To make new music instruments for to learn acoustics?

[science4ever]

I would not name it amateur science at all due to me not structured

and science is a highly structured biz.

 

I test out different shapes of mouth pieces for lip reed instruments like Trumpet like new instruments.

 

Very laid back non ambitious just for fun "sci" not real science. It is really fun.

Take the trumpets they have way back in time. Baroque Trumpet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baroque_trumpet

 

The baroque trumpet is a musical instrument in the brass family.^[1] It was invented in the mid-20th century based on ideas from the natural trumpet of the 16th to 18th centuries and designed to allow modern performers to imitate the earlier instrument for music of that time.

 

Here is a Trumpet guy on internet giving all the right dimensions.

Making a PVC Natrual Trumpet

he mispelled natural there.

 

He gives both inch and metrics to help us with different thumbs

I bought such pvc at a local mall cost almost nothing. The expensive part is

the mouthpiece he use a standard 7C Trumpet. I bought on in plastic from Kelly

for some 25 to 30USD depending on color. But I wanted to know acoustics so

I tested a lot of wild ideas how to get the sound without having to buy a real mouth piece.

 

So I used my imagination and as long as one have fun why not try it out?

 

 

[EdEarl]

You can add a scientific study to your acoustic fun by recording the sounds of your experimental instruments, and calculating plus graphing the harmonics of various notes from different instruments. Use Fourier transforms to determine the harmonics and intensity of each harmonic. Numerical methods allow the calculations by computer. See:

 

http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/9388/How-to-implement-the-FFT-algorithm

[science4ever]

Yes I found a site where they had done that but not sure how to find it again.

Natural overtones is interesting too. Some do coincide with our notes or tones

that we use for melodies so it could be our brain really hear them inside too.

 

some would say they are just cultural constructs but I find that not very likely.

Natural fifths seems to be something musically talented persons hear without

having formal education or having to be told about it they just hear it naturally.

[Enthalpy]

Music instruments are passionating, so go on!

 

Music instruments are the very difficult part of acoustics. Everything else is trivial in acoustics.

 

Fun: with deep knowledge for acoustics, if you read patents from instruments makers, you can guess that they have better knowledge of acoustics than most academic researchers. They often claim "experimental discovery by chance" where chance is highly improbable and excellent knowledge must have guided them.

 

Beware this Wiki article contains gross mistakes, about the 11th harmonic in tune or the effect of the vents.

 

Beware also that sound quality does not result from harmonics, because sound is not periodic, and this is a fundamental quality of instruments. A musical sound can not be synthesized from harmonics, hence neither explained. The old Helmholtz made this mistake long ago, and since then almost everyone propagates it. One physics group in a Britanny university investigated this 20+ years ago, but it's too little known, and nearly everything remains to understand here.

[science4ever]

Thanks sorry for delay in answer. I forgot to set it to send me reminders that I got responses.

I bought a Trumpet mouth piece and tested it on different tubes and one very close to

what that youtube video show and despite being a MP for beginners it was much harder

to get a clear musical sound than what I expected. I will carry on my totally naive experiments.

[Enthalpy]

Any tube can work as a musical horn. A mouthpiece is not mandatory but helps a lot - provided it matches more or less the tube's length and diameter.

 

Already a tiny smooth divergent at the open end (try a fitting bottle neck) helps a lot: nicer sound, easier emission.

 

But to get properly aligned resonant modes, you need the accurate variation of tube inner diameter over the position. First to produce all harmonics (a cylinder makes only the odd ones) then to put these harmonics where they are to be.

 

By the way, modern instruments don't use the fundamental mode normally ("pedal mode") and this one can be, and is, brutally out of tune. Piston instruments begin with the second mode and have no definite limit, well over the eighth mode. As higher modes are less spaced, a few pistons can join these modes.

 

The baroque trumpet uses even higher modes because they're even closer to an other; to be checked, maybe it begins at the fourth mode. This was necessary without pistons, to make many notes available. The difficulty is to play the desired mode among all these close to an other.

