Pros and cons of wood whistles? Looking at High D Penny Whistles. Thanks 
There really is not much you can say as a broad, catch-all âpro vs conâ when it comes to wood whistles, besides the obvious physical differences between wood and metal or plastic. Wood is more susceptible to temperature and humidity changes than those materials, and can crack or warp if youâre not careful. Even this isnât necessarily true if youâre getting a composite wood whistle rather than a solid wood one.
Broadly speaking, a lot of wooden whistles tend to be louder and require more air than some popular metal whistles like Sindts, Dixons, and Killarneys. They also tend to be more expensive than many metal or plastic whistles. Now that Iâve said these two things someone will come along to refute me with examples where they arenât true, but thatâs the thing: you canât really make any single statement, however broad or qualified, that applies to âwood whistlesâ as a whole.
Wood Whistle Pros:
Appearance - If you like the look and variety of different woodâs as opposed to metal, then this is a real thing for you. I love woods, though many seem to strongly dislike me, much like any number of forum members 
Feel - Wood whistles donât get cold or (generally) as slippery as many metal whistles, which can be an advantage.
Pitch Stability - Wood whistles donât conduct heat as readily as metal whistles so they MAY be somewhat more pitch stable with regards to starting cold and the starts and stops that can accompany session playing. That said, Iâve no scientific studies to back this up. 
YMMV, etc. etc.
Tone - Wood sounds different from metal. Some can hear this, some canât (get hearing aids), some like the tone of wood whistles, some donât.
Wood Whistle Cons:
Appearance - Some folks donât care for the âuntradâ look of wood whistles.
Feel - Iâve never heard anyone complain about the feel of a wood whistleâŚâŚuntil they become allergic. In fairness allergic reactions to whistles seem FAR more rare than reactions to flute. This would be due to the greater contact area flutes occupy plus the difference in sensitivity to allergens the facial skin has compared with the fingers, but make no mistake, one can react allergically to wood whistles. Talking dermatitis here, not anaphylaxis.
Tone - If the trad sound is your thing, you may not like the tone of wood whistles.
Cost - Wood whistles are often much more expensive, 10x, 15x, even 20x the cost of a similarly performing metal whistle. This isnât always the case, but I have certainly played $200-$300 wood whistles that played worse than some sub $20 whistles.
Durability - This one is pretty much a given, a wood whistle is going to be much more susceptible to damage by misadventure, weather, and the ravages of time. Each one of those factors can be mitigated, more or less, through proper care storage and handling.
That said, the owner has no control over how the whistle was made, and unfortunately many wood whistles are produced in a fashion that more or less ensures cracking under all but the most ideal conditions. Whistle makers often choose woods for their looks rather than suitability for woodwind making, as if they were simply turning pens 
A great many woods simply will not tolerate repeated cycles blowing warm air into them and then drying. Thereâs a reason you see a great many different woods used for guitar making, but only a few for woodwinds. At least by makers who have been around and successful for many decades.
And then there is the issue of seasoning the woods properly. Most makers of wood whistles are in a rush, they buy wood from a supplier and itâs turned into an instrument a week, a month, or a year later. And even if the original billet has dried long enough prior to the initial turning, the rest of the process is finished too quickly to ensure long term stability.
There a few exceptions to what Iâve said above. When I visited Chris Abellâs shop about 20 years ago my memory is that he had a wall of organized dated wood billets that was pretty old, and which he worked from.
There may also be some pipe and/or flute makers who work with well seasoned wood and also take enough time when progressing through the phases of production to allow for the movement that occurs after wood removal at each stage, which then needs to be corrected for at the next stage.
There are other methods of stabilizing the wood via resin infusion or the sealing of all internal/external wood surfaces with something like epoxy, but few go to the trouble.
Bottom line, be prepared for the potential for cracks to form, and exercise to care.
Iâm not going to generalize with regards to volume, I donât necessarily disagree with bigsciota, Iâve just run across enough examples that hit both ends of the spectrum with metal and wood that I canât really formulate a strong disposition either way regarding whether wood or metal whistles tend to be louder. I do think however that a loud metal whistle tends to be significantly more uncomfortable to hear than a loud wood whistle.
That mostly covers the pros and cons that come to mind, though Iâm sure I must be forgetting a thing or three.
Good luck in your search.
