FS: Coyne B Set in Boxwood

[upooper]

The set has a new home.

[tompipes]

Firstly just to clarify, I am not in any way doubting that this set for sale is a Coyne.
I'm just continuing the point that the safest way to identify a set of pipes is by taking accurate internal measurements.

But how can you be sure that its not just a very good copy or as you pointed out yourself that Coyne inherited bore designs from Kenna,that is in fact a Kenna?

Again, accurate bore measurements will determine if it's a Coyne or a contemporary copy. Sets that have been measured from Coyne's contemporares have shown that the bores are just not the same.

A lot of amature / hobby makers then and some still today would only use bell, throat and lenght to recreate a chanter bore.
It will kinda work and you'll have to move around your fingerhole positions but the shape of the bore will not look like a Coyne bore.

Bore designs have been copied by loads of pipemakers,Cillian O'Brien pipes are all rowsome on the inside as are Froments concert pitch,but what sets these pipes apart are the outside.

Froments pipes are Rowsome based but Cillians are not.

A pipemakers fingerprints are the way he turned the wood the shaped the metal.

I used the fingerprint analogy to describe one definitive point of reference to distinguish one antique makers work from a contemporay copy. External turning can help to identify works but it is aesthetic and not reliable. Bores are, just like fingerprints.


Tommy

[Hans-Joerg]

accurate bore measurements will determine if it's a Coyne or a contemporary copy. Sets that have been measured from Coyne's contemporares have shown that the bores are just not the same.

However, I was told that nearly all of the vintage sets were "butchered". Is there a way to identify the remaining original sections of a bore?

[rorybbellows]

Toms viewpoint assumes that no one has ever accurately copied a Coyne bore,
Many pipemakers have advertised the fact that their pipes have Coyne bores including the likes of David Quinn and Alain Froment. So you can be sure that the bores are as accurate as can be measured.
Bores are not like fingerprints,bores can be copied ,fingerprints cannot.

RORY

[Piobairi Uilleann Inis Fa]

Toms viewpoint assumes that no one has ever accurately copied a Coyne bore,
Many pipemakers have advertised the fact that their pipes have Coyne bores including the likes of David Quinn and Alain Froment. So you can be sure that the bores are as accurate as can be measured.
Bores are not like fingerprints,bores can be copied ,fingerprints cannot.

RORY

Hypotheticly this is certainly true, that anything that can be measured, can be copied. Though I would bet that disecting many sets of pipes from a particular maker would yield patterns of consistency of ideosincracies specific to that maker, that copiers may not have noticed since they would have not disected those same many sets. I beleive that DQ is a rarity in this regard when making a set in the Taylor style. Though even in that regard, when you read his analysis, he is left guessing how certain things were done over a hundred years ago, and often uses available technology to improve upon them I think. I cannot recall whether he has used bore measurements from the Taylors or not (I should read it again). But the fact that he may produce a Taylor-style set with improvements in any way would be noticed I presume by future pipe makers to identify it as not being a Taylor set. In reality I suppose the only real finger print that cannot be easily copied are the materials in the pipes them selves. I assume that carbon testing could be done on the wood and analysis of the metal alloys (God forbid!) to determine age, or rule out based on an inappropriate finding of the age. And even then, you might only be able to verify an approximate date and match it to other carbon results of other sets, but given that age alone isn't the final arbitor one can never be 100% sure.

Neil

[stew]

I would think due to the shrinkage in the wood after all this time you would have to allow for half a millimetre difference in bore measurements, unless you have an original diagram plan of a Coyne chanter you can whistle till the cows come home, there are one or two makers that have original plans of Coyne chanters, a rough measurement of a Coyne chanter has a throat size of 3.7mm and a bell measurement of 11.3mm but that was only from what I was told, before the reamers start be thrown!. some one like Peter Hunter would be able I would have thought to give a good opinion on the set, but really you only have the drones/ two regs and chanter to make a sure opinion on, I'd go with Maurice Coyne if any as the maker. all the best,stew.

[billh]

I would think due to the shrinkage in the wood after all this time you would have to allow for half a millimetre difference in bore measurements,.. .

