Are conical whistles harder to play because of breath requirements? I have a Shaw Low F with a conical bore which is just a son-of-a… to play! I’m out of breath after about 3 notes on the thing. Obviously, low whistles take more breath to play, but is the Shaw especially hard? Just wondering as I thought I might buy a different brand with a round bore if it would be easier to play.
Shaw’s do have notoriously high breath requirements. I don’t know if it has anything to do with the conical bore or if it’s something with the fipple design. I’ve not played a low f of Steve’s, but I do have an A which I really love.
(This is also a good time to put in another plug for the low D I’m trying to sell )
I tried some Shaw Lows a few years ago. And while I appreciated the sound, the breath requirements were WAY too much for me. Currently, I play two conical Low Whistles. Both Copeland. Both much easier to blow than the Shaws. (I wish the Shaws could be tweaked to be easier players. Their sound is special.) Don’t judge low whistle breath needs by Shaws! I’d wager EVERY other make is easier.
Partly explains the cost - but mostly it’s because of all the hand tuning and voicing that goes into them - that nice finger spacing takes a lot of expert attention to get right. Also, Sweetheart are very strong on their quality control which results in some degree of additional time and labour.
With regard to Shaw whistles - yes they take a lot of air - it is the fipple design, yes Jerry tweekifies E, Eb, D and C models to fix this, but does not do low D’s (to my knowledge - Jerry?).
I supose a brave person might try to reduce the windway a bit - much as you would with a Clarke original, but with a higher cost if it fails
One could possibly email Dave Shaw and get advice (dave at daveshaw dot co dot UK).
Shaws have relatively high air requirements all the way up to and including the high D. A word of tweaking caution: the Shaws also have a lovely unique tone that may be difficult to fully retain when tweaking to make air requirements less.
As for conical low Ds, I have a Copeland which is fine for me but said to have high air requirements by others. For example, it takes a bit more air than the Overton I had, the Burke or O’riordan that I currently have. So as not to confuse, remember that the Overton requires more volume of air pushed through it but you will likely get more notes on a single breath than with a Copeland, therefore the Copeland’s higher “air requirements.”
Others with more knowledge may chime in here, but it seems to me that from all the varying experience, including my own, that air requirements may have to do with a good deal more than conical v cylindrical bore. For example, I never noted any problems with the conical Clarke originals (my very first whistles) with respect to air requirements, but others have from time to time noted their “high air requirements.”
There have been very few high D whistles which have caused me concern re air requirements; the only two I can think of right now are the very old Shaw and a very old original style Alba (have not noted this aspect in any of Stacey’s newer models).
My amateur guess would be that the air requirement for a given whistle results from the relationship of the mouthpiece to the bore and then as well the actual construction of the mouthpiece and the bore. Throw in a bit of subjective player experience and you’ve got a range of “air requirements,” most being manageable, but generally exacerbated by the length of the bore.
It’s true that my Copeland Low D takes a pretty good huff to keep things going. However, since I (like some others around here) play most of my music at “air speed,” it works out alright.
The Shaw Low D made the playing of even airs take on a Big Lung Effort. Wind through the willows is lovely…but hyperventilation brings early riff retirement.