Pardon the tabloid-ish subject line. I should, more correctly, say “false myths,” as I, being a quasi-pagan, regard traditional myths as “true” in a psychological sense.
Anyhow, I got my Clarke original D in the mail a couple of days ago. Yes, it’s painted black with the “tacky” gold diamonds between the holes. Actually, it looks like something which might be quite at home in the hands of a medieval court jester. (Not a bad association, since jesters had a singularly privileged position, being generally immune to the king’s displeasure, but I digress.)
Does it require a lot of breath? Actually, no. Maybe a little more than a Feadóg, but not a horrendous amount, unless one is trying to play it at high volume, which brings me to the next point.
Is the tone “breathy?” Here was the biggest surprise for me. It is most definitely not breathy when played at low volume, which I have come to think is the proper way to play this whistle. Played softly, the tone is quite pure, even well into the second octave, with hardly a trace of the notorious “breathiness.”
“Chiff?” I don’t even know what that is, unless it’s the “chiffy” sound which ancient tracker-action pipe organs made at the beginning of a note. (The British organist E. Power Biggs has some excellent examples of this phenomenon on an old LP which I’ve got stored in the attic somewhere.) Anyhow, the Clarke ain’t got none of that.
“Chiff?” I don’t even know what that is, unless it’s the “chiffy” sound which ancient tracker-action pipe organs made at the beginning of a note. (The British organist E. Power Biggs has some excellent examples of this phenomenon on an old LP which I’ve got stored in the attic somewhere.) Anyhow, the Clarke ain’t got none of that.
I have the same recording, and yes, that’s exactly what chiff is.
My untweaked Clarke original in D, while not requiring huge amounts of air, is breathy sounding, and chiffy. It ain’t breathy like the Coopermans I used to have, though (or is that Coopermen).
Maybe it’s the whistles I usually play, but when I first played a Clarke, I got dizzy! I probably was going for excessive volume, since I seem to have adapted to it.
I’m with you all the way on this one, buddy. I love the sound of the old clarke. And I do think it works best when played softly. Not a whistle for sessions.
Bottom line for me is the Clarke original (in C actually with the Bill Ochs book and cassette)is what got me started years ago in something which has steadily and increasingly become a passion and a joy. I was drawn to it, enjoyed learning on it, and whether I now enjoy playing other whistles or not, it still holds a fond place. I also love the way it looks (esp the “tacky” gold stuff) and have it proudly displayed atop our shiny black piano (the gold stuff makes for a nice contrast). All Hail Clarkes original! Phil (Last Train to Clarkesville) Osattin
There is a lot of variety between
individual classic Clarke’s, on account
of the wood block and rolled tin
construction. Some take lots of air,
etc., some (a few) don’t. I managed
to get a really good one (unpainted)
a few years ago and it’s one of
my favorite whistles. Some others
I can barely play.
I learned on my old C Clark, and was a trifle upset when it got slammed in a cardoor on a late beery Sat night. Happy to say it worked just as well after a whislte de-bending operation.
Who says ya gotta spend a lot of dough on an instrument…
I have an old Clarke C whistle which I bought in 9th grade, which would have been about 1979 or so.
It has lots of chiff and has a soft but almost harsh sound, especially on the high notes, where it easily shrieks. It takes a lot of air, carefully controlled, and has no resistance at all–it’s like “blowing down a barrel.” If you’ve heard any of the old recordings of Seamus Enis, this is very similar to the sound of his whistle.
