Bigger, badder, bassier…

Where do you find the most bells in classical music? In opera. Where do you find the lowest ones? In Tosca by Giacomo Puccini. The percussion score includes an E1, an F2 and a Bb2. That E1 – the lowest E note on a standard piano – was inspired by the tolling of the Campanone (the big bell) of St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome. A 10 tonne bell – actually quite light as some tower bells go and, actually, an E3. We can only assume that Puccini wanted an E1 as an exaggeration. How do you replicate this in an orchestra? So far, the answer is, you don’t.

il campanone at San Pietro
il campanone at San Pietro

At least, you don’t with a tubular bell. You might with a bell plate. But that’s for another blog. I believe there have been E2 tubular bells – i.e. one octave up – made (by EQ Percussion and by Century Mallet) for use in Tosca, but I have neither seen nor heard them. They’ll be around 15 foot long 2″ chimes by my estimate. The overtone structure of tubular bells and the way your ears and brain assign pitch to such things really starts to fall apart below about Eb3 or D3, so there must be some tricks involved in making these work.

The Orchestra of the Royal Opera House at Covent Garden in London got in touch with me about replacing some old tubular bells they have which were – reportedly – the F2 and Bb2 for Tosca. The F is starting to crack up and can’t be played loudly any more. I went to have a look and take some recordings for analysis. It turns out these Bronze beauties are Harringtons’ Patented Tubular Bells from up to 120 years ago (metal tubular bells themselves being only around 155 years old as a concept). They were probably originally installed in a church tower. Roughly 3 inches in outer diameter, 1/2 inch thick in wall, and getting on for 3 metres in length; the F is around 65kg and, as it turns out, not an F2, but an F3. Sorry about the terrible mobile phone picture:

harringtons tubular bell
harringtons patent tubular bell

So, I’m both relieved and disappointed in almost equal measure that I don’t have to figure out the tubular bells below D3 conundrum – yet.

Evidently, the sheer size of the bells allow much more volume from the bass partials to get out into the air and thus to suggest the lower octave. Or, perhaps more likely, they are less prone to sounding an octave higher than they should, as deep tubular bells of lesser girth can sometimes do. Tubular bells fool you into hearing a virtual fundamental “1” by having three partials in their overtone spectrum which are approximately in the ratio 2:3:4 – so they seem like part of a harmonic series. Sometimes this auditory illusion can break down and you can hear the 2 and 4 as 1 and 2, or yet higher overtones point to a different pitch altogether.

To make replacement tubular chime bells in Bronze, or even Brass would be extravagantly expensive today – not to mention back-breakingly heavy. I have had success in making bass chimes using thick-wall Aluminium tubing. For this kind of thing, it ends up being quite a bit lighter, despite being up to 20% longer for the same note. The natural tendency for the Aluminium to dampen the higher overtones also helps bolster the virtual pitch illusion. Let the adventures in 3 inch diameter Aluminium tubular bells begin!

I wanted to use 3 inch outer diameter by 1/2 inch wall thickness Aluminium, the same cross section as the existing Bronze bells, but was not able to find any which could be supplied in time. So I went for 3/8 inch wall. Really, I would have liked to have been able to compare the two and decide which sounded better, rather than extrapolating from my experiments in 2 inch tubing. I ordered two 5 metre lengths. I couldn’t get them delivered directly to my workshop so had to transfer them from my home to there in my car.

uncut tubes in car
late night motor jousting

When I made my cymbal lathe, I made sure it was also capable of taking a standard metal-turning chuck. However, there isn’t a solid lathe bed or tool post, so some operations using this can be a little Heath-Robinson.

 
Still, I can make nicely shaped caps and do the overall finishing of these (very) long tubes using this lathe.

bell caps
cut and turned caps

I like to fit cord guide tubes on my tubular bells. It makes life so much easier when threading the suspension cords through and it also helps the cords last a lot longer before they fray. For bells this big, that meant drilling some pretty big holes. A 1 inch hole saw was slightly too large (larger than advertised, in fact) and a 15/16 inch hole saw was slightly under what I needed. So, that lathe chuck came in handy again by allowing some power-reaming.

don't try this at home
reamer in lathe chuck
holes drilled
cord guide holes
cord guide tube in tubular bell
cord guide tube installed

While proper tubular bell tuning is more than simply cutting the tube to the right length, tuning the Bb was a breeze. After a little experimentation, everything fell into place nicely. The “4” overtone being only 4 cents out with the “2” being dead on. The “3” was a little flat, but not enough to upset anybody. The (approximate) minor 3rd and hum tones were quite loud giving plenty of body to the sound of the bell. The F, however, was more of a challenge and took the bulk of the time.

It is easy enough with recording gear and computers to see exactly what is going on with the tuning of all the partials in a tubular bell. It is less easy to infer from this what the perceived pitch of the bell will be and, at notes significantly down on middle C (C4) like this, it can be hard to be objective about what you are actually hearing. Would the bell sound better 20 cents sharper? 20 cents flatter? 7 cents flatter? They all seemed reasonable and yet all a bit different, and different again in different contexts. After going dangerously far down a blind alley (finding a Bb partial in the F bell and matching it to a partial in the same octave in the Bb bell) I realised it was far easier to hear the apparent fundamental pitch of the bell when alternating between it and a reference, rather than listening to the two sounds at the same time. At last I have two bells which sound in tune and also good next to each other.

giant tubular bells
tall bells

They really are monsters at 2.8 and 3.2m long, but a fair bit more manageable weighing “only” 16 and 18kg. The Opera House has a specially constructed frame with built-in stairs and a platform for the elevated percussionist. Of course, it doesn’t fit in the pit, but that is fine as the bells are suppose to be “off stage” anyhow. I hear that Maestro Pappone is happy with the sound of the new bells – such feedback is always nice to receive! They just about fit in my workshop in the tallest part so I could test them properly. I thought I might have to move the lathe around 90 degrees to accommodate the F, but I got away with just pushing it back by 6 inches or so. If we need to replace the E bell at some point in the future, things may get a little more tight.

 

Share Button

The Quest for the Holy Grail?

I can’t resist a good challenge. This one, seemingly, has remained unsolved for over a century. I am talking about the deep tolling “crystalline” bells of the Holy Grail temple in Richard Wagner’s opera, Parsifal.

Wagner himself, was never quite satisfied with solutions to this sound he heard in his head. The lowest bell being 20 semitones below the deepest in St Stephen’s cathedral in Vienna. A real church bell like this would be larger and deeper than any ever made, as far as I know. The closest would be the great Kremlin Tsar Bell, which was never really finished and was damaged by fire in 1737. The low E would have to be 8 metres in diameter and over 260 tonnes! For the opera leitmotif you’d need 4, of similar proportions, to produce the C3, G2, A2, E2 peal. Real bells like this are, of course, out of the question. Too big, too heavy, too expensive and too loud.

Wagner's grailmotif
Wagner’s original manuscript

One of the earlier sonic solutions, which was rejected upon testing circa 1882, was a set of Chinese tam-tam gongs, sourced from London. To help the perception of a clear resounding pitch, a piano / hammered dulcimer hybrid was concocted. This had 6 parallel strings for each of the four notes and was struck with a wide mallet. You can hear a later version of it on the 1926 recording conducted by Karl Muck. Steingraeber made various iterations of this Gralsklavier including a brand new one earlier this year.

Here is the combination of instruments used by the Royal Opera at Covent Garden in 1914. Giant oversize tubular bells / chimes, a single gong (hiding there in the background, middle), and another of these piano dulcimer hybrids. Quite a wonderful newspaper drawing. I love the idea of playing percussion in hats and trench coats! Perhaps it was cold backstage.

Covent Garden Parsifal bells 1914
Covent Garden backstage bells 1914

By far the most grand solution to add the metallic and somewhat discordant bell like tone plus some low end woof to the harmonious piano dulcimer was the set of brewing vat resonated bell plates constructed at Bayreuth. Absolutely huge and requiring one player each! You can also just about make these out in the Karl Muck recording. I can’t help but think that this solution was arrived at by trial and error rather than applying the techniques of Helmholtz from his 1863 paper “On the sensations of tone”.

Giant barrel bells
Giant Barrels at Bayreuth 1927

It wasn’t long before electronics were getting in on the act. Smaller, grandfather clock like, metal tines with pick-ups and amplification have been used. Manipulated recordings (or “samples”) of actual bells have been used. Synthesisers have been used – including for quite some time as a favourite, the Mixtur Trautonium, one of the very first synthesisers. The latter was also a favourite of Alfred Hitchcock. He used it on the soundtrack to his film The Birds.

