REVIEW: Hudson Wind by Peter Bonsteel

[Cayden]

I just had my morning walk, feeling a bit more than slightly damp after a big shower jumped over Caherrush and hung moving curtain over the bay and the beach. Anyway, the head is clear, I've had my tea and there are no axes to grind.

First of all, I have long since stopped reading whistlereviews here, usually they come off as pieces crafted by people in love with their own words and they don't tell me an awful lot. I don't have a lot of expectations on that front.
The pics posted by Dale earlier raised some curiosity about this whistle, it looked for a change like it was made by someone with an eye for pleasing lines and the first impressions were it was a decent all purpose whistle (I paraphrase there) . So I read this review hoping to find more. I read the review, skipping over the bits that didn't tell me much. So far so good. But the real business of course is the whistle's sound and playability. I know there's no real alternative to having the actual whistle at hand and taking it for a whirl but I think a well played clip can give an impression, mind you an impression, of a whistle's tone and responsiveness. I hoped to find something there. I didn't, the clips did not convince me there was a whistle there I would even want to try (especially given it's price tag, which may be fine if you consider it a work of art you stand on a rack on your mantle piece but I for myself want a whistle that will do the business first and foremost).

Whatever else I found it immensely frustrating and although over the years here I have learned to shut up at times, this time I said something about it. I vented.

Now, in the past I have made a remark about one of Mike's clips which made him give a hurt, aggressive response. So I deliberately tried to avoid making it about Mike's clip's, if this seems disingenuous, so be it. I also wanted to avoid coming down on the whistle because the clips did not actually tell me anything I wanted to know about the whistle and I still think it looks like a well made, thought through piece of work.

Putting the butterfly on the rack, maybe, but nobody seems to be able to answer that one question: what does this whistle have over the whistle in the clip I posted, which is not 'some hot-shot tearing through a fast reel' but a clip of a whistleplayer playing a reel at a reasonably moderate pace that I lifted off whistlethis.com and by the end of the day it it comes down to that question if you don't want to go around mindlessly buying every whistle in sight. I need to know if this is a tool that will help me do a better job, or at least make the job easier before paying fifty times over the price of the present tool that does the job. And what to think if nobody can give me an indication this might be the case?

[Jerry Freeman]

... nobody seems to be able to answer that one question: what does this whistle have over the whistle in the clip I posted ... .

I don't know that it has anything "over" the vintage Feadog you referenced. However, it is a very different whistle.

Here's what I hear:

The first thing that is immediately noticeable is, the vintage Feadog has a more diffuse sort of voicing. Although there's quite a bit of complexity, it isn't a distinct, crisp reediness, such as the reediness that's especially notable in Overtons.

The Hudson whistle has what I would call a more focused voicing, and I think that may be partly because of its metal, rather than plastic whistlehead. While the Hudson whistle has a hint of that "birdlike" purity, it's a bit more complex than say, a Burke or an O'Briain Improved. There is a slight, and to my ear, interesting amount of distinct reediness that is focused in a way that the vintage Feadog's complexity isn't. The degree of complexity I hear in the Feadog I don't find interesting in its own right. It's just diffuse and unfocused, to my ear. To put that in more positive terms, it's a gentle diffuseness that could be considered a sort of polite, unimposing sweetness to the Feadog.

The Hudson whistle has a little bit of "cry" in the attack on the notes that gives a poignancy I like. The Feadog does not. (I'm borrowing this word from how it is used to describe a certain kind of singer's voice and style of attacking a note. It means something specific to me. If the meaning isn't clear, I might be able to find some examples.)

Unless Slowair has used some reverb in his recording, I also hear a resonance that's characteristic of some conical whistles, and I think it's one of the things people like about conical whistles in general. This is different from what I've heard with any cylindrical tube whistle.

To my ear, this is an interesting sounding whistle, and I think it does add something for people to choose if it suits them.

Best wishes,
Jerry

[BoneQuint]

Fair enough Peter, I see where you're coming from.

It's a new whistle, so I guess you just have to wait until more people get them, post more reviews, maybe some clips on WhistleThis, and maybe even some make it to your neighborhood so you can try them out. Or maybe email Mr. Bonsteel to see if he can get some pro-quality clips up. Maybe he'll let you borrow or give you a whistle if you'll record some clips for him. Here's his contact page:

http://www.hudsonwinds.com/page4.html

[crookedtune]

I'm a notorious rambler. So here, in its utmost brevity:

I enjoy reading reviews, and usually learn something from them. Not everything, but something. Sometimes I doubt or disagree, but I still learn and enjoy. I hope we don't charge the atmosphere to where folks are afraid to post their impressions.