 

To ease it, modern baroque trumpets are still very long for the pitch, hence use high modes which are close to an other, but have small holes that work much like overblow holes in woodwinds, in that they prevent some vibration modes (Wiki is false on that), making it easier to catch properly the others - which are chosen during play by covering only some holes.

 

Even harder then, musicians used the lips to play the missing half-notes: difficult, and the tone quality differed on these notes. Same for natural horns, where musicians closed more the tube with the hand to make the half-notes, but this changed the sound quality. From that epoch dates the (presently mis-) conception that tonalities sound differently from an other. Pistons have eased all this, and allow to play open and "stopped sounds" for all notes.

 

If you find Berlioz' "traité d'instrumentation" (Treatise on instrumentation), he lived at the transition time and explains it.

[science4ever]

Thanks Enthalpy. You are so right about this one

 

To ease it, modern baroque trumpets are still very long for the pitch, hence use high modes which are close to an other, but have small holes that work much like overblow holes in woodwinds, in that they prevent some vibration modes (Wiki is false on that), making it easier to catch properly the others - which are chosen during play by covering only some holes.

i bought a real Kelly 7C MP for to have something to compare with when I later will try to make my own

cornetto mouthpieces. The Baroque trumpet that I made following his imstructions has no such small holes

and some tones are extremely unstable and waver to and fro wobble style. Sounds terrible.

 

I know too little to find a solution to it and the fact that I am no musician and really want a Cornetto

and this Baroque experiment was more for to get somethign going fast so I had some encouraging result

but it failed.

 

Mouth pieces are extremely important. A small change in the diameter change the sound dramatically.

 

Just now I experiment with trying to make a PVC tube version of Cornetto but has not found an easy way

to make the tapering smooth. I want to combine two 1/2 Inch tubes so they goes from 1/4 about 6mm

in the blowing end and then up to some one inch or wider in the other end.

 

that would allow me to eaily bore the holes but it is rather difficult to glue these together and

to find a way to fill the blow end with some material taht makes it narrower.

 

So just now I practive my blowing tech by accepting to treat it as a cowhorn them too only use the lowest scale.

[Enthalpy]

At the mouthpiece end, modelling clay provides easily the taper.

 

As a bell, you may take the neck of a plastic bottle, one with a long neck, and cut slits in the length direction. This allows to adjust the small diameter to your tube, before sealing off with adhesive, glass fiber and epoxy...

 

Only some tones extremely unstable:it can result from

- Small leaks, which act differently on varied notes, just as if they were overblow holes

- Big obstacles to air movement like steps in the bore. Similar effect. This is used in some saxophones at the neck for a softer sound, in all saxes at the mouthpiece to dampen very high resonances and avoid the reed to whistle

- Badly aligned resonance modes. Playing one note excites many modes; the ones almost aligned made the sound wobble and the note difficult to play. This is one difficult part of instrument making; no quick and easy fix, it need a complete design; and if using a tapered mouthpiece on a cylindrical bore, this worry will appear.

 

To determine where to put overblow holes:

-Have a small microphone, or a really tiny tube, preferably of metal. Play the desired note (two people if possible) and insert the sensor to find positions (there are many on a brass instrument) where pressure oscillations are minimum, as you don't hear the sound through the pipe. At these places, you can have an overblow hole for the desired note.

- But you don't want one hole for every note... Some holes can be common to several notes. As well, some notes can benefit from several open holes.

- The baroque trumpet needs many overblow holes because its modes are so close to an other. Woodwinds, which use lower modes, can have few overblow holes.

[science4ever]

wow Cool that you know so much. Not many have that insight?

Sure i am a nobody on all this but I do have a long experience on

building ultra simple versions of Nay or Kaval flutes without mouthpieces

and from testing different inner diameters and lengths I know

that what you tell me there is reliable knowledge.

 

Some say that one don't need to have the bore linear? Some books

describe that it should be linear from mouthpiece to the end.