Hitchcock Trautonium
Alfred Hitchcock with the Mixtur-Trautonium

And yet, anything electronic or amplified and played through loudspeakers always meets with disapproval from at least one corner or other.  Even the (only slightly manipulated) recordings of the actual bells from St Sulpice in Paris as used this year for Berlioz’s Symphonie Fantastique at the Proms and the Edinburgh Festival got a drubbing in the review press. I can see why. When the rest of the orchestra is real, live, organic and full of human interpretation, expression and inflection, accompanying sounds which are not do rather stick out as alien interlopers.

As my own experiments and minor successes in the realms of bass bell plates in various different metals and bass tubular chimes have been proceeding not unnoticed by the symphonic and operatic worlds, I have now been asked by 3 separate people to consider producing a good, acoustic percussion solution to the problem of these Holy Grail bells of Montsalvat. There are numerous technical issues to overcome to do with the physics of such instruments and the psycho-acoustic vagaries of the human ear and brain, not to mention logistical and practical considerations. Nonetheless, I have a handful of different ideas to go and test out. Some are a single instrument per note, some are combinations. Whether I can produce a solution which satisfies all discerning ears, who knows? Watch this space…

Share Button

Aquasonic – underwater music

Music? Underwater? Really? I was both intrigued and excited by the challenge of this. This was one of those things that perhaps had the risk of being, if you’ll pardon the pun, a total wash-out. On the other hand, it had the chance of being amazing. It was amazing.

Aquasonic Percussion Tank with Dea

I really enjoyed working with the Danish group, “Aquasonic”, and with the small, transatlantic team they’d put together to really get to grips with all the issues of making good sounds underwater. We had a mechanical (and usually robotic) instrument maker from Brooklyn, an underwater acoustics professor from Texas, a pioneer in the development of the world’s first musical instrument that actually produces sound directly from water – the Hydraulophone, a “normal, above water”, Danish acoustician, a New York producer who usually works with the likes of Cirque du Soleil and me, the metal percussion specialist who also has some form tuning unusual instruments and figuring out general stuff to do with vibrations and acoustics.

The Aquasonic project has been going on for quite a long time, making discoveries and incremental improvements all along the way. With this new team and concentrated effort though, I think we’ve really pushed things forwards a few great leaps. Firstly, lots of skype conference calls, emails, tests, experiments and simulations. Then, for me, further underwater testing of prototype ideas in a plastic tank with a hydrophone (underwater microphone) in my workshop in Bath. Then a 9 day trip to Aarhus to install, test, tune and troubleshoot new instruments of my creation and some 3rd party instruments too.

So, Aquasonic is now 5 musicians, each with their own large custom-built aquarium – the largest ones clocking in at around 1600 litres. They play (and sing – more on that later) underwater as an ensemble. The audience gets to keep their feet on dry land – the music is picked up by hydrophones, amplified, and relayed through loudspeakers. The musicians have in-ear monitors so they can hear each other. This may be more important than you think. Visual cueing is not so easy with the strange refractive effects looking outwards from inside the big glass water-filled tanks.

Aquasonic group photo

The first big improvement was sourcing and using better quality hydrophones. We were all still very worried about standing wave reflections in the tanks (the wavelengths of sound in water are much longer than in air – the aquaria are very small spaces acoustically speaking) and attenuation issues, not to mention the de-tuning effect of the mass-load of the water on the instruments due to strong coupling because of close acoustic impedances. Musical instruments barely “notice” the air around them, but they really can’t ignore the water if they are in it. The second big improvement came from our acoustician – put the hydrophones right into the corners of the tanks. You get a boundary effect which naturally boosts gain and you also get a fairly nice constant overall amplitude (from summing the mics together) as you move the instruments around within the tanks. Before this breakthrough, it was looking worryingly like we woulShuffling singing bowlsd need spot hydrophones, very precisely placed, on every single instrument (and, in the percussion tank, there are 20 to 30 individual instruments). Standing wave issues, for the most part, were not actually a problem. Though we did spend a good amount of time fine-tuning the position of the 15 or so Singing Bowls to balance their timbres and resonance.

There are major issues with volume and sustain of almost all musical instruments underwater. You can forget wind instruments straight away, though Laila Skovmand and her protege Nanna Bech have mastered an inhale-exhale maintain-a-bubble-in-the-mouth underwater singing technique. Struck and plucked instruments almost all behave as dipoles and front and back sound waves cancel much more readily in the non-compressible water than they do in air. Most instruments have to be massive to have a chance or they need to have a continuing energy input – e.g. from bowing or rubbing.

