On 9 Feb 2011, at 16:02, Anthony Robb wrote: > Hello Francis, John and others with the stamina to keep reading this, > The puzzling thing is that we have had two reports in recent postings > of Reid sets happy to play up near F# (for example Billy Pigg) and yet > Andrew Davison's Reid set are said to be happy at F+20.
Hello Anthony and others, Well, not quite as far as the Andrew Davison set is concerned. What Julia said was that when a reed was first put in the chanter it was said to have played at F+20. I took that to be an interesting and amusing anecdote without any specific conclusions to be drawn from it [is that correct, Julia?] Incidentally, the owner of that set is admiring and appreciative of the work done by the expert fettler who did the best possible job. However, he acknowledges that the performance at F+20 of that historic set is not ideal at the present pitch which is (if other Reid chanters are taken as valid examples) very far from that originally intended. > What would be interesting, Francis, is to see the figures for Reid's > scale length (say top g down to bottom D) and compare that > with Ross/Nelson figures. I have recorded hole positions from several Reid chanters. This is easier than one might suppose because although hole sizes have wandered over the years, their original position is usually indicated very clearly on the opposite wall of the bore where the Reid drill made contact. It's evident that Reid revised some of his hole positions - a normal and sensible thing for any woodwind maker. As you would expect, the Reid scale is shorter, as you would expect from a higher pitched instrument. Julia is right to point out that Reid hole positions are provided (very accurately) in Cocks & Bryan. Ross/Nelson figures are not identical and I believe Colin's pattern also shows some evolution, as one would expect. Francis To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
