What to do? Fix it or put up with it [title amended - Mod]?

[RLines]

While on the topic, I also owned in the past an early set of Geoff's for a period of time, which I bought second hand and which needed complete restoration. When the reedmaker I was working with here on the project thought the chanter needed a bit of TLC to get the bottom D in tune, the obvious decision was to send it back to Geoff to assess it and tweak if he thought it necessary, which he did very nicely.

Rick

[Mr.Gumby]

the original Brown-made staple that was in the chanter

Did he, like the Taylors, use a reverse taper?

[RLines]

Hi Peter. To my shame I don't know. I have never taken the reed apart myself, and have always left that job to people more skilled than I am. It is hand rolled, and obviously from experience made to specific dimensions that suit Brown's chanters. Other attempts at hand rolled or tubing staples just haven't done the trick to date.

R

[Mr.Gumby]

Just asking because it's very important information to have. As I remember it it was the bit crucial to the successfully reeding the Touhey chanter that Geoff was talking about.

[rorybbellows]

Could this be one of those chanters that its impossible to reed .The first thing you notice is that all the toneholes( C# is only slightly bigger)are exactly the same size. Its looks like ,on the outside a very well made chanter but as far as I know has never been reeded properly .The maker of the chanter is unknown.
Have you ever seen a chanter where all the tone holes are the same size ?



RORY

[Brazenkane]

What about a chanter that doesn't work correctly, and the maker can't make it right?

It kind of defies logic that a maker would sell and send out a chanter that he can't make work right. ?

Quite the contrary. It does not defy logic that someone would sell a stick that is need of major tweaking. There have been makers in the past, who have tried to make a good chanter, but who are not great craftsmen, mediocre players at best, and poor reed makers. It's happened more than a few times. Just because a person loves making instruments, can turn wood, bore it, put holes in it, and put together 2pcs of cane, doesn't insure a great instrument (by a long shot). So on that specific statement Lorenzo, I respectfully disagree.


I think some of the ground level skills a pipemaker should have (amongst many others not listed) are great ears, make great reeds, be able to play well, absolutely know, inside and out, what a chanter is supposed to do. It's very difficult for one person to be able do all that!! That takes mountains of time! Most mortals can't be all things e.g. concert level players, and genius craftsman. Just one of those is a tall order give the few years one has in their entire life to master a craft (much less 2,3, or 4 others). Just to hit the nail once again on the head, the majority of self-proclaimed reed makers can't even make a superb reed!

[Brazenkane]

Padraic, I think you mean

"the bog standard [represented by the fingering charts in] Heather Clarke ['s book]"

As I'm sure you're aware, HC is a fine piper.

No slight meant to HC, at all!!!!!!

Respect!

[geoff wooff]

What about a chanter that doesn't work correctly, and the maker can't make it right?

It kind of defies logic that a maker would sell and send out a chanter that he can't make work right. ?

Quite the contrary. It does not defy logic that someone would sell a stick that is need of major tweaking. There have been makers in the past, who have tried to make a good chanter, but who are not great craftsmen, mediocre players at best, and poor reed makers. It's happened more than a few times. Just because a person loves making instruments, can turn wood, bore it, put holes in it, and put together 2pcs of cane, doesn't insure a great instrument (by a long shot). So on that specific statement Lorenzo, I respectfully disagree.


I think some of the ground level skills a pipemaker should have (amongst many others not listed) are great ears, make great reeds, be able to play well, absolutely know, inside and out, what a chanter is supposed to do. It's very difficult for one person to be able do all that!! That takes mountains of time! Most mortals can't be all things e.g. concert level players, and genius craftsman. Just one of those is a tall order give the few years one has in their entire life to master a craft (much less 2,3, or 4 others). Just to hit the nail once again on the head, the majority of self-proclaimed reed makers can't even make a superb reed!

Unfortunately that is true !

[an seanduine]

Thank,you, Geoff.

Bob

You are most welcome (to whatever it is I have done/said)..... only the plain truth after all.

I thank you, Geoff, because while it may by "only the plain truth after all", it is hard won.
Sometimes you can go about fixing a remedy for ignorance. . .but it is said you cannot fix stupid.

Bob

[Lorenzo]

Yes, in that case I agree. I should have qualified it with "reputable maker." I wondered afterward if you might be talking about sets from the M.E. and the like, chanters that probably never left the shop with the ability to play right. Still, I wonder how often this occurs among us and would enjoy a follow up on what exactly was found to be wrong with such a so-called chanter...other than what we know to be wrong with sets from the M.E.

