AND the Copeland that is coming soon. I like to know a little more about the treasure I’m awaiting (and have even more to elaborate on). People’s opinions and tastes differ of course but that’s what I would like to hear, if someone can spare the time.

Thanks a lot!

6

If you can get access to it, listen to Joe McKenna’s Irish Low Whistle cd, which I highly recommend you buy for the good music on it. Track 3 (my favorite) is played on a Copeland low d and you can hear exactly what they sound like.

Describing the tonal differences between whistles is a bit difficult. To me, the Copeland has a very chiffy flutish quality. You can play loud and soft on it without switching octaves. It’s not nearly as loud as an Overton low d. I only tried the Burke low d aluminum for a minute at someone’s house. I remember the tone was pretty clear. Let us know what you think when you have them both to compare.
Tony

7

The Copeland takes some time to
learn how to play because it is
highly breath sensitive. This makes
it very expressive but it can
take a month or two before
you are really in control of the
whistle. It takes awhile to
realize what it really is.
I have played a lot of
low Ds and I certainly don’t want
to say that any good whistle is bad,
so I will simply say that the
Copeland low D is generally considered
one of the most desireable whistles
made.

8

I’ve got to disagree with Tony on two points, one very subjective the other rather objective. No offense to Tony of course, just my usually twisted viewpoint as ususal, heh heh.

Objective first: The Overton Low D is not significantly louder than the Copeland Low D. I just compared my standard Goldie Overton Low D to my Copeland and they are just about the same in terms of volume, especially on the highest notes. The Overton is capable of slightly greater volume on the lowest notes however because you can blow harder before the octave break. The Copeland really does produce a good bit of volume.

Now the subjective thing: Personally I don’t find McKenna’s Low Whistle CD very interesting. There are only 3-4 tracks I care for at all. I find Eoin Duginan’s Low whistle playing and tune selection much more interesting, Eamonn Dillon’s too. If someone is interested in really trad stuff, there are so many flute recordings that are much more interesting and informative than McKenna’s…but that’s just my opinion. Still I’d rather listen to Laurence Nugent any day.

By the way Tony, How did you find out that it’s a Copeland on Track 3? I don’t see specifics of which whistles are played on each tune in the liner notes. Do you have a special contact on the inside you haven’t told us about? Hee hee :slight_smile:

Loren

9

Loren, how dare you challenge me! Let me give my objective opinion on your subjective opinions: phfffttt. (I’ll post an mp3 of tht sound)

I played an Overton low d at a guy’s house one time and it hurt my ears when I went into the 2nd octave. He cringed at the same time I felt the pain. (Maybe he was cringing at my playing; I’m not sure.) It seemed to me there was a big difference between octaves in sound volume. I don’t find that to be the thing with the Copeland.

As far as “interesting” cd’s goes, I’m not familiar with either of the one’s you recommended. I’ll check out sound clips on Amazon or wherever. I’ll stick by my enjoyment of McKenna’s. No, it’s not totally trad.

Anyway,Loren, having contradicted me, you’ve blown what credibility you had. :slight_smile:
Tony
edit: The whistle on track 3 of McKenna’s sounds EXACTLY like my Copeland, which sounds quite unlike any other low d I’m familiar with. Have a great holiday weekend everyone.


\

Clips](http://nwparalegalcom.readyhosting.com/clipssnip/newspage.htm%22%3EClips) and Snips Tunes
“When you make it to the top of the mountain, keep on climbing.” -Zen saying

[ This Message was edited by: TonyHiggins on 2001-11-21 19:33 ]

10

I have to say GET THE COPELAND!!! Just over the weekend I got to play a really old, as in one of the first made, copeland high Ds and I have to say that was a GREAT WHISTLE!!!
I have only heard a burke low d but from what I heard, it has a very pure tone and looked really nice. I have only played a copeland high d, so I can’t really say anything about the low one. But, well hope this helped some. I have to say from a lissening stand point burke and copeland are probably two of my favorite whistles.

