Would anyone care to expound upon the difference between the Copeland and the Burke Low D whistles? Obviously the price is one huge difference, but I am more interested in hearing about other factors I cannot so easily evaluate, such as playability and beauty of tone. If you’ve got an opionion, I would love to hear about it (directly or on the site).
I just came back from the Kerrville Folk Festival (in my back yard here in Texas). It was a great time, though it could sure use more pennywhistlers! The concerts were top notch and lots of them. Real fun.
I cannot talk about the Burke, as I have not played one (that is one I missed getting to at our party last Saturday, dang). I have just recently obtained a Copeland though and also have an Overton.
There are some differences between these two whistles. The O has a bit more back pressure and allows me to push and bend a little more, at least at this time.
The C sounds a bit more flutey than the O.
Finger spacing is nearly identical as well as hole size. I would call this one a break even as each has one thing that the other does not.
The mouthpieces are different and feel different while being played. I am still figuring out if either is more comfortable.
Once advantage my C has over the O is my O is not tunable. This is not a huge deal for me since I have lots of tunable High D’s to play along with. It is also quite in tune anyway. The other advantage the C has is I like the classy/classic look of the brass. It looks quite appealing with our mopani Bleazey whistles (my Bleazey Low D is my hands down favorite right now by the way!!! Wood Rocks!!! )
These two whistles are still fighting it out for my attention. At some point I expect one of them will start to shine a bit more than the other.
The Burke is a run-of-the-mill reliable whistle with a reliable tone and ease of play.
The Copeland is harder to play (breath control is needed in the top of the upper octave, brass is heavier than aluminum), but it has a much more complex and pleasing tone.
Copeland:
• sound colour (brass horn, when pushed down low)
• playability (finger stretch)
• easy half-holing
• loud
• heavier
• available in a conveniently toted three-pieces model
Burke:
• accurate tuning throughout
• consistency from one to the other
• precise cross-fingering
• Choice of aluminium (clear) or composite (darker, almost woody)
• lighter
Both:
not clogging-prone
balanced octaves
overall finish
more high than medium wind requirements
not the “Spillane/Riverdance” sound
Morale:
• I’d love a Burke big composite, in D
• I’d love a “jazz” Copeland in low Eb. Or just my D to finally come back from revoicing
• You’re in the US: for you it will be easier to try out both, and get them to your liking if needed.
These are two very nice, but very different whistles. Zoob pointed out the differences nicely; I will outline them from my point of view.
The Burke is one of the easiest-playing low whistles. The only way in which others are easier to play is finger reach, and wind requirements if you prefer less wind and more back pressure. The tuning is spot on, the octave transitions are very easy, and it has the strongest low end of any low-D I’ve played. The sound is pure for a low whistle, but if you’re used to high-D’s, it has a much breathier sound. If you’re looking for the classic low-whistle sound, this won’t be the whistle for you. I haven’t played a composite low-D; that would have a more complex sound than the AlPro.
The Copeland is also an easy player. The conical shape makes the finger stretch easy and the RH finger holes smaller. The breath requirement is a little less than the Burke, but as Jessie pointed out, it can be a little touchy. Mine is a little unstable at the bottom, and the Cnat must be half-holed, as I haven’t found any combination that’s good enough for long notes. The sound is much richer and more complex than the Burke, but still not the classic Overton sound. Some describe it as flutey; I don’t know as I would, to me it only sounds like a Copeland. Listen to Seamus Egan’s low whistling to seen what it sounds like.
Many thanks to everyone who had something to say. I really appreciate the different points of view, not to mention the different ways you each chose to quantify and qualify something as subtle as tone and feel!
Wood Rocks!!! 
)