I like the possible rich tone in a wood whistle, but there are dangers to avoid. Iâve only had one, a Sweetheart D whistle, all rosewood. It had a great tone, played clear, medium loud and through both octaves very well.
However, the drawback of using rosewood showed up within a couple weeks. Just having the whistle in my mouth wore off the finish and I started to see the grain of the wood open up as is saliva
was dissolving it. Honest, Iâm sure the dog wasnât playing it and I didnât use it to scrub pots and pans, so I was witness that only light playing was involved, with no teeth abrasion. 
So if you want a wood whistle, you could be in for a real treat, but beware the vulnerability of the mouthpiece area, and either get one with a synthetic mouthpiece and blade area, or
a whistle made of the hardest, non-absorbent, tiny-grain, most high density woods available, such as maple and a few others like African blackwood, maybe walnut, Aussie gidgee, or other regionals or exotics that will be durable enough (for who and for what price, is the question). The wood has to endure saliva, water, being cleaned 5000 times, temperature changes, humidity changes, etc., so it should be internally as strong as possible. 
Iâve noticed that quality bamboo flutes from India regularly wrap nylon cord around several areas of the flute, to strengthen it against cracking, a great idea, since they donât know what climate each flute is going to be sold to. A whistle with a metal ring added to the bottom would be that much more resistant to damage and cracking if youâre using it often or traveling with it. 
I have a sweetheart and havenât seen the dissolving mouthpiece issue. But then Iâve hardly touched it since I got my NSPs.
Traditional European woodwinds were appently made of fruit woods (other than apple) or Box.
Thereâs a whole range of tropical hardwoods, but many of these are endangered so Iâd be careful.
Ivory belongs on Walruses. Unless itâs elephant ivory.
Mine turns out not to be a Sweetheart after all, but a prototype cncâd for David Ledsam of Contrasaurus.
Itâs actually a myth that wood produces a different tone from other materials. Time and again, scientific studies and blind tests have demonstrated that material makes absolutely no intrinsic difference to sound when it comes to woodwind instruments like flute/recorder/whistle (and thereâs no scientific reason why it would). Any perceived difference in the sound of a material is due either to 1) the playerâs imagination, or 2) the different shapes of particular whistles.
Since there is no standardization for the shape of whistle heads or bodies, and since itâs all dependent on who makes the whistle, every whistle from every manufacturer is going to sound slightly different, and theyâre all going to have unique tonal qualities. So no wooden whistle is going to sound exactly like any plastic or metal whistle made by a different maker. But two plastic whistles made by two different manufactures are likely to sound just as different as a wooden whistle and a plastic whistle made by two different manufacturers. And itâs impossible to identify the material of a whistle just by listening to it.
All this to say, if you think youâre automatically going to improve your tonal quality by switching from plastic/metal to wood, or even that youâre going to significantly change your tonal quality in any predictable way (by making it âsweeter,â âmore trad,â âless trad,â etc.), youâre mistaken. Material simply does not matter for tone. Manufacturing/shape is what matters.
That said, one factor to consider is that wooden whistles are often made with much more care than your average non-wooden whistles, because they tend not to be mass-produced (this is likely because high-quality woods are more expensive, and also wooden fipples are difficult to mass-produce). Because of this, wooden whistles are going to TEND to be higher quality in general. Not BECAUSE theyâre made out of wood per se, but because theyâre usually more carefully made. (But of course, you can easily buy a high quality, hand-made plastic or metal whistle that is just as carefully made as a nice wooden one - usually for a lot cheaper.)
Other than the statements about tone, I think Lorenâs post is entirely on point.
My favorite whistle is my rosewood Morneaux. Itâs sublimely in pitch, it reaches the second octave easily, it has amazing dynamic range, and I love the tonal quality. But I think thatâs because Morneaux is an excellent manufacturer, not because of the material itâs made out of. The wood simply adds to the instrumentâs physical beauty (which, for me, is a 100% valid reason to prefer a particular material).
Oh, also, Iâve played my Morneaux whistle for years and it has zero cracking. If you oil well-made rosewood whistles like Morneauxs or Sweethearts, they wonât crack.
Could you please provide explicit references to one or two of those studies. If nothing else, viscous and thermal losses at the surface of a bore might be expected to be material dependent to an audible extent. Thanks!
Material simply does not matter for tone. Manufacturing/shape is what matters.
