|
The Warble is a “natural vibrato”
effect occurring in some flutes when the fundamental (all holes covered)
is played. Some folks find this to be a pleasing attribute and others do
not.
While many folks have read of this effect not too many people have
actually had the opportunity to listen to it with even fewer having NAF
flutes that will actually exhibit this effect.
Within the Author’s personal collection this effect is observed in only
approximately 10% of the flutes.
Betty Austin Hensley in her book covering the early 20th Century Flutist
Thurlow Lieurance and his Flute Collection referred to this effect as a
bubble and indicates that only approximately 10% of his flutes would
produce a good bubble. (Hensley, 1990)
Educator Edward Wapp Wahpeconiah (Comanche/Sac and Fox) wrote that:
“There were three main
characteristics of the flute that were preferred by both makers and
players and are yet important to players. The two most important were
a pleasing tone and a usable arrangement of scale tones; otherwise,
the flute was discarded and never played. The third characteristic,
which is not found on many flutes, was a warbling sound on the lower
pitch of the scale. The warble, in actuality, is a rapid alternation
between two different pitches (acoustical beats) and was probably
incorporated into the instrument’s design to imitate vocal pulsation
that is characteristic of Indian Singing. This sound was and is yet
preferred by flute players and achieved by only a few makers.” (Wapp,
1984)
Later Ed Wapp wrote the following
to me in a personal letter:
“One thing helps to explain
another. The flute used the vocal love song as source material. In
singing the vocal love song, the singer tried to disguise the voice.
As well, an aspect of vocal performance practice of the love song, a
vocal pulsation was sung on the fundamental. The warble imitates the
vocal ornamentation. My Grandfathers flute as the warble. Doc Tate
Nevaquayah really liked the flute. I remember Doc Payne when he was
trying to figure out the warble. Several makers around Anadarko
claimed that they knew how to put it in a flute. Basically, and it
takes precision to do it, the Nick on the lip [splitting edge] causes
[it]….. I had to laugh. The flutes that we use at IAIA [Institute of
American Indian Arts, Santa Fe, NM] have the warble, and they are made
from PVC pipe. One of the female students got one with a strong
warble. When she played it, it frightened her.” (Crawford, 7/01)
On the tape that accompanies the
Thesis “Instrumental and Vocal Love Songs of the North American Indians”
there are three recordings exhibiting this effect: Meskwaki Melody,
Wilson Rolberts, 1956; Winnebago Melody 1964 and a Kiowa Melody, Everett
Cozad, 1964. (Riemer, 1978)
On the tape that accompanies the Thesis “The Flute of the Canadian
Amerindian” there are 8 recordings exhibiting this effect: Kiowa Flute
Song, Belo Cozad, 1954; Meskawaki, Love Song for the Flute, Wilson
Roberts, 1956; Winnebago, Love Song, 1964; Comanche, I Saw and Eagle
Fly, Doc Tate Nevaquaya, 1964; Potawatomi, First Love Song for Flute, Ed
Wapp, 1982; Potawatomi, Second Love Song for Flute, Ed Wapp, 1982;
Comanche, I Saw and Eagle Fly, Ed Wapp, 1982; Comanche, Modern Courting
Song, Ed Wapp, 1982. Two of these appear to be the same as two of those
on the Riemer tape. (Conlon, 1983)
So far, as nearly as I can determine, the particular effect has been
commented upon the most by Doc Payne (Richard W. Payne).
In 1988 Doc wrote:
“Using a properly constructed
Plains flute with all tone holes covered, diaphragmatic air will
produce the tonic F sharp in warm vibrato. This accentuated vibrato,
known as the “warble,” is an important feature of traditional Plains
Indian flute playing. It is accentuated by directing the air blade
slightly high over the fipple edge and further enhanced by added
support of the air column slightly compressed in the pressure chamber
of the flute. Tone frequency of the vibrato can be increased by as
much as a half step by pushing cold air to produce a multiphonic
warble, the tempo and tonality of which can be controlled in an
effective manner. This warble, scrupulously avoided by organ pipe
builders who term it “burble,” is a prized attribute of the Plains
flute, which can be driven with considerable variation in air
pressure, in contrast to the organ pipe.” (Payne, 1988)
Then in 1999 Doc wrote:
“The Toubat flute (this is the
name that Doc gave a specific flute of his own design) requires
particular skills in playing technique. In the old style of Plains
flute playing, the vigorous multiphonic ‘warble’ on the fundamental
note was highly regarded. This requires careful alignment of the
block, nest and roost so that the air stream is directed slightly high
on the fipple edge [sic; splitting edge]. Breath control is critical
to execution of the oscillating warble; this is accomplished with warm
diaphragmatic breathing dynamics. Air compressibility is also aided by
providing slight impediment to the air stream, resulting from a
slightly narrowed embouchure hole and air vent.” (Payne, 1999)
From trial and error observations
it appears to me that the effect is generally best observed with the
bird/block ‘s leading edge being just forward of the chamber separating
block. In addition to the position of the block an increase in air
pressure (creating a higher compression of the air in the air chamber)
appears to be a general requirement for the production of this “natural”
vibrato (i.e. blow a bit harder).
