[NSP] Re: key question
Just when you thought it was all over, it seems it depends upon your point of view, and this may depend on your position in the history. Below an extract from Mr. Thomas Doubleday's letter to the Duke of Northumberland. date a bit difficult due to Google's OCR not coping with Roman dates, but mid-late C19. (1857 apparently) The Northumberland small-pipe is fitted up upon the plan of construction common to all bagpipes that is to say, it consists of a pipe with stops, by means of which the melody is played, and of three longer pipes sounding different musical intervals in such a way as to produce a rude and imperfect accompaniment to the melody. The bag is inflated by means of a small bellows, as the bag of the Irish or union-pipe is inflated. The great peculiarity of the Northumbrian instrument is its comparatively small size and the peculiar mode of fingering or stopping. In the case of other instruments of this kind, that mode of fingering which, in common parlance, is styled open fingering is the mode used. When this mode of stopping is used, more than one finger is lifted at a time, and by a sudden pressure upon the bag, the chanter, as this pipe is called, is made to sound an octave higher, and thus the range of the instrument is extended. Of this extension of range the Northumb! rian pipe does not admit. It is played upon by means of the method called close fingering for which it is calculated. This method of stopping allows only of one finger being lifted at a time ; and does not admit of the upper octave being forced by pinching or pressure upon the bag. Thus, this instrument is limited to a single octave; and this (little as it is) admits of all the airs, to which it is really suited, being executed by it's means ; with the additional improvement that it may be played perfectly in tune, whilst the tones it produces being all staccato and of a clear, ringing, pearly, and brilliant character, give the instrument a power which it's appearance by no means promises, and which is really suipr^ when L diminutive size of its chanter or melody-pipe is considered. In truth, whilst every other description of bag-pipe is defective, wanting in distinctness, and more or less out of tune in the upper octave, the Northumbrian pipe, when played by a master, executes the airs for which it has been intended to perfection, and with a precision even in the most rapid movements very pleasing as well as surprising. Its defect is the narrow limit within which its merits are confined. It is true that, within the last half century, by means of keys, the range of the instrument has been extended; but to me it is exceedingly doubtful whether this added compass has operated felicitously either upon the instrument or the performer. The peculiar genius of the instrument, which is brilliant and rapid staccato playing, is unfitted for airs of which tenderness and delicacy of expression are the principal attributes. In spite of this, however, that love of novelty which besets the majority of musicians and listeners to music, lures the former to attempt upon this instrument movements utterly unsuited to it. Waltzes in slow time, adagios, and sentimental airs, are thus frequently attempted to be played upon an instrument with the peculiarities of which they are at discord ; and the want of taste of the musician is thus too often made the vilification of that which he has merely misused. To essay to! convey by means of a bagpipe of any description, much more by that of the Northumbrian small pipe, the delicacy of expression which a fine player can produce from the violin, the German flute, the hautboy, or even the clarionet, is a monstrosity in music merely; but to this the additional keys of the instrument have too often led. Discuss! Full text available at http://www.archive.org/details/alettertodukeno00doubgoog Choose your favoured format in the View the Book box on the left. Tim On 16 Dec 2010, at 13:53, Richard York wrote: The only fitting response to this seems to me to picture the Charlie Brown cartoons - the image of Charlie with a sort of horizontal but wiggly line for his mouth - know the one I mean? Richard. On 15/12/2010 12:09, Francis Wood wrote: On 15 Dec 2010, at 12:05, Gibbons, John wrote: But Rob illustrates a simple feather duster - the 17 keyed ones are musically far more versatile... Is that a Peacock feather duster? Francis To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html --
[NSP] Re: key question
Hello Tim Wonderful stuff! Discuss? I'll have to print off, re-read (probably several times) and inwardly digest it first. It has, however, already given me a warm glow which more than compensates for the sub -zero temperature outside. Cheers Anthony -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: key question
