. . .so why would the quality be radically different?
Many, many times on this board I’ve seen posts to the equivalent of “Acme D whistles are great, but their C doesn’t cut the mustard.” I don’t understand what, other than the obvious volume of a whistle, would cause such a variation in quality.
I don’t understand it either. But sometimes
a whistle design that works really well
in one key is pretty lackluster
in another. Where the D whistle sings
and sparkles, say, the C’s tone
is dull and much less interesting.
Or vice versa. Maybe our whistle making
friends, or resident physicists,
can help.
The first example of “why” that pops into mind is the Susato whistle. Now I could be guessing wrong but IMHO, the Kelischeks have tried to make too many whistles keys from one bore size. The Eb, C, D, & Bb that I own all have the same bore size. The C & D play pretty nicely. However the Eb is a bit too piercing on the high end while the Bb is a bit weak on the low end.
Feadan, when you say ‘bore size’ do you mean the interior cross section or the length?
On 2001-12-17 13:28, tyghress wrote:
Feadan, when you say ‘bore size’ do you mean the interior cross section or the length?
bore size = inside diameter of the tube (or, as you put it, the interior cross section)
Bore diameters must be calculated for “optimum” effeciency based on the wavelength of the Key Frequency. You can fudge this by adjusting the size and positioning of the toneholes,e.g. higher pitch-larger toneholes/lower pitch-smaller toneholes.
Molds for plastic injection are very expensive,so mass producers try to drill different tonehole sets into the same diameter tube.The keys on the high and low pitched ends suffer from weak tone and poor response.
Low Whistles should have a large bore,smaller toneholes and a constricted bore end to bring the finger positions together for comfort and to conserve the players wind. High Whistles should have small voicing and a narrow bore to spred the finger positions out and reduce shrillness/piercing tone.
Perfect whistles in each key require a lot of labor to produce so “less than popular” models are cost prohibitive to mass producers. If you do some research,you will find that most professional musicians have “one of a kind” instruments that are designed or modified just for them.
Thomas, you are wonderful! Thanks for the info!
There it is! The truth from a bona
fide expert. But the problem isn’t
limited to mass produced whistles,
I’m afraid. I’ve found whistles that are
hand made with lots of integrity
are better or worse depending on
the key–even though the whistle
is adapted by the maker
for the particular key.
I do wonder if designs have inherent limitations
that become pronounced as the key
lowers–even if bore size is increased,
and so on. But this is hand waving,
of course!
Okay, I’ve gleaned the following from some of the top instrument makers:
One simply can’t come up with a design that works in one key and then crunch the numbers to come up with the perfect specs for every other key, it just doesn’t work out perfectly in the end. Seems that following the numbers (as Thomas suggests) will only get you so far - then a whistlemaker’s experience, intuition and finally experimentation come in. Move a hole a little bit here, change the bore dimension a tad there, fool with the windway a touch…each time you mess with one of these you run the risk of having to readjust other things to keep it all going in the right direction. There are really infinite number of combinations of hole sizes, placements, amount of undercutting, window and windway size and shape, as well as bore diameter and wall thickness to mess with.
So…It seems an instrument maker will first focus on developing the best High and Low D they can because those are the most in-demand keys. They they’ll try to use the same headjoint and tube diameters etc. to knock out a couple of other keys (Eb and C are common) without spending a lifetime trying to find the optimum design for each key. Then, when they get to the point where performance becomes unacceptable (say by trying to make a Bb using the same bore diameter and head joint they optimized for a D whistle) the pick another key to start more or less designing from scratch.
Look a Sindt Whistles for example: One head joint and tube size for Eb and D, then John designed a separate C whistle with different sized tubing and headjoint. He did this, I’m sure, after trying to make a C whistle and with the D headjoint and tubing. John likely found the D design just wouldn’t work all the way down to C, so he built something new, realizing the the A and Bb whistles would have to be different (from the C) as well, but he knew the A and Bb could use the same headjoint and tube.
