Patrick Hennelly chanter

[Evertjan 't Hart]

Hi, I've a Patrick Hennelly chanter to reed. I assume that it is a Patrick Hennelly chanter because it's stamped PH and very much in the Taylor style. Anyone reeded a Hennelly chanter before and want to share the specs....
Thanks EJ

[Steampacket]

Prehaps of some use, I found this regarding Taylor chanters:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4588

Author: tok [ Tue Jun 18, 2002 8:51 am ]
Post subject:
Anima,Thanks!! Also, Dionis, here is a guestimate of some specs on the whole or complete taylor chanter reed.
Taylor;
staple lenght, .51 mm.
diameter at bottom, .4 mm.
eye width, .5 mm.
eye height, .2 mm.
blade width, .10 mm.
bridle width, .4 mm.
blade lenght (total exposed area above winding), .25 mm. (roughly).
scrape, .21 mm.
reed lips seem to me to be best at one half a mm. Or a little less.
overall length, .71 mm.
I hope this is helpfull.
T.K.

One of the most interesting features of Taylor [style] reeds, and little has been published on that aspect of them, is the fact they used a staple with an inverse taper i.e. it widened considerably towards the reed head quite opposed to the Rowsome school of reedmaking.

Only yesterday I was looking at a staple that belonged to the Patsy Touhey chanter, and had played in it for over sixty year and originated either with the Taylors, Touhey himself, or [most likely] Mike Carney. This staple was extremely well made and regular formed and had a strong taper towards the head. Stronger I would imagine than the one in the pic on Tom Kennedy's website.

As I said some articles have been written about this aspect of the Taylor's reedmaking but there's plenty of room for research there.

I copy below measurements given by Bill Ochs for a reed that was in his Taylor chanter.

Length: 1.75”
Staple dimensions:
Inside Diameter: .128” - .141” (not perfectly round at bottom)
Outside Diameter: .180”
Thickness of brass: .020”
Length of eye (inside): .205”
Width of eye on centerline (inside): .073”
Length of taper: .970”

Blade dimensions:
Width: .415”
Length: 1.945”
Length of staple bed: .975”

Author: Jim McGuire [ Mon Sep 01, 2003 5:47 pm ]
Post subject: Taylor, Brown, Hennelly - Inverted Staples for the Chanter
Billy Taylor of Louth and Philadelphia, Patsy Brown of Kerry and Boston, Patrick Hennelly of Mayo and Chicago - all used the inverted staple in their chanter reeds.

I believe that Bill's pipes are Patsy Brown and would also have the inverted staple.

[tompipes]

I don't know if Hennelly copied Taylor chanters all that accurately so keep an open mind regarding staple designs.

Chris Bailey published his chanter measurements on a post below so have a look there too.

I would describe Hennelly chanters as Taylor-ish rather than Taylor-esque. Hennelly was a good maker but he was big on experimentation and described himself as an inventor. So, as I mentioned, keep an open mind!

Tommy

[Chris Bayley]

One of the most interesting features of Taylor [style] reeds, and little has been published on that aspect of them, is the fact they used a staple with an inverse taper i.e. it widened considerably towards the reed head quite opposed to the Rowsome school of reedmaking.

?

[tompipes]

Ah, the mythical upside down staple!

Some say they work in Taylor and early W Rowsome chanters.

I'd file that with '1/8" for every 1" of the chanter', 'reed head same width as chanter bell'
and other such favourites.

[nwhitmer]

Well, I'm a believer in the reverse-taper staple. My experience is limited to one Taylor chanter, but it seems to like a reed with a slight inverse taper, thus: inverted cone staple 2 1/8" long. Circumference at small end .500" Circ at large end .550" This based on the advice of an eminent reedmaker.

As for '1/8" for every 1" of the chanter', 'reed head same width as chanter bell', I'm in agreement. These ideas seem unrealistic as rules of thumb, much less iron-clad dogma.

Nick Whitmer

[Evertjan 't Hart]

Thanks Lads!

[Elmek]

?

