The two methods are actually very similar. Yesterday I made - rather, hacked - a whistle in 5 minutes using the alternate method. It does work, and I got a fairly decent whistle! That said, it looked and sounded definitely rough. When I make a whistle, it usually takes me an hour: fine-tuning and voicing takes time and very precise adjustments.
The problems with the fast method are:
it’s hard to cut the windway well using the scissors;
the half-moon lip is apparently less air-efficient and a lot breathier than a straight one. This problem can be alleviated if the lip is sharpened properly;
the fipple should be shaped to high precision, else the sound will suffer;
an untreated wooden fipple will soak up moisture.
So, in my view:
go with my directions if you want a high-quality whistle. I stress “high quality”! If you have the right pipe, you may get a fantastic instrument;
go with the 5-minute hack if you just need a quick-and-dirty whistle to try out.
Guido if can make a suggestion about your plan, it’s excellent, but it might be even better if you would put on the rough proportions (%) for the finger holes, since the measures that you have might not work for all people, bore width being different and stuff.
Ain’t that the truth! I made a few whistles (low ones) mostly because I was too cheap to buy one. I sure learned a lot. Currently I have a chunk of bamboo that I am planning to use for a whistle just to see what it will sound like. I think I am getting Whof (Whistle obsessive fabrication) disorder.
Go back and watch the video where the guy makes the hole template again. Not a good method. When he holds the template against the Susato whistle the holes are 1/4 inch or more off of his template markings. Rubber bands are not manufactured consistently enough to be used for measuring instruments and do not streatch at the same rate throughout their length. Also when he made the “three minute whistle” he drilled all the holes the same size and never told us what size drill bit he was using for any of the construction. You will also note that he did not play the whistle he made when he finished it. He failed to mention that the holes must be of differing sizes which lends in the whistle’s tuning. Look at any of the whistles you own and you will see for yourself. I don’t mean to sound huffy but making a whistle this way is a waste of time and material when with a little more effort and care you can make one that will sound good. The guy in Italy (Guido) knows his stuff. I wouldn’t care to play a whistle made by the guy on the video.
I would have to say after experimentation with the making of whistles the past few days, Guido is definitely A-1. I did manage to find 2 different percentages that seem to work rathar well.
#1. L1=43% L2=50% L3=58% R1=68% R2=73% R3=83%
#2. L1=45% L2=52% L3=61% R1=69% R2=75% R3=85%
Depending on comfortability of an individual’s fingers. Experimentation is fun!!!
Just starting on a couple of copper whistles: one D and one C.
Planning to do in a similar style to the old lead-fipple ones where there are only two pieces - the tube and the fipple block. I’m using epoxy resin for the block and plain copper plumbing pipe for the tube.
Does anyone know of any significant health issues with either of those? I will probably put some paint over the copper part of the “beak”…
I have an old lead fipple Generation in F (or thereabouts) for reference, but I’m not decided if I’m going to square off the profile at the fipple end or leave the mouthpiece round. Actually, I may try both.
I know the marine industry switched from lead to copper in their anti-fouling bottom paints when lead was declared a no-no in the waters.
Doesn’t sound good for copper…even if copper sounds good .
Seriously, I also would like to know about the possible difference between a copper mouthpiece and fingering a copper body. Should both be plated or otherwise covered up, or is just the mouthpiece an issue, or neither?