So, all of John’s whistles work very well (like them or not the do work exceptionally well), because he decided not to stretch the limits of each design too far. OTH, there are plenty of examples where the maker chooses to make an extreme stretch and the whislte’s playing characterestics suffer significantly - the old style Susato narrow bore A whistle immediately comes to mind, not a fun or rewarding whistle to play because it they had just strecthed a good design (for a higher whistle) too far. Eventually Susato redesigned the whistle and I’m sure it’s much more in line with the rest of their products now, in terms of performance.
Anyway…Ideally each key of whistle would have it’s own unique design, but very few makers would have the time or energy to mess that sort of R&D, especially if they have any sort of waiting list, so what we get are compromises that we have to accept.
Okay, so that’s what I learned on my summer vacation 
Loren
[ This Message was edited by: Loren on 2001-12-17 17:45 ]
Right on Loren!!!
Ronaldo
I want to point one thing out in addition to the good remarks already made.
In addition to needing a wider bore with length, flute-family instruments tend to have a more breathy sound with increasing length/lower pitch. A flute player, when switching from, say, flute to alto flute, will adjust her embouchure to partially compensate for this. In the case of the whistle, though, this must be incorporated into the fipple, and thus must be done by the designer/builder.
So to design a fipple for, say, a low-G, simply scaling up the design for a very good D, especially a chiffy one, may not work very well.
IMO, the prime example of a very nice family of whistles with a few clunkers is the Water Weasel – the Eb/D/C set (1/2" plumbing pipe) are really fine, as is the low-G (3/4", same pipe as the low-F, which I don’t own). However, the Bb/A (5/8") are just not that great sounding (especially when I play my Bb next to the Generation), although they’re just as playable as the others. The pipe seems to be heavier-walled relative to the diameter (I swear I could defend myself with the Bb), which may have some bearing on the sound.
Charlie
Each tonehole has it’s own performance frequency that defines harmonics and how high it will go in frequency. In instrument making it is called “Local Cutoff Frequency”. If you make whistle with pattern of certain hole sizes, that local cutoff frequency may work well with certain keys but then it is problem with other keys that stretch the limit.
So some extent, the limits can be stretched but there is a lot extra work involved - many don’t bother with it because the extra keys don’t justify the cost. You’ll find unusual keys more in PVC than wood because the R&D is lot less costly.
On 2001-12-17 18:39, chas wrote:
IMO, the prime example of a very nice family of whistles with a few clunkers is the Water Weasel – the Eb/D/C set (1/2" plumbing pipe) are really fine, as is the low-G (3/4", same pipe as the low-F, which I don’t own). However, the Bb/A (5/8") are just not that great sounding (especially when I play my Bb next to the Generation), although they’re just as playable as the others. The pipe seems to be heavier-walled relative to the diameter (I swear I could defend myself with the Bb), which may have some bearing on the sound.
Charlie
Just goes to show you that everyone likes something different. The Bb/A Water Weasels are easily my favorite whistles by any maker in any key! About a year ago there was a discussion about this, and several others also thought they were amazing whistles. My Bb/A Weasels have the most amazing, flexible tone, almost bluesy at normal breath pressure, and a great honking sound when you lean into them. Maybe not Trad, but wonderful & unique. They are also the best for half holing. I can play a pretty good fully chromatic scale with one. Can’t do that with any other whistle.
I recently sold off most of my collection and after agonizing for some time I kept my Water Weasels over everything else. It was the Bb/A’s that I couldn’t part with, but the C&D whistles are also great. They have a purer timbre with a bit of reediness to the tone, which I love. All of them are very easy to play, at least for me. I guess partly due to the different bores the C/D’s are very different from the Bb/A’s.
Strangely, the only Weasel I din’t love was the low G. It was OK, but didn’t have the wonderful sound of the Bb/A’s, and didn’t respond as well when I leaned into it. I don’t have it anymore.
I just ordered an “F” Water Weasel from Glenn. I hope it’s a good one, as the lowest whistle I own is the weasel A.
On 2001-12-17 19:40, bruceb wrote:
Just goes to show you that everyone likes something different. The Bb/A Water Weasels are easily my favorite whistles by any maker in any key! About a year ago there was a discussion about this, and several others also thought they were amazing whistles. My Bb/A Weasels have the most amazing, flexible tone, almost bluesy at normal breath pressure, and a great honking sound when you lean into them. Maybe not Trad, but wonderful & unique. They are also the best for half holing. I can play a pretty good fully chromatic scale with one. Can’t do that with any other whistle.
