Na Píobairí Uilleann

Chairman, NPU

An Píobaire

5

7 5 26 20111214 26 an integral continuation of the chanter body or in the form of a conventional detachable foot-joint. From here, there are two main options in terms of how such an extension would function. In the first, the extended chanter would be re-tuned so that it sounded C with the lowermost tone hole covered and D when uncovered, effectively turning it back into a pastoral chanter, but without vent holes so that it could still be closed on the knee. The other route would be to retain the standard uilleann fin- gering arrangement while incorporating a key to facilitate the playing of low C. The key could be open-standing, operated by perhaps the lower thumb, so that when closed, the chanter sounded C. Alternatively, a closed-standing key could be operated by the lower little finger at the point where the lowest tone hole would normally be lo- cated. With the little finger down, this key would open the D tone hole located further down on the extension. When the little finger was raised, the key would be released, thus closing the D hole and permitting C to be sounded. The first reason that both of these approaches would be anathema to most practitioners is that they would undoubtedly require modification of the chanter de- sign during its construction or of the chanter itself after it was already made. For many pipers and makers, this might be akin to ‘touching up’ a Ver- meer, perhaps adding a few flowers to liven things up. The second reason for an even greater repug- nance is that both of these approaches would sub- stantially alter the tone, timbre and volume of the bottom D, very likely interfering with or eliminating the hard D, not to mention possible effects on E and other notes. In the first approach, these effects would be especially profound. Additionally, in both cases, the low C would then become the ‘bell note’ of the chanter and receive much of the volume and tonal character previously possessed by the D. So we would then have a weakened D, and a bell note of C, sounding against D drones. This would be akin to re-painting a Vermeer with different colours. Here we can perhaps glimpse clues of some of the mo- tives in the transition from the pastoral to the mod- ern uilleann chanter. Another completely different approach which de- serves credit and occupied my mind in much late night contortionism is what is known as the ‘C thingy’. This idea, proposed by fellow Canadian Dave Moulton, and described in more detail on his website, consists of a chamber projecting side- ways from the lower section of the chanter which, when opened by a key, adds to the volume of the chanter’s vibrating column, lowering its pitch to C. In my desperate ‘to the death’ grappling with this idea, I came up with several variations in- cluding one where the chamber could be posi- tioned fully vertically along the outside of the chanter so that it might look more like it belonged there and less like a growth. In any case, because this new second chamber would be connected through a hole bored into the chanter wall, it would again be a non-starter with most practi- tioners. But even if it weren’t for that fact, the number of moving parts implicated makes a smooth and reliable functioning unlikely. Before I get to what I believe is a fully functional solution, I’ll mention one more flawed concept that I pursued to its illogical end. This involves moving the piper, or the listener, or both, away from the other at such a speed as to produce a flat- tening of the bottom D down to C in the ear of the listener. This is known as the Doppler Effect. The challenges of this approach would be formidable, not the least of which are achieving the required velocity at precisely the moment that a C is de- sired and then returning the piper and/or listener(s) to their relative positions for the other notes of the tune so that no loss of volume is perceived due to distance. Other problems would relate to the ‘fair ground’-like apparatuses required to achieve in- stantaneous acceleration and how to incorporate them into pubs etc., how to accommodate multi- ple listeners, pipers and other musicians, and the potential liabilities for all involved. And even set- ting all this aside, in the end the piper him/herself would still only hear D unless a method was de- vised to move the chanter further away from his/her ear at a similar velocity. More challenges here.

7

26

[Periodical]

2011-12-01T00:00:00

anonymous,guest,friend,member