11

It is as impossible to describe sound as it is to describe colour! (that “teal” is it a bluey green, greeny blue; that purple is it more blue? more red? mauve? what??? Does a whistle sound ‘clear’, ‘flutey’, ‘chiffy’, bright’, ‘voluptuous’? and does that depend on the player as much as the listener???)
Even the “playablity” of an instrument is subjective. Something I may find needing too much air and sounding loud, somebody else might describe as ‘full’, ‘rich’ with ‘lots of breath resistance for expressive playing’.
So…my advice is get them both, then post your opinions, and see how many people agree or disagree and if you decide to return/sell one, what have you got to lose? I always enjoy a good discussion on the comparison of instruments, but I know what I like and don’t like, so if somebody disagrees with me, they obviously don’t know what they are talking about! (just kiddin’!)

12

Loren, how does the volume between the Large hole and standard Overton compare to each other. My large hole will be here any day now. I know Colin said the standard has more pop to it, but I can’t recall if he mentioned anything about the volume diffrence if any. He might have, but he played a couple things for me over the phone that sent me off into an epileptic fit. He also mentioned that the large hole is more likely to be an easier blower in the upper register. I’m still trying to get a feel for how the pressure can vary between Overtons. I like having to lean into it for the upper notes (at least thats what i’ve deducted on the keys that I have) I still went with the large hole for the slurs and slides.
Always enjoy to see what you have to say about things.
Jack Orion.

13

Tony,

Credibility? What Credibility? I can’t ruin what I don’t have :slight_smile:

RE: Copeland vs Overton volume - honestly I think you’d have to play them side by side in the same room to see what I mean. I have two Overton Low D’s (see my comments to Jack, below) and I stand by my assertion that they are about the same volume as my Copeland Low D. I suppose it’s possible that my Copeland is louder than most, but this seems unlikely. Maybe you just played a particularly loud Overton, or it could have been the room. Who knows. It’s also entirely possible that I’m insane, I can deal with that :slight_smile: Actually, the high end on the Copeland Low F I just sold was definitely louder than the high end on my Overton Low F.

Having listened to the Joe McKenna CD again, I have to agree that track 3 sounds like a Copeland. I’d guess track 4 and quite likely 5 as well. really ought to try to contact Joe and get the run-down of all the tracks from him.

I’d like to revise my opinion of the CD a bit too: I really like about half the tracks, the other half leave me flat. Never the less, Mr. McKenna is 100 times the player that I am, so maybe I should just keep my mouth shut till I can play half as well.

Any luck finding Eoin Duignan’s or Eamonn Dillion’s CD’s at Amazon? I sort of doubt they would stock them. Dillion has some soundclips on his website (www.Eamonndillon.com) but as I reacall the only clips up there are pipe tunes. Duignana’s webaddy is: http://www.duigo.com Can’t remember if he has sound clips there.

JackOrion,

I have found everything that Colin told you to be true: The standard Goldie Overton is a little snappier and harder to blow on the high end than his Big Hole model Low D. There is still nice resistance on the high end of the Big hole, but it’s just not as extreme. I also think the Big Hole sounds a little more mellow at the top of the second octave.

Regarding the volume: I really can’t tell much difference, if any between the two. You’d think the Big Hole Low D would be louder, but it’s not, at least in my case…YMMV.

Personally, I think the Big Hole is the way to go, if one has the fingers for it. The stretch really isn’t so bad, it’s just a challenge to seal the holes if you have narrow fingers like I do. Good practice though :slight_smile:

Loren

14

First of all, I would add my voice to those who found the Joe McKenna Low Whistle CD kinda uninteresting. I listened to it once and it didn’t grab me. I gave it a second chance and it didn’t grab me. I have another confession to make, I almost never listen to Mary Bergin. WHen I do, I boggle at her technical ability but I don’t find much to love in her music.

Now for the poor person with the Copeland-Burke problem. Yikes. Problem is, they really are just so different. I agree that you probably can sell the COpeland without much problem. However, the list is much shorter that it used to be and I wouldn’t count on making a profit.

Dale

15

My first low whistle was, like yours, a Burke low D. I opted for the composite as I wanted something really light (I’m a recorder player and not used to hefting metal to lips grin).

Opinion? It’s great. It plays Irish, Chinese, Japanese, Indian,.. you name it; all you have to do is change the articulation and ornamentation and you’ve crossed cultures. It’s a great instrument, very versatile, flexible, responsive - but you knew that already.
It’s possible that I’m attracted to its ambiguity - it really can sound like an instrument from any culture you hear in your mind.
Another advantage: it doesn’t have the ‘please steal me’ look of expensive whistles. I leave it around all the time and people don’t touch it or want to try it out until AFTER I play it.

