TECH TUESDAYS - Series Introduction
Hopefully see you on Tuesday!
The staggered reedplates is a great start of this series.
This design seems to, at least superficially, to be a predecessor of and to accomplish much the same thing as the SlipSlider. A downside, you could argue is that it only gives the move-right notes in holes 1-6 and the move-left notes in holes 7-10. On the other hand, the button always takes you in the "right" direction to let you bend notes you couldn't bend before.
The first part of the video immediately gets you thinking about rerouting the channels to accomplish more bends, and after seeing the video to the end it seems you went pretty far down that hole.
Question: Did this line of thought, in the end, let you do anything you couldn't do with a SlipSlider? As far as you take us in the video it doesn't seem so from what I can immediately tell, but maybe something like the final combs you show could?
I know what I will be thinking about going to sleep tonight
Thanks again for sharing!
Seeing how much time you poured into this you might have found some reason I've overlooked why this doesn't work. If so that would be very interesting to hear about.
Anyhow, I reason as follows.
The notes of your setup are arranged like this:
Code: Select all
Blow: C E A C E G C E G C Draw: D G B D F A B D F A
Your mouthpiece chooses pairs of adjacent notes and lets you play them together. Un-pushed, hole 7 gives you a B and a C, and when you push it B ends up alone.
If you fill the gap with an A note, the B would become bendable:
Code: Select all
Blow: C E A C E G A C E G C Draw: D G B D F A B D F A
If you're a blues player playing second position, and if you usually produce that flat 3rd with a 6 overblow, maybe that bendable B isn't important enough. IF SO, you could fill that gap with another note to make extra chords! A D note would give you a high tonic power chord. An F would give you the subdominant in first position.
If it is the Bb you are after, you could even let the extra note BE a Bb, but that wouldn't give any extra bends...
Last night I went back to my CAD drawings and tried to figure out how to get the C and B bend whilst retaining the D bend. However I only focussed on my latest comb design (where the reedplate isn't split).
I figured out a way with a second slide how to get the C bend without losing the D bend, but it was fiddly - and still no B bend. However I didn't go back and look at my earlier comb with the split blow reedplate. That's because I had been seeing slicing up the reedplate as a negative and (I must admit), was somewhat blinded by my own cleverness in coming up with that last radical comb design.... Haha! In short I had blinkers on, focussing only on the last comb iteration.
You've now made a virtue of necessity and turned it into a positive, by going back to the earlier comb design using the extra real estate opened up by the reedplate split to add a useful extra reed - and therefore get both the missing two bends in Richter Tuning. Bravo, that's great
This clearly shows the benefits of exposing ones' ideas to a wider range of brains. Blinkers are removed, artificial obstacles overcome... Progress is achieved, and within a day!
I'll make a couple of these and bring one to Klingenthal as a gift for you.
I need to go to the computer and draw it out. Talk soon...
I did a design adding an extra blow reed, making 11 reeds on top. However, in this version:
1. To get the C blow bend and D draw bend when I push the slider, the doubled reed needs to be a C (not an A or G)
2. Therefore, I still can't get the 7 draw bend...
Wrap your brain around that Edvin, and see if you can come up with a solution.... I hope you can!
Only idea I can think of off the top of my head is to have an A blow modular reed mounted over the split between the two C reeds, directly above the B draw (making 12 blow reeds in total). But that would need a new hole in the slider, which would make playing awkward and detract from the pure Richter layout with slide out.
Bloody Richter! You wouldn't believe how much trouble it's caused for so many of the designs I've tried to create. Regular-breath tunings are SOOO much simpler to deal with! But it adds a fascinating extra challenge to overcome
The design I posted, with an extra A, will allow you to bend down the B, and by moving the gap and filling it with an extra C you have created a version that allows you to bend the C down to a Bb. You want to be able to do both. Hm. I suppose in your version you could play the B as a half bend and then bend it down further to get the Bb, but half bends are harder to sustain cleanly. If it's just the Bb note you're after you already have it, but to bend it up to a B is harder.
For now the extra reed seems to give you one or the other, but it's possible you could squeeze out bout some how.
I'm at work need to attend to some other stuff if I'm ever to get done for the day, but I'll have a look at it later!
PS. Amen to the Richter part! I see it as a very specialised tuning that solves a very specific problem, that somehow became the norm. But, as you say, a challenge now and then can be refreshing
Unfortunately it doesn't seem possible to get bends on both the C and B... I guess it's a matter of choice whether you prefer one or the other. The missing Bb is available as a bend in either version.
When I wrote my first post I was apparently confused about where you had cut the reedplate. I guess I thought it made sense to cut it where the breath change happens, but both way works! I made a little diagram before I saw your new post. The two versions have different mouth pieces, and give you either a bendable B or a bendable C. No idea how to acheive both yet, but today has been a busy day and I have not had much time to think. I'll write back if I think of anything!