Mr. Doubleday takes great pains to prove his sophistication. Even allowing for how the sense of some of the words used have changed since he wrote them, it appears that Doubleday was not enthusiastic about the NSP or NSPipers in general. So, are we to trust his judgement overall? On the one hand we have a tradition with sentimental waltzes and airs, most of which post-date Doubleday, Jack Armstrong's sort of thing. On the other hand, it's difficult to agree with him about delicacy of expression, keys, or sentimental airs after listening to Chris Ormston's recording of The Blackbird on SPIRIT OF THE BORDER CD, to name but one example. I would like to know more about the cultural context of the document. What prompted Doubleday to write this? To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: key question
On 17 Dec 2010, John Dally wrote: Mr. Doubleday I would like to know more about the cultural context of the document. What prompted Doubleday to write this? Here's a bit about him as a starter: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Doubleday Julia To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: key question
On 17 Dec 2010, at 16:44, Tim Rolls wrote: Discuss! One of the most remarkable qualities of this paper is Doubleday's extraordinary talent for using a colossal number of words to say absolutely nothing of any importance. A very narrow bore, in my view. Perhaps I'm being too unkind to him. The paper's an interesting curiosity. I got it a while ago as a print-on-demand thing from Amazon. Francis To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: key question
Hi John, Interesting that the extract gives you that impression. Having read the whole document I didn't infer that. I tried to isolate the particular part that led me to feel that way, but failed. I think you may need to set aside quarter of an hour and read the whole thing which is in essence a plea to the Duke to use his influence to preserve the Northumbrian culture which he felt to be precious and distinct and endangered, as he (Doubleday) didn't have the clout to do it himself. http://www.archive.org/details/alettertodukeno00doubgoog Tim On 17 Dec 2010, at 19:55, John Dally wrote: Mr. Doubleday takes great pains to prove his sophistication. Even allowing for how the sense of some of the words used have changed since he wrote them, it appears that Doubleday was not enthusiastic about the NSP or NSPipers in general. So, are we to trust his judgement overall? On the one hand we have a tradition with sentimental waltzes and airs, most of which post-date Doubleday, Jack Armstrong's sort of thing. On the other hand, it's difficult to agree with him about delicacy of expression, keys, or sentimental airs after listening to Chris Ormston's recording of The Blackbird on SPIRIT OF THE BORDER CD, to name but one example. I would like to know more about the cultural context of the document. What prompted Doubleday to write this? -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: key question
This seems to be a feature of a great many Victorian literary works in my experience. Unfortunately it's a feature which seems to be infectious. Tim On 17 Dec 2010, at 20:33, Francis Wood wrote: On 17 Dec 2010, at 16:44, Tim Rolls wrote: Discuss! One of the most remarkable qualities of this paper is Doubleday's extraordinary talent for using a colossal number of words to say absolutely nothing of any importance. A very narrow bore, in my view. Perhaps I'm being too unkind to him. The paper's an interesting curiosity. I got it a while ago as a print-on-demand thing from Amazon. Francis To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: key question
The only fitting response to this seems to me to picture the Charlie Brown cartoons - the image of Charlie with a sort of horizontal but wiggly line for his mouth - know the one I mean? Richard. On 15/12/2010 12:09, Francis Wood wrote: On 15 Dec 2010, at 12:05, Gibbons, John wrote: But Rob illustrates a simple feather duster - the 17 keyed ones are musically far more versatile... Is that a Peacock feather duster? Francis To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: key question
On 15 Dec 2010, John Dally wrote: But try playing 'Bigg Market Lasses' without a Bb key. The composer does! (Or did) A careful slide/roll with the A finger... But if seventeen keys are a guilty pleasure, what is the right number? My personal answer is 14 (no Bbs, no low D#), for one chanter, or 15 (add low A) for another (in F#, for an extended Wild Hills of Wannie) or 16 (add low A + G). Everyone's mileage will vary - my guilty pleasure is Gow style fiddle airs, hence the low notes. Top c is, I think you will find, no longer available, pipemakers who have tried doing it having decided it is not possible to get it reliably in tune with different reeds, though my information may not cover all makers. I have tune book (and CD) lust. Not only do I play through tune books as a form of entertainment and relaxation, as well as research, I also enjoy reading tune books. My girlfriend, a professional musician, finds it very funny that I'll curl up with a tune book instead of a regular book. Oh goody, customers!!! grin I'll get writing.even bigger grin Julia To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: key question
