I bought the “heart of the instrument” reed making DVD a few years ago . I watched it many times when I got It first and learned a lot from it. I watch it these days on occasion ,when i’m having a go at making reeds,especially if I’m having a problem of some kind, seeking inspiration I suppose. I have the greatest respect for the reed makers involved, the only one issue that I’m unsure about is the idea of making reeds by intuition or “feel” ,let the cane talk to you as Benedict Koehler puts it. Both he and to a lesser extent Cillian O’Brien
reckon that, that is the way to go . I bring up this point because the last few reeds I’ve made have turned out to be very good and the reason ,I think is because I put a lot of attention into assuring that the measurements I have from a previous good reed were the same, so much so that I’m now thinking that if I had the accurate measuring equipment that the art music guys use I could make consistently good reeds. What do think ?
If we were making reeds from an artificial , consistent material it would be all about the numbers because it would be possible to make virtually identical reeds but because cane is so variable it is sometimes necessary to stray away from your theoretical design to accommodate different density / hardness /stiffness of any particular piece of cane, unless you are going to be really ruthless in selecting your slips which could mean throwing away a lot of cane.
I’m only in my infancy as a reed maker, but I suspect that it also depends on how many reeds you make and how much experience one might have doing it. I can easily visualize a master maker having made so many reeds that they have internalised the mechanics and much of the measurement, and going more on intuition or feel. But for those of us either just starting down this road, and maybe for those who just occasionally make reeds for their own use, I suspect the numbers are much more important.
I dunno, Rory, I sent my intuition out to get it adjusted some time ago, and haven’t seen it since. . . .
Now for something completely different.
You bring up the ‘art music’ guys. I think if you look into what David Daye does, you will find a blueprint for applying ‘the art music’ thing to uilleann reed making. He buys bassoon cane, and is very rigorous in his standards for hardness and consistency. He is ruthless about throwing out the raw material that doesn’t measure up. He is meticulous about measurement and seldom wastes time on attempts that have already gone awry. He seeks repeatability, repeatability, repeatability, as well as predictability. He has a very limited number of designs and seldom strays from them. AFAIK he almost never attempts to reed random chanters. . .for a professional he is much more like a lone piper working with his one and only set, than the average uilleann reed guru.
Sounds like you’ve already got a working formula, and that repeatability using existing tools is not an issue?
After the broad parameters are established, does not experience adjustment at the fine level (i.e. via the ear)
become the sole factor?. I’d be pretty confident there’s never been ever a formula like “exactly 4 scrapes, over 3mm sq. area, at
3 psi, in the lower left quadrant…” for any reed instrument.
The question of understanding the impact of the range of variations of the most variable component (cane) suggest
a formula can only take you so far. Fairly cheap tooling gets you down to decimal points of a cm. Or 100/ths inch. Next
batch of cane might want 13.2mm head width, not 13.4mm…etc.
Ultimately, does it not have to be intuition…but then, its not really intuition - its inference. The anecdotes
beyond this instruments domain around exceptional reed makers and their ability to judge a reed - sometimes just
by look - abound.
I find making by measurement to be very useful. I do pay attention to cane hardness and adjust for it. Using my soft cane I gouge to about 1.0mm or 0.040" at the center. When I am gouging and find the cane to be harder, I gouge to around 1.2mm or over 0.045" so the scrape will be deeper and into softer cane. This is opposite of what Benedict Koehler does as he tries to get the same amount of flexibility on each slip by feel. This can be hard for a beginner to judge, while measurements are easier to check. Harder cane will be gouged thinner by following his method. I get good results and so does Benedict. Whatever works for you is the best way to go.
With my limited experience ,I think that inconsistencies in cane dont matter as much as we are lead to believe. Its the consistency of the measurements that make the difference. The one measurement that was giving me trouble was the consistency of the center thickness measurement . For a while I could not get the thickness the same each end ,one end being 1.3mm and the other maybe 1.6mm. I’m aiming for 1.5mm. . Also, I was not able to measure the thickness in from the ends so I made a altered a cheap calipers as the one in this vid at 7.30. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=os5Xj3E4K6g .This helped a lot. My hit rate is definitely maybe getting better.
Altering dimensions can affect the way a reed performs, can change the pitch , stability and tone of notes… so numbers and a specific design specification are important.
Yes at some stages of the reedmaking process a lot of ‘feel’ is involved as well as a large bank of knowledge built up by experience.
As each piece of cane is individual and different then an approach to ‘finishing’ each reed to itself and not to ‘a formula’ is necessary but in the construction phase dimensions are my watchword.
Solid air tight construction to exact sizes followed by finishing, slowly ( scraping) with a VERY sharp blade is my key to success. These are the two most important factors that you the reedmaker can add to the process.
I was considering buying one a these dial indicators
but they are quite expensive so I bought a dial on ebay. and made my own. The dial came from China it was only 4.99 pounds with free postage. How can they do so cheap
The test for such a gauge will be repeatability, followed of course by longevity (the robustness of its construction). Get a common set of blade style feeler gauges and always test the accuracy after properly ‘zeroing’ the thickness gauge. It might, or not, prove quite good.
The well thought of StarrettTM gauges made in the USA were unable to compete price-wise with the Japanese MitutoyoTM micrometers when the Japanese introduced pressure formed and rolled threads on their micrometers. StarrettTM stayed with precision ground threads and are now road-kill as part of the corporate merge and sell shell game.
The most precious computer is the human brain, so some degree of intuition is involved. If you have the capability of approaching reedmaking with the tenacity of an engineer, then go for it. The more you know, the better, and taking and using measurements make you no worse for wear. Do both, if you are able.
