Not So Low, Low Whistle Key.

Whistle
1

Hello There,

After a couple of years with various High D’s I took the plunge and tried my first Low D recently (a Kerry Optima) it felt VAST and despite being a Low D with a relatively ‘easy’ reach my tiny hands and slim fingers struggled to cover the holes and I’ve since parted with it. However I still wish to go go Low (ish), one friend has suggested a Low F, another Low G (they favoured the MK Kelpie and Susato respectively) as these are both relatively comfortable to play and occupy a range that encompasses the High and the Low.

Any other suggestions (both key and maker)?

2

Hmmmm? Let’s see. You listed, what, nine whistles in a month on another thread. Right? You’re on a trajectory for 80 some whistles in a year.

So, get it over with. You will eventually buy a whistle (or two or three) in every key made. So you may as well get on with it.

From what you have mentioned, you’ve got whistle you like in D, C and Bb. So here’s the plan.

Get the rest of the Generation family - high G, F, C and Eb. Might as well. Everyone has to have these - even just to complain about them.

Then get a low A and a B natural. Follow those with the low G and the low F.

After a bit you could look for a low E and then the Eb.

Once comfortable with those, see if you can get that Optima back. It is really a decent low D whistle, especially for a new low whistle player.

Then you can get the low C and maybe fill in on the flat keys.

Resistance is futile.

Suggestions of a maker? Hmmm? Depends on what playing characteristics and timbre you prefer. Any whistle I suggest would likely not suit you. Same might be true for anyone else’s suggestions too. It’s all relative to our own preferences, experience and skills.

Besides my own homemade whistles, I’m playing Burkes in all the keys (that I need), and in all the different materials (but not in all keys). It’s only a couple dozen whistles or so. But they are solid, tuned well and share the exact same playing characteristics across the board. No surprises from key to key. Or maybe Goldies, Brackers, etc., etc., etc.. Lots of very good whistles out there.

Feadoggie

3

Get a Dixon TB012D.


David

4

Great post Feadoggie!

I have, over the years, heard many people express the notion that the ‘ideal’ whistles (whatever that means) are ones around F or G.

I myself have never been especially taken with that area of the gamut, preferring Low D and other lows (C, Eb, E) or up at the other end D or C.

At the moment I’m really liking my new Sindt Bb however, and over the years I’ve certainly run into people who preferred old Generation Bb’s over all other whistles.

I find it interesting that MK has up to the present only offered whistles in Low D and F. I wonder if this was out of personal preference or customer demand.

Anyhow as Feadoggie says Burkes are solid and extremely even across the various keys. Or for a completely different tone and performance style go with an MK F, or any of the middle keys from Goldie.

5

I’ve been very happy lately playing an G whistle by Becker, and
thinking of spending some serious money on a high grade instrument,
probably a Bracker.

6

I also agree with Feadoggie, though not in so many words. If you went straight from a D, dabbled in C and Bflat, then the jump to a low D may just be too great. Don’t forget that scales are geometric, so while the difference in length between a D and Eflat is a scant half-inch, for the low D and low Eflat, it’s almost an inch. So go for an A or low-G, see how that goes for a few months, and if it goes OK, try a low-F.

For the medium whistles, I like Water Weasels, which are unfortunately no longer available and so good that they come on the market quite rarely. I had a Burke low-G that was almost too perfect. Great sound and response. Never found an F that I liked.

7

After reading the original question I was immediately thinking of suggesting that you try a low G for a while as an intermediate step, and several others have already made the same suggestion.

It will get you used to the greater span, and you can play many tunes you’ll already know from the high D on a G whistle (in the same key as you already know them I mean, different fingerings). Then the additional increase from the G to the low D won’t seem so bad.

At the risk of sounding harsh, you might also have to accept that you’re expecting too much too quickly, and you need to work on what you’ve got for a while before discarding it in search of another quick fix. Playing music just ain’t like that I’m afraid …

8

Not even a Burke F? I have Burkes in A, G, F, Eb, and D and they all play nearly identically. It’s one of the great things about Burkes, they play so similarly over the various sizes.

