Thanks to fr. Darcy, at www.uilleannobsession.com my gallagher set is on the market. You can see pictures and further information on his classifieds page there.
According to Seth, “its the only one out there like that”
Also, the price is flexible. Make an offer!
Here’s the direct link.
I’ve had a couple comments on the solid ebony trim.
Its a curious aesthetic, isnt it, mounting our pipes with dissimilar materials for visual contrast? We’ve all seen ivory shrunken and cracked, wouldnt it make sense, if we must have mounts, that they move as closely matched as possible to the wood of the bore they are supposed to protect? I suppose the difference between box and ebony as far as movement under humidity and temperature changes (not to mention sheer age) wouldnt be that large, unlike plasticivory but,
are there any reasons for using dissimilar materials besides the desire for simple aesthetic contrast?
I don’t mind mounts made of the same material as the pipes. I’ve noticed some makers use no mounts but turn the chanters with mount-like decorations. Apparently it’s better anyway, accoustically, to have no mounts. Most other bagpipes and woodwind instruments don’t bother with ivory/plastic mounts to the same extent as UPs.
Can you share why that would be so? I don’t think that is true.
The nice thing about imitation ivory and various kinds of horn, for mounts, are that they have a lot of give (elasticity) to them, so when the wood changes shape a bit, they just go with the flow and do not crack (unlike ivory). I suppose wood (box, ebony, etc) have some of that crack-resistance as well, but not as much, so I prefer either imitation ivory or water buffalo horn for making mounts.
I personally can’t share the reason why. All I know is I remember a pipemaker on this forum explain the possible effects of glued on mounts on the accousitcs of a chanter as opposed to one piece of timber turned stylistically as some makers are doing thses days. Hence my claim that it is ‘apparently’ so.
No mounts better acoustically?
I don’t buy it.
Recall that mounts do serve purposes other than ornamentation; then can serve as “bumpers” to protect the chanter from knocks. Of course with the polyester ersatz-ivory, the mounts often end up being the most vulnerable/brittle part. Still, in theory, replaceable; that’s one reason I’m not keen on Araldite/epoxy on mounts - removable glue or thread wrap is better from that perspective.
Many of the old chanters used horn mounts, which is much more resiliant to knocks, I think ivory is much more resistant to knocks than the modern plastic, but it does tend to crack/shrink with time, so it’s not a permanent solution either. Horn can shrink/crack too, but it seems to fare better than ivory and bone - at least on the old sets.
Bill
Well, I don’t know. I’m just recalling what one maker on this forum once said. I’ve tried searching for the post but so far unsuccessful. It may be untrue. But his reasoning was that gluing bits onto the top and bottom of the chanter could affect the resonance of the timber. I suppose that throws open the question to those makers who opt for no mounts but rather turn the decorations from the same piece of timber as the chanter itself - why? Is it purely for aesthetic purposes?
I know this gets back to the “does the wood vibrate” thing, but just do this: Have someone lightly grip the chanter at the stock plug in and at the base, where the mounts would be. The grip would have to be light to simulate the tiny weight of the mounts. Have them ungrip and grip back and forth while you play and listen to what tone or volume difference happens. Almost certainly you will hear no difference (compare only with the person in the same place, just moving their fingers an inch in and out). That should show the impact of having attached mounts. On my chanters, I get bupkiss difference. Except when playing a sudden bottom D, in which case I feel some resistance and a look of surprise from the gripper! 
Well, as we “all” know, the material itself is supposed to be accoustically insignificant in these winds, since its all about volume and shape, and as the accousticians insist, it could be made out of “concrete” for all the volume and shape cares, (whether this is true or not is for those beyond me) which ignores the fact that ebony sounds different from Apple…
…but it would seem to me that the mounts -should- have practically no accoustic value, and that they would have primarily decorative and structural value.
This is all ignoring what my original question was,
-What do Ferrules do?
-I came up with 2 answers-
-Protect the bore from cracking at exposed ends,
-Provide color contrast.
