Post by greginlondon on Mar 9, 2008 13:49:10 GMT
Well there are two schemes of thought about bagpipe pitch. I was reading a book about border pipes the other week and it got me thinking about this.
Various historical references to the bagpipes refer to them being shrill and/or playing at a high pitch. I have often wondered if this was due to pipes going out of tune = whatever the pitch, pipes can sound squeaky if they sharpen compared to the drones (or the drones flatten, whichever you prefer). Apparently, though, the Encyclopaedia Britannica first edition in 1771 said that border pipes were tuned to C above the tenor A on a fiddle/violin, which would be about 520ish Hz (someone else can work that out) on a modern concert pitch. The author took that to mean that this would be a much higher pitch than border pipes today, which are generally tuned to Bh or A and have a common fingering to GHB (ie they're similar, but quieter, well, not so loud).
Except concert pitch was not fixed at 440Hz until recently, a quick google on historic tunings will show that in the C18-C19 a violin/fiddle A could have been anywhere in the range 400-450Hz with some organ examples and tuning forks as low as 315Hz. Clearly with these as examples, a C above tenor A could be about the same as a modern chanter ~ 475-480 Hz-ish.
So at the risk of arguing against the position, were historic pipes more shrill (remember there would have been no clear distinction between reel/border pipes and GHB as there is (?) now) then they are now, or Harv they stayed more or less the same and other instruments have become shriller ?
Alternatively, people argue that pipes used to play at a much flatter pitch, maybe the same as other folk or concert instruments (whatever pitch they actually played at) and that over time the pitch has raised, possibly as a result of competition, or at least fairly competitive performances - the desire to sound better or brighter than the next piper, rather than play with him. Seamus MacNeill did a famous study some years back (1960s?) of the pitch of (then) current chanters and older ones. He concluded that older chanters were a little flatter and that 'modern' chanters were becoming sharper and would soon reach 466Hz - concert Bh ! The difference between that and modern pitch, 10-15Hz is marked - it is half a semitone, but is still no more than the variation of pipes with weather and humidity.
To accept this school of thought means either that the historic references to pitch (including the 1771 EB) are wrong/misleading or that 'border' pipes were a distinct instrument which played at a pitch singers would have found difficult to emulate, which would be unexpected to say the least.
I'm hoping this is of some interest to others - what do you think ?
Various historical references to the bagpipes refer to them being shrill and/or playing at a high pitch. I have often wondered if this was due to pipes going out of tune = whatever the pitch, pipes can sound squeaky if they sharpen compared to the drones (or the drones flatten, whichever you prefer). Apparently, though, the Encyclopaedia Britannica first edition in 1771 said that border pipes were tuned to C above the tenor A on a fiddle/violin, which would be about 520ish Hz (someone else can work that out) on a modern concert pitch. The author took that to mean that this would be a much higher pitch than border pipes today, which are generally tuned to Bh or A and have a common fingering to GHB (ie they're similar, but quieter, well, not so loud).
Except concert pitch was not fixed at 440Hz until recently, a quick google on historic tunings will show that in the C18-C19 a violin/fiddle A could have been anywhere in the range 400-450Hz with some organ examples and tuning forks as low as 315Hz. Clearly with these as examples, a C above tenor A could be about the same as a modern chanter ~ 475-480 Hz-ish.
So at the risk of arguing against the position, were historic pipes more shrill (remember there would have been no clear distinction between reel/border pipes and GHB as there is (?) now) then they are now, or Harv they stayed more or less the same and other instruments have become shriller ?
Alternatively, people argue that pipes used to play at a much flatter pitch, maybe the same as other folk or concert instruments (whatever pitch they actually played at) and that over time the pitch has raised, possibly as a result of competition, or at least fairly competitive performances - the desire to sound better or brighter than the next piper, rather than play with him. Seamus MacNeill did a famous study some years back (1960s?) of the pitch of (then) current chanters and older ones. He concluded that older chanters were a little flatter and that 'modern' chanters were becoming sharper and would soon reach 466Hz - concert Bh ! The difference between that and modern pitch, 10-15Hz is marked - it is half a semitone, but is still no more than the variation of pipes with weather and humidity.
To accept this school of thought means either that the historic references to pitch (including the 1771 EB) are wrong/misleading or that 'border' pipes were a distinct instrument which played at a pitch singers would have found difficult to emulate, which would be unexpected to say the least.
I'm hoping this is of some interest to others - what do you think ?