Gongs work quite well – especially the tuned types, with nipples and collars. Higher overtones tend to be attenuated and pitches shift down by varying amounts. Singing Bowls work surprisingly well, especially larger ones. I did a little re-tuning work on Aquasonic’s extensive collection. Only one bowl broke as a result of the (really quite delicate and tentative) re-hammering. I found that larger Bell Plates were good too, but their aspect ratio needed to change under the water – detuning of the overtone frequencies is not linear. They drop about a fifth overall, but the higher tones drop more than the lower ones. Through the generosity of a local glass workshop (Nyholm Cantrel Glass) we had access to equipment necessary for careful tuning of both ceramic tiles and glass bowls from a custom underwater Glass Armonica – Andy Cavatorta’s Crystallophone.

tuning glass bowls

I spent quite a bit of time in my own workshop trying to get Aluminium Harps (or instruments using the same principal) to work as I thought that they could be good under the water. Getting the right friction was a problem though. It still may work with a glass instrument, but time ran out there and I didn’t get to try it. As a by-product though, I came up with what I later dubbed the “SETIphone” as it rather resembles something you might use to contact little green men from outer space. Using (lacquered to mitigate rusting) rebar clamped in the middle on a frame with a cymbal as a sound radiator you can create quasi-pitched industrial sounds by striking or stridulating the bars.

There was a quest for something to perform a hi-hat function. Normal hi-hats and cymbal stacks just don’t do in water what they do in air. The cymbals are too light and there is too much suction between them. For drummers who have trouble with air-lock, you should try water-lock, it is orders of magnitude worse. We didn’t need foot pedal action, just a short, dry (but not too dry!) sound to propel beats along. We had a “bass drum” from a strategically damped Gong Ageng and a “snare” from a Darbuka (about the only actual drum that works underwater – though I did have high hopes for boo-bams). My best prototype was a cup chime with a triangle stacked on it. The evolution of this, which was more satisfactory, was a larger but still quite heavy cymbal with a triangle stacked over the cup and 6 pairs of tambourine jingles riveted around the periphery. The stacked triangle provided crunch while the jingles added hiss. Each one alone wasn’t enough but the combination was about right.

With the improvements in the hydrophone technique, cup chimes and triangles were found to be much more resonant than early tests had suggested, so we threw some more of those in as stand-alone instruments. The SETIphone actually became overwhelmingly loud and lighter beaters had to be employed!

With the new, expanded and somewhat more hi-fi sound palette, Laila is composing new material. Full length concerts will start happening in mid 2016. There were some short teaser previews at the SPOT festival in Aarhus this May. I was blown away by the video from it, even though it is still at the embryonic stage. I can’t imagine what will develop after another year.

 

Share Button

Castagnettes de Fer

Here is another “authentic” period instrument recreation. This time some “metal castanets” for Samson and Delilah by Saint-Saens. So, I’m working from a picture, but not one I’ve seen. It is in an out of print book and it has been described to me over the phone!

Some people use finger cymbals for this part, often mounted on “castanet machines” to make them easier to play. The reference picture though comes from the book of Joseph Baggers – Saint-Saens’ very own percussionist (and also the teacher, of percussion, to Messiaen, no less). So, again, we’re back to how the composer heard the sound.

What is required is a single piece of metal, forged into a shape somewhat like salad tongs, but with the ends like large spoons and arranged back to back, not face to face. Quite chunky because we need a good spring from the handle and the cups need to be robust. For the first prototype, I’ve gone with Nickel-Silver which I have artificially patinated to look somewhat ancient. There was a slight hiccup. I thought the brief was “like two large Victorian serving spoons”. Apparently it was *soup* spoons. So, I shouldn’t have pointed ends on the cups, they should be much closer to round. Ah well – that refinement will have to wait for prototype #2!

Metal Castanets

Reportedly, the sound and playability are very good. However, a pair would be preferred, to be played on the knees. I quite liked using the one so that you could modulate the timbre somewhat by shaping a cupped hand as you played against it. Perhaps Danse Bacchanale is a little too fast for one-handed playing. Maybe I’ll bring some pairs to PASIC in November and see if anyone else is interested in these.

Share Button

Recreating Baroque Triangles

I’ve been meaning to get around to making some proper old-school triangles for quite some time. Did you know that the original incarnation of this instrument was gap-free and had loose jingling rings on the bottom limb? I’ve had a few requests from possible customers. Period ensembles like to use instruments authentic to the time when the music was written – so that it sounds closer to the composer’s original aural vision. This either means using original / restored instruments or, more often than not, reproductions.

