text:
Talk:Serpent (instrument)

Removed text
Removed text:

, and eventually evolved into the saxophone

I don't think that's accurate. Certainly one of the Sax family (I forget which) was noted as a competent serpent player, but I think it's a stretch to say either the serpent or ophicleide was a direct ancestor of the saxophone. Willing to be proven wrong of course! Andrewa 05:24, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Serpent sighting
It might be a little silly, but I spotted a serpent being played in the ensemble in one of the scenes in Pride and Prejudice (TV serial). anybody else have any sightings? --W0lfie 01:36, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
 * A woman used to attend Tubachristmas events in the southern New England area and play the serpent. I haven't seen her recently. Counterfit 05:52, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * In the 1956 film The Case of the Mukkinese Battle Horn (starring Peter_Sellers, Spike_Milligan and Dick_Emery), the eponymous instrument appears to be a serpent. Heraldica (talk) 21:17, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know why it's taken me 14 years, but I've added a sentence to the film page! — Jon (talk) 11:38, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

I recently saw a serpent in a Depeche Mode video. I unfortunately did not make a note of which one and when I looked for it later, I could not find it. Will update here when I do. In a semi-related note, the music video for Everything Counts features a shawm, even though the sound is produced by a synthesizer on the studio recording. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riaanvn (talk • contribs) 07:30, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

 * @Riaanvn the music video for "Frontier Psychiatrist" by The Avalanches features the serpent. Perhaps we need a § In popular culture Jon (talk) 01:25, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

I am adding a new subsection, where we can stage the edits. Once we have 3 good entries, we can transfer to the main article (and leave the less notable or incomplete entries in Talk). Riaanvn (talk) 08:49, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

In popular culture

 * In the 1956 film The Case of the Mukkinese Battle Horn (starring Peter_Sellers, Spike_Milligan and Dick_Emery), the eponymous instrument appears to be a serpent.
 * A serpent is being played in the ensemble in one of the scenes in Pride and Prejudice (TV serial).
 * The music video for Frontier Psychiatrist by The Avalanches features the serpent.
 * The International Tuba Euphonium Association adopted the serpent as its emblem when it was first established (as T.U.B.A.) in 1973.
 * The Alien (soundtrack) to the 1979 film features the serpent for when the alien Xenomorph appears.

The saxophone/serpent discussion
Andrewa is correct that the saxophone did not evolve from the serpent. In fact (not an apocryphal story), the saxophone came about after Adolphe Sax experimented with an ophicleide (Charles Sax was a prolific ophicleide maker) by putting a bass clarinet mouthpiece instead of a cup shaped ophicleide brasswind mouthpiece on it. The resulting sound (try it) is remarkably like the modern saxophone. Sax subsequently modified the ophicleide adding more keys and making modifications to its shape, resulting in the saxophone family. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yeodoug (talk • contribs) 23:25, 2006 June 2 (UTC)

Alien
Jerry Goldsmith used the serpent in his score to Alien. It's sometimes part of the orchestral fabric but, every now and then, it gets a solo! Gingermint (talk) 21:08, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

 * Thanks, I just found it on the Internet when googling, and saw your edit on this page after an entry to section In popular culture. Riaanvn (talk) 08:59, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

characteristics
This section seems very confusing to me. I think it could be written better. I have never played a serpent, but I was a dulcian player, and also played numerous other Rennaisance instruments starting about 30 years ago. Anthony Baines in his books describes the serpent very well. Perhaps his books could be used as a reference for the unique characteristics of the serpent.

As I understand it, the lower hand supports the instrument and therefore the three fingers used are in the reverse order compared to straight woodwinds such as recorders, clarinets, etc. This section in the article could express that idea, but as it stands, it does not.

Just pointing it out. Nice to see such an article in Wikipedia. I am not prepared to do the editing. I read and make suggestions. Thank you.

69.166.29.13 (talk) 14:39, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Contrabass ("anaconda"), Tenor ("serpent") and Soprano ("worm").
The article is confusing at this point. The normal serpent is a BASS instrument, not a tenor. This section needs to be amended. I am a reader of Wikipedia and I rarely edit things, except for the few little grammar things I see. I don't rewrite much of anything. I am just suggesting that there is a problem here. I have played Rennaisance instruments for 30 years. Perhaps one of the editors will sort out this obvious error and re-do it. 69.166.29.13 (talk) 14:57, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

However, later models added keys as on a clarinet
"However, later models added keys as on a clarinet"...

I think that is midleading. What sort of clarinet? Maybe the earliest clarinets made by Denner, but not the modern clarinet. Many people reading this article will think that the serpent had modern key systems added. The serpent had keys added, yes... but they were like the keys added to the Dulcian, and the Crumhorn. Thank you. I am not amending the article, just suggesting repairs to it. I was involved in old music for 30 years. Recently sold my Dulcian and other inmstuments after health issues. So, just looking at articles here on Wikipedia, and suggesting ways in which things could be improved.

69.166.29.13 (talk) 15:10, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Relation to cornett
The first sentence says the serpent is not related to the cornett. This is followed almost immediately with a sentence saying it is closely related to the cornett, though not descended from. Suggest a different word than "related" in order to clear up the contradiction. 24.217.34.210 (talk) 22:51, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I wonder if the first one is a reference to the Cornet (with one "t"), but if so, that statement should go after the one saying the serpent is related to the Cornett (with two "t"s) as a clarification since "cornett" and "cornet" are nearly identical words but refer to two different instruments not related to each other. — al-Shimoni  (talk) 06:47, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I suggest using language similar to Britannica: "It was probably invented in 1590 by Edme Guillaume, a French canon of Auxerre, as an improvement on bass versions of the closely related cornett." 2600:1700:30D0:2390:653E:2E87:3261:814E (talk) 02:41, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * This page regarding the lizard clearly places it as midway between the cornett and the serpent: https://www.music.iastate.edu/antiqua/instrument/lizard 2600:1700:30D0:2390:9CBF:3620:43AD:A277 (talk) 18:29, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

I've copy-edited the opening paragraph, which should avoid too much detail, and then provided an explanation in the Characteristics section, with the ref from Clifford Bevan's Tuba Family book. As one of the few references that goes into the serpent's history in detail, and re-reading the chapter, the History section really needs a good re-write and could be considerably expanded. Douglas Yeo has more to say about the serpent too, in various journals (not just his website). If nothing else we need to at least mention the late 20th century English revival of the instrument propelled at first by Christopher Monk and other members of the London Serpent Trio. I don't have much spare time right now but I'll try and make a start in the next week or two if nobody else does :-) Cheers—Jon (talk) 03:56, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Modern revival
The article barely mentions Christopher Monk, who possibly even deserves his own page(?). History section needs a "modern revival" section, covering his work, the English Serpent Trio, revival of interest spread to Europe and North America (Doug Yeo, others), use in historically informed performance practice, and so on. Dumping this here as a note-to-self, or in case someone else notices it and wants to get started.—Jon (talk) 00:10, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Anaconda
I've added CC-BY photographs of the truly stupendously large 1840 restored contrabass serpent (sometimes called the "anaconda") from Musical Instrument Museums Edinburgh to Commons, ready for deployment here at some stage (1, 2). Good refs in Bevan's Tuba Family (2nd ed.), the Cambridge Encyclopedia of Brass Instruments, and Doug Yeo's Illustrated Dictionary. — Jon (talk) 11:50, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Playing technique, historical repertoire
For some reason (probably an excess of enthusiasm combined with its lack of citations) some of the material from earlier revisions has been removed, covering historical repertoire, playing technique, methods, fingerings in particular. I'll have a go at re-introducing it with citations (Myers, Baines, Bevan, Yeo, etc.) Jon (talk) 01:53, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

"Worn (instrument)" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Worn_(instrument)&redirect=no Worn (instrument)] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. TartarTorte 19:45, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes that was me, sorry - a silly typo.—Jon (talk) 06:40, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Not a "brass" instrument
The third sentence in the lede is ridiculous: "It is named for its long, conical bore bent into a snakelike shape, and unlike most brass instruments is made from wood..."

A "brass" instrument made from "wood"? The Hornbostel–Sachs classification	is 423.213; there is no "brass" category in Hornbostel-Sachs. The instrument category is: an aerophone with an enclosed air column that is set into vibration directly by the player's lips. Most such aerophones are, indeed, made of metal, usually brass, but some are made of wood or other materials (e.g., bone).

A "brass" instrument is an instrument in this category that is made of brass. Other instruments in the category share characteristics with brass instruments, but are not themselves "brass instruments"; the serpent is one of these. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.43.253 (talk) 20:18, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Serpent (instrument)


text:
Talk:Sarrusophone

Photo
For everyone's convenience, a photo has been added to this wikipedia page. --Kschwerdt514 05:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * (It was later removed -- Rsholmes 16:47, 8 December 2006 (UTC))

What size sarrusophone is that? That should be indicated under the picture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.192.200.169 (talk) 00:42, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Sarrusophone


text:
Talk:Sampler (musical instrument)

What about the layman?
Please explain to me what a sampler is and how it works in practice. This is an encyclopedia, is it not? (done?, but can still be expanded?)

Agreed, it also needs further details of the Akai range and some inaccuracies in that section correcting. I intend to do this (and update the Thomas Dolby Page which is what should have led me here!) JDM

Comment from someone else: ''NB! I searched for "sampler" in Wikipedia, believing that an article on the subject would give me an introduction. (done?) However, this was not the case - this article tought me nothing about how a sampler works. Poor work - please fix!''

I feel like while this article has some pretty solid technical information in regards to sample rates and such, that kind of thing would be better handled in seperate entries - it's simply too much for the layman, as noted above, and beyond the scope of this general article. Same goes for the mention of wavetable soundcards/tracker software - relevant as a mention, sure, but a complete chronology? not so much. Also this article is highly POVed... i.e. 'gritty punch' in E-Mu section. Tremspeed 08:47, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

 * I agree. There are terms like 'bits per sample' and 'kHz' all over the article without any attempt to explain how they attribute to the quality of sample playback. Also, some depth into different methods of storing samples (PCM, etc.) would be useful as well as how technology has improved over the last 30 years (ATRAC, AAC and what-have-you). sugarfish (talk) 02:11, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Software sampler section needs fixing
An interesting article for the most part, but still needs some work, IMO. The software sampler section is highly POVed / unsourced. Here the section I think needs some reworking:

"Unfortunately, most vendors of software based samplers have taken serious shortcuts that limit the potential of these products. For example, most "soft-samplers" lack sample editing, sample recording capability, top-flight DSP effects, and resampling. While these products are significantly easier to use than typical hardware samplers, their ease of use stems at least partially from the fact that their capabilities are nowhere close to those provided by real samplers. The "soft-sampler" term itself is really a misnomer, because in only a few cases do these products actually sample. Soundbank players would be a more accurate and less misleading term for most of these products. For people that require the creative possibilities and workflow only a true sampler can provide, there are fortunately some real software samplers available."

"Unfortunately" is an inherent opinion. In this context, words such as "most" and "top-flight" are inappropriate unless you have some sources to back these claims up. "Easier to use" than hardware samplers? Possibly, but this is an opinion. Do we have a source such as a survey of professional musicians? "...only a true sampler... some real software samplers..." etc, etc... ???

Regarding the term "soft-sampler" being a misnomer, I happen to agree, but this is somewhat subjective, as there are no "official" definitions on which to rely. The phrase "only a few cases", is probably inappropriate unless a source citation can verify this.

A term I've heard more often used than "soundbank player" is "Rompler", a combination of ROM+sampler. Again, this should be presented as an alternative form, not as an authoritative definition, IMO.

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

I can't speak for all the software products listed, but Kontact is clearly mis-labeled as a "soundbank player". It certainly has the capability of creating original sampled material - the entire point of a sampler. Kompact, however, is a good example of a "soundbank player".

Jboer 02:04, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I totally agree with the comments about softsamplers (or whatever we want to call them) - the current section is biased and miseleading. I moved from hardware to software samplers in 2000 - from an Akai S5000) to (then) Emagic's ESX24 - and I don't have any idea why that should be concidered to be less than a sampler - you sample a sound and throw it at the sampler and play it to your hearts desire. That's what I did witht he S5000 and that's what I do with ESX24 (rev.II). I do agree that there's much "rompling" going about - the attraction to (and fascination of) sampling your own sounds is perhaps on the decline, but I don't think the technology is to blame here.

I also agree that the Software Sampler section is heavily biased. More accurate than only two categories, you could draw soft samplers into three major abilities: sample playback, instrument/preset creation from samples, and sample recording.

- Those which have only sample playback abilities could most accurately be called "soundbank players." - Those which can play back samples and create instruments/presets from samples recorded elsewhere I think can still be considered samplers. If you record audio in your DAW or waveform editor (see note below) and can drop those samples into your sampler to create a new instrument/preset, I think that qualifies as a "sampler." This category constitutes the majority of soft samplers. - Those which can do all three are samplers which most closely mimic hardware samplers. However, I don't think that the existence of this third category means you have to exclude those in the second category from also being samplers.

 * Given the fact that many software samplers are used as plug-ins within a DAW or sequencer host application, the ability to record in the sampler itself is less important because you can record in the host and import into the sampler. You can look at it either way -- either the soft samplers are lacking a feature, or they are streamlined for the production environment they are generally used in. I think to paint all soft samplers that do not have the ability to record as deficient is as misleading as not mentioning the difference exists at all.

Of particular interest is the fact that in the description of a sampler at the beginning of the article it mentions sample playback and manipulation, but not sample recording (indeed, a mentioning of recording samples can hardly be found at all throughout the article). So why is such heavy emphasis given to the recording of samples in the Software Sampler section? (Pushing the products that can record, perhaps?)

So, I think there is a significant difference between soft samplers which do and do not record and this should be noted in the list of samplers, but I think the bias should be addressed. I think "soundbank players" needs to be limited to those which do not allow the user to create their own banks/instruments/presets.

66.92.94.102 16:26, 19 September 2007 (UTC) Josh

I agree with all the comments above, today software samplers are much more powerfull than hardware samplers; also, halion, ableton sampler and kontakt are real samplers and for the rest, I don't know them, but taking all the biased and wrong information, it wouldn't be strange that some of them were real samplers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.236.181.204 (talk) 11:53, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

 * Well, had a go at balancing this section118.33.245.156 (talk) 16:37, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Akai S-nnnn Details
As a one-time owner of the S950 I know that many of the features of the S1000 first appeared on the S950 - timestretch, crossfade looping, etc. Some of them may have been on the S900 too. I'm sure by the same token that there are many other inaccuracies in this article. It would be great if someone would do the research and fix these issues. Also, there is a lot more detail to the Fairlight section that would be of interest, and there are some key dates that I would like to see. Dates make an encyclopedia useful, in that you can learn about the first of something, or the first time something happened, etc. sugarfish (talk) 02:06, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

List
I think someone needs to clean up the list a bit. Both Roland and Akai have long list. It's not consistent from one list to the other. --70.142.59.164 (talk) 12:10, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

 * Which list are you referring to? Piano non troppo (talk) 12:25, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

= Hybrid synths = In the historical overview section the Kawai K series is named in a list of hybrid synths. While later models may be hybrid, the 1987 Kawai K5 (first in the 'K' series) was not. It relied entirely on additive synthesis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.198.80.167 (talk) 23:17, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Genres associated with samplers
There's a few genres that often make use of samplers (hip hop, industrial, etc.) It would be good to mention these genres in the article -- could someone familiar with this help out?

I think this info would most likely fit in the opening section to be consitent with the guitar and drum kit articles.

MrEricSir (talk) 02:10, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:07, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Renoise 2.6.png

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:49, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Renoise 2.6.png

Sample Libraries vs One Shots
There's a definite split between the world of sample packs and multi-sampling. It seems strange this is never acknowledged anywhere on this page. By rights there should be a separate page about sample libraries and multi-sampling.

Moved non-sectioned, unsigned topic from top of page
Please add a section on the evolution of hardware samplers to software. Trackers (octamed, fastracker, impulse tracker) Unity DS-1 SoundFonts Battery Kontakt Ableton Sampler SFZ DecentSampler Halion The list goes on...

Most people have dumped their hardware for software solutions.

title: Talk:Sampler (musical instrument)


text:
Talk:Ride cymbal

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Costinritter.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Sound
Dimensions help determine the sound of the cymbal, but the materials used to make said cymbal, process in which it was made, as well as weight of the cymbal all provide a different overall sound. This section could be further explained. (Costinritter (talk) 01:54, 6 September 2016 (UTC))

title: Talk:Ride cymbal


text:
Talk:Rhodes piano

fenderrhodes.com
Can somebody tell me what makes this site a reliable source? It looks very self published to me, though the facsimiles of the manuals are okay, as somebody can verify them by looking at the printed originals. Ritchie333 (talk)  (cont)   14:18, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

I researched and wrote most of it together with inventor and creator Harold Rhodes himself as well as Joe Zawinul among others back in 1996. As you can see we have numerous approvals and praises from both the Rhodes family as well as many other prominent people in the Rhodes history, if you read through the site. I still have contact with people who worked with Harold Rhodes at the factory as well as many of the prominent artists playing Rhodes. I've played and worked with Rhodes pianos for 40 years, and am the Rhodes Supersites lead historian since nearly 20 years. Many of the facts and sources on the Wiki page are completely wrong and full of guesses. I won't waste any energy in trying to correct all, so please be aware you are spreading lots of disinformation to many people wanting to know about the Rhodes. I see no reason for this and I think is is just very sad.

Frederik Adlers www.fenderrhodes.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fregot (talk • contribs) 02:14, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

I've been working with the Rhodes for almost 40 years. 18 years ago, in 1996, after extensive research and contributions by Harold Rhodes himself, Steve Woodyard, Mike Peterson, John McLaren and others from the company and factory, I also together with James Garfield founded the Rhodes Supersite. Among significant people I've been in contact with are Chick Corea, Joe Zawinul, George Duke and many, many others. I'm running one of Europes more famous workshops serving between 50-100 pianos each year all over northern Europe. I'm a official service center for Major key ( The original factory in Fullerton ), Rhodes Music Corporation ( The Mark 7 ) as well as the new Vintage Vibe pianos. My articles have since nearly 20 years been published in music magazines over the world. Besides talking to the inventor and his closest men, all of the significant musicians I have met through the years, I also have a vast collection of manuals, memorabilia, all the old Fender catalogues, archives of Keyboard Magazine and Down Beat. It is with sadness I read the Rhodes Piano page here on Wikipedia, since it never has been as bad as it is today. Nearly ever sentence contains mistakes and wrong facts, I'm afraid. I have no wish to go into arguments about this nor have I the time or desire to go into the complicated process Wikipedia uses to change contents and question what's been published. Many of the sources and references cited in the text have "borrowed" or distorted facts and whole sentences from my writings and the www.fenderrhodes.com. Hopefully this will be corrected by you pople who I guess strive to keep Wikipedia a great source of true information and facts. I will post a corrected version of the present text. You can do as you wish with tit, but it will be of much better use for your readers. Fregot (talk) 10:58, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

 * "Many of the sources and references cited in the text have "borrowed" or distorted facts and whole sentences from my writings and the www.fenderrhodes.com" Then you need to take it up with the authors of those sources - Wikipedia just references what has already been printed by professional publishing companies with a good reputation for fact checking and accuracy. Anyone can write anything on a website and claim anything they like - it does not follow that it is true. Do you own Harold Rhodes' trademarks? Are you an official representative to his estate? I suspect not. Charging in like a bull in a china shop and calling other editors "liars" is a great way to get blocked, and for your changes to disappear. Also, your recent edits introduced several basic spelling errors I have had to fix. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   12:36, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

List of bands
Please add Vince Guaraldi who uses a Fender Rhodes on "Heartburn Waltz" and many other of his Peanuts recordings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.26.41.122 (talk) 02:36, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Done. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   08:45, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Model 55?
I recall helping my dad set up a Rhodes some time in the early 1980s, which means it was likely before the Mk. V. It did not have the bars between the legs that I see in the image of the Mk. V, although I'm not sure if that was a universal feature. The case was clearly marked "Rhodes 55", and I recall this referred to the model, not the particular piano itself. Does anyone know anything about a Model 55?

I also recall trying to get the legs to screw into the sockets on the bottom of the piano was almost impossible. The legs screwed in at an angle, as you can see in the photos, but the socket was designed so that angle was not obvious. It took multiple attempts to get the screw aligned with the bolt, the first attempts always resulting in crossed threads. I remember being amazed at how hard it was, far beyond anything that made sense given that it was a screw and a hole.

This weekend I found my washing machine's trap is set behind a panel with three even more annoying mis-aligned holes, which are conveniently located just high enough off the ground that you cannot fit the 1/4 inch socket over them. I assume they hired ex-Rhodes engineers.

Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:57, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

 * I've had great difficulty getting hold of information about models from the late 70s onwards - people seem to just talk about the Suitcase and Stage and leave it at that. I personally tended to use a Wurlitzer instead of a Rhodes for gigs as I could (just!) pick the former up single handedly and put it in the back seat of a car. The EP Forums might have answer to whether the 55 was an officially recognised name, but finding a reliable source (such as a trade sheet or advert) might be a bit more taxing, as nobody (broadly construed) seems to have much love for anything that followed the Mark II. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  12:10, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

 * I've looked in all the obvious online sources and found nothing so far. And when I say it was marked "55", I do mean that, I recall it was embossed into the case, it wasn't a sticker or anything like that. That said, it looked exactly like the Mk. II as imaged here, especially those *^&* legs. A submodel perhaps? Or Canadian branding? Maury Markowitz (talk) 13:39, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Bingo! None of this is mentioned in the article, do any of the references mention any of these subtypes? Actually, the Mk. II doesn't seem to be mentioned at all! Maury Markowitz (talk) 13:44, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * It was in the article and reliably sourced (see changes), but appears to have been deleted (see above threads - perhaps I should have done a blanket revert on Fregot's edits but that wouldn't have been nice), anyway it's back now. As for the other models, the fenderrhodes.com site has got scans of sales brochures and trade ads, which are absolutely fine as sources to document specific models. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  14:02, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Reminder: Talk Page Guidelines
Please review the Talk Page Guidlines. Note:
 * *Stay on topic: Talk pages are for discussing the article, not for general conversation about the article's subject (much less other subjects). Keep discussions focused on how to improve the article. If you want to discuss the subject of an article, you can do so at Wikipedia:Reference desk instead. Comments that are plainly irrelevant are subject to archival or removal.

Thanks. 842U (talk) 14:08, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

 * We are talking about the article. There's clearly a whole section missing, the Mk. II isn't mentioned at all, the the 54-key version isn't either, which is precisely why I asked in the first place. Wasn't that clear right from the start? Maury Markowitz (talk) 21:03, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

 * There's stuff about the MK II and the 54 back in the article now; if there's anything still missing, shout., Maury's comments showed the content he was looking for had been deleted after the GA review without me noticing, so removing the discussion (and then edit warring over it!) was not just silly, but actively preventing an article from being improved. Please don't do that again. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  14:37, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rhodes piano. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110928214251/http://www.gearwire.com/rhodes-returns.html to http://www.gearwire.com/rhodes-returns.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:19, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Wurlitzer comparison is wrong/misleading
"while the Wurlitzer produces significant harmonics when the keys are played hard, giving it a "bite"."

That's not what the quoted article says. The Rhodes itself produces "significant" harmonics (whatever that means, that's not a good word) when played hard, giving it a bite. That's why people like them. The article quoted says out-of-tune harmonics and distortion on the Wurlitzer gives it a bite. Sounds like a similar effect to the Rhodes, but moreso. But I'm not an expert, have only played a Rhodes, so I didnt change the article. As it stands it's wrong, however. Technically right, but it's like saying, while comparing apples and oranges, "while apples are fruit" as if that differentiates them. No, they both are. 122.148.184.131 (talk) 05:44, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Are you sure? The source says:
 * In contrast [to the Rhodes], the Wurlitzer tended to have more bite and, when played hard, the enharmonic partials and increasing distortion 'barked' at the listener.
 * That sounds to me like the source is saying the Rhodes does not have this "bite". I don't know much about either Rhodes or Wurlitzers, but it looks like the article reflects the source correctly to me. Popcornfud (talk) 11:07, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * That sounds to me like the source is saying the Rhodes does not have this "bite". I don't know much about either Rhodes or Wurlitzers, but it looks like the article reflects the source correctly to me. Popcornfud (talk) 11:07, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * That sounds to me like the source is saying the Rhodes does not have this "bite". I don't know much about either Rhodes or Wurlitzers, but it looks like the article reflects the source correctly to me. Popcornfud (talk) 11:07, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

 * Yes I'm sure. Not sure why youre commenting here if you know nothing about the subject. 122.148.184.131 (talk) 00:51, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but if you're the one who is saying the article is wrong, you're the one who needs to find sources showing that it's wrong. Otherwise we can't change the article. Popcornfud (talk) 09:29, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Toy piano
Might be interesting to note the similarity between the tone producing mechanism in the Rhodes and that of a toy piano -- hammers striking metal rods. Indeed, unamplified, a Rhodes sounds quite similar to a toy piano, albeit much quieter.

Would also be interesting to include a close-up photo or two of the actual rod/pickup mechanism, and maybe a mention of how the instrument is tuned. 74.95.43.253 (talk) 01:35, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * If you can find a reliable source that is doing the comparisons, drop off a link. We can't make the comparisons ourselves, we can only publish what others have written about it.  Dennis Brown - 2¢ 01:37, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Notable players
Surprised Richard Tee wasn’t mentioned… 2600:8801:281A:F87E:1038:7F7F:F252:E595 (talk) 06:30, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Rhodes piano


text:
Talk:Metallophone

Assessment, stub class for now
I replaced the assessment tag. This was assessed this as a top-importance article for the Wikiproject Musical Instruments, being a common percussion instrumente. It is a start class article, but needs references. If you improve it and want reassessment or need help or have questions, please drop me a line.Jacqke (talk) 02:51, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Additional Images
While I see the need for additional images, I reckon there would have to be a lot of them in order for it to be of any use—a glockenspiel looks rather different from a celesta. Unless this article were expanded very much, I'd actually prefer to see it without any picture at all. EldKatt (Talk) 16:10, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

title: Talk:Metallophone


text:
Talk:Melodica

picture
you need to compare the melodica's size to something.

-krum0786

That trivia is entirely pointless and almost painful to read. --John Lunney 20:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I removed the picture with children. It looks kind of creepy with all those black squares.--Yovi (talk) 21:14, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * That is not a valid reason. -- Escape Orbit (Talk) 22:25, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Article needs a sound clip.

Notable?
The Rock band "The Hooters" are named after the melodica. Their music features plenty of melodica. The notable instrumentalists section doesnt seem to be exactly full of notable instrumentalists, rather ones that have used the instrument. Using the instrument doesn't make you a notable instrumentalist. As it is, the list is long and a pain to look at and should be trimmed down to only those who actually are notable. Glassbreaker5791 02:51, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

anyone else think that the history and origin should be noted?

I just made an edit to notables (wasn't signed in, sorry! Just realised) as I agree that list was WAYYYY too long. The list, in my opinion, should be of musicians of some notability who used it extensively (eg Augustus Pablo) or musicians of great notability who used it for more than about 5 seconds - a 5 second tweet on a b-side doesn't count (eg Paul McCartney). My musical and melodica knowledge is good but not great, so I just culled a bunch, and it's gone from WAY too long to just too long. Please reinclude any I've unfairly removed, but I'd prefer an inclusion based on people who have actually done something, not just because you like them. Moonman1 (talk) 11:29, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree it's too long. Perhaps it would be good to require citations showing that a particular artist is a notable melodica player.--Rsl12 (talk) 15:50, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I did a quick search for references to melodica players. The "Eve, 2007" that I used is a terrible reference because

1) it's on the spam blacklist 2) it's not a particularly reliable source, and 3) because it's a list of "people who have been recorded playing the melodica", not a list of "notable melodica players".

Hopefully someone (maybe even me when I have time) can get proper sources and make the list more accurate.--Rsl12 (talk) 16:20, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

 * First off, associated content is self-published, i.e. the author submits the article and the "editor" posts the article. The author receives money depending on the number of hits. Second, to base notabity of instrumentalists based on a source that does not meet source standards fails my sniff test, at least. I do think that it is very hard to verify this sort of thing, but that does not justify linking to a blacklisted source. Stealthound (talk) 14:05, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Notable Players Again
I've tidied up this section, again. Like many lists, it attracts garbage; there were many non-notables without links, or links that went to the wrong person, or just went to the band article because the musician themselves aren't notable enough to have their own.

It still needs pairing down. The list should be notable players, not just a musicians who occasionally have been heard to play a melodica. Many of the musicians listed here make no mention of the melodica at all in their article. -- Escape Orbit (Talk) 23:00, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

 * Yah. When I think of "notable", I think: If someone asked me to name a top dozen exponents of an instrument, who would come to mind? Who would be useful to know for someone introducing themselves to the subject? E.g., with guitar, would I mention Les Paul, Jimmy Page, Julian Bream? Absolutely. Something essential about guitar craft from each. Would I mention Britney Spears? Did she develop or popularize a playing style? No. Did she significantly contribute to the development of the instrument? Is she in the top 50 guitar solos of all time? No. Did she influence someone who is in that list? No. Aren't there, in practice, better examples of every aspect of guitars that could be mentioned? Surely. Following that general reasoning, there would be no reason to include Spears. The same reasoning would apply here. If there's not something outstanding about an artist's use, then let's find another artist who is outstanding!

 * I removed the list entirely. A list of almost 40 names with no citations, no references, no explanations about their contributions. Wiki articles on instruments shouldn't have lists of people who once recorded with an instrument. Piano non troppo (talk) 10:38, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Notable Players list is back. This isn't my baby so I don't care one way or the other, but if it's going to be here it should be accurate. The melodica featured in Cake's _The Distance_ video isn't actually in the song--that's a synthesizer. You can tell by the portamento, which a melodica can't do. I have no knowledge of whether or not they use melodicas in other songs, but it ain't in that one despite what's in the video. --68.45.162.2 (talk) 02:44, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately I think this section will need constant attention, as people will keep adding trivial examples of their favourite band once playing a melodica. -- Escape Orbit  (Talk) 08:59, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Types
These don't really seem like types of melodicas, but rather specific models produced by a couple of different companies:  The MyLodica uses a similar mechanism, but is constructed with wood. SPECIAL EDITIONS - In 2008 Hohner Germany released its 50th Anniversary Jubilee Limited Edition Melodica. Made in Germany. In Ruby Red with Black Keys (and includes a Melodica Tube and mouthpiece, along with a carry case).

The rest of the list is varieties of melodica, not models. To pull out the dreaded car analogy (evil cackle), it would be like this:

Types of automobiles:  Sedan/saloon Station wagon/estate Pickup truck SUV Ford F150

Toyota Camry

Suggest removing the last two items (which I'll do in nobody complains and I remember it later). Nasch (talk) 20:49, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Notable players
Okay, so we seem to have established that we need some rhyme and/or reason to the list. In my opinion it needs to be in a similar form to the list of guitarists in the Wah-wah pedal article. Below follows the list as it stands, for its members to either be included in the new "verbose" version or eliminated. --Bobyllib (talk) 17:05, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * How does that look? The list below is mostly redundant to Melodica in music now I think about it - if it's only on one or two songs rather than a defining instrument of the artist/group (e.g. Oasis) it definitely belongs there not here.
 * Rearranged the list below into three categories, to make our little wikiproject a bit easier. -- Bobyllib (talk) 21:27, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Currently in article

 * Augustus Pablo
 * Hermeto Pascoal
 * Damon Albarn of Blur, The Good, The Bad & The Queen and as 2D in the virtual band Gorillaz
 * Rob Hyman and Eric Bazilian of The Hooters
 * Bernard Sumner of Joy Division and New Order
 * Jon King of Gang of Four
 * Jonny Fox (a.k.a. Itch) of The King Blues

Probably going in article

 * Monty Alexander
 * Donald Fagen of Steely Dan - definitely notable, and if I can find the paragraph in my SD biog he's going to be included and cited.
 * Stevie Wonder

Not sure / currently not in article

 * Ian Curtis of Joy Division
 * Rick Davies of Supertramp
 * Jack DeJohnette
 * Ben Folds
 * Zach Gill of Animal Liberation Orchestra and Jack Johnson
 * Tom Gray of Gomez (band)
 * Mark Hart of Crowded House
 * Joe Jackson
 * David McWane of Big D and the Kids Table
 * John Medeski of Medeski Martin & Wood
 * Julia Nunes
 * Jared Gomes of Hed PE
 * Jeremy Michael Ward of De Facto
 * Bernie Worrell of Parliament/Funkadelic
 * Ollie McGill of The Cat Empire
 * Dan Haseltine of Jars of Clay
 * Joe Zawinul of Weather Report (can be heard on the track Birdland)
 * Christopher Bear of Grizzly Bear
 * Yann Tiersen
 * Billy Preston
 * Missy Higgins
 * Richard Galliano (apparently plays the Vibrandoneon, according to its article (RIP))
 * Michael Stipe of R.E.M.
 * Mike Patton
 * John Lennon of The Beatles - all I can find on Lennon playing one is that he played one a bit in a documentary.
 * Paul "Bonehead" Arthurs while with Oasis - not that notable. one song (IIRC)
 * Alison Goldfrapp of Goldfrapp - not mentioned in article
 * Andre Matos - not mentioned in article
 * Peter Murphy of Bauhaus - not mentioned in article. also, needed to link to Peter Murphy (musician).
 * John Frusciante - not mentioned in article

Thanks for doing this, Bobyllib. I broadly agree with your categorisation, but I don't think we need a list at all. Notable players should be a mention of a select few who are particularly skilled and noted for playing the Melodica. Musicians who, if someone was wishing to hear the instrument at its best, would be the ones to be recommended. Musicians where the instrument is specifically mentioned in their WP article. Occasional players, musicians who are not generally known to be players of the instrument, or musicians who are not widely known themselves, should not be mentioned. It's not the job of this article to itemize every musician who has once picked up a melodica, any more than you'd expect to see a list of occasional strummers on the guitar article. -- Escape Orbit (Talk) 09:11, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I agree. I mostly wanted to sort out who actually was notable. In addition to what you said, the idea of having a list is, as I think has been mentioned, is redundant whilst we have the Melodica in music article. -- Bobyllib (talk) 11:22, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Tonguing
Hi, All.

The article says "Notes played on most woodwinds can be started with a percussive tongued attack; however, on a melodica this is not usually possible". I've only ever played one model of melodica, a plastic, one-octave one made for kids. On it, tonguing and trills are easy. It's hard for me to conceive of a melodica on which things things would be "usually" impossible—let alone how they would be impossible. Will someone enlighten me, or shall we change the article?

(Random tidbit: John Lennon plays a melodica at New York City's Plaza Hotel in the Beatles documentary The First U.S. Visit.)

President Lethe (talk) 00:06, 15 April 2010 (UTC) Tonguing is an essential and easy part of melodica playing, I have no idea how someone could come up with such an idea. Source: Just played the melodica with plenty of tonguing, very easily. The melodica men on youtube have tutorials for tonguing,etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:9b1:26ff:fe00:b821:9ef2:b574:a49 (talk) 21:00, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Interesting. Must investigate that next time I play mine. FYI the John Lennon tidbit was in this article a while ago, but was removed as it wasn't particularly notable. -- Bobyllib (talk) 00:40, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Melodica. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130926132112/http://www.patmissin.com/history/melodica.html to http://www.patmissin.com/history/melodica.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:30, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

the device's name
Per an old online article by one Pat Missin, "Melodica" was the Hohner trade name for their 1950s introduction of a line of "small hand-held breath powered reed organs." Though the device had been around for some time, it was apparently Hohner that made it a commercial success. While "melodica" may have become a generic term, it's likely still Hohner's property at least by coinage and usage.

FWIW, Missin also notes similar instruments such as the Harmoniphon (patented 1836, and another under the same name in the 1850s) and the Sears-Roebuck blow accordion with "ten buttons or keys, plus a pair of bass and chord buttons." Western free-reed instruments Weeb Dingle (talk) 15:06, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Mentioning that brand name and the general name being the same should probably be included in the article. That makes for a more structured article, as opposide to the reference of the whim of the manufacturer. It's not the whim of naming the instrument, but just that of naming the model, as the instrument name can't be used for that. (A Diamonica is a clear case of this, since the other model is the Minimonic.) Mysha (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:26, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Problems with "Comparison with other reed instruments" section
I have removed this section again. It confuses free reed instruments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_reed_aerophone with woodwind instruments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodwind_instrument. It is the same as comparing a piano with a rebab (single string fiddle). If this comparison is worthwhile, it should be added to the free reed page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_reed_aerophone. Further critique below:

- "Melodicas are unusual because unlike most other reed instruments, they make use of a piano keyboard rather than a specialized fingering system using holes and/or buttons"

Not true. Out of the three most popular free reed instruments (mouth organ, accordian, pump organ), two have piano type keyboards. No free reed instrument uses fingering holes etc - the free reed decides the pitch, not the column of air ala saxaphone, clarinet etc.

- "This allows the player to use a single finger to play any one note of the instrument's range, rather than requiring several fingers to play individual notes, as is the case with most other reed instruments."

Again this is not true, as above.

- "The player can then play chords by using their remaining fingers to press additional keys, and thus, sound additional notes. In other words, whereas most reed instruments such as saxophones or clarinets are monophonic, the melodica is polyphonic"

Mouth organ, accordian, and pump organ are all polyphonic. Two of them have piano keyboards.

- "Additionally, for a beginner, a melodica can play accidentals more easily than a reed instrument, which requires special fingering."

Again, this is as relevant as comparing a xylophone with a cowbell. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.101.170.68 (talk) 23:12, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

intro edits
Not sure what is trying to be said in the fourth paragraph of the intro. Also pretty sure 'mouse' is supposed to be 'mouth'? I don't know enough about this to start fixing it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikevanoost (talk • contribs) 19:26, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Recent move
I think the recent move from to Keyboard Harmonica (Melodica) suffers from several defects. In light of the issues above, I'm going to revert the move and related edits to the article. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:52, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) The instrument's WP:COMMONNAME is "Melodica"; it started as a specific instrument by Hohner, but now it is used generically (although the Hohner is by far the most used model).
 * 2) The new name violates several naming guidelines: the second word should not be in caps, and the disambiguator is unnecessary.
 * 3) The move of an article that existed under this name for more than 18 years, and exists under this name in many interlanguage Wikipedias, including DE and Commons, ought to have been discussed here first.

0 or more hands
The instrument can be played with or without a tube. It can be played single-sided or dual-sided. These two facts are unrelated. Separately, it's possible to use a type of bellows to replace the mouthing of the instrument, but that means you can't control the timbre that way. Basically, that's like using a metal hook to play the snares of the guitar: You get sound out of the instrument, but it's rather an amputation, no longer the complete instrument. I guess this could all be fitted in "Styles of play", but "Two hands" is a rather inaccurate and incomplete description. Mysha (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:43, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Melodica


text:
Talk:Lasso d'amore

Late Late Show
I think Craig Ferguson sometimes twirls one on the Late Late show... AnonMoos 01:40, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Bugle
Why is there a link to "Bugle". It's not relevant in any way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.233.158.204 (talk) 17:16, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

title: Talk:Lasso d'amore


text:
Talk:Kora (instrument)

Untitled
Hi - Could there be a list of Kora builders? mschraud —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.82.9.85 (talk) 21:26, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Image and link
hi - I can get you a better image probably - I made a website www.malika.org.uk where koras are sold. Maybe the pics there aren't very good but I can get her to send a better one if needed. let me know (skoria at gmail).

Also - the link to allmusic is broken.

 * Please sign your posts on talk pages per Sign your posts on talk pages. Thanks! Hyacinth 06:27, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

 * More images are always welcome. Audio files and videos of playing would be even better. You can upload them here, and type in "Kora" when the page asks for categories. If I don't spot it and add it to the article, someone else will. Thank you for the offer, 82.32.18.117, it's great that you are willing to contribute to Wikipedia! And since you posted this in 2005, apologies for the very belated reply. HLHJ (talk) 03:47, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

The section on kora players being called "Jali"s is misleading. Yes, traditionally all kora players were Jali (griots, the hereditary musician class), but so are n'goni, balafon, and djembe players (if they are in fact born into a griot family). Jeli doesn't refer only to kora players, but to all musicians born of that class. In Bambara, for example, the word for a kora player is korafola, and there are no doubt other words in other languages (In Wolof for Senegal, in Jula for Guinea, etc). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.34.178.172 (talk) 03:41, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

 * Thank you, 75.34.178.172. I've fixed that. HLHJ (talk) 03:47, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

The range chart should go down to the F right below the bass clef staff, that is the lowest note the Kora can play when tuned to F, which is the somewhat "standard" tuning, though it varies significantly from player to player. Nonetheless, the chart on here should reflect the most standardized tuning. Andreuso (talk) 17:26, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Official links
See WP:ELOFFICIAL for the specifics on what constitutes an official link. I doubt that there exists a link that would meet WP:ELOFFICIAL criteria for Kora, but certainly not gravikord.com. --Ronz (talk) 17:53, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Move?
Shouldn't this page be renamed "Kora", and the disambiguation page be moved to "Kora (Disambiguation)"? It seems like the most detailed article on the list, the one which people will most likely associate with the word "Kora", and the one which most people would search for.

The two articles which may contest with it are, in my opinion Kora, Katihar and Persephone, but these have less of a claim to the "Kora" article:

 * Kora, Katihar
 * This article already has an "ordinary" (no parentheses) name.
 * It is often referred to as Korha - even in the article itself.

 * Persephone
 * This article also has an "ordinary" (no parentheses) name.
 * The word "Kora" almost never refers to Persephone. She is occasionally called "Kore" or "Cora", and she probably appears on the disambiguation page only because these names are similar to "Kora".

So should this page be moved to "Kora" ? - Oisín(Message) 10:38, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Tuning systems
I realize there are more than one traditional tuning, and that there may not be a fixed reference pitch. But still it would be very informative to give approximate string tunings.2A01:E35:2E06:77B0:A5E3:A175:8C9A:C83 (talk) 11:25, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kora (instrument). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110207212146/http://toumani-diabate.com/ to http://www.toumani-diabate.com/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110724214502/http://www.abbaye-keur-moussa.org/musique/instruments/kora.php to http://www.abbaye-keur-moussa.org/musique/instruments/kora.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:47, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

The Range chart needs alt text
Currently the range chart has no alt text, so there is no way for a screen reader user to get anything from the image. Also I think the instrument's range should be mentioned in the article text.

I know hardly anything about the instrument so can't add this info myself. KaraLG84 (talk) 19:21, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Kora (instrument)


text:
Talk:Gayageum

Under construction
I'm still going to add more sections to this article, probably techniques and styles.

postmoderncore 10:45, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Great work so far! -- Visviva 11:01, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

I wonder if more modern use of the instrument should be mentioned. http://koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/culture/2013/04/135_134124.html mentions that it's ideal for blues because of the nong-hyun technique.. Larssmith (talk) 04:43, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

History
I think according to Samguksagi, the history of Gasil goes like this. One day he heard someone playing the chinese instrument Zheng and says that why do we need a chinese instrument to play our music? We have our own culture. So, to better suit the taste of the korean music at that time, he ordered his craftsmen to make the korean version of the zheng under his supervision. Later he named the instrument gayatgo to distinguish between the instrument he invented in the Gaya kingdom and the Zheng. The Hanja for Gayatgo is comprised of the word 'Gaya' for Gaya kingdom and 'Go' for stringed instrument, implies the instrument is originated in the gaya confederacy.

In a different reference, a legend says that the arrival of zheng to korea. A chinese king has two rivaling daughters who both wants to inherit a 25 string Se. In a struggle they broke the instrument into two pieces of 12 and 13 strings each. The king later banished the fighting daughters from his kingdom. The younger daughter with her 12 strings part of the instrument flees to korea while the older daughter with her 13 stringed part of the instrument went to japan. Thats why the gayageum has 12 strings and koto has 13 strings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.53.20.98 (talk) 18:34, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Switched back to earlier image
I reverted to the image which was in this article as of Special:Permalink/620610987. That image had been in the article for seven years without any opposition. Additionally, I think it's a better image in visual terms because the subject has high contrast with the background. In contrast, the other image features a person wearing white clothes on a white background, and the editors who inserted it (and removed the old image) and keep blowing it up to very large sizes seem to be interested solely in promoting one specific gayageum player rather than contributing to Wikipedia in general. In any case, any uninvolved editor should feel free to pick another better image or even use both images if they feel in good faith that it would be an improvement. 210.6.254.106 (talk) 12:03, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

pun: Gay + age + -um
Traditional Korean Music isn't immediately perceived as harmonious, but it might have some deeper soothing effect, if one is tolerant towards it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:2149:821A:3100:F9E1:2DDA:4FE8:40F6 (talk) 22:48, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:07, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Vietnamese woman playing Korean gayageum.png

title: Talk:Gayageum


text:
Talk:Crash cymbal

What's a Fast Crash?
Guys what's a 'fast crash'? Is it a crash where after you hit, the sound goes away quickly? Hanz ofbyotch (talk) 20:30, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

 * Exactly. They tend to be thinnish and highly tapered, with little or no overtone if played towards the rim. My Wuhan 14" Fast Crash has quite a thick bell, capable of some lovely pianissimo ride patterns using a nylon tip (7N or even 9N or similar), but its primary function is as a rich full crash at moderate volume. Too fragile for power rock, use a rock splash instead for even moderately loud. Andrewa (talk) 20:39, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

photo has been added and more will come- Mikeh0303

Cracking
This section needs work... needs citations, contains many questionable statements.

But it's right in many ways. Cymbals often break because they are played badly, and crash cymbals are the most common breakages. But there are many reasons for this. One is simply that many self-taught beginners don't buy a splash until after they have already broken several crashes. They start off with ride, crash and hats, and their next purchase is a second crash for the other side of the kit, and then probably a china, by which time many have already broken at least one of the crashes. If they started with a splash it would go first! And some do.

This attrition is blamed by many drummers who know no better (and some drum shops who should and probably do know better) on wear-out. In fact modern cymbals rarely wear out if properly chosen and played. I fear that some drum shops encourage the wear-out myth because it enables them to avoid claims of defective cymbals (claims that are nearly always unjustified anyway, and would be rejected by the cymbal suppliers leaving the shop stuck in the middle), and hope that it's not because it also helps them to sell more cymbals.

In my experience cymbals break even more often because they are badly mounted, for example how many beginners leave out the plastic sleeve that's supposed to cover the mounting bolt, or one of the felts? We've even had a writer at splash cymbal recommend leaving out the felt between piggybacked (not stacked) cymbals, apparently unaware that this will probably damage the cymbals. (Stacks are fine, it's the stress point at the mounting hole that's the killer with unfelted piggybacks.)

Cracking does sometimes occur even with well chosen and played cymbals, and can sometimes be treated. My one-time teacher Alan Turnbull has a favourite crash he's played for years with a large triangular piece cut out of the edge to stop a split. It hasn't wrecked the tone. I might try to get a photo of it! And the legendery Paiste 602 Paperthins were famous for splitting, I notice the recent 602 reissues don't include them. I played a 16" and a 12" paperthin for years with no problems at all, but "Tony the Tuner" of Venue Music City branch claimed to have personally broken no fewer than three of the 18" Paperthins, and he was a very skilled player. They all broke not at the thin rim but at the relatively thick corner between bell and bow, which was a sharp corner in all the original 602 designs (well, except the flat ride of course) and sharpest of all in the paperthins.

Anyway, lots to do. I don't want to add my own WP:OR to the article. We need sources. Just hope the above may help to find them. Andrewa (talk) 06:36, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Crash cymbal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120629232408/http://zildjian.com/Education/Zildjian-101/Care-and-Feeding to http://zildjian.com/Education/Zildjian-101/Care-and-Feeding

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:33, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Crash cymbal


text:
Talk:Denis d'or

Description
Where can I find a detailed descripton of this instrument, or at least some reputable sources? How could electricity be used to modify the sound? Can someone please explain the sense of the following sentences?

--Doktor Who 08:50, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * But the most special feature was that Diviš (temporarily) charged the iron strings with electricity in order that the sound quality might be enhanced — "purified" so to speak.[...] Additionally, he installed a slightly sadistic gimmick so that, any time he wanted, the player could be given an electric shock.

According to http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/muwi/fricke/303sitter.pdf charging the strings with electricity was not possible until 1820. The author is quite convincing, since he argues not only from the sources (most of them were written much later) but from a historic standpoint. It seems like the Denis d'or was rather a gigantic piano-like thing with the extra gimmick of giving people an electric shock - a very popular joke in Barpoque and Rokoko.

The claim that the Denis d'or was the first electric instrument seems to be wrong, since there's no connection between electricity and music.

I can't change the article, though, my mothertongue is not English (I guess, you know that by now ;-)

91.5.228.190 (talk) 10:33, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Maybe this should be clarified by saying that Diviš thought the electricity would purify the sound, but he must have been mistaken. -76.21.65.206 (talk) 19:02, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Image
For your information: No painting, drawing, or photo of the Denis d'or is extant! — Editorius 15:08, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * This also goes for audio files. The only known prototype was lost in the 18th century, long before sound recordings were possible. --Enyavar (talk) 14:42, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Real?
Is this real? Badagnani (talk) 06:15, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Deletion
What is this, someone's homework. This article is rambling, without citation and looks like a precis of an essay someone wrote for school. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.200.107.179 (talk) 13:08, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I am the original author, and I am not a schoolboy. The article was exclusively written for Wikipedia and it is strictly based on the known historical facts (unfortunately there aren't many) and definitely not "rambling".—Editorius (talk) 20:17, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

 * Well, this is a very obscure novelty instrument built in only one prototype which only existed from ~1753 until ~1770. Its entry here is only justified by a dozen reports in music encyclopedias that claim it's the oldest electrical instrument... I edited the article to free it from heaps and heaps of biased adjectives; there may still be enough bias left to let musicians daydream about this mystical instrument's magical sound quality.
 * Also added a source that objectively compares all the reports of the instruments and tries to put them in context. The unfavorable claim at the end of the article is that the Denis d'or might have been "just" a very complicated unique clavichord with the "shocking gimmick". The inventor may still have been a genius both in construction and playing. --Enyavar (talk) 19:11, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Little evidence to support 'electric' claim
Sounds neat, good to know about. The instrument itself is an interesting topic. But I'll suggest that the speculative claim that this was "possibly the first ELECTRIC musical instrument in history" is not encylopedic (especially at the top of the article!) ( A claim, so far, backed up by one cite behind a paywall). It was hard for anything to be ELECTRIC in those times. What would the source of 'electric' power be? (Interestingly, battery inventor Alessandro Volta was only born in 1745 ... the same year the Leyden jar first showed up!) This instrument isn't mentioned in the Divis article, possibly for good reason? Grove is a great source on music, but maybe not on technology. Probably a good idea to stick with the known facts and save the speculations until more sources are found. Twang (talk)
 * Hi first, the Denis d'or is mentioned in the Divis article. Strg+F is your friend. As I wrote before, there is little known facts about the instrument, and I also don't like the claim that it's practically the grandfather to all electric guitars. Because it almost definitively wasn't. I'm however surprised that the Clavecin électrique so far hasn't been mentioned in the article. I'll change that. --Enyavar (talk) 06:14, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
 * * The Divis article is not cited. * The Divis article mentions two sources of static electricity. 'Electric' instruments cannot be powered by static electricity, which hasn't the longevity to power anything. * The paragraph which states: It is disputed whether the Denis d’or sounds were also produced by electricity or if it was an otherwise acustical instrument like the clavichord, apart from misspelling 'acoustical', is not sourced. * The 120years article (most of that site is reputable) says: Several accounts describe the instrument as an electro-acoustic instrument where the strings are vibrated using electro-magnets. 120years knows better, and says so in the last paragraphs of the article. At that time, there were no power sources ... not even batteries ... to make electromagnets possible ... not until Volta invented batteries, decades later. In short, any claims for the instrument being 'electric' ... apart from giving shocks to the lucky guests ... are speculative and unsupported by existing (cited or not) sources. The first line of the present article is a farce. Twang (talk) 06:28, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm not sure what you're saying in the first bullet point, so please restate if it's important. The second point I'm not arguing against: Powered instruments weren't invented until more than a hundred years later, as far as I know. After having read up on it, my personal opinion on the matter is that Divis was indeed charging his instrument with statical energy. That might then have produced some effects that were designed to awe the audience, and most of all the player who got shocked. That way, Divis convinced everyone that his "invention" was a powerful and "electric" instrument. Given what we know of how the 18th century regarded the novelty of electricity, the weirdo was guaranteed to impress at least some audiences with that. Which is how we even know about this instrument. Your third point was, apart from not correcting an obvious typo, a good one, which is why I moved that external link to the corresponding claims. Your last point seems to be that the 120years-page adds additional information; in my opinion however it's just a very condensed translation of Sitter. That link may solely be kept because not everyone will want to read through Sitter's short essay, as that one is in German. Finally, what is wrong with the statement "in the broadest sense, possibly the first electric musical instrument in history"? In the broadest sense, Athens was the first democracy in history, too. --Enyavar (talk) 08:29, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
 * You're so right about Athens. The answer to what is "wrong with the statement...." is nothing, so long as it's not misleading. Your 'personal opinion on the matter' may be right, and if the article makes it clearer that Divis was a P.T. Barnum, not an instrument-designer, it's better for it. Twang (talk) 23:06, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Denis d'or


text:
Talk:Conga

Untitled
I was under the impression that "macho" and "hembra" were the names for the two drums in a set of bongos. I'm pretty sure that the different tippes of congas are requinto, quinto, conga and tumba. —Preceding unsigned comment added by User: (talk • contribs)
 * In Cuba people call the tumbadoras macho, hembra and tercera. A quinto is a special kind of tumbadora. ROGNNTUDJUU! 11:57, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Re-disambiguation re; drum/dance
Don't know why the new first para.(re: dance vs. drum) is back in here, since it re-ambiguates. I'm taking it back out.--Silverlake Bodhisattva 19:33, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

 * In that case, the article needs a link to a disambig page at the top. --Perimosocordiae 02:06, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I am trying to do a bibliography for this cite but i cant unless i know who the publisher is 1.145.102.83 (talk) 05:30, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Playing the Congas
"Muffled tone: like the open tone, is made by striking the drum with the four fingers, but holding the fingers against the head to muffle the tone (which combined with the first is called the tumbao - played in most salsa and rumbas today)."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the tumbao is principally composed of slap and bass notes, not open and muffled notes. James barton 10:08, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I suppose there are many ways to play it; the one I learned first went heel, toe, slap, toe, heel, toe, open, open (Dworsky 1995). It could be written more broadly, that is certain. Bruce H. McCosar

We need some disambiguation here: the sequence desacribed immediately above is clearly the son tumbao, and is described correctly, but differs substantially from the low drum (tumbador) part in rumba, which of course is played with rumba clave and as I learned it, (and in any version I've ever heard played) has no slaps, and consists of basses, opens, and "timekeeping" notes, (heel/toes or touches played, in some cases, as ghost-notes)and occasional muffs as ornamentation.--Silverlake Bodhisattva 18:24, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

The statement is a bit misleading. It is correct when applied only to the open (and muff) tones in the tumbao, but the tumbao as you both note consists of more than just that. A tumbao in English would be called the groove and often in bands is defined not only by the conga parts but the bass part (as in bass guitar) as well. Bass guitar parts are often closely derived from clave. So the tumbao is a driving groove that has considerable variability (as do all grooves) though there are standard tumbao conga patterns commonly used in salsa, cha cha cha, rumba etc. The problem is that the above statement makes it sound like a tumbao consists only of opens and muffs, whereas typically that is not the case. It is a rhythmic pattern where the opens and muffs in it are the tones that carry over the band and are thus lending character to the music, but the entire tumbao as noted above is a whole rhythmic thing with bass, heel-toe, rhythmic notes, ghost notes, and others that serve to keep the music going.

One other thing: I made the statement in a recent addition that Dezi Arnaz played an Ashiko drum. This is easily seen in films of him playing babalu on I love Lucy or on a .jpg of one of his old album covers. (Ashikos are cone shaped with straight sides. They are not convex like conga drums) A reference has been suggested as needed for this statement. But the album cover .jpg is obviously copyrighted and not suitable for Wikipedia. How would one reference this?

-- My apologies if you took this the wrong way; I am new to Wikipedia and am editing by feel, more or less. The statement, to me, seemed to demand some sort of proof. If I could not, myself, find the proof, I turned the problem over to someone much more knowledgeable. And, in your widely read and experienced reply above, you have proven my estimate correct. You know more about this than I; you should find a source to cite. If not a book, if not a picture, how about a webpage that shows the picture, or compares the drums, or discusses the problem? Again, I apologize if I inadvertently gave offense, because it is clear you are much more qualified than I to discuss this point. Bruce H. McConar

I'm not offended. I'm pretty new to the wikipedia scene myself, so I'm not very experienced with how some of this is done. So I asked. Yeah, the webpage answer is a great idea. I'll look around for one. Thanks for the reply, Bruce. By the way I love the way the conga article is coming along. Not too long ago it seemed pretty sparce.

I'm not certain how much of the "tumbao" discussion needs to be here specifically, rather than in, and linked from, discussions of the musical genres involved. My understanding,(more from teachers than specific text sources) is that in modern popular forms (salsa, songo, timba) the "tumbao" is often extremely loose in its structure, shifting among the instrumentation (congas, bass, trap drum player, left hand of the pianist, etc.) chaging in its "density", and "pushing" against the clave if a clave is still even being explicitly stated.

On the other hand, in "folkloric" rumba, (particularly in stricter "Havana-style" as contrasted with a more improvisational "Matanzas-style") the other players tend to want the tumbao player to keep flawless time, (to maintain the clave/tumbao/conga "lock" clearly) but to not engage in substantial improvisation or ornamentation.Silverlake Bodhisattva 17:34, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Famous conga players
If we need to have this list at all, it should be limited to those persons who are famous for their conga playing. It should thus exclude Stevie Wonder and Richard Feynman. (Anyway, I read that Feynman played the bongos, not the conga.) TheScotch 09:05, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Revision
Somebody has to revise the version before it was shortened. The editor on November 21 deleted a lot of information pertaining to the conga drum without any logical reason. Can somebody please fix this mistake? Cancionista78 (talk) 02:48, 22 November 2007 (UTC)Cancionista78

There was a photo as well as lots of information that was deleted, someone should fix it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.239.190.106 (talk) 23:58, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Afro-Colombian
Could someone please finish that sentence? whoever it was that was writing it.Domsta333 (talk) 10:44, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

WP:NOPRIMARY
This should really be at conga (drum) per |Conga|Conga_line|Conga_(music) less than half of page views In ictu oculi (talk) 17:49, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Conga


text:
1982 in rail transport

January events

 * January 13 – The 1982 Washington Metro train derailment involves an Orange Line train in Downtown Washington, D.C. in the United States and kills three people.
 * January 26 – The Palace on Wheels luxury train begins to run on Indian Railways.
 * January 27 – The Bouhalouane train crash in Algeria kills 131 people.

March events

 * March 16 - An extension of the Namboku Subway Line in Sapporo, Japan, opens for service between Shin-Sapporo Station and Shiroishi Station.

April events

 * April 1 – A major railroad line service in New Zealand, officially operation transferred to New Zealand Railways Corporation from New Zealand Railways Department.
 * April 6 – Opening of the Wells and Walsingham Light Railway in Norfolk, England, at 6.5 km probably the longest public 10+1/4 in gauge miniature railway in the world.

May events

 * The last freight trains passed over the Dumbarton Cut-off.

June events

 * June 23 – The Tōhoku Shinkansen line in Japan opens between Omiya (near Tokyo) and Morioka.
 * June 25 – Opening of the Furka (Base) Tunnel (15.4 km) on the metre gauge Furka Oberalp Bahn in Switzerland between Oberwald and Realp.

July events

 * July 28 – Fire destroys the Harrisonburg, Virginia, offices of the former Chesapeake Western Railway, which had been merged into the Norfolk and Western Railway in 1954.

August events

 * August 2 – Helsinki Metro opens in Finland, the World's most northern metro.

September events

 * September 18 – The second stage of Brisbane, Australia, Suburban Electrification is commissioned between Bowen Hills and Shorncliffe, and also between Roma Street and Kingston.
 * September 19 – Final day of PCC streetcar operation in San Francisco before all routes began full time Muni Metro light rail services through the Market Street subway.
 * September 21 – Takabata Station in Nakagawa-ku, Nagoya, Aichi Prefecture, Japan, is opened.

October events

 * October 23 – The first of 46 new 85-foot stainless steel electric multiple unit cars (1-46) built by Nippon-Sharyo of Nagoya, Japan are placed in service on the South Shore Commuter Line by the Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District. These cars replaced Insull-era equipment dating back to 1926.

November events

 * November 15 – The Joetsu Shinkansen opens for service between Ōmiya and Niigata, Japan.

December events

 * December 29 – The Seaboard Coast Line Railroad and the Louisville and Nashville Railroad merge to form the Seaboard System Railroad.

Unknown date events

 * Robert Krebs succeeds Alan Furth as president of the Southern Pacific Company, the parent company of the Southern Pacific Railroad.

title: 1982 in rail transport


text:
Talk:Calliope (music)

Is it an organ?
Is a Calliope a type of organ, or not? If not, why not?
 * A calliope differs in no substantial way from an organ with one rank comprising only closed metal flue pipes. The fact that steam rather than cold air is the fluid is not a substantial difference. Organ pipes have varying air pressures - this is just higher than any of those. The acoustics of the pipes and the fact that each note has one pipe (rather than changing the pitch by uncovering holes in the sides) are the same. Conventional organs may have wooden pipes, open pipes, several stops, pedals and a swell chamber, but need not have any of these. (Theatre organs may - but need not - also have percussion instruments including drums, cymbals, piano, xylophone, glockenspiel, woodblocks, castanets etc, driven pneumatically from the keyboard.) Yes, it is a (pretty minimal) type of organ. --Hugh7 08:03, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Request for Pictures
Added picture of the Kitch Greenhouse Steam Calliope in action at The Ohio Historical Society. There is an interesting story on this instrument, which travels around Ohio for special events. This is my first photo, so I hope that I got it right. Lowellt 23:18, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

i added a picture the other day and now it is gone. can anyone tell me why, or what i did wrong? thanks Alandindas 14:42, 14 October 2006 (UTC)alan dindas
 * Perhaps it was copyright? --Hugh7 08:02, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Banner removed
There are three pictures now, and the 'image request banner' has been in place for two years. I think it can go now...

...gone!

EdJogg 14:57, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Range?
How many whistles did/do they have, and what was/is their range? Were/are they diatonic (~white keys, "natural notes") or chromatic (~white and black keys, sharps and flats)? I see the steamboat one seems to have 16, but can we see them all? The Kitch Greenhouses instrument seems to have about 30. --Hugh7 07:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC) It seems that calliopes don't have a fixed range, since they're quite little-frequently used.--221.1.27.213 (talk) 04:01, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Excellent question, just the sort of information we should be collating.

http://www.neworleansonline.com/neworleans/music/musichistory/natchezcalliope.html starts out The Steam Calliope is a uniquely American instrument, a 32-note steam pipe organ, but it doesn't say what the 32 notes are.

http://www.northweststeamsociety.org/Pages/ProjectsStationary/Calliope1/NWSSScalliope1.htm reads in part ''PIPES: Number: 26. Range: F sharp below middle C to G above middle C.'' F# to G inclusive chromatically as described would only be 14 notes! But if one of the octaves is wrong and the range is actually two octaves and a semitone, it would make 26, and be a far more useful range, similar for example to many glockenspiels.

My guess is the 32 note one is also chromatic, which would give a similar range to a standard set of pipe organ pedals, but presumably pitched higher.

http://chestofbooks.com/crafts/popular-mechanics/The-Boy-Mechanic-700-Things-for-Boys-to-Do/How-To-Make-A-Steam-Calliope.html describes a ten-note calliope, likely to be diatonic I guess... it tells you how to tune the pipes, but seems to leave the choice of notes to the constructor.

Watch this space... Andrewa (talk) 19:20, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Miner calliophones
http://www.minercompany.com/The%20Excursion%20Boat%20Special.html has a photo of a 43-whistle air-blown calliope, and the model number is CEA- 43 which I'm guessing is short for Calliope Electronic Airblown 43-note. They quote the names of a number of "steam" boats on which they've installed these instruments.

http://www.minercompany.com/CA%2043%20Specifications.html gives the specifications of a 43-note airblown calliope, 43 notes F to B, while http://www.minercompany.com/CA%2053%20Specifications.html is a 53-note version, 53 notes  C to E. http://haskey.com/johnh/calliope/index.html describes one of these and gives the bottom note as ''the 'C' below 'Middle-C' on a piano keyboard. ( 4' C if you are an organist)''.

From the number of pipes and the photos of the keyboards, all the Miner instruments currently on offer seem to be chromatic.

Whether an air-blown calliope is really a calliope or whether it's a calliophone seems an interesting question. Andrewa (talk) 20:00, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

http://www.bendermelodies.com/calliope_home.htm describes a 58-note airblown calliope, custom built by Miner. http://www.minercompany.com/Calliope%20Page.html claims that they have built the world's largest Calliope with 67 notes. Andrewa (talk) 20:25, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Steam calliopes
http://www.steamcalliope.com/calliope.htm

Some interesting snippets:

...the traditional Nichol style calliope with 32 notes...

...This is the largest Morecraft Calliope built, a 37 note instrument, and the second largest in the world next to the MISSISSIPPI QUEEN...

Progress... of course, just obtaining the information isn't enough, it needs to be presented in verifiable, encyclopedic fashion. Andrewa (talk) 20:52, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Repertoire?
What sort of music could they play? Anything ambitious? (eg prelude to Act 3 of Lohengrin? waltz from Gounod's Faust?) What sort of music was on the rolls and drums? --Hugh7 07:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC) The only example I know is Seventh Alloy by Wayne Lytle, which is quite hard to be said what style it is.--221.1.27.213 (talk) 04:04, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Air Calliopes
I can't confirm this anywhere else, but I believe there are many high pressure air calliopes in use. A friend of mine often plays one at a private railway museum. He certainly considers it to be a true calliope--just without the heat and moisture! Donincalif (talk) 00:20, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Refactor
I've rewritten the lead to answer some of the above questions, and present an overview. The rest of the article still needs a lot of work. The history section is probably the most important, since this is largely an historic instrument.

But there's lots of good stuff there. Andrewa (talk) 20:10, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

in fiction
Something_Wicked_This_Way_Comes_(novel) has a calliope in it as a significant plot devcice —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.231.178.239 (talk) 08:27, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

COI edit request
The information about the Mission Impossible music being played in three episodes of "Hawaii Five-0" is incorrect. Morton Stevens wrote the theme that is heard in those episodes. Walter Schaff wrote the music for the "Mission Impossible" episode. You can confirm this on IMDb listings for the programs / episodes in question. Thank you.

I should add that I corrected "Hawaii Five-0" episodes, dates, and actors' names before I watched part one of the "Mission Impossible" episode, did not hear the music, and checked the composer's name in the end credits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.186.166.48 (talk • contribs) 03:36, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I have notified the editor who added the content to the article. If that editor has not shared his or her views here by, say, the end of this month (October), we will simply remove the unsourced material. --82.136.210.153 (talk) 17:41, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
 * If the info I added was inaccurate, I have no objection to its removal. – Athaenara  ✉  17:02, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Calliope featured in a movie
Back when I was a kid in the 1980's I remember watching a 16mm film that heavily featured a travelling calliope. The calliope was central to the film, and if I recall correctly, the main character was a little girl. I would guess the film was about an hour in length, and probably made in the 1960's or thereabouts. The sound was in English. Despite my best efforts, I can find no trace of such a film now. I thought the word 'calliope' featured in the title of the film, but I could be mistaken - it was so long ago. Does anyone else remember this or have some way to track it down? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.64.20.67 (talk) 03:14, 16 June 2015 (UTC) I just remembered also that at much the same time I saw "The pigeon that worked a miracle" on 16mm. That dates from 1958 and the runtime is about an hour, so it makes sense that the film that features the calliope would be from a similar time and of a similar length. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.64.20.67 (talk) 03:33, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Calliope (music). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150707052453/http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjT7Bz0icSM to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjT7Bz0icSM

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 03:30, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Calliope (music). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070515073540/http://www.jmww.150m.com/Lindsay.html to http://www.jmww.150m.com/Lindsay.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:27, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Calliope (music)


text:
Talk:Biwa

Recent Edits
I recently made several large edits to the main page, mostly the biwa history section and a few small edits within other sections. Unfortunately I wasn't signed in at the time so the edits will appear to be anonymous, but I have based the information on essays written by prominent biwa players and my own experience as a licensed player. If you have any issues with the edits, please discuss them here.--Obakedake (talk) 02:31, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Change of title picture?
Looking at this page, the main/title picture at top of the article is of the gogen biwa from Nara, which is, as described in the article, a one-of-a-kind instrument. I have seen a few reproductions personally, but they are exceedingly rare (perhaps a few dozen in the world?), and far from a representative biwa. I'd suggest changing the main picture to a more common biwa, perhaps a Satsuma or Chikuzen. If I could obtain a copyright-free photograph of a typical biwa, would there be an objection to this change?Obakedake (talk) 04:10, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

The current title picture is of a Tang Dynasty pipa, why is it being used for the biwa? --158.143.185.119 (talk) 10:37, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Merge with pipa?
Pipa and biwa seem to be essentially the same instrument - the two names are just different ways to pronounce the same word. In fact, the title image on this page depicts a "Tang dynasty pipa". Are there any essential differences between a pipa and a biwa to warrant separate articles? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sinbios (talk • contribs) 01:46, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

 * They are related but completely different instruments. Completely different sound, shape, contruction, playing style (biwas use a plectrum, pipas don't), number of frets (the pipa has dozens more than the biwa), etc.  They are different enough to warrent seperate articles. An analogy would be the difference between a koto and a guqin, or perhaps a violin and a mandolin. --202.216.95.3 (talk) 06:43, 17 March 2009 (UTC)Obakedake

 * I agree with the OP. It's not different enough not to just put a "pipa in Japan" section on the Pipa page. The instrument was brought to Japan from China through korea in the Tang Dynasty, the first biwas were Tang pipas and evolved from there not separately. The fact that the name is exactly the same means its more like having two articles for To-may-toes and To-maa-toes because any tomato is just a variant thereof not some totally unique thing. Wiki already did this with the erhu and niko just fyi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.38.213.212 (talk) 20:24, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

 * I disagree with any proposal to merge biwa and pipa. They are two different instruments, in two different cultures, with different construction, playing styles, musical functions, and vastly different repertoire.

 * FYI, Wikipedia currently supports separate articles for "Guitar"; "Acoustic guitar"; "Electric guitar"; "Classical guitar"; "Flamenco guitar"; "Multi-neck guitar"; and a half-dozen others (at least) -- all of which, it could be argued, are just minor variations on "guitar".

 * Biwa and pipa deserve separate articles.

 * 74.95.43.249 (talk) 00:50, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Languages
Why is it that the Japanese 琵琶 page links to the English one in the "Languages" box, but not the other way around? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.185.161.246 (talk) 22:47, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

What's heikyoko?
It's mentioned several times in the article, but never explained... -- megA (talk) 17:37, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

 * Heikyoku (note spelling) is a Japanese traditional semi-classical music originating in the 13th century. It's similar in concept to the the troubadour music of medieval Europe.
 * I've added an explanatory footnote to the first occurance of the term in the article.
 * 74.95.43.249 (talk) 01:00, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

tunings
I suppose the Biwa in Kwaidan is tuned EBea (although my disc is NTSC it's still nearly a semitone higher than that). But what about fret spacings? I think it would be useful to the discussion to explain how such a fretboard generates the pentatonic scales and in which modes.

Evolved? or Devolved?
From the section "History":

 * The biwa came to Japan in the 7th century and it was evolved from the Chinese instrument pipa,...

The pipa has 26 frets, is played in virtuostic fashion with fingerpicks on all five fingers, and has had full concertos composed and performed for it, using both western orchestra and traditional Chinese plectrum orchestra accompaniments.

The biwa has 4, or occasionally 5 frets, is played in minimalist fashion with a single "pick" the size of a small frying pan, and is used primarily as a drone behind other gagaku instruments, or as an accompaniment for voice in folk music.

All in all, both the biwa as an instrument, and biwa playing style and musical function are far cruder and more limited in scope than the pipa and its tradition.

This doesn't really seem to meet the criteria for an "evolution" of the earlier Chinese instrument, but rather a regression to a more primitive form. To say biwa 'evolved' from the pipa is rather like saying the mountain dulcimer 'evolved' from the guitar or the archlute. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.43.249 (talk) 00:43, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Re: Evolved? or Devolved?
The biwa is not derived from modern Chinese pipa but from an early form of that instrument from the Tang dynasty. If you look at chinese paintings from that time you may notice people playing what looks like a gaku-biwa or less commonly gogen-biwa but no modern pipa.

It was in later eras that both chinese and japanese have started modernizing the pipa. However while the chinese have abandoned the triangular plectrum in favor of fingerpicks, removed moonholes, added more frets, started holding it vertically rather than horizontally and eventually replaced silk strings with metal ones, japanese kept all of these features in their biwa. (except for vertical playing position as some biwas are played vertically while others horizontally)

Instead they raised the frets and made them wider allowing for pitch-bending and producing a sitar-like buzzing sound. They also introduced thechniques like hitting the biwa's soundbox with plectrums's angles or rubbing the strings with it's base.

So in consclusion the biwa did not "evolve" directly from modern pipa, rather they only share a common ancestor. --83.29.77.152 (talk) 11:45, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Biwa


text:
Talk:Bazooka (instrument)

sound clip
A sound clip would be nice as well. – Adrian Lozano 14:02, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

"The bazooka has sometimes been confused with a different novelty instrument, the kazoo; kazoos have sometimes been referred to as "bazookas", especially in British English." No they have not, unless you count total dumbasses in which case you'd have to say pianos have sometimes been called plinky plonky boxes.

picture
we need a picture. what does it look like?

69.166.29.13 (talk) 15:02, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

 * It looks like a vuvuzela. --damiens.rf 13:32, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
 * A case could be made for fair use of this image in the article for the purpose of identifying the instrument, without diminishing the image's value to its originator. Just plain Bill (talk) 22:35, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Bazooka (instrument). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070208152328/http://users.aristotle.net:80/%7Erussjohn/burns.html to http://users.aristotle.net/%7Erussjohn/burns.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:51, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Bazooka (instrument)