Hi all,
many thanks for all the info. on the Burke versus Serpent whistles.
Now I'm asking for more info. please!
What do players think of the new professional model wooden Sweetheart whistles in D?
Are they good for playing fast Irish tunes in a session?
Do they require much air in the upper register?
I'm looking for a wooden whistle to play in a fast session, which won't need too much air to play the high notes. Could you recommmend any?
Thanks again,
Dublingirl
wooden Sweetheart whistles - what do you think?
-
dublingirl
- Posts: 58
- Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2003 4:39 am
Dublingirl, I have a Sweetheart Pro, and think very highly of it. I've also had the opportunity to let some highly skilled musicians play it, and they've been impressed. Its relatively loud, very responsive, and not particularly difficult on the upper notes. It's purer in sound than many whistles you'll find.
One of the great things about the whistle is that while it is wood, it is a laminate and in no need of the fussy care that some people don't like about the typical wooden instrument.
Do a search through the site on Sweetheart and you'll find a nice selection of opinions.
One of the great things about the whistle is that while it is wood, it is a laminate and in no need of the fussy care that some people don't like about the typical wooden instrument.
Do a search through the site on Sweetheart and you'll find a nice selection of opinions.
Remember, you didn't get the tiger so it would do what you wanted. You got the tiger to see what it wanted to do. -- Colin McEnroe
-
glauber
- Posts: 4967
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2002 6:00 pm
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Location: I'm from Brazil, living in the Chicago area (USA)
- Contact:
I have the one that was Cranberry's. So keep in mind it's the old model, but rumours are that the new model is better.
This is a great session whistle. It has good sound and is very responsive. It's happiest when playing LOUD. The only drawback is that renny types compliment you on the "pretty recorder".
g
This is a great session whistle. It has good sound and is very responsive. It's happiest when playing LOUD. The only drawback is that renny types compliment you on the "pretty recorder".
g
On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog!
--Wellsprings--
--Wellsprings--
-
Zubivka
- Posts: 3308
- Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2002 6:00 pm
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Location: Sol-3, .fr/bzh/mesquer
A renowned whistle maker came at my home. He picked up my blackwood Kilhoury, and just commented "wow, is this tone pure!".
I think the reputation of these whistles has been harmed by two comments by Dale on the main board. That's the Power of the Undisputed. If you read them carefully, you can see it refers to older basic models, and that Dale's opinion was moderate. However, people do read through the comments, and retain roughly:
1) They look like recorders
2) They're not responsive.
All I know is I was myself prejudiced by this reading, until I went against and purchased one from AndreaZ. Now I strongly disagree with both statements.
I also placed a firm order on a fully keyed one, knowing it will have to be pretty expensive.
(However, I did try one other Kilhoury which I disliked. There ARE variations in hand-made whistles. Well, I'm sure Ralph Sweet would stand behind his product if it was sent bach to him.)
With a bit of modification by Ralph Sweet, my unkeyed Kilhoury is now on par with my Rose, with very similar "colour" of their tone. For balance, close call up to top of second octave. Then the Rose remains playable into 3rd, while the Sweet top C# already gets shriek. However, it's give and take: the Rose has a weaker low end, and flips sometimes unduly (with my limited skills again) into 3rd register. The Sweet it noticeably louder, though the Rose is not quiet; here's a choice between comfort in the den and assession in a sertion.
Also, the Sweet may have a tulip-shaped head--hence what some call "recorder" looks--but it is all wood. I prefer this contact than the cold feel of metal, even when it's only a slim "skin" over wood like with the Rose, and gold-plated too. If you want to do away with the metal skin, actually a reinforcing "belt", then the head has to have this tulip shape, otherwise the wood will crack over time.
To sum up my opinion: I had that whistle on sale, but I may just as well sell the Rose instead: it will bring me more money (like three times more...), given its raving reputation (and rightly so), while I know I love both and that my skills will never outgrow either of them. However, what I do know is I have to concentrate on playing one or the other, because of their subtle differences in fingering and breath control, so I'd better master one than half-ass both...
I think the reputation of these whistles has been harmed by two comments by Dale on the main board. That's the Power of the Undisputed. If you read them carefully, you can see it refers to older basic models, and that Dale's opinion was moderate. However, people do read through the comments, and retain roughly:
1) They look like recorders
2) They're not responsive.
All I know is I was myself prejudiced by this reading, until I went against and purchased one from AndreaZ. Now I strongly disagree with both statements.
I also placed a firm order on a fully keyed one, knowing it will have to be pretty expensive.
(However, I did try one other Kilhoury which I disliked. There ARE variations in hand-made whistles. Well, I'm sure Ralph Sweet would stand behind his product if it was sent bach to him.)
