Kenna B from SRSJ vol 2

A forum to discuss the arcane art of making uilleann pipes, reeds, and set maintenance.

Moderators: the plod, dropkick

Post Reply
User avatar
brescianimichele
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 8:16 am
Real Name: Michele Bresciani
Location: Mantova, Italy
Italy

Kenna B from SRSJ vol 2

Post by brescianimichele » Thu Jan 03, 2013 6:21 am

Hello there,

I'm about to make a Kenna C set, the one from SRSJ vol2.
I'm working on the chanter bore plot because I'd like to make a new set of reamers. I've noticed that the bore is not so straight, full of bumps in the throat and body sections. I'm thinking to make my reamers following the minimum points of the graph? because it seems that 2 bumps in the body area are near the toneholes(G hole and Bflat key) , so i think that's the result of undercuts. What do you think guys?

Michele

erniethepiper
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 12:16 am
Real Name: Aaron Setunsky
Location: Tacoma, WA U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: Kenna B from SRSJ vol 2

Post by erniethepiper » Thu Jan 03, 2013 8:37 am

Always easier to take a little more off in places than try to add. I have always gone with the theory that no maker in the past started a design with a lumpy, bumpy, and elliptical bore. The wood went that way after completion at some time or after initial reaming the bore was fine tuned some with spoon bits during voicing a chanter. It sounds like you prefer the multiple reamer approach to things which gives you a bit of leeway to tweak a section of the bore to your liking.

billh
Posts: 732
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 6:12 am
Location: skerries-by-the-sea
Contact:

Re: Kenna B from SRSJ vol 2

Post by billh » Fri Jan 04, 2013 2:12 pm

erniethepiper aka Aaron wrote:Always easier to take a little more off in places than try to add. I have always gone with the theory that no maker in the past started a design with a lumpy, bumpy, and elliptical bore. The wood went that way after completion at some time or after initial reaming the bore was fine tuned some with spoon bits during voicing a chanter. It sounds like you prefer the multiple reamer approach to things which gives you a bit of leeway to tweak a section of the bore to your liking.
Hi Michele and Aaron,

I would have to disagree with Aaron about the first point. Having closely examined many 19th century chanter bores, I would say there is no evidence that makers started off with straight bores. While it is very plausible that some makers may have used spoon bits or similar 'tuning reamers', it seems clear that others, such as Coyne, did not, but instead that the complex shape of the bore was built in by the initial reaming[1]. About Kenna, I cannot say for sure how many reamers were used, or in what order, but I can say with some conviction that they were not straight[2]. The obvious care taken with the bores and tone-holes, and high degree of consistency in the case of many makers, argues that these deviations were not accidental.

I also recommend the multiple reamer approach; there is evidence that the 19th century makers used multiple reamers as well.

If you make reamers that do not faithfully follow the observed bore, you may be able to make a working instrument but it will not be very similar to the original. If you wish to learn from the original, you must follow what you observe. It is true that you may need to apply judgement when copying 'bumps' that occur directly beneath tone-holes, of course. The effect of tone-hole interference is more likely to be noticeable with large-holed chanters, i.e. wide bore concert pitch, than with 19th century examples. The Bflat key is very unlikely to be undercut, IMO.

I would add that I have successfully used the bore data from the SRSJ Volume I Coyne B chanter and can confirm from direct comparison that the data listed there is reasonably accurate. The Kenna C has the disadvantage that, as Ken McLeod notes in his article, the tone-holes had been modified when he obtained the chanter; this means that the final sizes required are somewhat speculative. There may also be a bit more uncertainty in the bore data itself. I hope not to give offense by suggesting that it would make an excellent follow-up project.

- Bill

[1] - for instance, the regulators' bore shapes often match the chanter bore very precisely - tenor, baritone, and bass, demonstrating that the bumps are not the result of differential shrinkage, blocks, or tuning with spoon reamers. One sees this in the work of Kenna and Egan also.
[2] - the Kenna bores that I have the most experience with do differ from one another, but share sections where the bore shapes match closely, illustrating the use of the same tools in distinct combinations. These bore sections tend to be strongly convex, i.e. 'paraboloid', rather than conical.

erniethepiper
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 12:16 am
Real Name: Aaron Setunsky
Location: Tacoma, WA U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: Kenna B from SRSJ vol 2

Post by erniethepiper » Fri Jan 04, 2013 9:09 pm

Bill,

You sure seem to write things down better than I. I didn't mean to infer that the bores started straight, most do have curve to them. I was trying to convey that sometimes wood changes a bit over time in cross section of the bore and it seems that some of the lumps and bumps seem to be done after the initial reaming. In taking bore data from chanters you may need to fair the curve to expel a point that seems out of line and fine tune that spot later. Thanks for being more specific and or correcting.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests