==Range pictures==
A question:
I have under my homepage http://www.hut.fi/~tbackstr/ranges/ranges.html a list of the ranges of the most common orchestral instruments. The data and pictures and everything is collected and created by myself, and thus it is not under any copyright and could be used on this page. So, the question is, in which format and where should they be added?
If somebody whishes to do the actual work of copying the data, then please, go ahead... --[[User:Tbackstr|Tbackstr]]
:For information on uploading files see [[Wikipedia:Uploading images]] and [[Special:Upload]]. I would suggest then placing each image on the article of the appropriate instrument, and an example or possibly all at [[range (music)]], which has yet to be written. See also: [[Wikipedia:Images]]. [[User:Hyacinth|Hyacinth]] 01:55, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
===Harp===
Why isn't harp on it? Harp's pretty common (ok maybe not but it's important!) :)
* If you're talking about my page mentioned above then you have a good question. I admit, I don't know. It just isn't included. --[[User:Tbackstr|Tbackstr]]
Do you need to know the range? I think I know it...hmm 47 notes, with all the accidentals in between. The lowest note is the C three octaves below middle C and the highest note is the G three and a half octaves above middle C. At least I think so - I'll check later. [[User:dreamyshade|dreamyshade]]
----
==Earliest instrument and classifications==
the "earliest instrument" question has to be speculation, since there are plenty of music-generating devices (human bodies, hollow logs, etc.) that don't leave music-specific archeological evidence.
boy, i'd much rather see the aerophone/membranophone/idiophone/chordaphone/electronaphone as the prime division of instruments; "keyboard instruments" is a confusing category, since any instrument in it belongs to at least one other category.
maybe all of the classification should be move to the "musical instrument classification" section, and instruments should be discussed in general terms of sound production, tone quality, relationship of musician to instrument. any thoughts? -jp2
:I agree that the keyboard bit is a mess but I think that needs sorting separately. I ''don't'' agree that we should go over to -ophone classifications in this article - it's too scientific-sounding for an introductory article and will confuse many people. At least with "brass" or "woodwind" there is something familiar to hang onto. If the -ophones are going to be used people should be led gently to it later. By the same token I don't think it's an improvement that the little examples of types of instruments have been taken out - I think they were helpful. On a slightly different tack, the use of "[[tone quality]]" is an improvement of the previous spectral nonsense but oddly there is no linked article there - though there is a pretty short one at [[timbre]]: is that perhaps the answer? [[User:Nevilley|Nevilley]] 22:42 Jan 24, 2003 (UTC)
----
==Examples==
timbre link: nice idea.
i'm not averse to bringing back examples of instruments, but i would not want to see them in the current instrument family bullets; i'd be more apt to remove all detailed discussion of instrument families from this page and relocate such details to the "family" pages. a general discussion (instruments make sounds; sounds are affected in these fashions) might be a stronger gateway into the current referenced entries. [[user:jptwo|jp2]]
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed in any way by the Wikimedia Foundation or any of its affiliates. In fact, we fucking despise them.
|