 

They mention the magic number 1/32 related to the narrow mouthpiece

and the wide part in the end where the Clock? should be to make the sound bright.

 

where I live we have outer diameter of the tubes 16 and 20 mm

and the inner diameter is about 13 to 16 so they fit rather okay one in the other.

 

So for to make a hasty mockup just for to be able to practice overblowing

and to test out where to place the holes I wanted to start with the IEC Halogenfrei

some kind of European standard so like you suggested I need to fill the first part of the tube

to get about 3 to 6 mm start and then go up to the inner diameter 13 mm and then go up

to over 16 mm inner diameter and then open that one up and combine two of these

so I get a diameter of some 26 to 32 mm dependent on length of the tube

if I make a G tuned one or a higher pitched one.

 

Do you know from your experience or could you understand from your know how

what would happen if I let the 3 to 6 nn inner diameter to be several inches long

and then change to the 13 mm some inches long and then 16 a few more and

then go up to 20 to 30 mm rather steeply? would such irregularity disturbe the nodes too much?

 

does it need to be very smooth changes from one inner diameter to another?

 

The Cormetto that I will make in the end should be a regular one made out of wood

but I only have material for one such so I don't want to fail with that one having no experience

so I want to make mock up version out of cheap plastic first. And the tubes that I have blown now

sounds okay but lack half of the over tones due to it is cylindrical unstead of conical.

Music instruments are passionating, so go on!

 

Music instruments are the very difficult part of acoustics. Everything else is trivial in acoustics.

 

Fun: with deep knowledge for acoustics, if you read patents from instruments makers, you can guess that they have better knowledge of acoustics than most academic researchers. They often claim "experimental discovery by chance" where chance is highly improbable and excellent knowledge must have guided them.

 

Beware this Wiki article contains gross mistakes, about the 11th harmonic in tune or the effect of the vents.

 

Beware also that sound quality does not result from harmonics, because sound is not periodic, and this is a fundamental quality of instruments. A musical sound can not be synthesized from harmonics, hence neither explained. The old Helmholtz made this mistake long ago, and since then almost everyone propagates it. One physics group in a Britanny university investigated this 20+ years ago, but it's too little known, and nearly everything remains to understand here.

Sorry to quote this much but what you say nere is very interesting. My little experience from

making ultra simplistic versions of Turkish Kaval without mouthpiece confirm thatone need to

make them until they sound good. To try to use math and expect a final good result based solely

on that math seems to fail. It has to be built on true know how from having built many and

having experience on what happens when one do small changes and what to avoid.

 

So much appreciated that you share your knowledge.

 

I used google for to try to find others on my extreme low level that we could encourage

each other and share our experiences but that seems not very successful

 

Either you have experts that make them and sell them and they keep that know how secret

or you have no interest at all. Or me have failed to use the right key words.

 

I should be rich enough to buy one but there is a one year waiting on the reputed masters

so they only make them when they get enough customers on the wait list.

As you can see above that is a Funnel for pouring gas into the tank

when it is difficult to reach it on some engines? Extra long tip.

Cost almost nothing. I made the tip about 3 inch longer

and that allowed me to play both the lowest tone and the first overtone

 

while if I use a cylindrical tube then it only play lowest and one and a half octave above

 

 

So looking crazy but seems to work accoustically at least without holes.

 

I come to think of it as a Cow Horn or Buffalo horn or Shofar horn but with fingerholes.

Such where used way back in time here in Scandinavia and they could be played in lower register

and maybe on tone on the first overtone. so how can I find out what is most likely to work here

 

Should I make the funnel part a bit shorter or keep that? How many tones may it allow

to play on both register? I could maybe fill the funnel with something to make it less steep?

 

Another possibility are the "Drain" tubes for Loo? These comes in two dimensions

32mm and 40 mm but they don't tell if it is inner or outer but the Other tubes

did get listed with outer diameter so maybe same thinking here? Taht means that

I have 16 mm and 20 mm and 32 mm and 40 and could couple these together

and try to make a crazy looking cornetto out of them smooting out the overlap

inside using model clay or BeeWax They sell in 1 meter length and cost very little

less than 8 dollars.