With a bit of modification by Ralph Sweet, my unkeyed Kilhoury is now on par with my Rose, with very similar "colour" of their tone. For balance, close call up to top of second octave. Then the Rose remains playable into 3rd, while the Sweet top C# already gets shriek. However, it's give and take: the Rose has a weaker low end, and flips sometimes unduly (with my limited skills again) into 3rd register. The Sweet it noticeably louder, though the Rose is not quiet; here's a choice between comfort in the den and assession in a sertion.
Also, the Sweet may have a tulip-shaped head--hence what some call "recorder" looks--but it is all wood. I prefer this contact than the cold feel of metal, even when it's only a slim "skin" over wood like with the Rose, and gold-plated too. If you want to do away with the metal skin, actually a reinforcing "belt", then the head has to have this tulip shape, otherwise the wood will crack over time.
To sum up my opinion: I had that whistle on sale, but I may just as well sell the Rose instead: it will bring me more money (like three times more...), given its raving reputation (and rightly so), while I know I love both and that my skills will never outgrow either of them. However, what I do know is I have to concentrate on playing one or the other, because of their subtle differences in fingering and breath control, so I'd better master one than half-ass both...
-
glauber
- Posts: 4967
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2002 6:00 pm
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Location: I'm from Brazil, living in the Chicago area (USA)
- Contact:
Buy the whistle from Zubivka already! You won't be disappointed. The low end on the Sweets is probably the best you can get. They are nice whistles.
On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog!
--Wellsprings--
--Wellsprings--
i think everyone is right on--the new professional is an outstanding instrument, especially in company. i play mine with one of my sons on flute; it simply can't be ovepowered, but always has great tone and response.
my first experience with a sweetheart whistle could have been 20 years ago or so. i still have that one and, while beautiful and great sounding, a' was really the practical top end. i have the new D laminate and it's totally different in that respect. walt sweet told me that he basically halved the degree of conicity (sorry, i mean the cone is more moderate) to improve the top end. it worked, and the low end is still exceptionally strong.
one thing, and this could well be me. i find that i need to be careful to blow out the windway regularly to get the best tone., but i do that with my other whistles, too.
my first experience with a sweetheart whistle could have been 20 years ago or so. i still have that one and, while beautiful and great sounding, a' was really the practical top end. i have the new D laminate and it's totally different in that respect. walt sweet told me that he basically halved the degree of conicity (sorry, i mean the cone is more moderate) to improve the top end. it worked, and the low end is still exceptionally strong.
one thing, and this could well be me. i find that i need to be careful to blow out the windway regularly to get the best tone., but i do that with my other whistles, too.
elendil
-
Zubivka
- Posts: 3308
- Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2002 6:00 pm
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Location: Sol-3, .fr/bzh/mesquer
I didn't know the original Sweetheart whistles had a conical bore, and strongly so. Casts a light on the "recorder-like" issue, as not altogether an urban myth.elendil wrote:walt sweet told me that he basically halved the degree of conicity (sorry, i mean the cone is more moderate) to improve the top end. it worked, and the low end is still exceptionally strong.
Note the Kilhoury line (the blackwood one which was optionally keyed) is not conical, and even the opposite: straight bore, with a slightly reduced cylinder for the head.
As for a moderate cone (less than flutes and, of course, recorders), it seems also the trick behind the tuning and playability of Yvon Le Coant's whistles. He reluctantly decided for that shallower slope, since it meant retooling from scratch when the flute reamers were ready at hand, at least for the low D...
The reamer issue is one reason why conical bore wood whistle makers usually offer less choice of tones. For Le Coant, Bb means retooling, when the G, A and C are readily available.
cones
Zub wrote:
apparently when walt sweet joined his dad he started playing around with a variety of design ideas and materials and came up with this modified conical bore, as well as other changes to the head. i have a rosewood sweetheart C with a cylindrical bore that i bought a year and a half ago or so. it's not bad, but the laminate conical professional is tops for me. i asked walt whether they might come up with additional keys (like C or Bb), but the likelihood seemed low.
great guys to deal with.
oh, yes, but this whistle goes back, as i say, probably a good 20 years or more, and i believe most recent sweethearts have been cylindrical. actually, sweethearts have gone through a number of design changes over the years. the problem with the conical bore (as i'm pretty sure you know) is that, while very strong at the low end, their upper end can be difficult and more limited in range, compared to the cylidrical bore (which, however, lacks the real strong low end).I didn't know the original Sweetheart whistles had a conical bore...
apparently when walt sweet joined his dad he started playing around with a variety of design ideas and materials and came up with this modified conical bore, as well as other changes to the head. i have a rosewood sweetheart C with a cylindrical bore that i bought a year and a half ago or so. it's not bad, but the laminate conical professional is tops for me. i asked walt whether they might come up with additional keys (like C or Bb), but the likelihood seemed low.
great guys to deal with.
elendil