[Wanderer]

Unless Slowair has used some reverb in his recording, I also hear a resonance that's characteristic of some conical whistles, and I think it's one of the things people like about conical whistles in general. This is different from what I've heard with any cylindrical tube whistle.

To me, there sounds like there's some reverb in there...it's really notable on the Sally Gardens clip. If he didn't add it, I imagine there's some wall reflectivity happening where he recorded at. In one distinct spot, he cuts the note off really crisply, but it takes a moment for the sound to dissipate.

[scheky]

Sadly Peter, though you do raise some valid points, you did it in a rather rude manner. This isn't the Rubber Room...we are actually supposed to try to be polite here.

I admit, there were some things lacking in the review. However, he's not getting paid to do a review. He offered it for free. At that, you CAN feel free to ask questions for more information, or you can feel free to ignore the review. To attack the review and go off on a rant like you did, well...that's actually a very ignoble action.

SlowAir offered us up a review. Pics were included, a few sound clips, and a description of the playability. As such, it's more information than any of us previously had. I gather that it' a higher backpressure instrument than the cheapies (which I favor), but not to the degree of, say a Chieftain...more in range of a Susato. I also know the tuning isn't anything that an intermediate player and above cannot blow into tune easily.

This tells me there is much difference between this whistle and say a Feadog. Sure, a good player can make a cheapie sound wonderful (I have an oak that I can make truly sing), but that doesn't mean it's the only thing out there. You talk about tools. Look at it this way. I have a Hammer, and I have a Makita Drill. Both will put a screw into the wall. One does it easier and smoother.

Most of us know that the sound from whistles are more the player than the whistle itself (much like flutes). However, different people like differing playing experiences from them. I prefer whistles I can really lean into lately. Thus the Chieftains and Susatos are to my liking. I also like the Burke for the fact that it's so easy to play (sometimes it's nice to just play and not worry about anything). Where I could get a great sound from my Oak, I could never get the same volume as a high backpressure whistle (cheapies always make me feel like I have to hold back). From the descriptions, it sounds like I might enjoy this whistle very much.

Thanks for taking the time to put out a Review Slowair. I'm sure we will get more comments as more folks get a chance to try this out.

[DreamOgreen]

It may not be worth much to comment about the usefullness of soundclips or the value (or not) of expensive whistles over Feadogs, generations etc. because I don't have enough experience in the whistle world to say. But I personally would like to thank Slowair for the time put in on an interesting review. I'd also like to thank the more "seasoned" board posters for the entertaining philosophical 'bar fight'. I did'nt even have to duck or move my coffee. One impression though I'd like to share is that it seems to me that some of the friendly disagreement stems from the differences that people have with what they enjoy about playing and owning whistles. Someone who loves Itrad music with it's whistles sounding chiffy and full of "character" would value the sound of the whistle and playing qualities over esthetics or other subjective qualities. Someone else might like a really pure and flute like tone in their whistles or really enjoy the look and feel of gleaming metal or smooth toneholes in a perfectly strait line. In my humble view, there's nothing wrong with enjoying whistles for the sound that you like and also taking pleasure in the look and feel of a well crafted instrument. Any soundclips or subjective qualities of playability, volume etc. should (imho) be in the catagory of "for what it's worth" and not be looked at with any ranking against some arbitrary "standard". Many people, myself included, enjoy reading reviews just to learn about whistles what other people think about them. They can be entertaining to read. As long as the reviewer gives an honest impression "from the gut" as someone says, that's all anyone has the right to expect. As far as weather or not to buy one well, "ya pays yer money and ye takes yer chances"

[PhilO]

To repeat, I'm thankful for Mike and Paul's reviews, postings and mostly sharing of their experience; it's always uplifting to have people share thier exuberance about whistles, making and playing. I hope that nothing that has been said herein will make them or anyone else hesitant to post reviews, comments, pics, clips, etc.