What about a chanter that doesn't work correctly, and the maker can't make it right?

It kind of defies logic that a maker would sell and send out a chanter that he can't make work right. ?

Quite the contrary. It does not defy logic that someone would sell a stick that is need of major tweaking. There have been makers in the past, who have tried to make a good chanter, but who are not great craftsmen, mediocre players at best, and poor reed makers. It's happened more than a few times. Just because a person loves making instruments, can turn wood, bore it, put holes in it, and put together 2pcs of cane, doesn't insure a great instrument (by a long shot). So on that specific statement Lorenzo, I respectfully disagree.


I think some of the ground level skills a pipemaker should have (amongst many others not listed) are great ears, make great reeds, be able to play well, absolutely know, inside and out, what a chanter is supposed to do. It's very difficult for one person to be able do all that!! That takes mountains of time! Most mortals can't be all things e.g. concert level players, and genius craftsman. Just one of those is a tall order give the few years one has in their entire life to master a craft (much less 2,3, or 4 others). Just to hit the nail once again on the head, the majority of self-proclaimed reed makers can't even make a superb reed!

[mirabai]

Excellent discussion! Sorry to be unavailable till now for further response. And thank you, Geoff, for your in depth comments.

It is interesting to note that Geoff's comments about versatility and my own appear to be diametrically opposed. I believe there is a place for everything, and a place where each and every perspective is at home. Relatively speaking, I have prioritized being as in tune with as many differing fingerings as possible, so that I can take advantage of the tonal differences and conveniences of these different fingerings without compromising the tuning. This will indeed minimize some of the idiosyncrasies but not to the point of nullifying them by any means. It is a choice that serves me as a piper who likes to make use of what dynamic and tonal range I have while still being in tune. Geoff has obviously taken a different route. Viva la difference!

An example that supports my point is a D chanter that has a particularly small G hole that in combination with other factors will not sound a proper note at all with one finger in the first octave. Given that it is SOP to play staccato triplets and the like with one finger, and is quite inconvenient to do otherwise, this is to me unacceptable. In my experience, such as it is, I find no down side to making the G slightly bigger to ameliorate the problem. I understand that there may be differing opinions on even what I would consider a relatively straightforward issue. The C natural/C# issue is similar to me in that many chanters seem to have a flat C# with any reed. Making the hole slightly higher and smaller if necessary cures it with no ill effects that I am aware of. These kinds of issues indicate to me that there is a significant history of chanters that have never played optimally from any standpoint and that in my experience it is only relatively recently that hardly anyone seemed to care. Slightly out of tune has simply been the norm.

I think we have established that assuming much about another maker's work is a tricky business at best. But I do believe that although there are some very thoughtful highly skilled makers out there, currently and in the past, there are many that are neither. As dicey as determining the difference may be, there are some instances where it is quite clear, both currently and historically. To assume otherwise is foolish, though acting with respect, regardless of the maker's apparent skill, is clearly a reasonable option.

[mirabai]

The problem is complicated further by the fact that there is no hard line between "reputable makers" and those less fortunate. IMHO, most makers fall in between. Indeed, there are few players or makers that are even in a position to judge what warrants the description of "reputable". It could even be said that there is no such thing as a perfect chanter. It is a matter of what compromises one chooses, and how well they are dealt with. As I have already said and Kinch just restated, very few makers, if any, excel in all ways required to be worthy of trusting their designs implicitly across the board. Then there is the matter of sending a set from one extreme climate to another, like Ireland to Utah, such as is often the case. The otherwise effective maker may be at a complete loss as to how to deal with circumstances that they have never nor might ever experience. As usual, it is simply not black and white and never will be. At least we can share what we do know and act from as informed a position as we can. We are lucky to have such forums as this...

Yes, in that case I agree. I should have qualified it with "reputable maker." I wondered afterward if you might be talking about sets from the M.E. and the like, chanters that probably never left the shop with the ability to play right. Still, I wonder how often this occurs among us and would enjoy a follow up on what exactly was found to be wrong with such a so-called chanter...other than what we know to be wrong with sets from the M.E.

It kind of defies logic that a maker would sell and send out a chanter that he can't make work right. ?

Quite the contrary. It does not defy logic that someone would sell a stick that is need of major tweaking. There have been makers in the past, who have tried to make a good chanter, but who are not great craftsmen, mediocre players at best, and poor reed makers. It's happened more than a few times. Just because a person loves making instruments, can turn wood, bore it, put holes in it, and put together 2pcs of cane, doesn't insure a great instrument (by a long shot). So on that specific statement Lorenzo, I respectfully disagree.


I think some of the ground level skills a pipemaker should have (amongst many others not listed) are great ears, make great reeds, be able to play well, absolutely know, inside and out, what a chanter is supposed to do. It's very difficult for one person to be able do all that!! That takes mountains of time! Most mortals can't be all things e.g. concert level players, and genius craftsman. Just one of those is a tall order give the few years one has in their entire life to master a craft (much less 2,3, or 4 others). Just to hit the nail once again on the head, the majority of self-proclaimed reed makers can't even make a superb reed!

[geoff wooff]

Many of us would have a view of 'our perfect chanter' whilst admitting that such a thing is just a figment of our desire however, when someone's attempt at a set of reasonable compromises is swept away by another who thinks they know better but perhaps has not really considered the other person's reasoning... is this not tantamount to vandalism ?

The tiny un-musical sounds produced by close fingering on small hole chanters does provide a seperation of rythmic devices from melody notes and the result can be like a layer cake of impressions.. almost as if two instruments are playing at once.
For examples of this try any of the better recordings of Seamus Ennis.

Mr.Britton,
I would like to read your take on the tunings of C's therefore I will say what my own are:

Addmittedly some of the old musicians would use only one C note.... several of the aged fiddler's that we played with during 15 years of living in Co.Clare would use a sort of C neutral for all things C. Whilst these tunings may have come into being during a period when the Traditional music was in very serious decline, I don't believe that this was the case during the first 'Golden Age' of the pipes.
Here in Europe, since the revival of Traditional musiques (1968-) the scales of the Chanter's of some of the Bagpipes have been Modernised to conform more closely with the Accordion.. this has lead to a scale that whilst not quite Equal Temperament is somewhat between that and an ideal 'harmonic interval' regime. Whilst I am not really happy with the result I can see the reasoning behind this even though it is detrimental to the beauty of the instrument.

My approach to tuning the Irish pipes is one of the least compromise away from a set of Harmonic intervals. So, without getting too long winded I will just take the C note. From this hole I want to get a harmonic flat seventh that is 29 cents flat of equal temperament... a C# that is 10 cents flat of ET.. a second C natural which is as close to ET as practicable ( a little on the sharp side) and another C natural which is slightly flat of ET. Even dealing with the subtlties of getting just one chanter note to do all that one wants takes a lot of time an patience.

Imagine if you will dear reader, having to re-make a chanter... oh it is just a stick of wood... yes well it is but one that you have guarded for perhaps ten years, whilst it stabilises (dries).. then you make your basic bore and rough turn the outside.. leaving the piece for a further six months or more in the climatic conditions where it will be finnished... after this you can begin to finish your turning... slot the key blocks drill the initial finger holes... and leave it to sit for a while longer..... make the keys and mounts and fit it all together. That is Stage One. Then you make the reeds (this takes me a week to produce a batch) then you spend another week testing and refining the reeds with due consideration as to where the instrument's customer lives (climatic).. then when you are satisfied that you have several excelent reeds for this chanter you begin to refine the tuning and the voice of each note... this takes me at least another week !! Eventually the chanter can be taken appart for final polishing.......

Of course, the contrapoint is that when a reed maker is asked to make a reed for a chanter that is not one they know and the customer expects to pay the price for a reed ( 50 ? 100 ?) it can take hours/days/weeks to come up with a recipe that works well... it just is not Worth it.... " sorry but I spent a week trying to make a reed for you so please give me your week's wages" !

Yes the temptation to adjust something to correct that last fault is very strong.. but reboring and re sizing all the finger holes is the action of a very arrogant individual who should be exposed to the piping public.

PS; It has been suggested to me , by a friend, that part of the last line should read " should not be exposed to the piping public".

[rorybbellows]

Would it not be a step in the right direction if one of the goals in pipemaking development was to make chanters easier to reed ,namely to fit them with tubing staples. The future for hard to reed individual instruments may be very bleak and confined to underneath someones bed. As far as I know all Alain Froments instruments are designed to play with tubing staples.

RORY

[MichaelLoos]

As far as I know all Alain Froments instruments are designed to play with tubing staples.

The original reed of my Froment CP chanter (made in 1998) has a rolled copper staple.