Morning - for those who hanker after multi-key extended chanters (or are wondering at the minutiae of what is being discussed) here's a little exercise that will demonstrate one of the key differences. First; take a pencil and hold it as you would a chanter - almost no effort is required to hold it and the centre of gravity is between the two hands. Now take a long feather duster with a wooden handle - (3' or 1m will do) (http://www.jbsgroup.ie/catalog/feather-duster-with-long-handle-p-1448.html) Turn it upside down with the feathery bit pointing at the floor (but not resting on it and hold the top of the handle as you would a chanter. The centre of gravity of the instrument is now well below the bottom hand and the natural tendency is for the stick to swing to vertical. A much greater effort is required to main stability in the neutral playing position. Now 'play' a few notes including the two thumbs and the you should be able to feel how the whole stick is trying to jump about. The effect is more pronounced the further you normally hold your chanter from vertical. For a standard length chanter (simple, 7k, or 7+accidentals) the centre of gravity for the chanter is approximately at the centre between the hands. This means that when removing either thumb, the hands are mainly focused on maintaining balance and chanter can be held still with relatively little effort. When you switch to an extended chanter (bottom B or longer) the centre of gravity moves a lot lower - certainly below the back thumb and sometimes below the right hand. When the player removes a thumb, the hands have to do a completely different mechanical job to maintain balance in the chanter. The tendency is for the chanter to move more. Many players of extended chanters choose to anchor the base by planting it on the leg to counteract this. Actually playing the keys is a subject for another day. cheers Rob (http://www.milecastle27.co.uk/rob/) To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: key question
The 2 extravagances on my big chanter are the high bflat - used a grace up to a high b in Maggie Lauder- And a low A - useful in a few Clough tunes, including the 'big' Lea Rigs, and in the Bonny Lass of Bon Accord. Neither of which I can play adequately yet... It's also useful if I am harmonising, which I am very bad at. Most of what I play is simple chanter stuff, from Peacock etc, but the low end tunes like President Garfield's are wonderful, and well worth the investment. I certainly needed a better chanter than the one I had. Yes, I do rest it on my knee, or the seat between my legs if there's room, but if I'm standing then I hold it near vertical. The weight doesn't distract me as much as the tuning problems on my 7-key one did. Yes, I'm a tune-book addict too. But Rob illustrates a simple feather duster - the 17 keyed ones are musically far more versatile... John -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of rob@milecastle27.co.uk Sent: 15 December 2010 10:05 To: NSP group Subject: [NSP] Re: key question Morning - for those who hanker after multi-key extended chanters (or are wondering at the minutiae of what is being discussed) here's a little exercise that will demonstrate one of the key differences. First; take a pencil and hold it as you would a chanter - almost no effort is required to hold it and the centre of gravity is between the two hands. Now take a long feather duster with a wooden handle - (3' or 1m will do) (http://www.jbsgroup.ie/catalog/feather-duster-with-long-handle-p-1448.html) Turn it upside down with the feathery bit pointing at the floor (but not resting on it and hold the top of the handle as you would a chanter. The centre of gravity of the instrument is now well below the bottom hand and the natural tendency is for the stick to swing to vertical. A much greater effort is required to main stability in the neutral playing position. Now 'play' a few notes including the two thumbs and the you should be able to feel how the whole stick is trying to jump about. The effect is more pronounced the further you normally hold your chanter from vertical. For a standard length chanter (simple, 7k, or 7+accidentals) the centre of gravity for the chanter is approximately at the centre between the hands. This means that when removing either thumb, the hands are mainly focused on maintaining balance and chanter can be held still with relatively little effort. When you switch to an extended chanter (bottom B or longer) the centre of gravity moves a lot lower - certainly below the back thumb and sometimes below the right hand. When the player removes a thumb, the hands have to do a completely different mechanical job to maintain balance in the chanter. The tendency is for the chanter to move more. Many players of extended chanters choose to anchor the base by planting it on the leg to counteract this. Actually playing the keys is a subject for another day. cheers Rob (http://www.milecastle27.co.uk/rob/) To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: key question
On 15 Dec 2010, at 12:05, Gibbons, John wrote: But Rob illustrates a simple feather duster - the 17 keyed ones are musically far more versatile... Is that a Peacock feather duster? Francis To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
