Just be aware that moving the holes around, on a cylindrical-bore whistle, ALWAYS comes at a price. It’s the law: the laws of acoustics.
Move the holes away from their acoustically correct positions and the evenness of the volume, timbre, and performance of the various notes is damaged.
It’s not by accident that these different makers of good-playing Low Ds have their hole positions about the same: they’re forced to, by acoustics and human anatomy. Any of these makers could move the holes elswhere; but the result would be a whistle that doesn’t play as well.
What DOES help is using a conical bore, which allows the lower three holes to be closer together due to the contaction of the bore.
Someone mentioned offset holes. I’m not a fan of them. The piper’s grip allows in-line holes to be sealed comfortably.
Exactly, it isn’t an accident. What we are seeing are three whistles that are designed, in part, around the placement of the holes, not three whistles whose hole placement was determined strictly by the whistle’s bore. Three different whistles, three different bore diameters, holes nearly identical.
Carbony whistles have a tapered bore. What he did was just move them to one side a bit for me - not quite ‘offset’ because they’re still in a row.. just over some. So instead of having to stick my elbow out a bit, and losing feeling in those fingers, I can keep my hand at a natural angle across the holes - still utilizing the piper’s grip.
I should note that tonally, I can’t tell a difference between my whistle and the lender - still nice sound through both octaves and into the 3rd.
I did not include Wall Thickness because it is detremental to correct pitch in the upper registers. As the internal pressure increases, the air column pushes up into deep toneholes and flattens the notes and the scale. Anyone who owns a cylindrical whistle with deep toneholes will know that they must constantly increase breath pressure to correct flatness of notes in upper registers leading to shrill tones. This flatness increases with each upper register. Best results are between 1/16th to 1/8th inch wall thickness and “undercut” toneholes help.
As for conical whistles that are longer than cylindrical(?) Toneholes are placed within boundries called Anti-nodes. A tonehole is smaller in the upper end of the “box” and will increase in size as you place it lower down the bore. The angle of the conical bore determines the spacing of the Anti-node “boxes”. This and slightly differnt sized toneholes, can give the illusion of a longer bore, especially if the toneholes are deeper.
I got a kind email back from Rob Gandara “… I do custom work and can modify the hole size and rotation. I would be happy to exchange emails with you to design one that you would enjoy playing.” I think I’m going to go that route. I don’t live where I can play lots of whistles. Having one that is comfortable and enjoyable from the start is very appealing. Thanks for the referral!
You simply cannot ignore the wall thickness if you want to produce a whistle that is in tune - I know, I’ve been making them for 6 years now. Nor was my tape measure providing me with an illusion when I compared the two Copeland whistles - the new one was 1/2" longer, as measured from the blown edge to the bell end, when they were both in tune and tuned to each other. The pitch of the taper of the bore was the same. The physics you are explaining aren’t wrong, you simply aren’t taking everything into consideration.
From what I have seen in my whistles, and in the whistles from other makers that I have had, increasing the bore does not necessarily translate into a shorter hole pattern. Wall thickness - as you have just explained yourself, has an impact on this - for the very same reason you say you chose to ignore it. If the placement of the tone hole gives a flat note in the upper register, then the hole placement is too low - you simply move it up slightly on the next one. This is also why, if you have ever watched someone voice a whistle or particularly a flute, the upper register is done first, and provided the instrument was any good to begin with, little work is needed in the lower register after that.
With regard to the low whistle, some makers have been open about taking the overall spread of the holes into consideration when redesigning their whistles - this isn’t some extrapolation on my part. But to understand this, you need to be concerned with every aspect of the whistle’s design, not just the bore - even the angle at which the airstream hits the blown edge will have an affect on tone and pitch. Every aspect of the whistle has an impact on tuning, that is why we are able to make different whistles with very different designs, from different materials, of varying diameters, and varying lengths - all in the same key, and all in tune. Otherwise, there would be but ONE formula for each whistle key, and nothing else would produce one that is in tune - and obviously, that isn’t the case at all.
Yes any whistle maker CAN modify hole size, but all the makers that make really good-playing whistles have nearly identical hole size and spacing, because to move the holes elsewhere would result in a whistle that doesn’t play as well, a whistle that has uneven voicing, that is, some notes remain strong but other notes are feeble.
Playing a whistle that plays as well as a Low D can play is what’s appealing to me! Playing a whistle that has uneven voicing, with some feeble notes, doesn’t appeal to me at all.
It reminds me of a conversation I had with Michael Burke. I suggested to him that he might consider moving holes 4 and 5 a tad closer together, because it’s been my experience that if two of your fingers are closer together it allows the third to stretch further comfortably. The goal is to place hole 6 as far down the tube as practical, as Low E is usually the Low D’s weakest note.
He wouldn’t hear of it. “I am not interested in making mediocre whistles” was his reply. The spacing he arrived at produced the most even voicing possible and he wasn’t interested in making whistles any other way. And it’s true that the voicing on Burkes is extraordinarily smooth and even. Good for him!