The humble triangle (albeit often the instrument that makes other instruments sound better!) has murky roots. There seem to be different origin stories and, just perhaps, it might be possible that more than one of them is true. Did the triangle evolve from the Ancient Egyptian Sistrum, a ceremonial instrument? Or did it start out as rudimentary horse stirrups which were taken off the straps and used as folk instruments? There’s even an outsider suggestion of a hand-held metal device for making sparks from flints, the fire steel.

Sistrumacciarino_medievaleStirrup    SistrumSistrum3

Officially, the triangle entered the European Orchestra with the fashion for “Turkish” music in the late 1700s to early 1800s, this new section being called the “banda turca”. The triangle had existed in other musics in various places on the planet well before then. Though we only know this from paintings, drawings and wood carvings. I don’t know of any surviving instruments from those times. Today, these ancestors may be classified as early “mediaeval” triangles (closed, with rings, often quite tall and isosceles, sometimes even trapezoidal) or the later “baroque” triangles (open, with or without rings, often with scrolls fashioned into the open ends).

Ting tingBaroque triangle diagram

Of course, nobody today really knows how the originals sounded, we can only guess. Then there’s the question of whether you go the whole hog into authentic materials, construction techniques and hopefully sound or do you make a halfway house. Somewhere between the guess of what the originals sounded like and the modern, open ended, ring-free triangle we are used to hearing now. As a maker, it fascinates me to wonder if there’s some secret buried back there waiting to be re-discovered.

Last year I had a percussionist from an Austrian Orchestra after a “banda turca” triangle. He was disappointed with solutions he’d found elsewhere and wanted something with more sustaining and obvious sizzle – that you can still hear from a distance, through the texture of the orchestra. I had an idea about using cymbal rivets instead of rings and it certainly worked better than rings that pass through holes in the triangle limbs. Still not quite what was wanted though. Then, we tried a pair of tambourine jingles on a small bolt, threaded into the triangle at an angle – perfect! So, we have a triangle that sings for a short – but not too short – time, accompanied by a clear jingling sizzling sussuration. So, not remotely authentic, but it made the sound the player wanted.

Jingle Triangle

This February, I had a different request. For a more authentic baroque style triangle, for Mozart. The suggestion was to have a slightly unorthodox scroll arrangement – both turning upwards. This was perfect for keeping the loose hanging rings from falling off the bottom limb though. The other alternative is to have the triangle gap small enough that the rings can’t get out unless you prise the bars apart. That has issues though, I think. Straight off the bat, this worked better than a rings-through-holes triangle. The rings are much more free to move, and thus they dampen the triangle less.

Baroque triangle with rings

There’s still a question to be answered regarding how many rings, of what material, what size and weight, etc. The originals would have been forged from iron by a blacksmith. For the triangle itself though, my client wanted one of my brighter sounding bronze alloys. Making small rings from this was somewhat out of the question, brass ones would be easy to make, but I don’t think they’d work too well. I found some wrought iron rings (for curtain poles!) – perhaps a little large, or maybe OK. Then also some stainless steel rings which were smaller and felt to be about the right size.

After rehearsal tests at Glyndebourne in late May and early June, the stainless steel rings were found to be the sonic winners, 4 of them on a 9″ triangle. But they don’t look right, of course. The wrought iron ones look the part but are too heavy. So, I cut some down to the same weight as the stainless ones and re-forged them into a smaller ring. So, that should be perfect, right? Wrong. Still the stainless ones work better (good job I had blued some up to make them look more in keeping). My theory is that actually the natural pitch of the rings is important. If the rings resonate at a frequency which is strong in the triangle then they can more easily suck energy out of the instrument. The wrought iron rings were much lower pitched than the stainless ones, and possibly close to one of the main lower partials of the triangle. Only time and making more will tell…

jingle rings

As for mediaeval style triangles with all 3 corners closed (or 4 if a trapezoidal one), I’ve got to figure out some welding smarts for that one. Butted joint? Scarfe joint? Forge-welded or cheating modern methods? I think there may be some other subtle tricks too, to get an instrument that actually sings nicely. Tune in to a later blog to find out!

 

Update Feb 2016 – though this photo is from November 2015:

I got better at making the scrolls. Here are some more recent editions of my triangle with the “blued” stainless steel rings.

New baroque triangles
Newer edition triangles
Share Button