I have had three different Clarke D originals all bought in the last five years or so. All have a much lower air requirement, are softer, and have a much cleaner and clearer sound with only moderate amounts of chiff. The upper octave in particular is clear and clean and doesn’t shriek, and the whistles have more resisitance. The size of the airway is visibly smaller on the new whistles. I consider them to be particularly fine whistles, even if somewhat soft for anything but at-home play.
i have a clarke c which was bought for me as a birthday present about 8 years ago.I, foolishly, didn’t like it at the time,being used to tootling away to the Dubliners and the Pogues on a redtop Generation and a Feadog mk1.,so it got filed away in a drawer.I now see this whistle in an entirely different light- it’s the 'original real thing’as far as i’m concerned now.it’s a totally different instrument from your plastic headed metal cylindrical type,and perhaps needs to be treated a little differently.certainly,as previous posters have noted,you aren’t going to dominate a session with one(!),but for solo playing at home they are a real alternative to most other ‘cheap end’ whistles. I bought a ‘d’ last year,following my return to whistledom and(mainly)the irish instrumental music tradition,and it’s really enjoyable to play.I have recently started to re-evaluate my original Clarke-apart from now recognising it’s true worth and the vast historical legacy which it embodies,i am slowly overcoming my dislike of ‘c’ whistles in general-they do have their uses!
Don’t get me wrong. I’m a fan of the Clarke original. It is the only whistle I ever play, other than a low D. All my other whistles (a Generation C, a Generation tabor pipe, and a Soodlums D) are in storage, and I haven’t seen them in years. I’ve never even tried a high-end whistle (such as Susato). Oh yeah, I have a Sweetone too, somewhere, but it’s a Clarke.
Of course, in my opinion, it depends on the session; A small one of probably no more than 6 or 7 people, a good Clarke would probably do just fine. Where as if you were playing in a session like the bluegrass one I played in.. (2-3 mandolins, 6 guitars, 1 upright bass, 1 fiddle, and 2 banjos playing at full dynamic range) a louder whistle would be better…
On 2002-07-19 21:47, Walden wrote:
It ain’t breathy like the Coopermans I used to have, though (or is that Coopermen).
Thinking about Coopermans makes me feel all warm and fuzzy. I learned on one. It’s a difficult whistle (very squeaky) but I have a soft spot in my heart for it, and I like it for fast songs, because it has kind of a “crunch” thing.
On 2002-07-20 02:18, Dewhistle wrote:
Maybe it’s the whistles I usually play, but when I first played a Clarke, I got dizzy! I probably was going for excessive volume, since I seem to have adapted to it.
This is just a thought, probably worth exactly what you paid for it, but…
I’ll grant you if your goal in session is for everyone else to hear you in particular, the Clarke is a bad choice, especially if the session is large or you are competing against loud instruments.
But what if your goal in session is to add to and enrich the total sound? Even a Clarke will add a different feel to a piece by changing the total blend of the sound.
Maybe there is a point where you no longer look at a session just as a chance for a bunch of soloists to all play the same music together and show off as much as possible?
No offense meant to anyone, just thinkin’ me thinks.
I mean, isn’t the whole point of a session for musicians to enjoy the music they’re creating??? I always thought it shouldn’t matter (unless you’re performing, of course) whether or not the onlookers could hear YOU… just as long as the musicians you’re playing with can hear you, and you are all enjoying what you’re playing… The feel of being able to contribute a little to the entire whole of the intricate landscape of sounds… But, I’m waxing poetic…
On 2002-07-21 00:01, peeplj wrote:
But what if your goal in session is to add to and enrich the total sound? Even a Clarke will add a different feel to a piece by changing the total blend of the sound.
The point, as I understood it, was that it is hard to hear oneself play when in a group of instruments. When playing it is important to hear oneself, or one will probably hit the wrong notes.
I cannot hear myself play, either, when other instruments are playing loudly. Even if I’m amplified, the sound doesn’t come back to me, and I might as well just not play, as it’s only messing the sound of the group up. If using a whistle with more volume, this could be overcome.
On 2002-07-21 00:38, Walden wrote:
Even if I’m amplified, the sound doesn’t come back to me, and I might as well just not play, as it’s only messing the sound of the group up. If using a whistle with more volume, this could be overcome.
Well, if you were amplified, you could always feed it back to headphones or an ear bud. I find when I’m playing along to a piece at home, it’s best to use my headphones with just one ear covered. That way, I hear the music in one ear, and myself in the other. Works wonders.
Without the amp, however, nothing beats sheer volume.
