Bob Dunsire Bagpipe Forums

Bob Dunsire Bagpipe Forums (http://forums.bobdunsire.com/forums/index.php)
-   Soda Shoppe (http://forums.bobdunsire.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=350)
-   -   Tenor-dominant Hendersons? (http://forums.bobdunsire.com/forums/showthread.php?t=159833)

Michael Kazmierski Dunn 08-05-2015 02:59 PM

Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Hey guys,I have a question regarding the new Henderson / Hardie line of pipes made today. I hear that they are supposed to represent a Henderson bore, and I have definitely seen a positive improvement in the tone of the pipes, especially recently. However, in some of the videos it is very dificult to hear the bass drone and I know that Hendersons are somewhat bass-dominant in sound. Unfortunately I cannot send URL links but I can refer to these videos in a different way. In one video called "Alastair Dunn demonstrates new Peter Henderson Chanter" or varient thereof, the drones seem way on the tenor side despite using what I think is the prize setup. Also in the video playing new Peter Henderson pipes they too seem slightly tenor dominant. But in a positive way I feel these pipes have improved especially on one of the COP episodes where Alastair is playing at what I think is the Echos of Oban (with Lochinside, cowall Gathering / Millbank Cottage, and the Battle of Waterloo). These pipes in that recording have the best balance I have heard between bass and tenor, and so the pipes in the video of the Rghp01 Acetyl pipes. Does anyone mind explaining to me why the Hardies and Hendersons used to sound somewhat tenor dominant? My first guess would be the recording and how it was produced, but I think the same set of drone reeds were used all along. Also I forgot to mention, but in the Winter Storm 2014 concert video of Alastair, the pipes are again balanced very well. I first thought it had to do with a new change in the design but I may be wrong. Thanks and I am not trying to ask too many questions. MichaelPS. at St. Andrews Highland Games, I got a first place in grade 4 with my 2/4 march. There weren't any other events in which I could compete, but many of the pipers said that I don't belong in grade 4 they recommend I switch to grade 2!

flares2 08-05-2015 03:37 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
I searched for the video you referenced and assuming I found the same one, I felt the balance was quite nice between bass, tenor, and chanter. As discussed before on these forums, recordings can be deceiving, especially in regards to balance. The position of the microphone, movement of the piper, size of the room, can all really sway the sound from one recording to the next. Best to hear the pipes in person when applicable.

Congrats on your 1st. Don't be lulled into a false sense of confidence though. A grade 4 to grade 2 jump is ludicrous, simply because at Grade 4 you predominantly have 2/4 march and piobaireachd. It's difficult to predict your jig, strathspey/reel skills if you're not competing with them. Don't be in too much of a hurry to upgrade. You're young, still have plenty of time to move up the ladder.

Rooklidge 08-05-2015 04:54 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Kazmierski Dunn (Post 1286607)
...but many of the pipers said that I don't belong in grade 4 they recommend I switch to grade 2!

Don't be fooled by flattery, Michael. They are just trying to get you out if their grade! Stick, settle in, and win consistently...then move up. :thumb:

John McCain 08-05-2015 05:05 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Kazmierski Dunn (Post 1286607)
but many of the pipers said that I don't belong in grade 4 they recommend I switch to grade 2!

I get that all the time, but then I realized they were saying "poo"

GordonLawrie 08-06-2015 10:04 AM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
The way in which pipes are recorded (equipment/mic positioning/ambient acoustics/eq....etc...etc. can make a huge difference to how they sound.

You really have to be there to make a good judgement.

oops- just read down the thread. Sorry to be repetitious.

Michael Kazmierski Dunn 08-06-2015 03:15 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Hey guys, thanks for all of your responses. Yes, I do completely understand that recordings have an immense impact on the sound, but I'm afraid, Flares 2, that the video wasn't the correct one. It's the one where he plays the 6/8 march Cameron MacFadyen, rather than a hornpipe. Also, given the comment that people wanted me to go to grade 2, I don't feel ready for it anyway. I may feel ready for grade 3 though. TTYL (as my bestfriend Deborah says all the time),
Michael