Assuming that we want color contrast,
-Are there advantages to using dissimilar materials?
How much does ebony move under drastic humidity change? If ebony is glued to plastic, and the wood wants to move, but the plastic/metal that its permanently attached to does not, will the plastic actually -protect- it? I’ve seen metal ferrules on mainstocks cracked by the wood underneath, and solid mainstocks are the thickest parts of a set of pipes, (therefore the most stable, right?) how much movement needs to be intentially allowed for?
Thus my original question about using -dissimilar- materials.
could you look at GHBP chanter for an answer/more confusion to this?
i am told they are made as thin-walled as possible to increase the volume (less to dampen, i suppose, and perhaps more to it than that) and more “traditional” chanters generally have an enormous disk at the bell - at least 3/8" thick and 3" in diameter. other sets simply have a thicken “welt” - turned with the body. i have been told by the players that there is no real difference in the playing given these two very different “mounts”.
yes? no? maybe?
Metal ferrules and rings can certainly protect instrument joints such as flute joints. One important way they do this is by providing compressive forces, to help ensure that the wood is not placed under tension across the grain (to help prevent splitting/cracking). This is especially important in tenon sockets, where the wedging in of the tenon could otherwise place the socket under lots of tension. So if the metal rings on a flute, for instance, become loose, it actually can endanger the instrument, since they are no longer serving this function.
I don’t think the ivory/bone/plastic mounts on chanters serve in that respect, since they can’t provide nearly as much compressive force (without splitting themselves). So in the case of non-metal rings/mounts, I think any protection provided is of the “bumps and scrapes” variety.
In either case, the mounts are not going to appreciably dampen the very limited vibrations of the relatively thick walled uilleann/union pipe chanter.
Bill
To whoever the fellow was who called me 4 days ago with an offer for the Set, which I was prepared to accept.
Please call again, as I have not recieved -any- emails from you since, and dont have any contact information from you, or, in fact, even your name.
Chris Behnke
1(907) 770-9999
1(907) 590-9394
another_piper@yahoo.com
Looking at the dates, he may have since moved to another board.
Well, I have an interesting story.
-Buyer #1 was willing to purchase the set, but could only put a small downpayment until his loan came through for the rest of the set.
-Buyer #2 suddenly calls, and says that he will ‘send me a certified check right away and will beat the other offer’, and I tell him to email me with the offer, because I allready had an offer from buyer 1, at which he says “do you check your email often? I’ll write you tonight!”
With this set of exclamations and promises, I wrote buyer 1 and explained that buyer 2 made a better offer.
-I put buyer 1 on hold waiting for buyer 2’s email. 2 weeks later, no emails, no email address and no contact information, I suddenly get a string of no less than 4 phone messages asking “are the pipes for sale? Are the pipes still for sale? Are the pipes for sale?” Only -one- of the messages contained a phone number.
-When I called him, he asked “so the other buyer is out of the picture right?” And I said Yes, hes out of the picture. And his reply was “Great, I need to talk to my wife about this, I’ll email you tonight after we talk”
What was he doing for the two weeks he had me waiting?
-Then, not that night, but -4- days later, he emails me a one sentance email stating “my wife says I need to sell a guitar and a banjo before I can buy the pipes, so count me out for now”
So I wrote buyer #1 again, who I had told the set was sold, telling him I would sell the set to him after all,
And in the meantime turns out he’s gotten on a waitlist for a Set.
So, the moral of the story? Never, ever, take the people on the internet seriously.
So the pipes are -still- for sale, folks, this a great set of pipes, please, though -serious- inquiries only.
At least with written correspondance you might have a more enforceable “contract”. I suppose getting a phone number would help in these cases.
If you take a deposit, I suppose the terms for completion have to be pretty clear too. Especially with people you don’t know, it seems to me that a sale isn’t final until the first money actually comes through. If you’d had a deposit from either buyer, no matter how small, my guess is that they would have been slower to change plans without informing you.
In the event that two deposits arrived, you could always return the second one undeposited.