WTT #5 - A "Boring" Subject

Whistle
1

This time, let’s start out purely subjective. Remember, one can gather scientific stats from subjective impressions! Equations begone! (For now…)

My first tinwhistle (which I still have) was a C Generation. To say that, next to my C Clarke, it sucks, is being kind. Kick it into the second octave, and it’s all over the place, while the Clarke hangs tough.

Now, you may say, “Ah, Bill, but that’s because the Clarke has a tapered body!”. Then I’ll play one of my own C whistles next to the Clarke and the Gen, and it’s as good in the second octave as the Clarke.

My whistles, and the Generation whistles, have straight-tube bodies. The tube diameters differ slightly, with mine being a tad larger, and the fingerhole-center-to-blade-edge ratios are virtually identical. (Edit)My tube is also considerably thicker (0.035" wall) than either the Gen or the Clarke.

Don’t answer the question “Why does the Gen not have a good second octave?”. Right now, I don’t care. Instead, let’s gather some stats…

Riddle me this, Batman – what do you think about the sounds and responses you get from your straight and tapered bodies? You “Engineering is God” folks please hold off until Monday night so I can get some stats without too much chiff. Then explain to your heart’s content, and I’ll be happy to listen and learn!

Thanks,
Bill Whedon
(second edit fixed the title)
(third edit changed the name)
(fourth edit fixed my finger-check) :astonished:
[ This Message was edited by: serpent on 2002-10-27 01:26 ]

[ This Message was edited by: serpent on 2002-10-27 01:28 ]

[ This Message was edited by: serpent on 2002-10-29 19:46 ]

[ This Message was edited by: serpent on 2002-10-29 19:47 ]

2

Someone said recently(I forget who)that the best tweekers are the top whistlemakers.The whistles you have mentioned, for all there faults, provide a lot of clues for creating a great whistle.Much has been said about the tuning benefits a conical bore provides but I have never `heard´ the evidence of this and it would seem to be theoretical only.I,ve tried tuning a Shaw and a Sweetone with only moderate success.On the other hand,a cylindrical bore,once the compromise between octaves is understood,can be tuned very well.A cylindrical bore enables more versatility in tone hole size and placement.A large E hole on a conical bore(soprano) is not always possible for lack of wall area.Perturbing a cylindrical bore can provide better tuning between octaves but there are others who are more experienced in this to say why.A simple but effective trick is to add a small sleave or ring at the end of a Generation for a more solid and in tune bell note in both octaves.Anyway Bill,I hope this in some way can help you and others to make a better whistle.:slight_smile: Mike

[ This Message was edited by: mike.r on 2002-10-27 05:39 ]

3

Probably to see some differences between a conical and cylindrical bore of a whistle, is NOT to compare 2 different models (one cone, one cylinder).

Probably because y’know, the mouthpiece/+blade design is different, etc, so it would require diferent qualities.

Bill can probably do some experimentation (like what he does every day) on his whistles - maybe make one cylindrical and one conical, WITHOUT modifications to anything else, then see what effects (good or bad) each gives.

4

Mike, Caoimhin, astute observations! Well, the “apples and oranges” comparison is actually what I’m looking for. Like I said, “subjective” is the watchword here, and I’m interested in what everyone who has an opinion (I know, I know :slight_smile: ) thinks about the sound. 'course, that implies that you’ve heard/played both styles in one form or another.

Breaking my own rule a little, but, Mike, what is the audible effect of the ring on the Gen? Does it (perception) flatten the note at all? And have you (or anyone else who knows this tweek) looked at the before/after on an audio analyzer?

Anyhow, let’s get those opinions in here, and then cut loose the Engineering gurus on Monday! I dunno what’ll come of it, but so far, I’ve done nothing but learn stuff from these Tech Talk sessions! :smiley:

Cheers,
Bill Whedon

5

I’m bored waiting for certain emails.

Bill, go start another (or more) topics so we can all type a lot!

6

Breaking my own rule a little, but, Mike, what is the audible effect of the ring on the Gen? Does it (perception) flatten the note at all? And have you (or anyone else..

There is a slight flattening of the 1st oct bell note but 2nd oct remains unafected for some reason.I use a IOmm alloy sleave for this tweek.It also serves as a mechanical bell note extension to compliment fipple tuning adjustment where needed…a simple twist of the ring puts the bell note exactly where I need it and a slight head adjustment is all thats needed to fine tune the top end.:slight_smile: Mike

[ This Message was edited by: mike.r on 2002-10-27 12:45 ]

7

On 2002-10-27 09:52, Caoimhin wrote:
I’m bored waiting for certain emails.

Bill, go start another (or more) topics so we can all type a lot!

Start one yerself! I don’t “own” the title, in fact, I hereby place in public domain, the title particle "Whistle Tech Talk # " and you fill in the rest. Right now, we’re at #5 (this one) so be sure to look at the sequences out there so we don’t step on each other.

In fact, (wicked grin…) maybe we should email Dale before putting one up, and ask him to please maintain sequence numbers for us… ? After all, it is his board! (ar, ar, ar!) :slight_smile: Howzabout it, Dale? Hmmmmmmm? :smiley:

Cheers,
Bill Whedon

8

On 2002-10-27 14:26, serpent wrote:

In fact, (wicked grin…) maybe we should email Dale before putting one up, and ask him to please maintain sequence numbers for us… ? After all, it is his board! (ar, ar, ar!) > :slight_smile: > Howzabout it, Dale? Hmmmmmmm? > :smiley:

Considering that the board re-sequences things every time someone makes a post, I think this is just a silly idea.