Michael Kazmierski Dunn 11-16-2015 04:38 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Hey guys,Understandably I have not posted in months, but I must say. Regarding the tenor dominance of the Hardie/Hendersons, I did a bit of forum-based research and found out that the bore of the bass bottom can have an influence on volume. I learned on one of these pages that the bore is a 1924 Henderson with a Hardie bottom probably 19/64. I do not have a caliper so this was what I have heard. Most bass bottoms for modern Hends are - maybe, just guessing - 11/32 or so. Maybe this reason, of having a 19/64 bottom, could be the reason for the tenor-dominance. However, as I said before I have heard a dramatic, positive improvement in the tone, especially with the bass being a lot more pronounced and projected in a good way. I'm just going to take a wild guess that the bottom bore of bass has been opened slightly, and if this is so, I'd be curious to know its measurements. When I do get my Rghp01 pipes and before I sell my Naills to my girlfriend Deborah (story coming later), I might experiment by putting my Naill bass bottom on the Hardie, 2/3rds of the bass (so Naill bottom, Hardie middle and top). If this changes the drone dominance I can tell you about it, but I probably will not have the Hardies until maybe a year or two from now. Has anybody done this experiment by putting different bottom bores on existing middle/top bores to increase or decrease dominance? Understandably the chances of screaming are taken into account, but I have always been fascinated, after doing this research, if the dominance changes. Reason being, I love that big bold bass-dom. Henderson sound, although I'm afraid my pipes - when I do get them - will be tenor-dom. Of course, reeds have a big effect. Sorry for bothering anybody, and if I was offensive I did not try to do it in the slightest. TTYL (as Deborah says)Michael

Dan Bell 11-17-2015 11:45 AM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
My understanding is that modern Hardies and Hendersons (which are both made by the RG Hardie company) use the same bore. Only the outside profiles are different. I've heard both in person and I would NOT say that they are tenor-dominant.

Michael Kazmierski Dunn 11-17-2015 01:35 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Dear Dan,Unfortunately I wasn't talking about the exterior design; it's just that Hardie design is only one made in Acetal / Poly / Delrin, which I love. It's ok if you don't really know about bores but I was just trying to clarify. Yes they are the same bore, I know that. Michael

pipernz 11-18-2015 05:03 AM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Kazmierski Dunn (Post 1292173)
Dear Dan,Unfortunately I wasn't talking about the exterior design; it's just that Hardie design is only one made in Acetal / Poly / Delrin, which I love. It's ok if you don't really know about bores but I was just trying to clarify. Yes they are the same bore, I know that. Michael

Hardie bagpipes are available in ABW also not just plastic.

Henderson (as in modern) in short are modeled off a 1924 set of Henderson with bottom bass section replaced. At least they were when I inquired some years ago. This has been carried through a few makers pipes these days siting tuning issues, double toning, growling etc.

Alastair played a cane bass and ezeedrone tenors for solos and full cane for band when I spoke to him a couple of years ago.

It's one of those multiple answer question really, could be a whole range of things. Likewise, some people say Henderson are tenor dominate and other say they are bass dominant. I personally think you should just satisfy your own ears and get the sound that you want by changing what you need to.

PS Don't believe there is any harm in going up a grade earlier just means you might stay in that grade for a little longer and besides if you keep winning / getting places in a lower grade clearly it's time to go up and give the others a shot.

Michael Kazmierski Dunn 11-18-2015 07:14 AM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Thanks PiperNZ for the comment. Interesting you mensioned that Alastair played a cane for solos, that could contribute to the tenor dominance because, until recently I've been told he's been playing Harmonic Deluxe bass reed. This might have something to do with it.

Shawn Husk 11-18-2015 04:07 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
FWIW, the Henderson sound in general is quite a balanced sound for the most part.

Big bold ringing tenors and a big bass as well. They can be set up to be slightly more bass dominant or slightly more tenor dominant. Overall they are just a big sounding drone on both sides with a very slight bass dominance. But they are easy to set up for a very big bass sound typically.

That said, I have never played nor handled a set of the new Hardie or Hardie made Hendersons so I have no personal experience with those sets and their bores.

pipernz 11-18-2015 08:49 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawn Husk (Post 1292222)
FWIW, the Henderson sound in general is quite a balanced sound for the most part.

I agree with Shawn, thats where my opinion stands, certainly on the cracking vintage sets I've played. And some of the modern bored 'Henderson' spec - Kron Heritage for example.

For me personally the RG Hardie Henderson I played left a lot to be desired IMO, I didn't own them for long.

HHD/ezee and cane/ezee are both popular combos. Cane can be manipulated and the variety of sounds between different reeds themselves can be quite different in tone.

Michael Kazmierski Dunn 11-24-2015 07:37 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Hi there,
Alright, so I have just read the replies. Thanks Shawn, that is very informative. Now here is my question. I figure nobody had done this before, although if this happened to some of you, that's cool. The bottom section of the bass is bored to 19/64, or so I have heard. Again I do not own calipers. Do you think there would be a very significant volume change by reboring the bottom bass section to 11/32? I suppose this would be the case and it might even be steadier, as I have done additional research and the relationship of bores between the different sections accounts for steadiness. Once I get Hardies, I'll conduct an experiment whereby I will put my Naill bass bottom on the Hardie midsection and top section and see if there is a volume difference, or tone difference. If any of you have done this I'd like to know the results, but if no one has done it before, it's no big deal. BTW if I don't have time to reply, have a great Thanksgiving!

Michael

pipernz 11-25-2015 01:25 AM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Kazmierski Dunn (Post 1292482)
I figure nobody had done this before, although if this happened to some of you, that's cool. The bottom section of the bass is bored to 19/64, or so I have heard. Again I do not own calipers. Do you think there would be a very significant volume change by reboring the bottom bass section to 11/32?

I can only comment on my experience / experiments with my own pipe. I'm unaware of the dimension of a Naill bass bottom bore. Was not nearly as much into measuring and experimenting when I owned a set many years ago.

Yes it has been tried. .344 is a “classic” bottom bore to use with a “Henderson”, inverted commas because I’m generalising this style of pipe (could be Lawrie / could be a modern pipe made in this style or others for that matter). It is used (and has been tested) by a few makers I know of. It is also a classic modification on a vintage set of pipes with a larger bottom bore.

My factory Henderson (most probably pre-1930) bass bottom bore is .359. It gives a lovely deep bass sound but is prone to growling, producing rough overtones and is fussy with reeds. Have to select and adjust the right cane bass reed to get it to behave itself. Replacing with the .344 allowed the bottom section to tune higher on the pin. Perceived that it produced more resonance, and better balance with my tenors and chanter. And of course the previous problems were gone. Overall better performance. Some guys will tell you that you need the bottom pin tuning out right near the hemp but I’ve found that unnecessary in my circumstance.

However, you are going to do the opposite i.e. decrease the bore size to lower the mid section on the bottom pin. It really depends on your other bore dimensions as to whether this will work for you. It is easier to test for the sound you are after by ‘rushing’ or ‘sleeving’ the bore (before you go for more permanent options) but obviously you need a large bore to begin with. Provided you can get the Naill bottom bore into the mid section this would be a good first pass.

IMO a good caliper is worth having if you are right into this sort of stuff. Bore gauges and a micrometer if you are super keen.

el gaitero 11-25-2015 04:56 AM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by pipernz (Post 1292488)

My factory Henderson (most probably pre-1930) bass bottom bore is .359. It gives a lovely deep bass sound but is prone to growling,

Have you considered the stock bore might not be right? If not...measure it and consult with Alistair Dunn at Hardie.

pipernz 11-25-2015 05:25 AM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by el gaitero (Post 1292493)
Have you considered the stock bore might not be right? If not...measure it and consult with Alistair Dunn at Hardie.

I thought my preceeding remarks after that statement you quoted were quite clear on the remedy. But yes all of my stock sizes are "typical" Henderson.

The real point was to offer some information in context to the OP.

el gaitero 11-25-2015 05:42 AM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by pipernz (Post 1292496)
I thought my preceeding remarks after that statement you quoted were quite clear on the remedy. But yes all of my stock sizes are "typical" Henderson.

The real point was to offer some information in context to the OP.

Curious.... Will you share what are the stock bore diameters you measured in mm?