Excluding double bore NAF’s I have five principal flutes that I use to
demonstrate the Warble. A “D#” flute by Ken Light; an “E” flute by James
Gilland; an “F#” flute by Doc Payne (a, k, a, the Toubat flute), a “G”
by Timothy Nevaquaya, and a “G” Flute by Doc Oliver Jones. Each flute
seems to have an observable difference in the velocity of the
oscillation of the vibrato. Ken Light’s is by far the fastest while
Timothy Nevaquaya’s is the slowest. Doc Jones flute, appears to be in
the middle and has one of the more stable and consistent warbles.
The Ken Light flute and the Doc Payne flute have a metal nest. The Doc
Jones flute has a wood nest. The James Gilland flute has the air channel
cut into the body of the flute while the Timothy Nevaquaya flute has the
air channel cut into the bird/block
Doc Payne was of the tentative opinion that a narrow mouthpiece end
might possibly be a perquisite, however, the James Gilliand flute, being
constructed of river cane, has a totally open air chamber and,
interestingly enough, appears to me to be one of the easiest to
demonstrate this effect with. The point that Doc Payne was most
concerned about making was that an increase in compression within the
air chamber is required (whether by the player blowing harder or
possibly simply by wind way design).
In preparation for a presentation on this topic at the first INAFA
convention (2001), I took my dial micrometer and set about to measure
every possible and conceivable attribute that I could possibly identity
that would definitely differentiate what physical characteristics are
required to be present for this effect to occur. After taking a variety
of measurements on four of the flutes that Warble and flutes that do not
I was not able to arrive at any single characteristic or combination of
characteristics that could be identified as being physically responsible
for this effect, that would at least be apparent by physical measurement
(see 3rd paragraph from end).
Of these five flutes, as far as I know, Doc Payne and Dr. Oliver W.
Jones, Jr., are the only builders that specifically set out to create
flutes that will exhibit a “natural” Warble, with the possible exception
of Timothy Nevaquayah. In a conversation with me on this topic, in April
of 2001, Doc Payne confessed that not all the flutes that he builds
exhibit this effect; those that do not he destroys. While on this
subject, Doc Payne is not really in the business of building flutes to
sell. He only builds a few each year. (Crawford, 4/01).
Doc Jones, Wild Horse Mountain Flutes, La Jolla, CA, also builds
warbling flutes for sale. In a conversation with me on 2/7/02 Doc Jones
stated that he has yet do discover with certainty what physical
characteristics or attributes are in whole required to produce a warble;
however, he has discovered, never the less, that for his flutes there
are two very specific criteria necessary in their construction for them
to have the warble characteristic. “1) The air column spacing under the
block has to be very thin, 1/64 of an inch (.0156) and 2) The distance
from the block [bird, saddle] across to the beveled splitting edge must
be 10/32 of an inch (.3125).” (Crawford, 2/02)
Flute Builder, Michael “Searching Bear” Smallridge, Searching Bear
Flutes, Ravenna, OH, stated that he is now achieving consistency with
building warbling flutes:
“Every flute I make now I am
able to find where it will warble without even blowing on it. So at
least with my flutes and the way I make them, it’s all in where the
totem is positioned in relation to the ‘bottom’ of the window. I tend
to burn my windows at a slight slanted angle. I have also found that
just because it warbles does not mean this is the ‘best’ position (the
totem) for the rest of the notes on the flute.” (Crawford, 4/02).
I can comment and agree with
Michael on positioning in that my Doc Payne flute’s (which I am quite
pleased with, and keep in perspective that each one is unique) best
block/bird/saddle position for a solid warble is not the best position
for most of the rest of the notes on the flute.
Additionally, Michael “Searching Bear”
Smallridge, further commented after reading an advance copy of this
Appendix:
“Thanks for the warble info.
With all this information and my experiences with my flutes, I can
come to one conclusion. Nobody knows why it happens or how it happens.
More so on the latter. Lew Paxton has exact dimensions that causes it,
as Lew would, but I find them to be incorrect for mine. Maybe it's a
weather thing. Atmospheric pressures? Also, as far as the drones go, I
tend to make my drones slightly off key from each tube. You stated 30
cents. I go about 10 cents. This would get me the cyclic phase.
But,,,,,,, I created an F# of African Mahogany, if wood matters, and
both tubes are precisely tuned exactly the same. I would assume it
would phase cancel each other out but it warbles better than any of my
other drones. You don't even need to try to create the warble. It just
does it!
All my drones, however, seem to
warble. Knowing quite a bit, or apparently just enough, about music, I
made my first drone knowing and understanding the phase cancellation
effect. Being in the studio recording all these years I actually
picked up something!
This F# I spoke of seems to
shoot down the phase cancellation theory. On the single tubed flutes,
I have noticed that a sharp cutting edge pretty much destroys the
possibility of warble. Many flute makers go for this sharp edge. But I
find, at least in my flutes, the very opposite. I have actually made
flutes that will not jump when you over blow! I like that. Some folks
don't. They feel they are getting robbed of the extra note. All I tell
them is to take all their fingers off the flute; there is your octave
note. (At least in the 5 hole version). I have played many a flute
that was just too hard to keep from jumping. I hate when that happens.
Especially when you are not ready for it! I also must add, and I
believe you were quoting me, that I have had several flutes that
warbled in the construction phase only to lose it after dipping the
flute. Figure that one out???
All I know is that in my flutes
the angle of the window (attention to the back side of the window on
the bottom - not the cutting edge) and the placement of the totem is
the most critical requirements for the warble. The edge of the totem
(be it the inside of the chimney or no chimney) must line up with the
bottom of the angle inside the flute. So the totem may cover a slight
bit of the hole on the nest. As well as the blunt cutting edge.
I'm not sure about the Nick in
the cutting edge though. Mine, as far as I know, are not nicked. I
would think this would cause a bit of a rasp sound. In closing, all I
can say is most of the flutes I create (70%) warble during
construction phase and I really am not trying to create it. I do know
where to place the totem in relation to the window to get mine to
warble. That is if it is going to warble I know once I try to get the
warble, I won't be able to............... Wa do” (Crawford, 4/02)
In a phone conversation with Lew
Price, Lew states that while he personally is not attracted to this
effect, it is a result of a flutes tendency to over blow. To increase
the tendency of a NAF to over blow, given equal diameters, a change in
the ratio of the length of the air chamber to the sound chamber can
contribute to this tendency. This is best accomplished by lengthening
the air chamber. In addition to an increase in the length of the air
chamber the next important variable is the angle of the bird/block
chimney and the shape of that chimney, i.e. the length of the sides; the
bird/block variables are open to experimentation with the important
objective being that of reducing the induction of outside air into the
air stream as it crosses over to the lip or edge. (Crawford, 5/01).
One flute builder emailed me that he had crafted a flute that warbled
“very, very loudly and the speed of the warble was quite slow. After I
dipped the flute for the finish, the warble was gone!” [see
Michael Smallridge Comment above]
R. Carlos Nakai sent the following to me in response to an inquiry on
this topic:
“In actuality, the warble sound
which is sounded at the all closed position only on all five and six
holed flutes is, to my experience, merely an indicator that the sound
producing mechanism is well made and is correctly positioned for
optimum air flow from the air chamber over the block and directed by
the saddle/bird mechanism against the distal edge of the body tube
hole. The oscillations of air movement coincidence with the Coriolis
effect and the standing sine wave in the body tube helps to make this
effect possible. That’s all, no mystery as my 1985 air pressure smoke
tests have shown!
As an effect, if one only played
the flute’s tonic pitch then the warble effect would be a useful
embellishment for modulating that singular pitch. The variations of
air intensity in effecting a more or less pronounced and sometime
faster or slower warble is also an indicator of effective use of
embouchural air control by the flutist and adds to the quality of the
resolving pitch. In
more cases than not, the subsequent quavers/vibratos that are
performed at various stages of one’s performance are matched to the
warble so upon returning to the resolving pitch, if it is the lowest
one, will be the use of the warble rather than the vibrator. Simple
but difficult in practice!” (Crawford, 4/02)
I have two drone flutes and both
of these flutes exhibit a warble. Only one of these flutes is
constructed in such a manner that I can blow down either bore,
individually, as well as both together. Neither bore, individually, will
produce a warble yet a warble is created when playing both bores, as a
drone, in the fundamental. I have talked to a few other owners of double
flutes who also have commented that their drone flute also warbles.
The drone warble then appears to be the result of an oscillation between
the tones produced in each bore created by the fact that each bore is
not quite precisely tuned to the other. My tuner did show a difference
of about 30 cents (100 cents for a full 1/2 step to the next note)
between each bore of this one “A” drone NAF.
What is clearly happening with the drone warble is termed a “beat
frequency: which results “from the interference between two sound waves
of slightly different frequencies. The frequency of the beats will be
equal to the difference between the frequencies of the sound waves.
Since the beats will disappear if the two frequencies are made identical
[Conversely, it is unlikely that the beat frequency can be perceived
once it’s velocity gets above 30/second], the phenomenon is useful in
the tuning of musical instruments. Beats can occur between the
fundamental of one pitch and a higher harmonic of another as well as
between the two fundamentals” [a tuning technique used by some players
of stringed instruments]. (Randel). Ed Wapp, in an earlier paragraph,
also offered a similar explanation.
This same explanation may also hold true for all mono flutes, and helps
to explain the differences in the warble speed described in different
flutes in an earlier paragraph; the differences simply being differences
in the frequencies of the secondary tone being produced.
However, an understanding of the beat frequency concept being a physical
explanation for the warble still leaves the mystery of how this effect
can be induced by construction into the Native American Flute.
The “drone effect” has led me to believe that something must be
happening at the splitting edge (distal edge of the sound chamber hole)
to create, in effect, a balance of some type between the fundamental
note and an overblown note (whether another fundamental note of a
different pitch or simply some higher harmonic) and or possibly even a
co-existence of two air streams. Whether this is due to a part of the
air stream being delayed (thousands of a second), which could occur by
the splitting edge being angled) or possibly compressed, or the angled
windows used by Michael Smallridge or caused by the splitting edge
possibly being nicked (or angled) somewhat, or for that matter some
other as yet undiscovered explanation, is unknown to me. It is to be
hopped that some future researcher will be able to resolve this issue
with clarity (and quite possibly R.Carlos’s explanation already
accomplishes this).
I can comment, that two of my warbling flutes have noticeable nicks at
the “splitting” edge, when viewed with magnification; both Timothy
Nevaquaya’s and Doc Oliver Jones flutes have this characteristic (Doc
Jones’ flute also shows the “splitting” edge to be slightly angled
across the opening). While I do not know if this is the sole reason for
these flutes to Warble, it does cause me to speculate that there might
possibly be several different and correct explanations as to how to
induce a warble into a flute.
As to how one sets out to specifically create this effect I can only
point you in the direction of Doc Jones, Doc Payne’s’ Lew Prices’,
Michael Smallridges’ and Ed Wapps’ observations as well as my own
regarding the “drone effect.”
A “closing” comment of curious interest: French craftsman during the
19th Century (1800’s), when building organ flue pipes found it to be
important to have certain pipes (referred to as Celeste) constructed in
two ranks with one turned slightly sharp to create what was referred to
as an undulating sound (a.k.a. beat frequency and Warble). (Randel,
1996)
Footnote 1: The author, Tim R
Crawford, considers this topic to still be a “work in progress” and
welcomes any additional information that anyone would like to share ( windwalekr1@mac.com )
Footnote 2: Portions of this text were originally used in a presentation
on this topic at the first INAFA (International Native American Flute
Association) held at Kent State in June of 2001. During the closing
ceremony of the convention names were drawn of those that had entered a
fund raising raffle for INAFA; as fortune would have it my name was
drawn for the Doctor Oliver Jones Warbling flute that is described
herein.
Footnote 3: This is an unabridged copy of an abridged version which
appears in my book, “Flute Magic: An Introduction to the Native American
Flute”, 3rd edition, Rain Dance Publications, 2003.
Citations
Conlon, Paula. 1983, “The Flute of the Canadian Amerindian.” Master’s
Degree Thesis-Carleton University.
Crawford, Tim R. 1999, Personal correspondence from Lew Paxton Price,
10/26/99
-------Phone conversation with Dr. Richard W. Payne, April 12, 2001
-------Phone conversation with Lew Paxton Price, May 6, 2001
-------Personal correspondence from Edward Wapp, 7/01/01
-------Phone conversation Dr. Oliver W. Jones, February 7, 2002
-------Email from R. Carlos Nakai, 4/2/02
-------Email from Michael Smallridge, 4/3/02 & 4/5/02
Hensley, Betty Austin, 1990 “Thurlow lieurance Indian Flutes”. Kansas:
nap.
Payne, Richard W., 1988 “The Plains Flute,” The Flutist Quarterly,
Volume 13(4)
------- 1999, “The Native American Plains Flute”. Oklahoma: Toubat
Trails Publishing Company
Randel, Don Michael, 1996. The New Harvard Dictionary of Music [8th
edition]. Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University
Riemer, Mary F., 1978. “Instrumental and Vocal Love Songs of the North
American Indians.” Master Thesis-Wesleyan University.
Wapp, Edward R., 1984 The American Indian Courting Flute: Revitalization
and Change. Sharing a Heritage: American Indian Arts. Contemporary
American Indian issues Series No. 5, Los Angeles: UCLA, UCLA
Publications Services Department. |
