On 2002-10-12 00:59, tomcat wrote:
…i got interupted in the middle of posting and vapor posted the picture during the interim
Yeah, that must be it. 
On 2002-10-11 20:13, PhilO wrote:
Ok, you guys, just answer my question will ya - Where does the Copeland rank on the chiff scale?Regards,
Philo
Philo, this is just from my own experience, but I’d rate Copeland soprano whistles on the low end of the chiff spectrum. I have a brass and a nickel soprano D and both have very little to no chiff at all. The nickel is one of the purest, most clear whistles I own.
~Larry
Don’t mind us, but you gotta love us >
Teri
I can’t believe I left that part out. I must’ve been in a rush. Mea culpa. 
(Actually, it goes without saying! I retract my mea culpa.)
Tony
Clips](http://nwparalegal.com/clipssnip/newspage.htm%22%3EClips) and Snips Tunes
Don’t believe everything you think.
[ This Message was edited by: TonyHiggins on 2002-10-12 13:52 ]
Am I wrong finding that the definition of “chiff” here still remains quite different from that of pipe-organ builders ?
Or am I mislead by things like :
http://www.ibiblio.org/pipeorgan/Pages/Noframes/Glossary.html#C-D
?
I wish Michael Copeland would give us his definition of “chiff”, since he seems one of the few with both organ and whistle building experiences.
On 2002-10-10 19:12, madguy wrote:
jim stone has given us the most eloquent and basic explanation of all, stating that, in it’s basic form, a tin whistle is a pipe - thus, in whistling, “chiff” is nothing more than the breathy (CH) sound when you attck (start) a note.It’s all that simple! >
‘Chiff’ is also a word used by designers of synth patches. I have a Kawai and checked out the chiff patch. There’s nothing of interest in the attack at all. The sound is just a very fuzzy, furry tone, something like an organ and something like a whistle.
I gotta say something radical here:
chiff is the breathy sound of
organ pipes, I said. Well, that sound
is definitely there on the attack,
but it can last through the note.
Breathiness persists, sometimes,
and then I find no principle by
which one shouldn’t call it
chiff then too. There’s gotta
be a word for the part of the
tone of an organ pipe that is
breathy and not melodic, whenever
it occurs. ‘Chiff’ is that word,
I submit. For what it’s worth.
I think Copeland whistles have
a lot of chiff, differing respectfully
from some earlier posts.
Sounds good to me, Jim. I think that’s pretty much what I meant by chiff all along.
Vaporlock, I think that one reason some of the whistles in your spectra show different levels of attack noise (what you and I call chiff) is that the volume of each whistle was different. So, if you look at the top line, you can see that the Hoover was much quieter overall than say the Busman. The chiff, then just might have fallen below the level of sensitivity of your microphone. Hence my earlier “controlled air source” suggestion.
Chas, I understand what you’re saying, and I sort of agree. The amount of attack noise (my use of the word chiff) will depend on the way the note is played (as you well point out) on a whistle, whereas on an organ, it’s played the same way all the time. But I’d say this - given the same way of playing a note, one whistle will have more attack noise than another because of the construction of the windway and edge.
Is all of this debate really useful? Does anyone really care all that much about what constitutes chiff and what doesn’t?
We’re here to talk about whistling, and that’s all! Seems to me, all of a sudden, there are these “elitists” who take up the whistle and, after a few months, think they know all there is to know about a simple to learn instrument!
Get over it!!!
~Larry
Larry, you don’t have a good word for anybody this morning, do you?
Perhaps some coffee would help.
Best,
–James
http://www.flutesite.com
Had plenty of coffee, thank you!
Four or so years ago this was a great place to be…Now, all of a sudden it seems to be a big group of people who think they know everything there is to know about a simple instrument! That’s all…
~Larry
But your comments in the past posts have helped me greatly!!!
–quote–
Had plenty of coffee, thank you!
Four or so years ago this was a great place to be…Now, all of a sudden it seems to be a big group of people who think they know everything there is to know about a simple instrument! That’s all…
~Larry
But your comments in the past posts have helped me greatly!!!
–endquote–
Well, yeah, we do have some self-proclaimed “experts” here, also some folks who really do know what they are doing, and yet more who are learning.
I wasn’t on the board in its beginnings, but just in the length of time I’ve been here I’ve seen the number of helpful posts drop, the number of sarcastic / complaining / negative posts skyrocket. I’ve seen one representative of a very popular whistle company pretty much forced to leave the board, and then I’ve seen another maker who was pretty much tried, convicted, and hung before he even had time to know the board was here or make his first post. I’ve seen a small “clique” of users who have a mutual admiration society going on and who attack anyone they perceive as incroaching on their territory with all the malicious cruelty of gradeschool playground bullies. I’ve seen beginners discouraged when they are in their most delicate phase of learning by overly negative posts and harsh criticism–some of these, sadly, will never touch a whistle or any other instrument again.
You want to see the boards be a friendly and welcoming place again where both the expert and the novice are equally at home? It starts with all of us only posting nice things, every time. Politeness is the foundation of every meaningful human communication, and this board is no exception.