My Burke F is a wonderful player… but I’m thinking about getting an MK F. Never played one, but based on how well MK Ds play they should be great.

9

Not even a Burke F? I have Burkes in A, G, F, Eb, and D and they all play nearly identically. It’s one of the great things about Burkes, they play so similarly over the various sizes.
{/quote]

Not even a Grinter. The key of F just doesn’t do it for me. I’ve kept the Water Weasel for completeness.

As I said, the Burke G was almost too perfect. I still love my Burke old-style wide-bore brass (thought the session model was a huge step backward), but I’ve sold the rest of my Burkes except the low-D. There’s a saying among engineers that the perfect is the enemy of the excellent.* I guess with whistles, I find that an almost-perfect sound is kind of bland; I like the sound a little dirt or buzz in the sound.

10

I’m sort of the opposite, as I use an MK Low D (or a Reyburn depending on context) but have Burkes in other low keys (Eb, F, G, A).


Ha a good quote! Though in opposition I will offer the old piping quote “there are no perfect reeds… we have to learn to do the best we can with the imperfect ones”.

And the one told me by a professional tuba player “the perfect wind instrument can never be made… we have to learn how to sound as good as we can on the imperfect ones”.

So while ‘perfect’ is perhaps attainable in certain types of engineering, such is not the case with wind instruments. The ‘perfect whistle’ cannot be made because the musician’s demand for ultimate flexibility collides with the whistle’s fixed tone production mechanism and fixed bore size. The bore that’s optimal for the 2nd octave is different than the bore that’s optimal for the low octave… in fact, to be optimal each note of the scale needs its own specific bore (like on panpipes) and its own fipple (like on organ pipes). Any whistle therefore is a bundle of compromises, a low range that’s just stable enough married to a high range that’s just sweet enough.

In my opinion all Burkes have bores which are just a tad too big for their pitch. That old narrow-bore Susato A demonstrated the many benefits of a narrower bore.

11

Be interested to read the response(s) to this. Not sure if other whistle-makers will comment publicly, but their insights would be particularly illuminating.

Best wishes.

Steve

12

Yes, that’s an interesting subject, Steve. It’s all relative to what the player is looking for and comfortable with, I think. What do you prefer, Steve?

Richard likes what he likes. That’s fine.

I happen to like the Burke standard bores and think they are pretty much ideal - for what I am looking for and how I expect a whistle to perform. But I also play the narrow bore Burkes, in the keys in which the narrow bore is offered, when I might want a slightly sweeter voice in the top end. So I see it as a matter of choice and preference.

There’s no “one ring to rule them all”. I make high D whistles in a couple bores myself. I might prefer a high D with a 1/2" bore but many players want something a bit smaller. I’ve observed that the majority of beginners gravitate towards narrow(ish) bores while experienced players go towards toward large(ish) bores - but not always. I’d think a maker might make what they prefer (first choice) but also offer what many other players seek (second choice). Different strokes. Horses for courses. Variety and spice. Blah, blah, blah.

I think Hans Bracker has offered a nice analysis of bore sizes on his website. Maybe a review of that would be a good place to start. And we all know Hans offers a wide array of whistle models in differing bores.

We could spend a lot of time and words on the relative merits and advantages of one length-to-bore ratio over another but I am afraid it wouldn’t result in anything particularly definitive. It is worth talking about certainly. It’s going to come down to a matter of preference, I expect.

Yes, at some point a bore is too large or too small to produce the required range of notes well. No need to talk about that. Right?

How many players actually know the length-to-bore ratio of the whistle they like to play?

Feadoggie

13

Think I tried High Ds in four different bores on one visit to Hans, including an extra-wide (experimental?) model that he’s not currently advertising/selling. Which was even wider than a Chieftain, but still produced the full two octaves without any trick fingerings (which my now-sold higher Chieftains wouldn’t). So I’d say Hans knows a thing or two about working with different whistle bores.