Edited July 31, 2013 by science4ever

[Enthalpy]

You're perfectly right that simple math alone won't make a decent instrument, and even the best acousticians have produced, err, perfectible instruments. Therefore, you need a way to test many designs.

 

Plastic is less than optimum for a wind instrument, even a brass, but the ease of fabrication determines your choice. As for wood: only the densest ones (and most expensive) have a chance to survive the humidity variations of a wind instrument: blackwood, grenadilla... You can really forget all others: they will split very quickly.

 

-----

 

A wind instrument's bore can have steps. This has been theorized, experimented, and the instruments work. I heard and played a bamboo saxophone that sounded like a softer sax. (Bamboo or) cane would be a candidate for your trumpet experiments if you can get many diameters with thin walls that fit in an other.

 

Though, the steps introduce more losses which, due to their positions, act differently on the notes. This is a serious drawback for a brass instrument, which needs equally easy notes to be playable. Long smooth transitions would be much better. To the very least, the sections must be shorter than a quarter wavelength of the highest note, and even of its harmonics - this is very short on a baroque trumpet!

 

These aerodynamic losses are also non-linear. The bamboo sax I tried could play pianissimo but not fortissimo, pity for a trumpet.

 

-----

 

Would you access a rapid prototyping machine? More and more amateurs have their own, this would make you one prototype per night with arbitrary shape.

 

If you access a lathe, you can turn the inner diameter of the straight instrument, with wax loaded with talc adhering on a central metal tube, then cover it with glass fibre and epoxy, and remove the wax. I made rocket noses that way, with steps of 0.2mm. Though, a straight baroque trumpet will be very long! Only the prototype? And how to access the overblow holes?

 

A very nice alternative: let cover the wax with nickel instead.

 

Honiba had a patent, expired meanwhile, to make the walls with a metal wire winded on a (wooden?) shape, then join the wires with solder. Nice for prototypes!

 

-----

 

13mm inner diameter is already much for a baroque trumpet! Have a look at manufacturers' catalogues, for instance Yamaha.

 

What taper shape? That's the difficult part!

 

A complete cylindrical bore does work. It's not very good for a brass, I suppose because of impedance matters. The frequency multiples (only odd available) are widely spaced, which is what you don't want on a baroque trumpet. But at least the modes are properly aligned in a first approximation; keep the flare very short (very few cm) and the mouthpiece transition as well.

 

A strict straight cone works well and gives all frequency multiples (odd and even). It is used in the Alpine horn to give a really nice sound, unique among brass instruments. It precludes pistons which need a cylindrical portion, but you don't want pistons on your baroque trumpet anyway, so it's very possible. You could roll a sheet of brass and braze it. Previous conical designs like the ophicleide had tone holes instead of pistons. The diameter for a high-pitched trumpet would resemble an oboe. The sound will differ much from a trumpet.

 

-----

 

The usual flares have no algebraic solution. They are essential to the sound quality of each instrument and its ease of playing. They offer a cylindrical section where to put the pistons. This cylinder de-tunes the fundamental mode, but the higher modes not too much. The "reason" is that for a half-wave, a cylindre is as long as a cone; only the last quarter-wave is longer in a cone. The precise flare compensates for the approximation, and a cylindre plus cone won't work well enough for a music instrument (I hear 0.1% pitch).

 

This also means that a baroque trumpet, which won't use its second mode but starts at its third (or fourth?) can have a long cylindrical portion and a short flare. This is even necessary in order to reflect the high frequencies, so the air column resonates on high notes instead of just radiating.

 

There is some choice for the length of the flare: short on a trumpet, it lets high frequencies resonate and gives a brilliant sound; longer on a cornet with its softer tone; very long on a flugelhorn for the warm mellow sound. This also makes higher or lower notes easier to play, but the mouthpiece contributes to it.