Are we really going back to the old concrete flute argument?
FWIW, I have yet to come across a wooden whistle I would like to play. For some reason they seem to be, more often than not, obnoxiously loud, with an unpleasant edge.
My McManus is very loud. The tone is pure lovely to me. But, I find I do not play it as often as it needs to be due to the volume.
Not sure what you mean by viscous and thermal losses. But it IS true that metal instruments can take a longer time to sharpen up their pitch. That IS a legit difference in the materials that has been scientifically documented. But that has to do with pitch, not with tonal quality.
As for the studies, here are a few (and also an article explaining why it makes no logical difference what material you use):
https://ccrma.stanford.edu/marl/Coltman/documents/Coltman-1.06.pdf
http://bulldog2.redlands.edu/fac/julie_rathbun/physclasses/brad.pdf
https://pubs.aip.org/asa/jasa/article/36/10/1881/755252/Effect-of-Wall-Material-on-the-Steady-State-Tone
https://bretpimentel.com/does-material-affect-tone-quality-in-woodwind-instruments-why-scientists-and-musicians-just-cant-seem-to-agree/
The studies on this topic focus mainly on the flute. As far as I know, thereâs never been a study on this specific to whistles. The logic, however, applies to whistles. Material fundamentally shouldnât affect the sound of woodwinds, because vibrations of the instrumentâs body are not whatâs creating the sound. The sound is formed solely by the movement of air, so the shape is all that ultimately matters.
I agree, with the caveat that certain materials do sometimes have a bearing on the dimensions used, as well as surface texture of various components of the whistle, both of which do affect the column of air within. So, while I believe there is no such thing as a clearly defined âbrass soundâ, âplastic soundâ, or âwood soundâ, I think there are certainly certain qualities that are far more likely to coincide with the usage of certain materials.
Thatâs very possible, although one would think that an extremely well-made wooden instrument would have few enough imperfections that the texture wouldnât affect the sound an audible way when compared to a well-made plastic instrument. Maybe it would, though.
As a long-time flute maker, I was never happy with the studies that claim materials make no difference. So I did a reductio-ad-absurdum experiment making a Prattens keyless from our local plantation timber, pinus radiata. It was predictably awful! No surprises when we remember its density is around 0.4 whereas boxwood is about 1, blackwood around 1.2 and Delrin around 1.4gms/cm3. Brass comes in around 8.4 and Silver at 10.5gms/cm3.
My interpretation is that materials wonât make much difference providing they make an adequate container for the vibrating air column. IE, smooth, airtight and strong. Iâd describe boxwood as marginally dense enough, and the others fine. Pinus Radiata doesnât come near!
The article about the Pine Flute is at: http://www.mcgee-flutes.com/pine_prattens.htm
Thatâs fair. But Iâm curious: Why does density make any difference to the sound (Iâm not saying it doesnât, Iâm just curious because I donât know a lot about flute-making)?
I think itâs fair to say it makes a difference by subtraction through losses. I mentioned that a good container for the vibrating air column should be smooth, airtight and strong. Smooth and airtight, so that we donât suffer friction and pressure losses, and strong so we donât suffer loss of energy through wall movement. If you can visualise the cell structure of cheap construction grade pine (or think balsa wood!), youâd agree that the pine wonât finish well, and that thin walls of it will leak air and be prone to vibration. All those things rob precious energy. Whereas african blackwood finishes like plastic, is airtight and strong. We can see that difference in their densities - the blackwood is 3.5 times heavier, so density becomes a good starting point when comparing timbers. Itâs not the final word, as you do come across some timbers that are very dense, but still have a relatively coarse grain structure. âDense and fineâ might be a better descriptor of what weâre looking for.
I mentioned further up that I regard boxwood as marginal. Make the same flute in boxwood and blackwood, and the blackwood one will be louder. But the boxwood one will still be very nice. Probably because it is so fine compared to other timbers in that weight group. But go much lighter than that (below about the 1.0gms/cm3 mark) and you start to notice weaknesses sneaking in. The usual âfurniture timbersâ like walnut, mahogany, maple, beech etc are far too coarse and light (around the 0.6/0.7 mark), although some makers have had success by bulking them up with resins and other goups. That increases their density as well as improving airtightness and maybe smoothness. A good example is the cheaper range of recorders which are maple bulked up with ethylene glycol.