I’ve yet to play it against fiddle and box ( there are none where I live. Players, I mean) but it doesn’t matter cos it’s loud enough to be felt as a colour in the mix but not too loud to overpower other sessionists. I like that sort of subtle thing, but that’s just me :slight_smile:
I just thought I’d add in a good word for the Burke as the previous posts were heavily weighted towards Copelands. I don’t own a Copeland, have nothing against them and would like to have one in future.

16

Dale put his finger on something I’ve
wanted to say for awhile. I like melodically
interesting,moving tunes, with which
celtic music abounds. But there are
also many jigs and reels that, while
they require considerable technical
ability to play, leave me pretty cold.
So I haven’t learned them. There are a
fair number of beautiful fast tunes that I’ve learned, but, given my prejudice, I’ve learned more of the slower ones.

Am I making a mistake? I know I’ll
never play like Mary Bergin, no matter
how I try–but I wonder if mastering
more fast tunes that don’t interest
me will make me a better whistler, and
maybe I’ll come to like them.

17

Hey Jim, from my point of view, yeah you’re missing out something by avoiding the jigs, reels and dance tunes! I’m speaking from the perspective of one who got interested in Irish music mainly from all the slow, moving stuff I heard.

And how do you know if you’ll never play like the Bergin Mary (sorry for the pun!) when you don’t even start trying? Don’t ever give up hope on yourself! Technique comes from correct practice, exposure and time, nothing much to it basically. I’m sure you’ll get better at it after a while. Plus, its not all technique that makes a great tune. Tunes can be played plainly and have a lot of groove too!

18

Well, since I’ve started something here: I really think,Jim, that there is a major asthetic disconnect between the kinds of tunes you are talking about liking, airs for example, ang jigs & reels. One simply is not required to like both (or either for that matter). Airs and laments and other tunes just have a very different expressive purpose than jigs & reels. In the latter, I think the close association with dance & celebration make them an entirely different order. I also think that one can hear a kind of competitive, show-off aspect to that music (that’s not a criticism). I like it myself but, a steady diet of it would drive me crazy.

Dale

19

Thanks to Eldarion and Dale for the
encouragement. It sounds as though
I really ought to learn more about
Irish dancing. I do know and play
a fair number of fast tunes–but
I’ve learned mostly the fast tunes that
move me. Will try to make a foray
into the rest of it.

The reason I think I will never
play like Mary Bergin (by which I
mean really like Mary Bergin) is this:
I have the impression that the technical
giants of whistling began playing as
small children in Ireland. In America
I’ve seen little children learn the whistle
with remarkable virtuosity. It seems to
help to start when you are little
and in an Irish arts milieu. Or perhaps
this is my way of explaining away
my own disinclination to practice
demanding stuff I so far don’t much like! I started four years ago when I was 56.

Let me say that I don’t think I’m
giving up on myself. I think my musical
talents (and interests) lie in another
direction. However you’all have persuaded
me that this may be sour grapes plus
sloth@torpor! I’ll give it another go.
Thanks again

20

Jim,

I certainly sympathize with the comments about “show-offs” and feeling disinclined to learn fast songs that do nothing for you. As a fifer I deliberately avoided learning a song called “Downshire,” which is not remarkable for anything but its difficulty, because of the hauteur of those among the elite who had taken it on. I found it very off-putting.

My approach to learning fast songs has been like yours. I pick ones that say something to me, and therefore find the playlist to be the most useful part of the CD because it helps me to find the sheet music if it exists. My personal opinion is that once one has learned a fast song, the phrasing more or less takes care of itself once one has begun it. Slow airs, on the other hand, require interpretation every time they are played, and I think there is much more of musicianship in a slow air played well.

Be patient in learning the fast tunes. I start slow and work on precision. If you always practice it to the same “felt” level of difficulty, it won’t be all that long before you’ve achieved light speed and your fingers fly. Real fluency comes when I learn to relax as I play. Breathing seems to take care of itself as I fiddle with the ornamentation.