The Double Chanter Bagpipe from English Church Architecture
By H.L. Aleyn Wykington
Apprentice to Master Stephen of Hunmanby OL
La reconstruction de Yuri Terenyi est très convaincante !
You need to be a member of Musicologie Médiévale to add comments!
Replies
and The Cantigas whith 4 drones ?
Cantigas bagpipes:
http://prydein.com/pipes/cantigas/index.html
voi aussi :
Barnaby Brown a dit :
Two drones a 5th apart seems likely for the 1500s:
http://c8.alamy.com/comp/D9DR5H/bagpipe-player-after-a-1514-engravi...
http://cache.desktopnexus.com/thumbseg/933/933198-bigthumbnail.jpg
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cd/Pieter_Bruegel_...
Looking at these images, however, the 3rd of the chanter scale would not lie between the drones in pitch: if the chanter were cylindrical, then it would sound an octave higher; if conical, then two octaves higher. Either way, the two drones and a major 3rd on the chanter *could* be tuned pure, or Just. As with organ pipes, two drones a 5th apart sound like one drone an octave lower than the bass - a useful maker's trick, saving wood and weight.
l'original donc
images.jpg
I agree with Yuri Terenyi : a slightly conical looking chanter doesn't imply a conical bore. Moreover, one can wonder how well the sculptor did know the actual instrument. They did represent both hand at the same level, so I guess they didn't know much organology.
Check out Julian Goodacre's reconstruction of the cornish double pipes, with large double reeds and cylindrical bores.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bl4uQYGfZ5o
The original :
yes, this can be done for the emission of sound...
Yuri Terenyi a dit :
Conical looking chanters do not necessarily mean the bore is conical, too. It can be straight, partly conical (like the only truly undisputed medieval chanter, the Rostock one0 or completely conical. With double chanters I suspect the conical ones would be at a disadvantage, as they tend to have more upper harmonics, or at least more pronounced upper harmonics, that will clash more noticeably. And I also found that two drones is problematic too, at least if the drones are a fifth apart. (an octave apart is OK) The problem is that of thirds, familiar to anyone who tried to work out a good temperament for any instrument. With one drone you can tune the thirds to a non-tempered pure sound against the drone. With the drones a fifth apart you have a big problem. (To those not familiar with the problem, you have a fifth, and add a third in between. One way it's the minor third, the other way major, whichever you add.) Now the thirds simply cannot be true to the two notes surrounding them . (Think D-A, with an F or F# added. If you have the drone D, you can have both F and F# true. But not both to the D and the A.)
Dominique Gatté a dit :
Oh, I'm well aware of the chromatic possibilities in Antiquity. Except that all that was achieved by an early version of Boehm technology (tongue in cheek, but when you think of it, it's actually true.) Cross-fingering is something else. But it's actually not difficult when you work out the few rules to follow when designing a chanter. (Or flue pipe, the principle is the same.)
Regarding chromatic chanters and reeds, this technology was widely available in the Late Antique world, wherever there was Roman influence: www.doublepipes.info/pompeii-tibia-first-sounds/
Early days - both our precision engineering and playing skills fall short of Roman standards!
Also here at the beginning of the fifteenth century two conicals chanters:
http://jeanluc.matte.free.fr/fichio/chatelard.htm
Two drone for the XIIIth !
http://jeanluc.matte.free.fr/fichsz/vilnvyonne.htm
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next