 

For a baroque trumpet with a real standard flare, I'd take the flare length and shape of an existing trumpet of the same pitch, or scale it according to the pitch. I'd favour an even shorter flare, because the longer tube of the baroque trumpet will make the tone softer and more distant. Before this flare, I'd just lengthen the cylindrical section. This will de-tune the second and third modes, but they aren't used anyway.

[science4ever]

First things first Much appreciated that you share all this knowledge

 

Sadly self centered naivety misled you I thought I told you I gave up on Baroque trumpet

Ooops sorry I did not realize my English is this confusing

I have already given up on the Baroque. I now concentrate on

The Cornetto/Zink instrumenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornett

 

So maybe maybe making the cone out of "brass" would be easiest for me

being able to glue the joint together so it get water tight and air tight

and easy to make cheap new ones in plastic with same dimension as the "brass"

as prototypes? I would need to stabilize the plastic sheets with something thicker

so they does not vibrate and wobble and disturbe the "impedance" making tone not stable?

 

Yes there do exists Cornetto/Zink instruments made out of "recin"

but in practice it is Epoxy "recin" and they say such need heavy ventilation

very dangerous to inhale in a small room like I have. And it easily get bubbles

and maybe cost much to use for prototypes.

 

One guy took a 3D printer and made 4 cones and then glued them together

to get one long instrument 23 to 24 inches some 600mm But 3D printing cost a lot

and take rather long time to print out too but the plastic used seems to be strong

 

I would not trust that I can glue four pieces togher and it looks good after when finished

Edited August 2, 2013 by science4ever

[Enthalpy]

I see. You were clear, I'm just a bit stubborn. Cornetto, serpent, ophicleide...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornetto_(musical_instrument)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serpent_(instrument)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ophicleide

Wiki's articles are heavily biassed in favour of these horrible instruments.

 

The cornetto doesn't overblow, the serpent I believe doesn't, while the ophicleide does badly. All have horrible intonation, a bad range, a dull sound that varies an awful lot depending on the note... Why the hell should you want to play them? Any toy instrument is better than that!

 

It's just that tone holes do not fit with a brass mouthpiece. They fit a reed, but a brass mouthpiece demands valves or a natural instrument. Worse: except on the ophicleide, the tone holes are ridiculously tiny.

 

----------

 

What instrument makes call "resin" instruments aren't generally made of epoxy but of PMMA, ABS or PP. These are not so unhealthy for humans, especially PP is considered harmless. Makers must consider "resin" to look more luxurious that "plastic" or "polymer", but they're just thermoplastics.

 

Personnally, I wouldn't be afraid of blowing in an experimental epoxy instrument through a metal mouthpiece. But I would not sell one.

 

----------

 

To produce experimental bells, you could make an inner mould of clay on a potter's wheel, then cover it with nickel, or epoxy and glass fibre, or layers of MMA that you polymerize... then separate from the mould.

 

----------

 

Have you seen the price of instruments that probably work a bit, as opposed to a cornetto?

At eBay.com, just the first answers when looking for "bugle":

item 350712757879 sells for 30 dollar

item 200938513000 sells for 60 dollar

they can overblow as you wanted, and at this price, you can bore overblow holes if you want.

 

Variant: you buy such a horn, preferably short, and add a cylindrical tube between it and the mouthpiece. This makes an approximate baroque trumpet, where you can add overblow holes if desired.

[science4ever]

"bugle":

item 350712757879 sells for 30 dollar

item 200938513000 sells for 60 dollar

 

That is a very good price indeed. They sound cool.

 

I agree that Cornetto/Zink has limits but when you write this

 

 

The cornetto doesn't overblow

Maybe I have not learned what the word really means

AFAIK a well built Cornetto does allow that one get one octave higher

on each of the holes so at least two registers the low and high a continues scale

from g to g to g and the xpert player can play even higher up but that needs much practice.