Rant over, stepping away from soapbox…
–James
http://www.flutesite.com
On 2002-10-20 10:45, peeplj wrote:
You want to see the boards be a friendly and welcoming place again where both the expert and the novice are equally at home? It starts with all of us only posting nice things, every time. Politeness is the foundation of every meaningful human communication, and this board is no exception.Rant over, stepping away from soapbox…
–James
http://www.flutesite.com
I’m in no position to comment on how this place was four years ago. But in my short time here I’ve found people in general to be very helpful and courteous. I’ve only been rude once (under provocation) but I apologised and won’t be provoked again. Likewise hardly anybody has been rude to me. I tease a bit but I can take a tease—it’s all in good fun. I’ve learnt a lot and I do what little a relative newbie can do to help those even newer. But politeness is the key I’m sure.
On 2002-10-20 10:45, peeplj wrote:
I wasn’t on the board in its beginnings, but just in the length of time I’ve been here I’ve seen the number of helpful posts drop, the number of sarcastic / complaining / negative posts skyrocket. I’ve seen one representative of a very popular whistle company pretty much forced to leave the board, and then I’ve seen another maker who was pretty much tried, convicted, and hung before he even had time to know the board was here or make his first post. I’ve seen a small “clique” of users who have a mutual admiration society going on and who attack anyone they perceive as incroaching on their territory with all the malicious cruelty of gradeschool playground bullies.
As someone who has been here since the beginning, I’d have to say the number of helpful posts seem to have dropped most dramatically in the past year. I can only offer my opinion and assessment, of course, but I’d say it’s due to the response received when advice or guidance is offered. People who have decades of experience are kind enough to give their opinion only to be met with being labelled “know-it-all”, “higher life forms”, or argued with. If the result of your help is to be met with attack, why bother? In any other area such experience would be appreciated. I’m NOT saying ALL people don’t appreciate it, and I’m NOT saying the advice is the absolute word on the subject. What I am saying is very knowledgable players step up to help, give their time and energy with no reward, only to be resented. There seems to be level/ability attitudes here that I just don’t understand.
[/quote]
You want to see the boards be a friendly and welcoming place again where both the expert and the novice are equally at home? It starts with all of us only posting nice things, every time. Politeness is the foundation of every meaningful human communication, and this board is no exception.
[/quote]
I can’t speak for Larry on this, but I think what he’s referring to isn’t the politeness, but the out of control OT problem (what some perceive to be a problem). The original idea that this is a whistle/trad music board is long gone. This is a board where the members have that in common and meet to talk about their lives, politics, and religion with one another. I know, I know, freedom of speech, don’t read it if you don’t like it, yadda, yadda, yadda! If you look back on threads and see which ones receive the most attention, it’s very telling. We seem to enjoy our train wrecks most of all.
Teri
[ This Message was edited by: teri-k on 2002-10-20 12:35 ]
To hopefully bring this full circle, answer my question and bring relief to Larry, I guess I’m thinking in line with Jim in thinking Copelands chiffy.
Anyway, if as Paul states the material or wall thickness does not impact vibrations, perhaps it is conical bore that is one element causing that reverberative tonal quality of the Copeland? Other conical bores such as Shaw and Clarke originals seem to be in that class as well, but more as to breathiness and less as to reverberative quality or resonance.
The bore width doesn’t seem to impact these qualities. A word, Paul, Bill? Could it be that the conical shaping of the air column does it? (more irregular compression of the air column)
Larry - I know by now you’re thinking of the other meaning of “bore.” I know this is not devastatingly important, just a musing (no word play intended). NO need I guess to enter into the musings of others if you’d rather not; that’s fine.
Finally, I have found Avanutria, among others, to be nice, interesting, helpful, to the point and certainly worthy of feedback. I also don’t understand all this stuff about people who’ve been around for a long time, that’s nice, but so what? I’ve also been around the Board for a long time, and appreciate the input of many of the new members.
Take care all.
Regards,
Phil Osattin
Finally, I have found Avanutria, among others, to be nice, interesting, helpful, to the point and certainly worthy of feedback. I also don’t understand all this stuff about people who’ve been around for a long time, that’s nice, but so what? I’ve also been around the Board for a long time, and appreciate the input of many of the new members.
Take care all.
Regards,
Phil Osattin
The longevity of some members isn’t a badge of honor, or hierachy, or any other position to be noted, except that we may have a unique perspective on board evolution and trends. Possibly some predisposition to flagellate.
Teri
Larry -
Sorry if the chiff discussion offends you. As a scientist, I find the discussion fascinating, but I know it’s not everyone’s cup of tea. I also don’t consider myself an expert on the matter, and more than willing to hear other points of view. Chas, for example, has raised some good points that I had not considered. As for whether the board is here for discussion of this type, well, where else on the internet are you able to have a discussion on the exact meaning of chiff?
Probably nowhere else could a discussion of chiff be possible… I, for one, never even heard the word until here!!!
~Larry
Some here seem quite knowledgeable about pipe organs.
Does one know where to find an illustration of an organ’s flute equipped with a complete “beard” i.e. “ears” à la Copeland whistles, plus a cylinder across the mouth?
These are supposed to control the chiff.
[ This Message was edited by: Zubivka on 2002-10-22 03:50 ]