Been lurking for months now, and finally decided to register and ask a question or two. Such as…
Does a pipemaker tune a chanter differently when putting together a practice set as opposed to a set with drones? It’s my understanding that one can’t completely tune a chanter (of any sort) unless it’s playing with the drones. If this is the case, then does the maker allow room for retuning a chanter from a practice set if the piper wants to upgrade the set in the future? Does it mean that the tuning of a practice set’s chanter will be inherently imperfect?
Can’t speak for all makers, but usually the problem is the reverse: the maker tunes the chanter as though for use with drones. This means that the notes are not quite true, i.e. notes like C# are detuned to sound better with the drones. This drives people nuts when they are playing without drones, as the chanter now sounds out of tune to their ears. BUT - if you are going to add drones you will not want a perfectly tuned chanter, as it won’t go well with the drones.
Will your chanter go well with drones or will you have to return it? - only your pipemaker can verify this for sure, describing his intentions with the chanter’s tuning in the first place.
NoE (sorry to hear it), actually my pipe maker walked me through the process. You are correct that the UP chanter is based on equal temperment, but it is then further detuned, as some notes in equal temperment just don’t sound good against the drones. Not detuned by much, mind you, but enough to be noticebly out of true when the drones are off. I had complained about this, as I’ve seen others do here on this board, and he showed me how this is done on purpose, not in error, not a reed problem, but to improve the blend with the drones.
A chanter must be tuned against a drone. This may simply be an electronic note. The notes must sound their sweetest against that drone, or they are out of tune.
What you consider de-tuning, I consider fine-tuning to a higher musical standard.
Equal temperment is a compromise tuning that allows instruments like pianos to be very close to in tune in every key signature as opposed to perfectly in tune in a couple of keys and badly off in the rest.
No E (refering to how I spell my last surname, not my pipes )
Hmm, seems to be some misunderstanding. Whether it’s yours, or your pipemaker’s, I cannot say
The drones are the basis for musicmaking on the pipes. Historically, it’s quite correct that equal temperament is a compromise designed for playing ‘modern’ chromatic music, and Just Intonation has the longer pedigree, as well as the authority of acoustical physics to back it up.
So just intonation is the basis for tuning a pipe chanter. If you are playing chromatic music without drones, along with a piano (heaven help you!) then possibly you would want to fuss about with tape or rushes to bring your chanter into equal temperament, but you are getting a long way from piping in that case.
So I think to say that making the chanter sound right against the drones isn’t ‘detuning’ at all. Designing a chanter starting from equal temperament sounds pretty daft, I doubt your maker really had this in mind. At least I hope not!
Note that ‘just intonation’ against the drones means not only that the audible ‘beats’ are minimized, but that the frequencies of the notes of the scale correspond to exact integer ratios of the drone (tonic) frequency. You can’t achieve that mathematical consistency in multiple keys at once, which is why ET was invented, but you can get exact (to within the tuning consistency of your instrument and reeds) against the drone fundamental.
Seamus Ennis always said each and every note on the chanter should play a perfect harmony with the drones, probably that’s why djm keeps proclaiming he can’t listen to Ennis
Thx, Peter. Actually, its Willie Clancy who drives me nuts with his totally out-of-tune pipes, especially the regs. Ennis was usually not too far wrong as far as tuning goes, but then again, Ennis was never any great shakes on the regs. His brilliant chanter work more than makes up for it, so that there is no real lack.
One recording I have of Ennis is back in the 1950s playing an air in an English pub, for a broadcast, I think. His pipes are in excellent tune; truly a superb sound. Wouldn’t you know that the drunken a***s around him are making so much noise they nearly drown him out of the recording.
What the @#$%#& ?! Just be grateful Jimmy O’Brien-Moran, Pat Mitchell, and Neillidh Mulligan don’t read this board, they’d tear you up a treat for that remark. Peter is being remarkably restrained, it can’t be easy.
Someone might make a case against some old timers like O’Mealley and Leo Rowsome for excessive reg vamping, but not Seamus. He almost always found interesting ways to include them, but was always mindful of using them too much.
I agree that Ennis always warned about using the regs too much. I agree that Leo Rowsome sometimes used the regs to the point of distraction. What would you say to Ronan Browne. Are you saying that he uses the regs too much? I think his reg playing is superb.
What recordings of Ennis do you refer to where his reg playing is exemplary? Although he touches them from time to time, and sometimes in airs he leans on them for prolonged chords, I can’t think of any examples where I could say his reg playing is remarkable. Can you give some examples?
Fair enough. Unfortunately I’m not in a position here to write a detailed commentary right now, although I will try to come up with some examples if someone else doesn’t beat me to it. Anyone with a handy copy of 40 Years or Return from Fingal want to take up the question? My copy of 40 Years is in my car and the other one is on loan…
I remember from school tha a sound goes with harmonics whose frequency is multiple of the fundamental sound; that means that an instrument which own a D drone should respect a diatonic scale based on D harmonics; that’s the reason why, in GHB, the high G is so flat. That’s also the reason why GHB hasn’t a trebble drone, whose harmonics can’t match with chanter notes, except D, for the first harmonic will be equal to back D.
How diatonic is the UP chanter? A very-well-in-tune chanter would be like GHB. I suppose it isn’t the case because UP is played with other instruments (specially fiddle and flute), not always for himself.
Has anybody measured the frequencies of some chanters?
RE willy clancy regs - bear in mind that most of the available recordings were, ahem, not studio recordings. In some cases it’s not WC playing the regs, it’s Sean Reid playing regs while Willy plays chanter (on the same set). All good fun, but prolly not intended as a basis for judging technical skill The wonderful musicality shines through anyhow, and the sense of fun
? Don’t quite follow your meaning in that last statement. Treble drone harmonics would be exact multiples of the tonic drone harmonics. So I don’t follow (or perhaps don’t agree)
I just said that trebble drone’s harmonic begin to high to match perceptibly with low notes of the chanter, for instance E. The interest of low drones (why not contrabass drone?) is that the 3rd or 4th harmonic exactly match with a note on the chanter.
Of course I agree on the fact that trebble drone and low chanter notes have (when well in tune) common harmonics; but that’s too difficult to hear.
The harmonics aren’t too difficult to hear unless they are above the
human hearing threshold. See A. Benade chapter 14 for a discussion of how heterodyne components make harmonics important even if they don’t match chanter notes exactly.
Also, realize that every chanter note has its own set of harmonics, many of which would match harmonics of the treble drone.
Thx, Peter. Actually, its Willie Clancy who drives me nuts with his totally out-of-tune pipes, especially the regs. Ennis was usually not too far wrong as far as tuning goes, but then again, Ennis was never any great shakes on the regs. His brilliant chanter work more than makes up for it, so that there is no real lack.
The wonderful musicality shines through anyhow, and the sense of fun 