Michael Kazmierski Dunn 11-29-2015 03:38 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Hi there. Thanks for the comments. I've got a few things to say. First of all, you didn't''' (speech fading away - audience murmuring) - just kidding! (audience laughing). I just like being sarcastic! Here's the real deal? The other day I herd Kron Heritage pipes played by Jim McGillivray from the sound sample page on Kron's website, and Kinnaird reeds were used; the pipes were very bass dominant, the sound I really like. After doing more research I learned the bass bottom bore in those early Krons (they were recorded in 2001) had a bore of 5/16. I then thought, well, maybe opening the bore might fix steadiness and reed issues but it probably won't make a volume difference. As Jsragman77 pointed out, a bore of 5/16 IIRC made the bass growl and there were steadiness and tuning-pin issues. I then listened to the Kron Heritage pipes with Rocket tenors and Kinnaird bass on Patrick McLaurin's site, and the tenors were a lot more pronounced (i.e. you could hear the harmonics that blend with the chanter easier). Well, the tenors were not Kinnaird. Given that these were probably the new variety (with the bass bottom opened to 11/32), I figured, well, the volume on the bass seems the same. There's also a Youtube video of Peter Henderson bagpipes, and I think they are using Ezeedrone tenors and Kinnaird bass, and the blend was the same as it was for the Heritage recording on McLaurin's site, so it goes to prove a point that maybe the difference in the bores doesn't make a huge difference in volume - as the Peter Hendersons have a bass bottom bore of 19/64 like Hardies. Lastly on a 1917 recording of David Arthur Smith (which btw cannot be beaten for steadiness, drone tone, fingering, tuning etc), the Hendersons (or so they sound like) were as bass-dom as the McGillivray recordings of the 2001 Kron Heritages, and Kinnaird reeds are similar to cane in tone (as most people I hear tell me), so it could be that the Kinnaird tenors (and maybe cane too) are just softer in tone in a Henderson-based pipe than other makes of reeds. I have the 1917 recording from the Tony Langford collection and I remastered it using Audacity, so if any of you guys are interested to hear the recordings let me know. Thanks,Michael

Jim Fogelman 11-29-2015 05:37 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
A lot has to do with reed choice and reed setup. I can take my Dunbars and put different reeds in and of course get a different sound than I do now. I can also take my current reeds and make them more tenor dominant or more bass dominant with bridle adjustments.

Michael Kazmierski Dunn 11-29-2015 07:23 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Of course, Jim, you're definitely right. (or as my girlfriend Deborah says, "Debbie-Deb-Definitely" right). Reeds make an immense difference no doubt. However, I have heard that the bore is responsible for the majority of the sound, especially harmonics. I.e. It is difficult to make a Naills sound like a Henderson harmonically speaking.

John McCain 11-30-2015 03:36 AM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Here is a recording of the same set of drones with 9 different sets of reeds. I didn't record this to make a point, I was curious about the result. There was no effort made to set up the reeds for optimal sound. The method was to put the reed set in, tune to the same reference pitch and record a few seconds. This was all done in about 5 minutes.

https://soundcloud.com/pipermccain/9reeds

pipernz 11-30-2015 04:02 AM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by John McCain (Post 1292760)
Here is a recording of the same set of drones with 9 different sets of reeds. I didn't record this to make a point, I was curious about the result. There was no effort made to set up the reeds for optimal sound. The method was to put the reed set in, tune to the same reference pitch and record a few seconds. This was all done in about 5 minutes.

https://soundcloud.com/pipermccain/9reeds

Nice work! Illustrated well. Any chance of listing out what they were in order?

John McCain 11-30-2015 04:30 AM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
You bet: The first drone set are a mixed set of Rockets that I've used in these drones in the past (carbon bass, glass tenors). 2nd set are Cannings. 3rd are Crozier Carbon. 4th set are new glass Rockets (don't know what spec). 5th set are old glass Rockets (spec'd for older Henderson bore). 6th are Kinnaird original. 7th are MG. 8th - Kinnaird Evolution. 9th - Selbie.

I've posted this file before. Hope nobody minds the re-repeat.

HighlandPark 11-30-2015 08:49 AM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by John McCain (Post 1292763)
You bet: The first drone set are a mixed set of Rockets that I've used in these drones in the past (carbon bass, glass tenors). 2nd set are Cannings. 3rd are Crozier Carbon. 4th set are new glass Rockets (don't know what spec). 5th set are old glass Rockets (spec'd for older Henderson bore). 6th are Kinnaird original. 7th are MG. 8th - Kinnaird Evolution. 9th - Selbie.

