I’m rather off topic here, but I thought that some of you might be interested in a book I stumbled upon recently. It is “Altered Sensations” by David Pantalony, a book about Rudolph Koenig’s Parisian workshop and the role it played in the creation of modern acoustics. The first chapter, for example, is about Koenig’s transition from violin maker to a maker of precision scientific apparatus such as tuning forks and resonators. By the end of the 19th century, his tuning forks became the established standards around the world. Very interesting. This book may put the pitch changes of our instrument into better context. Here’s a link to the publisher’s details. The beginning of the book is readable online. http://www.springer.com/humanities/history/book/978-90-481-2815-0
Interesting reading, and page 22 is a help towards understanding why hollow mainstocks might assist the sound we perceive.
I find some acoustic theory interesting, but overall its a pretty useless subject as it doesn’t help you play the pipes any better and it doesn’t help you make better reeds and the same probably goes for pipemaking. Its like the theory can only in part explain what we already know from listening.
RORY
So? Does every subject need some practical value? Do you (and unfortunately a lot of funding bodies these days 
) not think it’s worthwhile to do research just for the sake of increasing knowledge and not necessarily for any pragmatic purpose? Do you really think that the only subjects worth studying are ones with practical applications and everything else, say most humanities subjects, is useless and shouldn’t be bothered with?
As far as I am concerned, it doesn’t matter whether the history of acoustics or acoustic theory helps you play better or make better reeds or whatever. It’s knowledge for knowledge’s sake, which has its own inherent value.
Here. David Mitchell, writing for the Guardian, said it far more eloquently than I ever could: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/sep/27/david-mitchell-pointless-studies-survey.
Right… getting on with my useless research of the day.
I think that it’s impossible for a human being to make a set of pipes without formulating some sort of acoustic theory, even if sub-consciously. The nature of the activity is such that you can’t avoid having some sort of conceptual framework for “how the thing works”.
It’s far better that such theories have at least some grounding in scientific acoustics than to just make them up from a mix of isolated observations, anecdotes, and baseless conjecture. I’ve seen countless “explanations” of pipe acoustics from people without such grounding, and most of the time they are demonstrably rubbish.
I also think that current acoustic theory, though apparently not adequate to completely predict the behavior of uilleann pipe chanters, has practical application… and some very well respected pipemakers seem to agree.
“It’s far better that such theories have at least some grounding in scientific acoustics than to just make them up from a mix of isolated observations, anecdotes, and baseless conjecture…”
Aye, that’s what university humanities departments are for.
Or, at least it explains their “physics envy”…
Does nothing for global warming, either.
This is another good book with both some theory and application:
http://windworld.com/products-page/books--cds/air-columns-and-toneholes-principles-for-wind-instrument-design/
From the same company, I found a book on amplification of acoustic instruments:
http://windworld.com/products-page/books--cds/getting-a-bigger-sound/
…which is very helpful for those of us who play pipes with electric guitars, bass and drums…
Even seemingly pointless research has a purpose and that is to give funding bodies a reason to spend their allotted budget and so claim an increased budget the following year. So all research has a practical value except humanities of course, which is a total waste of tax payers money.
Maybe people have a different idea of what acoustic theory is ,but my idea of acoustic theory is the method of explaining how acoustics work in the form of mathematical equations and algebraic formulae with a spattering of graphs and pie charts, its useless to a musician or reedmaker because it cannot be practically applied . If I understand Bill correctly I think what he’s describing is empirically acquired skill and experience gained over many years not conceptualized theories. Bk is probably the best reed maker in the world not because he has diligently studied the laws of acoustics but because he has been making reeds for more than thirty years and has probably learned something from every reed he has made.
RORY
I went through dozens of lengthy calculations and finally came up with this one simple formula for my chanters:
V=11
“Even seemingly pointless research has a purpose and that is to give funding bodies a reason to spend their allotted budget and so claim an increased budget the following year. So all research has a practical value except humanities of course, which is a total waste of tax payers money.”
I really hope you’re taking the piss, dude.