14



I hope my comment didn’t come across as my being skeptical of Richard’s opinion. Far from it. I was more wondering just how much impact the length-to-bore ration had on a whistle as compared to other variables such as the size and shape of the various elements of the head, the materials of either the head or tube, finger-hole size/placement, etc. I never really thought about the length-to-bore ratio in the whistles I have. I’ve been more interested in their outside diameter—I tend to prefer larger diameters because I feel like I have a better grip.

But, after your asking, I went through the whistles I like most and, in fact they tend to be larger bores: a new-to-me Thin Weasel, Jerry’s Mellow Dog and a Busman are all in the front row. That being said, a Kilarney is what I use most when playing with others, mostly because the sound seems to stand up better in a group.

Best wishes.

Steve

15

I’m certainly nearly entirely ignorant of whistle design.

Empirically though I’ve seen over the years that when the bore gets to a certain size high A and especially high B get touchy to attack, less stable, slightly harsh of tone, and loud.

Having started out when only Generations were around (well, and Clark C’s) I got used to the easy sweet nimble 2nd octaves good Generations have, I was underwhelmed when I got some early Susatos (machined PVC, wooden block) which had clearly larger bores for length. The 2nd octaves were very loud and difficult/tricky and harsh. These just couldn’t be played in the same style because the 2nd octave didn’t speak easily enough or quickly enough.

I’ve got used to Burkes. I have them in high D (session bore) and low D and several in between and they’re great whistles. However when I compare, for example, my Burke A to my homemade Generation A and my Sindt A it’s quite clear that the Burke, with its larger bore, isn’t as responsive/quick/nimble/sweet/stable on the high notes of the 2nd octave (particularly high B).

Ditto comparing my MK Low D and the couple Burke Low Ds I’ve had. You don’t have to force out the high notes on the MK; they sound with a relatively subtle change in breath. The MK tube is smaller than the Burke.

It’s simply a matter of what end of the gamut you want to emphasize: all Burkes have very powerful bellnotes that the other whistles can’t come close to matching, and their entire low octaves are stronger, which of course follows from a bigger bore.

16

I love me some good thread drift.

Let’s put some numbers onto this discussion. Here’s a table with the approximate aspect ratios of some of the whistles that have been mentioned:

MK low D: 23.9
Susato SB A: 29.6
Susato SB Bb: 27.8
Susato SB B: 26.0
Susato SB C: 24.4
Susato SB Db: 22.8
Susato SB D: 21.1
Susato SB Eb: 20.0

So, going just by the aspect ratios, an MK D should play most like a Susato SB C. (And yes, I’m well aware that there are scores of other variables here.) But wait, there may be more to just aspect ratio: http://www.navaching.com/shaku/equiv.html

The basic idea is that “Flutes should get skinnier as they grow longer and fatter as they shorten”, in order to maintain the same tonal character and response. To be “the same”, lower whistles should be thinner, proportionally, than higher whistles. I think I’ve also read about how organ builders double the bore at the 15th pipe or so, instead of at the 12th, due to the same principle.

How does that change our numbers? Here’s the table from above, with approximate equivalent aspect ratio (EAR) after the aspect ratio, and in parentheses:
MK low D: 23.9 (EAR 23.8)
Susato SB A: 29.6 (EAR 31.8)
Susato SB Bb: 27.8 (EAR 30.1)
Susato SB B: 26.0 (EAR 28.6)
Susato SB C: 24.4 (EAR 27.0)
Susato SB Db: 22.8 (EAR 25.6)
Susato SB D: 21.1 (EAR 24.2)
Susato SB Eb: 20.0 (EAR 22.9)

So if we go by equivalent aspect ratio, the MK low D should play most like the Susato SB D.