I've posted this file before. Hope nobody minds the re-repeat.

Don't mind the repeat all -- thank you for re-posting. Those reeds all sound quite distinct and appear to maintain the 'family-characteristic' tone, i.e., Rockets sound like Rockets, Kinnairds sound like Kinnairds. I was surprised at which ones I liked and disliked, comparatively-speaking.

What I'd really like to know is how a cane reed would sould like up against this cohort. Can you make any assumptions as to which reeds would line up closest, John?

pipernz 11-30-2015 12:12 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by John McCain (Post 1292763)
You bet: The first drone set are a mixed set of Rockets that I've used in these drones in the past (carbon bass, glass tenors). 2nd set are Cannings. 3rd are Crozier Carbon. 4th set are new glass Rockets (don't know what spec). 5th set are old glass Rockets (spec'd for older Henderson bore). 6th are Kinnaird original. 7th are MG. 8th - Kinnaird Evolution. 9th - Selbie.

Thanks John.

John McCain 11-30-2015 12:30 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by HighlandPark (Post 1292768)

What I'd really like to know is how a cane reed would sould like up against this cohort. Can you make any assumptions as to which reeds would line up closest, John?

I play cane drone reeds for 3-4 months a year so I have a tiny bit of experience with them.

It's a difficult question to answer because cane doesn't sound the same from one reed/reedset to another.

But I have a recording I haven't posted of cane drone reeds in another Henderson influenced bore and it sounds remarkably like set #1 in the 9 reeds post. If there's any interest I can post it.

pipernz 11-30-2015 01:44 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by John McCain (Post 1292781)
It's a difficult question to answer because cane doesn't sound the same from one reed/reedset to another.

But I have a recording I haven't posted of cane drone reeds in another Henderson influenced bore and it sounds remarkably like set #1 in the 9 reeds post. If there's any interest I can post it.

Agree cane van vary quite a bit from reed to reed. Maybe a comparison between 10 sets of cane. :) Then there's also the variability of the reed set up itself to mould the characteristics you want.

I like set one. Interesting how they sound so different by comparison to your other Rocket sets. But yeah understand they might be spec'd differently.

Edit: I'd be interested to hear the other recording. :)

Michael Kazmierski Dunn 11-30-2015 04:03 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
John, As regards the brand of pipes you used, my first guess would be Hendersons, if not Hardie, maybe Kron Heritage. I haven't gotten a chance to listen to the recording due to me having to work on a 200-word paper for one of my classes, and writing papers is a major weak point of mine, especially having to make it 200 words when you may have the entire kit and kabootle covered in only 100 words it's dang frustrating. I'm sure I'll get to it after it's due - as we all know, listening to pipes all day in the dorm will get you nowhere. I'd rather not disclose the subject of the paper for running the risk of being too off topic. I was just saying that I'm afraid I can't listen to it right now, but I'll chime in when I do. I may even email Deborah and I'll post what she thinks so you can get an idea from a superlatively musical yet non-piping perspective - she does know bass-dom versus tenor-dom.

Michael Kazmierski Dunn 11-30-2015 07:21 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Regarding my last post; just a slight correction: I meant to say 2000 words rather than 200 words regarding what is keeping me from listening to the recording. Again I am very, very sorry for rambling off topic.

John McCain 12-01-2015 04:30 AM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by pipernz (Post 1292791)
Agree cane van vary quite a bit from reed to reed. Maybe a comparison between 10 sets of cane. :) Then there's also the variability of the reed set up itself to mould the characteristics you want.

I like set one. Interesting how they sound so different by comparison to your other Rocket sets. But yeah understand they might be spec'd differently.

Edit: I'd be interested to hear the other recording. :)

I take back what I said. It's reed set #5 in the 9Reed file that seems to be closer to cane.

Here is a file with repeating 2 second samples. First is cane, Second is reed set #1 (carbon Rocket bass with glass tongues, Third is reed set #5 (older glass tongue Rockets). This group of three reed sets then repeats 3 times:

https://soundcloud.com/pipermccain/c...ockets-rockets

There is nothing particularly scientific about this. Cane and Synth Reed recordings were made at separate times.