Exactly what the differences in sound are between adequate timbers and inadequate timbers I havenât looked into. Just picking up my Pine Prattens, it just seems weak, and I can feel the walls vibrating, particularly on Low D. The lower notes seem worse, I guess because they are exposed to more losses in their longer journey down and back. It feels happier in the second octave.
The material a musical instrument is made of, can affect tonal response of the instrument. I learned this in both wind instrument playing, comparing and research, as well as in the research and experience of designing and building electric guitars. With a whistle or flute, the vibrating air column is contained by a structure made of a certain material, that does and always will, have itâs own response to the energies going on within the vibrating air column. That means that the vibrations in the air column, being itâs energy patterns for the main frequency and all the harmonics, are getting a feedback process going on from their enclosure, which will tend to be more neutral for some frequencies/harmonics and to dampen some others, which could also then make some of those energies seem enhanced. So the end result of the materialâs influence on tone can vary quite a bit between major shifts in material such as the difference between pine wood, ebony, maple or brass, titanium, silver, gold, aluminum or glass, plastics of various kinds or even ice or water or rock types like granite or marble. Within one group like âwoodâ, the various types of wood, thickness of the materialâs wall, density, weight, openness of grain, water absorbency, can all affect tone as they vary their response to energies put through them.
So itâs a reciprocal process going on that affects tone. Putting a vibrational energy through a material will cause that material to absorb the energies and respond with its unique level of transmission and absorption of those energies, resulting in some variation of dampening and tonal coloration.
With electric (and certainly acoustic too) guitars, the various wood types and construction designs have various responses to the vibrational energies of strings. There is a big difference in total response between mahogany, rosewood, alder, ebony, ash, pine and maple. With electric guitars you also have great variation in the materials and construction involved in bridge and nut designs, neck designs, and then of course a vast variety in the designs and responses of the electric pickups. But no matter what pickups you put in any electric guitar, if you swap in/out the same pickups across 15 guitars, youâll see consistent evidence that the guitar materials and construction designs affect tone. The pickups affect tone too, because their electrical responses vary so much. The vibrating string sends that energy directly into the guitar at the bridge and the nut, as well as to any fret it touches. The guitarâs physical response to that energy, feeds back to the string by transmitting that energy/frequency/harmonic fully or with some dampening. So the vibrating string will be affected by the energy sent back to it by the body of the guitar. The balance of this, the stringâs original vibrational tendencies mixed with the influence of the physical feedback from the body of the guitar, create a tonal character that the pickups sense. Hence, the vast diversity in guitar materials, designs, components and pickup designs, as guitarists all want to be unique. Democracy of tone.
Happy camping in the music section. 
I donât think it is reasonable to compare guitar fabrication to woodwind fabrication. With guitars, the strings are physically vibrating, and transferring energy to the pickups and the body. The material of the body will inevitably affect the transfer of energy. (See âimpedance matchingâ.) With woodwinds, only the air column needs to vibrate. Any transfer of energy from the air column to the body is incidental. and at least in the case of Terryâs pine Prattens, that transfer of energy is detrimental.
The longer journey is probably a big part of it. In the second octave, there is also more energy to go around, so subtracting some may not make as much of a relative difference to the total.
In terms of materials, including questions of weight and density- imo itâs a mistake to discount purely subjective factors. Assuming all instruments in question are indeed well-made, a heavier or thicker instrument may make the player feel like they need to blow or support differently, which may in turn affect the manner that they finger as well. So the material itself may not be what affects the sound, but the brainâs feedback loops may introduce secondary factors which do.
I take blind tests with a grain of salt. Even if instruments may objectively sound identical⌠my own experiences on clarinet are that Iâve subjectively got ingrained (snobby?) enough opinions- valid or not- of wood vs plastic that I donât play as well even on well-made plastic instruments. Maybe thatâs foolish dismissal on my own part- but Iâm finally old enough to respect that my unfounded biases are worth taking into account before splurging on new instruments. 
My experience with wooden whistles is extremely limited- I bought a midrange one a couple years ago but didnât like its resistance. Iâd love the chance to try more but so far havenât had the opportunity. With how narrow a high D whistle bore is, Iâd be reluctant to buy a less dense wood than blackwood or possibly rosewood, due to the risk of cracking.