Actually, no. Since wood shrinks differently in all three directions, a bore which has shrunken a lot will also be oval. The apparently-unaltered Coyne chanters I've had the good fortune to measure have been remarkably round in section (compared, say, to many recently-made chanters and most 20th century sticks.)

best regards,

Bill

[tompipes]

Toms viewpoint assumes that no one has ever accurately copied a Coyne bore,

Not at all. I never said that. I may have suggested that copiers of Coynes work of his day never took accurate bore measurements but since the 1970's there have been many makers that have taken excellent measurements from complete antique instruments.
Jaysus Rory after all the chanters you measured and made you'd think you'd know by now

However, I was told that nearly all of the vintage sets were "butchered". Is there a way to identify the remaining original sections of a bore?

Fortunately not all existing Coyne, Kenna, etc., chanters were interfered with.
The thing is that the pristene ones work well but the ones that were re-bored have tuning issues.
For example a certain Coyne chanter was made to play in modern B but rebored to work in concert C. the throat was widened and as a result has a chronic autocran, which is a trait of too wide a throat.

These antique chanters that are in original condition have a bore shape that is recognisable when measured.
The reason this bore shape is commonly found is that it WORKED.

Nuff said.

Tommy

[upooper]

There back.... sale(s) fell threw now on ebay for seven day auction, low reserve, come and gettem.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... 500wt_1152

regards

[PJ]

Ebay will probably cancel the auction once they realise that the set contains ivory.

Don't worry, I won't tell.

[upooper]

Right you are PJ

I had to re-list in compliance with their policy, which the set complies with now....

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... 500wt_1152

[billh]

If eBay policy doesn't allow you to offer international shipping (for an item that otherwise complies with their policy), then the policy is too broad. Ivory items that are over 100 years old do not require CITES permits at all (they are exempt under the terms of CITES) and can freely and legally be traded across international borders.

However recent ivory repairs (unless made with mammoth ivory) are still a problem. I would suggest removing recently-added mounts if this is a concern for an overseas customer.

FWIW, I don't think eBay is necessarily the best place/way to sell such a set anyway - as it might take some time to find the best home (or best price).

I see no reason to include the word Ivory in this sale - you could just say "original" mounts or "traditional material" mounts, and any knowledgeable customer would understand.

It would be very useful to know the total length of the chanter (not including cap), to the nearest millimeter or 1/64". Same goes for the baritone regulator (when removed from the stock, without reed, distance to the end of the wooden bit with the end cap removed). Do you have a measurement for the chanter throat diameter (as you said in the previous listing that you have been told the bore has not been tampered with - can you reveal your sources for that info?).

Thanks and best regards

Bill

[Kevin L. Rietmann]

The set has a new home.

I'm confused, did you buy them from Bil and are now reselling them? Or are you Bil? The description in the eBay listing suggests as much, but you could also be a new seller who just cut/pasted Bil's words.

The movie was a good idea, you can see a lot more detail then with just pictures. That's a weird bass regulator separator, does the lower/wooden/keyed part plug into the upper section? That would be the modern way of building these things.

[upooper]

Hi Kevin

sorry for the confusion, the first sale fell through, yeah i'm bil, always lowercase by the buy.

I just sold the set and that's that, i've taken the ebay ad down. Sorry didn't have the calipers, tapemeasures necessary to take the measurements requested by Billh, though i would have liked to. I think they are going to a very nice new home and will be played, enjoyed and learned from. i'll certainly miss them, but am happy that selling them is over, now to play some tunes!

have a nice day and thanks for your consideration.

regards

bil

I'm confused, did you buy them from Bil and are now reselling them? Or are you Bil? The description in the eBay listing suggests as much, but you could also be a new seller who just cut/pasted Bil's words.

The movie was a good idea, you can see a lot more detail then with just pictures. That's a weird bass regulator separator, does the lower/wooden/keyed part plug into the upper section? That would be the modern way of building these things.

[Dionys]

Did they sell, then? For more than the starting bid, I hope -- I would have bought them for more than that.

It'll be interesting to see where they turn up next