And again, I didn't make these recordings to prove a point or a theory. They were made for me to check my perception (as much as a recording can) and to have something archival.

pipernz 12-01-2015 05:16 AM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
This is interesting in that #1 set in the 9 reed recording sounds different than #1 set in the 3 reed recording. A lot more buzzy in the second recording. Whereas to my ear #1 on the first recording sounds only a little brighter than #5. A bit like a new set of cane versus a blown in set of cane. In your second recording #5 is certainly closer. Could be a different perception again in 'real life'.

Thanks for posting. :thumb:

John McCain 12-01-2015 05:24 AM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by pipernz (Post 1292807)
This is interesting in that #1 set in the 9 reed recording sounds different than #1 set in the 3 reed recording. A lot more buzzy in the second recording. Whereas to my ear #1 on the first recording sounds only a little brighter than #5. A bit like a new set of cane versus a blown in set of cane. In your second recording #5 is certainly closer. Could be a different perception again in 'real life'.

I also noticed that. I guess it's from listening to the reed set in different contexts. I went back to the wav files to pick up the samples before converting the whole file to mp3 for soundcloud.

Michael Kazmierski Dunn 12-01-2015 07:36 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Hi guys
Alright, so I just finished my paper which took a very, very long time, and rewarded myself by listening to the drone file. Of course, I sent the link to Deborah as well so she could judge for herself what the drones sounded like. To me, this is the sound that I would characterize as tenor dominant, and let me explain it using something which I never came up with, but Deborah originally described it this way. Obviously the drones are not human voices but we can use the "Oo" vowel to designate a mellow sound and the "Ah" sound to mean full of harmonics and quite bold this was her idea. In all of the recordings the bass seems to always hover on the Oo sound and the tenors always make the Ah sound, which is what I did not expect. I expected the bass to sound the Ah at a forte dynamic and the tenors to just Oo in the background at a mezzo-piano level, because this is the sound on the Kron Heritage recording as well as the recording of D.A.Smith in 1917, the sound which I like. John, I'm not saying I didn't like the drone sound, I just expected something different. I was sort-of saying to myself, "If these are Hendersons, they are not bass dominant to my ear, they must be either Dunbar, MacLellan, something different". The only types of pipes I know of that have the bass project with the Ah vowel and the tenors on the Oo vowel are only the Kron Heritage pipes, as well as the latest R.G.Hardie pipes as uploaded by Tartontown (Not to mention the Smith recording). Other pipes which are Henderson based, like Dunbar, MacLellan, MacMurchie etc, all sound to me like the tenors take over with the big Ah sound and the bass, while quite present, leans towards the Oo sound, even with several reeds used. The difference in the two sounds come only from when the three drones are playing together. Separately you won't hear a difference (I.e. You'll always hear the Ah vowel regardless), but together, if you listen closely, it's likely that either the bass itself or the tenors themselves project, or, sometimes together producing the Ah, as heard in the video "RGHP01 Acetal bagpipes", which, too, is a sound I personally favor. Ok I didn't mean to sound too nerdy if I seemed that way, but I was trying to explain myself as best as I could with the help of an idea straight from Deborah. I probably would have said the bass would be mellow and the tenors bold, but different people have a different perspective, so I was trying to simplify it. Then again, the reason for the bass being mellow could be that the bore in the bottom is 19/64 rather than 11/32 which might account for the great difference. Maybe it wasn't until recently that Hendersons and Hardies changed their drone tone for the better, maybe you have a Henderson that was made not so recently, just guessing here.
Michael

Michael Kazmierski Dunn 12-01-2015 07:51 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Excuse me, the second link to the Soundcloud won't play for some reason. Maybe you can probably put the MP3 file on Dropbox or something? Or I'll try it sometime later and let you know if it works.