 

One can see and hear that that is so on the videos they shift between lower and higher

in the music pieces while the cylindrical bore that I have on my flute trumpets with

fingerholes they can only make the lower register and the longer ones like a Clarinet

they can one and a half octave higher on the lowest fingers.

 

Most likely I use the word overblow wrong this guy here name it harmonics instead?

http://www.flutetunes.com/articles/flute-harmonics/

 

I thought the correct word for teh lowest scale was ground tone and the first harmonics

being one octave higher is named first harmonic or first over tone or first over blown.

 

Flues are open air so they allow at least the ground tone and the first octave harmonic

 

whole Clarinet and very short Trumpet like instement being closed air tube miss the first

harmonic and instead give the one one and a half above being the second harmonic?

 

I know nothing I only guess based on having blown home made flutes since some 50 years

 

Hehe what you dislike about the sound of a Cornetto/Zink is most likely what we love about it.

 

it sounds heavenly to us who love it. so it is a matter of taste most likely. The constrained sound

is the charm it has for our ears. Intonation is very hard to master I know. So that maybe is why

there is no such for school orchestras The others would scream to the Cornetto play on tune or get lost.

 

wiki says about overblowing this

 

the pitch jump is from one vibratory mode of the reed or air column, e.g., its fundamental, to an overtone.

So that is how I understood the term too and ahve used it but I forgot the word fundamental

so a good Cornetto should at least have two octaves first the fundamental and then the first overtome scale

same note/tone so a fingering for G also gets a G one octave higher but next harmonics gets you to D seven

halfnotes higher? and next harmonics to G again Only my wild guessing but that is how flutes acts.

Edited August 4, 2013 by science4ever

[Enthalpy]

OK, the cornetto overblows, my mistake.

 

Whether an octave or a twelvth: these are ideal cases. All intervals exist, preferably inaccurate ones. Getting proper intonation over two or more modes is difficult and needs experiments, among others because the embouchure has a strong influence on pitch.

[science4ever]

Yes each instrument seems to be indivdidual so not predictable

from case to case so those that have been measured one hope

them where good versions and not just a random sample that

maybe where not optimal craftmanship.

 

I will need to test many options until it works to get two octaves

that sound at least close to being in tune. It is only for the fun of it

so no big deal if it fails in the end. that is a way to learn that it was difficult.

 

When visiting the Music shop I tried to play their P-bone Trombone

and I had more difficulty with that one than with my one octave only

cylindrical "Cylinetto" just made that term up such does not exist

and these have no mouth piece one just use the end of the tube as the MP.

One is 300mm long and 1/2 Inch about 13 mm inner tube and the other one

400mm 16mm inner tube 20 mm outer and that sound more like a small clarinett

 

8 fingerholes on both. But one need to get them conical because they sound too muted

lacking the overtones harmonics due to being cylindrical.

[adrianaflower]

I had broken many music instruments while creating different acoustic music. I was very angry when one of my favorite trumpet got broken and music instrument repair shop said that it is unrepairable. That no was really unacceptable to me.

Edited March 24, 2014 by swansont
remove commercial link

[Lizzie L]

I see. You were clear, I'm just a bit stubborn. Cornetto, serpent, ophicleide...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornetto_(musical_instrument)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serpent_(instrument)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ophicleide

Wiki's articles are heavily biassed in favour of these horrible instruments.

 

The cornetto doesn't overblow, the serpent I believe doesn't, while the ophicleide does badly. All have horrible intonation, a bad range, a dull sound that varies an awful lot depending on the note... Why the hell should you want to play them? Any toy instrument is better than that!

 

 

Or even better:

 

[Enthalpy]

Thanks for the links!

 

A good player obviously. Nevertheless, the intonation is poor, among other shortcomings of the instrument.

 

Then, the sound of a wooden horn can't be replaced, sure.

[Lizzie L]

What? The intonation is beautiful!

[Enthalpy]

No, the intonation is catastrophic.

[Lizzie L]

I beg to differ