However, at the same time, I don't think it's fair to characterize Peter's well stated points as a "rant" or "ignoble." Peter posted some candid thoughts and opinions regarding reviews and whistles. I often find his posts valuable in that they tend to keep us and especially newer players focused on some key points; e.g., don't forget about the music, the playing, the traditions. Helps to keep us "honest."

This whole thread seemed actually kind of well balanced; except of course for Bloomfield's total lack of response to my question to him regarding the mutual exclusivity of responsiveness/ease of play. Bloomie you must be easy to play but not very responsive.

Philo

[Cayden]

OK I don't think we'll ever get this straightened out, I tried to explain what the reason was I, despite knowing better, posted what I did. I did my best to avoid making this personal in any way, but I did speak out as I saw it. If it's perceived rude, well so be it. I have encountered far greater rudeness here in the past and few took blinked an eye at it and we all survived. I suppose it's like reviews, there's no way whatever one posts will please everyone.

I can of course hear tonal differences between the two but am still left non the wiser, I'll stick with the whistles I have for another while so.

[Loren]

And let's be honest Peter, you've never found any expensive whistle that you thought "better enough" that you've sprung for one, am I right? So what are the chances that any review, of any given whistle would change your opinion enough to go out and spend $150+ ?

I love ya man, but let's be fair, you'd have felt the same, regardless of the review.



Loren

[Bloomfield]

This whole thread seemed actually kind of well balanced; except of course for Bloomfield's total lack of response to my question to him regarding the mutual exclusivity of responsiveness/ease of play. Bloomie you must be easy to play but not very responsive.

What am I to say? They are not necessarily exclusive, nor necessarily compatible. There are whistles that are easy to play and very responsive (like a Generation Eb, say). There are whistles that are easy to play and a bit sluggish (like Burkes imho). There are whistles that are a bit demanding to play but very responsive (like Overtons). And there are whistles that are neither responsive nor easy to play.

Look, it's a tendency in reviews to not say negative things. I do that myself, feeling the tension between being positive and being fair. When I am reading reviews I am looking for code: hints at what might be an issue to the reviewer's mind. So in Mike's review the phrases I wondered about where "well behaved in the upper octave" and "you can push it for volume without it switching octaves uncontrollably." What does that say about the whistle supposing I want to switch octaves controllably and very quickly? This doesn't mean that the whistle isn't perfectly satisfactory, or that Mike was trying to send a subtle message, or whatever... I am just describing what went through my head, when I read the review.

I liked the pictures and certainly appreciate the effort. It's exciting to drive out and meet a new whistle maker and all that! I would have loved to come along.

(Finally, and on a side note, since Peter brought up a bit of history: Kudos, Mike, for just staying out of this, for not getting defensive, and for letting the discussion play itself out. We got a very interesting debate about the difficulties of whistle reviews. As for the clips, I think you are making progress as a player, good for you! (not that you should put much stock in what I say))

[Cayden]

And let's be honest Peter, you've never found any expensive whistle that you thought "better enough" that you've sprung for one, am I right? So what are the chances that any review, of any given whistle would change your opinion enough to go out and spend $150+ ?

I love ya man, but let's be fair, you'd have felt the same, regardless of the review.



Loren

I am quite happy with the Sindt D and B and the narrow bore Humphrey I have. They do the job, even if they may not be the first I pick up when I play a tune at home. But none of the other expensive whistles I tried really did it for me, no. Which ofcourse doesn't mean I am not interested if one appears that does sway me.

On that note: Anyone looked at the new whistles Tommy Martin has started making, they sound promising and he can play them very well and knows what he's aiming for.

Thanks everybody for not letting this thread go up in flames.

[shadeclan]

Of course, all this can be solved by putting this whistle on a tour. Paul, Mike, do you think this guy can be persuaded to do that?

Sign me up!

Your user name should be "TourGuide."

I thought he was the tour guide.

Gentlemen, Gentlemen (and I mean that in the most generic sense )! I'm simply trying to get my hands on as many whistles as possible!


Would you trust this face to guide you?

[Tommy]

Your user name should be "TourGuide."

I thought he was the tour guide.

Gentlemen, Gentlemen (and I mean that in the most generic sense )! I'm simply trying to get my hands on as many whistles as possible!


Would you trust this face to guide you?

[dfernandez77]

Would you trust this face to guide you?

That face looks like it quite possibly knows where the good ale is.

So in a word... Yes!