You got me wondering with this somewhat cryptic post Mr Bayley so a few minutes on the calculator and now see why None of the sets measurements given make an inverse tapered staple and if they are correct it is a very shallow or at best cylindrical. Why does nobody take the initiative when posting to verify that what they are writing is actually correct

How long have you known this ? I know your chanters are Taylor based and use a cylindrical staple so guess along time

Do you have any measurements for a reverse tapered staple or is Tommy correct to have it in the list of popular UP myths,

John

[tompipes]

is Tommy correct to have it in the list of popular UP myths,

Well Nick informed us that he had success with a reverse taper so I stand corrected.

A thing to keep in mind is that you can alter the shape of the reed head to make up for weaknesses in the staple design and visa versa.

So really, a reverse taper staple should work but not with the same shape head as a normal taper or tube staple.

Also I would presume that the internal workings of Chris' chanter will be different to a Hennelly chanter so different reed requirements anyway.

[cormacc]

I've spent a good deal of time attempting to reed one particular Egan (and have heard much more knowledgeable authorities opine that the Taylor bores could be derived from Egan). I've gone back and forth on the reverse taper, but for the last while have been happiest with a straight staple rolled from a 1/2" x 2 1/8" blank -- bottom Ds seem more stable, and back D less likely to be flat -- reverse taper feels to me in hindsight like an attempt to push the second octave into tune with an overly-short staple, for my chanter at least. Plus it's very awkward to shape the taper/eye section accurately with a reverse taper -- your eye forming mandrel is restricted to the narrower diameter, so very easy to cave in the tapered section a bit at the seam, and not so easy to push it out again.

The chanter in question has been through the wars, so may not be the a representative sample. That said, I've had some success with the same staple in another Egan in C and a Taylor D.

Think there's a good deal of variation in Taylor bores though (again, based on hearsay rather than experience). Know the reed in the Touhey/Carney Taylor chanter is on a reverse-tapered staple.

[Steampacket]

Some old info from my site but prehaps of interest: "Regarding Taylor reeds "The Taylor Brother thread is interesting (this refers to a discussion thread on the uilleann pipe list) and shows how little serious study has been done. Most of the comments are inaccurate and probably based on little info/examples/measurements. First Taylor reeds. The examples I've seen range across the full spectrum of sizes and shapes and only a few had wide heads. This is similar to Leo Rowsome reeds which astonished me by the range of sizes. Leon Rowsome told me his father rarely measured and mostly made reeds by feel. Some Taylor chanters played OK but rather loud and these almost all seem to be wider bore and from later years - I think they made 'loud pipes' by request in later years. Most of these later years chanters have bigger tone-holes - almost as big as many modern D chanters. Even these examples conform to a large extent to the acoustic principles I found in earlier narrower bores. In examining a Taylor narrow bore D and comparing with a normal bore Taylor D I found an identical acoustic design excepting only the bottom D bell. These are two of the best chanters I have ever had in my hands. A few interesting observations from Matt Kiernan (who began making pipes 1920'ish - not long after Taylors) - Taylors had a set of master reeds and each chanter had pilot tone-holes drilled before being fitted with the master reed. This explains oval tone-holes and accurate tuning. It seems also that Taylors adapted chanters to fit the playing style - Matt suggested that some apparent mis-tuning (mostly B and G) on some Taylor chanters was attributed to the chanter being set up for a tight player." The above very interesting information is from Michael Dooley"

I wonder what happened to the set of "master reeds" Were they amongst the material that Hutton got or were they thrown away or lost in the transfer to the Mercer Museum?

[Driftwood]

I have a Taylor type chanter sleeping peacefully under the bed. It hasn't been played for over 2 years so I'd better speak softly in case I upset the beast.
It likes to play at about A=452hertz. and probably sounds at it's best like that. It can be made to play around A=445 with the right reed plus a rush and some tape. It can also play at A440 with a different reed and a virtual "re-design" involving lots of wax in the lower holes and a specially shaped rush intended to make it like a Rowesome bore.

My guess (and it is only a guess) is that if the Taylors had more than one chanter design, then they also had more than one reed formula. Maybe the "reverse taper" staple was something they used or perhaps it was a later invention designed to help drive down the Hertz numbers.