. . .
Strangely, the only Weasel I din’t love was the low G. It was OK, but didn’t have the wonderful sound of the Bb/A’s, and didn’t respond as well when I leaned into it. I don’t have it anymore.
I just ordered an “F” Water Weasel from Glenn. I hope it’s a good one, as the lowest whistle I own is the weasel A.
The F is the “partner” of the G. I don’t own one and have heard nothing about them, so don’t know if it’s similar.
I don’t dislike the A and Bb at all – I just don’t think they’re nearly as special as the C and G. I just got the Bb recently, and on the second play I liked it much more than at first – It may yet become a favorite. I think one thing that enables the half-holing on this set is the large size of the holes, which is partly a result of the large bore. I sometimes have a really difficult time covering them – I usually use the pipers grip even on the A.
Charlie
Really interesting thread. I think Loren’s thesis is correct. Let’s call this Loren’s Law:
Given whistle design X:
If the maker sticks to design X, scaling it up and down in size to extend the range of key offerings, the quality of the whistles will be diminished somewhere along this range.
If the maker wants to maintain a high level of quality across the range of keys, he or she must make modifications in design X along this range.
Beautiful. Elegant. Let me illustrate further with this diagram:
I think the Copeland holds up well across the range with few apparent, major accommodations in the design, although he does, for example, put the walls around the window in the lower keys. It is rumored that the Copeland high C is the weak link in the range of offerings.
Dale
[ This Message was edited by: DaleWisely on 2001-12-18 00:40 ]
Dale, you know, you realy need to stop playing with that Van De Graff generator. Soon I fear your going to top that 4 foot monster sub woofer I saw on another post!!
Thanks Ronaldo
On 2001-12-18 00:38, DaleWisely wrote:
Really interesting thread. I think Loren’s thesis is correct. Let’s call this Loren’s Law:Given whistle design X:
If the maker sticks to design X, scaling it up and down in size to extend the range of key offerings, the quality of the whistles will be diminished somewhere along this range.
If the maker wants to maintain a high level of quality across the range of keys, he or she must make modifications in design X along this range.
Beautiful. Elegant. Let me illustrate further with this diagram:
I think the Copeland holds up well across the range with few apparent, major accommodations in the design, although he does, for example, put the walls around the window in the lower keys. It is rumored that the Copeland high C is the weak link in the range of offerings.
Dale
[ This Message was edited by: DaleWisely on 2001-12-18 00:40 ]
Wow Dale, I’m honored! Loren’s Law, I like the sound of that, heh heh.
By the way Dale: I have a Copeland Nickel C that would make you weak in the knees - Easily the best Copeland I’ve got, by far. (Notice it’s not up for sale like the others?) It’s odd though; I’ve spoken with one other person recently who has a great Copeland C, and several who have had bad experiences with that key Copeland. Mine is relatively new, about a year old, maybe less. I wonder if Mike and Jim changed anything in the design recently?
Loren
Dale. . .carefully now. . .put the Crystal Person DOWN and step back. . .they’re messin’ with your mind. . .
Okay, after playing them all a bit…I take it back: The A Copeland I have is better than the Nickel C, if only because it has the most balanced volume between octaves. In fact the Copeland A has better balance between the octaves than almost any other whistle I’ve played.
Geeze, one more whistle I’ve convinced myself not to sell. I’m never gonna pay the rent now…
Thank you Dale,for your enlightened diagram. It all comes together now! Such simple elegance! If you can re-insert your tongue in your cheek…
I have dicovered a secret paper from Sri-Lanka on removing those nasty spit clogs using Molecular technology!
Molecular](http://members.iinet.net.au/~steveb/danforth/dan1.html%22%3EMolecular) Water Displacement
I’m sure this will set the world of whistle technology on it’s ear!!!
[ This Message was edited by: Thomas-Hastay on 2001-12-18 14:43 ]