Michael Kazmierski Dunn 12-05-2015 05:13 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Hi there. So you won't believe my discovery here. I was using audio software called Studio Recorder from the American Printing House for the Blind (Aph), which has several unique features. I'm a bit afraid to digress into this but it does have to do with changing drone dominance. A way to navigate audio is by "pixels", or groups of 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256 or 512 audio samples. It depends on the sample rate used, because at the standard 44100 Hz, each pixer, depending on the zoom setting, will navigate you by either (in approximations) 1/86 of a second, 1/172, 1/345, 1/690, or 1/1375 or thereabouts. I'm unable to do calculations at the moment so the values are far from true but you got the idea. So my idea was to navigate by 1/120 & 1/240 of seconds, the bass and tenor drone freqs respectively. Therefore the sample rate is set to 61440 in order for the pixels to be that length. Also the pitch of the pipes, which you can change with Sr as well, must be at exactly 480. Anyway, done with the tech stuff. I opened one of the Kron Heritage files, changed the pitch 16 cents higher so the Low A equals 480 exactly, resampled to 61440 in order to navigate by 1/120 & 1/240, deleted only 1/240 of a second and mixed it with the original (so the bass harmonics cancel out and you only can hear the tenors). I copied the tenor-only result to the clipboard, revert back to when the bass could be heard and mixed the two. Therefore the tenors increased 6 decibels in volume. Note that you should set both clipboard and destination mix volumes to -6 to avoid the audio enemy, i.e distortion or "clipping". I never thought the blend would be just excellent. I was under the impression that the tenors would overpower the bass, but truthfully not, it's a really nice blend between the two. So now I feel like I've been looking for too much bass dominance in the past! These Hardie pipes seem to have this type of excellent blend, but then again they can be set up to sound as bass-dom as the original Kron Heritage recording. Not sure if there is a way for any you guys to do this easier, but it just involves mixing two identical piping files at exactly the tenor drone frequency, copying the tenor-only result, and mixing it with the original to make the pipes slightly more tenor-dom. Note you have to be exact with the frequencies or else this won't work. You don't need a delay effect, just mix it once. Then again you can invert-mix instead of regular mixing, and you would do otherwise the same steps to make pipes more bass-dom too. Well hopefully I didn't sound too off topic but I just thought I'd tell you that I was under the misaprehention that "blended" means a lot of bass. Then again I have Naill pipes which are slightly tenor-dom, so this may be part of the reason why I like bass-dominant.

Klondike Waldo 12-05-2015 06:12 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Without getting into ratios, pixels, hz, just relying on what our old friend Pythagoras worked out...

I suspect sampling each drone in turn wouldn't really give you a sense of tenor dominant vs bass-dominant as closely as all drones working at once reinforcing ( Or not reinforcing) harmonics through difference tones:

When one tenor and the bass are in tune, the difference in their pitch is equal to an octave. We hear this difference between the pitches ( difference frequency) as an audible pitch, called a difference tone.

As the difference tone in this case is equal to the fundamental of the bass drone (A), an in-tune tenor-bass connection produces a second ( though weaker) bass A. Similarly, all the other harmonics between the tenor and bass, if in tune would have difference tones of one octave, reinforcing the harmonics of the bass drone in the same manner.

Add a second tenor drone, perfectly in tune and again the difference tones between the tenor and bass would equal the fundamental and harmonics of the bass drone, further reinforcing it.

That's the acoustic theory of it, at least.

Considering how the tenors reinforce each other, however, gives us the other part of the phenomenon: If the tenors are perfectly in tune with each other ( perhaps a rash assumption), then the pitch is increased in volume as the waves sync up. That increased amplitude, however should somewhat increase the volume in the tenor/bass difference tone as well.

Michael Kazmierski Dunn 12-05-2015 06:28 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
You might want to take a look at this file to demonstrate my point. I uploaded it to Dropbox, although if the link is dead, maybe you can PM me with your Email address.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/x2cohphzx2...r-dom.mp3?dl=0

Michael Kazmierski Dunn 08-01-2017 01:40 PM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
Well, I've never posted in forever about this topic.
I'm selling my Naills so I can get my hands on one of these Hardie pipes. According to Alastair Dunn, the bottom bore in the bass is 8.0 MM. Just over 5/16, not 19/64. To me, this seems to be the reason why the bass is so much louder these days...
Oh, BTW my external hard drive just crashed and I lost all my music worth 1000 gigabytes! UGH! I think it's just a problem with the cable haha... But this music does include recordings of the Hardie pipes, old bagpipe records, and much more. I'm pretty sure it can be fixed.

milwiron 08-09-2017 11:04 AM

Re: Tenor-dominant Hendersons?
 
John, I didn't see it mentioned. Are you playing Naills in your sound samples?


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:14 PM.