So, I’m curious. Which Susato do you think the MK D plays like? Is equivalent aspect ratio worth the extra math? Is it not directly applicable to fipple flutes at all?

Also, what is the difference in internal diameter between an MK D and a Burke low D? What about A–what’s the ID of a Burke A?

17

Also, in response to the OP:

I’d personally buy the MK in F, or a Burke or Bracker in G or A. In fact, those are what I have my eye on at the moment!

Especially since you’re in the UK, take a look at Bracker. He makes very nice instruments, and is happy to customize hole placement.

18

Interestingly, the profile for the OP reads, “The requested user does not exist.”

“Something’s happening here, what it is ain’t exactly clear…” Buffalo Springfield

Best wishes.

Steve

19

Interesting idea about EAR (Equivalent Aspect Ratio), I have not come across it till now. But, having looked at the formula presented on that Shaku Design page, it looks equivalent to the formula I used for creating the Whistle Bore Diameters Graph. Both use an exponent of 5/6 (on length and frequency respectively). This corresponds to a doubling in bore diameter when you go up the scale 14.4 semitones, and this maintains the same Q value, and therefore the perceived timbre. So, yes, it applies to whistles and other flutes. The standard bore for a shakuhachi I think is different than for a whistle (somewhat thinner), but the scaling principle looks the same.

Is calculating EAR worth the extra math? Well, not for me. I prefer not to use that concept, and as designer deal with the bore diameter directly, relative to a whistle key. So I rather consult the graph and not worry about the math, as it is already done in the graph. And talking about whistle bores I find it more meaningful to talk about specific bore sizes for a given key, and compare bores on that basis. For instance fora high D whistle 12.7mm or 1/2" bore is about optimal, 12mm I regard as narrow bore, and 14 mm as wide bore. 15mm would be extremely wide bore.

I don’t think any longer about Length to Bore ratio (even though the finger hole calculator on my site still displays that value), as it is a value which is not useful to compare whistle bores of different keys. EAR conceptually would be, but I rather see where a whistle lies on the Whistle Bore Diameters graph, i.e. its deviation left or right (narrow or wider bore) relative to the optimum line. This is good enough for my purposes. (PS: I will change the Hole Calculator to use some form of EAR instead of Length to Bore ratio, adjusted to whistle bores, so thanks for bringing this up!)

As to comparing different makes of whistles: the relative bore size is just one factor determining the tone of a whistle. It can only give some indication how a whistle may perform. Window design and size and finger holes are far more important, and better indicators IMO. But often a wider bore whistle will have a wider window for instance, because the bore allows it, and plays accordingly louder and with a different tone. But it could just as well have a smaller window and play quieter, if one wants that kind of design. And finger hole sizes should be in some relationship to window size. Not much good to have a large window and rather small finger holes, or vice versa, for best tone quality.

20

Very interesting stuff there Stanton!

It’s long been my experience that Susatos get better as they get lower, the Low D and Low C being the best of the lot IMHO, probably because I like the performance of narrower-bore whistles. Those Susatos had easy sweet responsive 2nd octaves.

The high Susatos I got back around 1980 not so much (the original machined wood-block type). The high D, for example, had a bore, as I recall, somewhere between a Generation C and a Generation Bb, and performed as one might expect, with a difficult 2nd octave. That whistle was the loudest high D ever. The mezzo G also had a bore too large for its length. The A was narrower and was a much better player. Susato only had a certain number of PVC tube sizes that they worked with, evidently, and it was hit-or-miss whether or not the bore size would be appropriate for the pitch.

Hans I wasn’t really addressing tone in the sense of the overall tone of the whistle, but rather ‘action’, except in regard to the fact that the larger the bore is the more difficult the 2nd octave is to produce, making the high notes sound ‘forced’ (as they used to say) if the bore is too big.

It’s perhaps instructive that Low D’s by MK, Reviol, Chieftan, Overton, and Kerry all use a 7/8" bore but the Burke uses a 1" bore.