OZ whistles serial numbers

Whistle
1

I’ll preface this post with the following, because I know someone will say “just contact the maker”: Normally I’d contact Mitch directly for information, however it’s my understanding that he has been having significant health issues in recent years, so I’m not comfortable troubling at this point in time over something trivial.

So I’m curious, does anyone know anything about the (at least) 2 different serial numbering systems Mitch used on OZ whistles? The one I have seen in person has a letter and a 3 digit number. Alternately, Mitch and an owner mentioned a specific 5 digit, all numbers system in a post here on the forum some years back. (Yes, I’ve searched the forum archives to try to find an answer to my questions)

Does anyone know:

  1. Which of the two numbering systems came first?

  2. What specific information, if any, is contained in the numbers? Production date? Type of wood? Etc.

  3. If there is no production date information contained in the serial numbers, does anyone know what the approximate time frames are for when each serial numbering system was used? Or at least which came first?

Any information would be appreciated, thanks.

2

Hello Loren
I bought my Blackwood OZ middle of 2018. I think it was one of the last Blackwood whistles Mitch made. I remember when I contacted. him some months earlier he said he was only making his Delrin model but after some back and forth he said he had “found a stray piece of Blackwood in the shed” and some months later mine arrived.
It has a number on one of the silver rings which I am having some trouble deciphering- I think it reads X219.
Hope this helps

3

My Oz high D whistle is definitely older than JTUs, but I’m not sure exactly how old since I bought it used.
Its serial number is 80202, so I presume this format came first.

The serial number is on the bronze ring on the head side of the tuning slide. I’m not sure what wood mine is made of. It is a dark brown wood that looks like cocuswood, but with a bit more grain structure. I suspect it may be gidgee.

4

Hi JTU,

Thanks, that’s all very helpful. So apparently the X+3 numbers system came after the 5 digit system. Interesting details about 2018 being essentially the end of wooden whistle production OZ. I suspect production in general was nearly done by that point.

I hope you’ve enjoyed your whistle JTU. I always liked Mitch and his whistles seem well made and highly regarded. Thanks again for taking the time me to share the info, I appreciate it.

5

Thanks Jonathan, that Jives with JTU’s info and would seem to confirm your conclusion.

The serial number is on the bronze ring on the head side of the tuning slide. I’m not sure what wood mine is made of. It is a dark brown wood that looks like cocuswood, but with a bit more grain structure. I suspect it may be gidgee.

That’s the location I’ve seen both types of serial numbers stamped. Perhaps Mitch simply ran out of room to add an additional number past a certain point and that’s the reason for the switch to alpha numeric? One possibility anyway.

And yes, that sounds like your whistle is most likely gidgee. I believe Mitch used that wood quite a lot, though I know he also used some other dark brown woods occasionally as well, including some cocus, but all the gidgee I’ve seen, which isn’t that much, has more swirl, burl, or blotchy type figuring, as opposed to the typical straight grain of Cocus. I actually quite like the gidgee I’ve seen. How’s the bore of your OZ whistle holding up, still smooth? Just wondering if gidgee is one of those woods that holds a good finish or tends to “fluff up” over time like Mopane and some other “alternative” woods.

6

Loren I have always loved playing my OZ above any whistle I owned. I sold most of my whistles after moving onto Irish Flute 18 months ago but I kept the OZ and won’t willing part with it. Mitch was great to deal with and I always enjoyed his wacky sense of humour in his posts. After I received my OZ middle of 2018 he messaged me along the lines that he was offering his Delrin model at at pay up front set reduced price to anyone who had previously expressed interest in that model - I stupidly didn’t take up the offer. I think that all happened at the end of 2018 maybe early 2019 and he ceased manufacturing whistles around then.

7

You are right Loren, the bore is definitely fluffed up. The exterior of the whistle is actually much smoother than the bore. I don’t know if the bore was ever totally smooth. I never really looked at it that closely, so I haven’t tried polishing it up myself.