9

On 2002-10-27 15:08, Wandering_Whistler wrote:

On 2002-10-27 14:26, serpent wrote:

In fact, (wicked grin…) maybe we should email Dale before putting one up, and ask him to please maintain sequence numbers for us… ? After all, it is his board! (ar, ar, ar!) > :slight_smile: > Howzabout it, Dale? Hmmmmmmm? > :smiley:

Considering that the board re-sequences things every time someone makes a post, I think this is just a silly idea.

YES! It is silly! You got it! Congratulations! :slight_smile: Now you have the right to start your Very Own “Whistle Playing Talk #whatever…” ™ thread!

Gosh, it’s so much fun here, sometimes! :smiley:
Bill Whedon

10

The classic conical-bore whistles are Clarkes, Shaws, Copelands, and Sweetones. Of course, nothing can be said in general that pertains to those makes. One thing that needs to be pointed out is that the taper of Clarkes and Shaws is much greater than the taper of Copelands.

If you’ve played Clarkes and Shaws, you’ll have the perception that conical bores lead to a breathy sound, when in fact it’s just the design of the mouthpiece that does in these two brands that happen to be conical. The one Copeland that I played was very pure, especially in the upper octave. I also have an old French flageolet that’s conical and is the purest-sounding whistle I own. Listening to Seamus Egan playing it, the Copeland low-D is almost indistinguishable from a flute. I’ve heard people say that the flute-like sound is due to the conical bore, but I don’t know if I believe that.

Oh, and Mike Copeland worked on the Sweetone mouthpiece, which is on a conical-bore shaft, too. I think the Sweetone sounds like a watered-down Clarke myself, still pretty breathy. Others have different opinions, and I’ve only played a few. YMMV

There are also at least a couple of wooden whistles that have slightly tapered bores. I just don’t think you can say it leads to or contributes to a particular sound.

11

Hmmm… food for thought from Chas. So far, I see no real usable stats shaping up, so let’s open it up for WhistleTekkie discussion now. Anybody got pointers to research into the subject? I’ve been playing with some of the turbulence equations pointed to on another WTT thread, but nothing about tapered tubes was mentioned.

BTW - this is purely academic interest on my part. I’ve no conical whistles in the works or in the plan for anytime soon. So far, the straight ones have been doing well, and moving into brass is, well, a bit more of an ordeal than I’d imagined it to be! But that’s an issue for “Materials”…

Cheers,
Bill Whedon

12

It’s Monday - I’m back. I haven’t done as much looking into the effect of different bores as other subjects, but there is a guy in Australia who has a flute acoustics site. He has some discussion on the effect of bores on the harmonics that get reenforced with conical vs. cylindrical bores. However, the conical bores he was looking at tapered from the mouthpiece out (think oboe, bassoon, saxaphone) and not from the mouthpiece in. In the tapers-out case, it reenforces the even-numberd harmonics at the expense of the odd-numbered harmonics.

If you took the taper to an extreme, and the end became closed, the whistle may begin to behave like a Helmhotz resonator (think ocarina). AFAIK the Ocarina can only play one octave - no overblowing. Might it be logical to assume that tapering the bore and closing the end causes the whistle to have fewer high harmonics and a reenforced first harmonic? This would mean the sound would not be as “bright”, which is consistent with how the Sweetone, Shaw, Clarke, etc. sound.

Dave

13

Dave, that’s very interesng about the “reverse” cone. I had initially thought it explained something that had always bugged me, but it actually just may confuse me more after a couple minutes’ thought:*

The clarinet has a register key that is not an octave key. That is, when you open it, the fingering for a low-F is used to sound the C 1.5 octaves above it. That’s the second harmonic. You can actually get the C just by chomping on the reed with a little practice, too, but never the first-harmonic F. The clarinet is pretty straight, with just the bell at the end. OTOH, the saxophone has quite a taper along much of its length, and you get the first harmonic with the octave key or by tightening your lips. Flute, you get the first harmonic. Trumpet, you can get practically anything.

Any ideas why the clarinet automatically jumps 1.5 octaves instead of one?

*There might be some jargon confusion, the first harmonic is actually the second (n=2) excitation – just occurred to me.

Charlie

14

The Clarinet is a whole different subject.
Because the clarinet has a reed instead of an opening, it is considered a closed ended pipe. It does not overblow on the octave, the register key helps reduce pressure in the bore to encourage the clarinet to go into the next ‘register’ easier. Closed ended is rich in odd harmonics, take a whistle mouthpiece and cover the end and notice that very low note that it produces.

Both cylindrical and conical whistles are open ended bores. The fipple hole is one end and the bell hole is the other.

15

Daniel hit it right (as usual). The clarinet is a closed-end pipe, and so it’s “octave jump” isn’t an octave at all, but a twelfth. Flutes, (and I guess saxaphones, because they’re conical) do an octave jump. Clarinets also are “transposing instruments” meaning they don’t play the note as written either, but that a whole other OT.

Chas, I was wrong in my previous post. The taper reenforces the odd harmonics, not the even as I previously stated.

Dave

[ This Message was edited by: dkehoe on 2002-10-29 08:24 ]

16

On 2002-10-29 08:11, dkehoe wrote:
Clarinets also are “transposing instruments” meaning they don’t play the note as written either, but that a whole other OT.

Ain’t most all woodwinds transposing instruments ?

17

All I know is that if everyone else in my wind enseble plays an A to get in tune, I have to play a B.

Dave

18

Clarinets and saxes are transposing instruments. flute, oboe, bassoon aren’t. Most Brass instruments are transposing instruments (I would say all, but you can get C trumpets which are not. Not very common though). It is the length of the tube & therefore the bellnote which determines whether an instrument is a transposing instrument. Conical/straight does not affect it.
Jo.