Bell End Problems

AlanB · Post by **AlanB** » Fri Jun 23, 2006 7:18 am

Can any of you makers help me here please?

If approx 3 - 5mm is lopped off from the bottom of an approx., normal concert pitch chanter, what effects can I expect to encounter to individual notes and 8ves?

Thanks

PaisleyBuddy · Post by **PaisleyBuddy** » Fri Jun 23, 2006 9:00 am

Well I don't know that my experiments can be classed under NORMAL concert pitch chanters, but I tried cutting off 5mm from a couple of useless maple mistakes I had lying around.
In both cases I found that without moving the reed from when the cut was made that the first octave rose in pitch and the second octave didn't appear to. Strangely enough the A in both octaves on both chanters dropped in pitch. I also found the second octave B became raspy on both tests with different reeds.
But I wouldn't cut a working chanter based on these results. Hope to hear other makers thoughts.
Kenny

David Lim · Post by **David Lim** » Sun Jun 25, 2006 2:56 am

I am deeply concerned that you have not received any response from the pro/semi-pro makers. Bell end issues always deserve immediate attention.

There is also usually a sage reminder about altering chanters on these threads, there must be an event somewhere this weekend.

If I can offer some amateur advice this may help.

Drink a bottle of wine......... and save the cork.
The next day shape the cork so that it inserts up the bell the required amount and seals against the bore. Cut off the excess sticking out of the chanter.

Of course you will not be able to assess the affect on the low D but it should give a good idea of the effect on all the other notes of a specific chanter.

David

Joseph E. Smith · Post by **Joseph E. Smith** » Sun Jun 25, 2006 4:23 am

I shudder at the thought of any alteration.

reedman · Post by **reedman** » Sun Jun 25, 2006 5:09 am

Hi Alan, one thing is sure,it will rise in pitch,the e,f,g notes will probably go sharp also,"Why"? do you want to lopp off 3-5mm of the chanter, there are easier ways to correct a chanter than to lopp of it head

is it that you think the chanter is to long, or maybe the chanter bore is a little on the big side, a hand rolled staple I would have thought, would help you to get closer to what your trying to achieve.

And I hope its not an Eb concert chanter.

All the best with the big decision.

Chris Bayley · Post by **Chris Bayley** » Sun Jun 25, 2006 5:24 am

Alan

Who made the chanter and what exactly is wrong with it. ?

If it is by a known maker then I would expect it to be correct. If I know who the maker is then I (or someone else on the forum) may have dimensions of another and a comparison can be made.

Have you compared it to other chanters to see if it is disproportionally longer ?

Was there an original reed with it ?

Rowsome and Rowsome based chanters are generally 14.25" but there are a few out there that are longer such as Peter Hunter's and my own at 14.5"

Unfortunately being located near Hobgoblin I get to see quite a few of the "unmentionable" pipes and these invariably need lengthening.

Tuning woodwinds - I have watched an Oboe maker use a long tool to place a small lump of wax in the bore moving it around until it had the opposite effect of what he wanted. He then knew to remove wood from that area (a little at a time) to tune the instrument

Hope this helps

Chris

AlanB · Post by **AlanB** » Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:41 am

Thanks everyone.

Maybe I should've been more explicit in my opening post.

An unknown chanter I'm reeding has most definitely had about 3-5mm removed from the end (no ferrule remaining) , so there is about 2mm poking below the mount. (As I have now had time on it, the Back D is predominantly sharp, so maybe it was hacked to get that in closer??)

Because of this, obviously the tuning is screwed. I require/d some reliable info from makers so I could iron out whether (or which) tuning problems could be attributed to this or whether it might have been lopped off to cure existing problems. I didn't want to go too far down the road designing a hopeful reed until I knew odds were in my favour.

I won't be attempting any alterations to the instrument in the way of permanent alteration. I am not a maker or repairer.

Joseph E. Smith · Post by **Joseph E. Smith** » Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:43 am

AlanB wrote:

benwalker · Post by **benwalker** » Sun Jun 25, 2006 11:02 am

I have a problem with my Bell-End too....perhaps this isn't the place to discuss this though

billh · Post by **billh** » Sun Jun 25, 2006 12:13 pm

Hi Alan:

Hey, I knew what you meant

If the bottom of the chanter has been chopped, it seems likely to me that either the top has been chopped too, or the toneholes have been enlarged, or both, as it's often a sign of someone trying to get the chanter to play sharper.

On the other hand, usually the complaint with concert pitch chanters is that they're _too_ sharp, so maybe something else is/was going through the perpetrator's mind.

I would expect the Fsharp could be wonky - F# octave could be out, and the Fsharp could very possibly be flat. Taping it might (counter-intuitively) sharpen it, but you may need to restore the length by making a long ferrule first. It's worth a try anyhow, if the F's are wonky. The F# and A notes, because they are 'single hole' notes, seem IMO to be more sensitive to the length of the chanter than other notes. Oh yeah, the back d too, for similar reasons. The closed-end single-tonehole notes have, in effect, two bores vibrating, the one at the reed end and another one from the foot end. At least one of those is now shorter than it was originally...

Bill

AlanB · Post by **AlanB** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 3:09 am

Thanks all. Based on your sage advices I decided to fashion a prosthetic 'limb'

for the chanter . The tuning has come in much improved, but back d is still sharp even with compensation in the reed design.

Joseph E. Smith · Post by **Joseph E. Smith** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 3:17 am

AlanB wrote:Thanks all. Based on your sage advices I decided to fashion a prosthetic 'limb' for the chanter . The tuning has come in much improved, but back d is still sharp even with compensation in the reed design.

Time to break out the electrical tape.

billh · Post by **billh** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 4:01 am

AlanB wrote:Thanks all. Based on your sage advices I decided to fashion a prosthetic 'limb' for the chanter . The tuning has come in much improved, but back d is still sharp even with compensation in the reed design.

Any signs of tampering at the reed-seat end or in the back d hole itself?

reedman · Post by **reedman** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 6:41 am

Hello Alan,if there has been wood remove from the end of the chanter, turn a 5mm long small wood ring or ferrule, around the size of the chanter end bore, so it fits tightly in the metal ferrule on the end of the chanter,so you can then ajust the bore taper, of wood ring in the lathe if needed,and see if it makes any difference to the tunings,it a delicate job,

I had to do this once before, to a butchered chanter,then made a precise end piece to fit it permanantly. all the best with your venture.