Interestingly, the whistle still plays extremely well, so the fluffy bore doesn’t seem to be interfering with its performance in any noticeable way. But having said that, I’d never dream of letting one of my own instruments leave the workshop with a bore as fluffy as this. I’d say that this really does lend weight to the theory that the wood is gidgee.

Just for your entertainment, I’ve attached a few pictures. In the last two pictures you can see the bore and the inside edge of the tone holes, both fluffy. These are close up pictures, of course, and it is hard to notice this in person, especially with my failing eyesight. But despite this, it is a very beautiful looking, sounding and playing whistle.

I don’t play it a lot. More often than not, I tend to play my Sindt, because I’m playing at home in an acoustically live space and the Oz is a little bit loud for my tastes in that particular environment. But I’ve kept it because I feel it is the best example of a wooden whistle that I have ever played, and I expect to one day make a few wooden whistles of my own, and thought it would be a good benchmark against which to test their performance.

8

JTU, it’s great when you find an instrument that
really suits you, glad to hear the OZ is one of those for you. Shame you missed out on the delrin model opportunity, would have made for a nice, carefree travel whistle for you. Similarly, I put off ordering a whistle from Mitch until it was too late.

Mitch is a character and I too enjoyed his posts. His presence is missed around here.

9

Thanks for taking and posting those pictures Jonathan, they are very…..illustrative :laughing:
The exterior wood finish does look excellent, and I can see the raised grain and “fluffiness” well in the photos.


I don’t know if the bore was ever totally smooth. I never really looked at it that closely, so I haven’t tried polishing it up myself.

I know Mitch cared a great deal about the quality of instruments he was producing, so it’s hard for me to imagine he’d neglect the bore. That said, I know some makers struggle to get a very clean and even finish during the reaming process, which can lead to problems even when you try to polish (sand) the bore after reaming.

Still, the tone hole edges being fluffy like that, despite the tone holes obviously being cleanly drilled, makes me think this is primarily an issue with the wood, and not the manufacture. Some woods just go like this unless you seal the bore and tone hole edges with something waterproof and durable.

I’d be sorely tempted to polish the bore and tone holes on any whistle of mine that looked like that; partly due to craftsman compulsion, and partly out of curiosity about the potential for improved sound and response.


Interestingly, the whistle still plays extremely well, so the fluffy bore doesn’t seem to be interfering with its performance in any noticeable way.

I’m not surprised it plays well enough if the overall design and execution is solid. Of course one can’t really know how much, if at all, the roughness is affecting tone and response, until doing a before and after play testing comparison.

But having said that, I’d never dream of letting one of my own instruments leave the workshop with a bore as fluffy as this. I’d say that this really does lend weight to the theory that the wood is gidgee.

Agreed, and I’m sure all the surfaces in question were much smoother when Mitch completed them. Some woods just really swell and/or fluff when exposed to direct moisture.

These are close up pictures, of course, and it is hard to notice this in person, especially with my failing eyesight.

I feel you on the eyesight thing. When I was working at the shop I wore contacts for my distance vision, but even with the contacts in place I could do detailed close work with no assistance. I used to watch the head of the shop wearing his glasses, plus an Opti-Visor over those in order to work, and I was thinking to myself “that must really suck”. And now, 15 years or so later, I am that guy. And yes, it does suck.


But despite this, it is a very beautiful looking, sounding and playing whistle.

It is indeed a very good looking whistle, and I’ve only ever heard good things about how Mitch’s whistles play, which gives the impression he produced consistently good instruments.

I don’t play it a lot. More often than not, I tend to play my Sindt, because I’m playing at home in an acoustically live space and the Oz is a little bit loud for my tastes in that particular environment.

I can relate to this as well: My ears have become sensitive to certain pitches and volumes in recent years and as such all but the quietest of my D whistles are unpleasant for me to play at home without wearing earplugs.

But I’ve kept it because I feel it is the best example of a wooden whistle that I have ever played, and I expect to one day make a few wooden whistles of my own, and thought it would be a good benchmark against which to test their performance.

Cool, I look forward to trying out one of you whistles someday! And thanks again for sharing those photos :slight_smile: