[go: up one dir, main page]
Jump to content

Talk:Flute

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Opening Illustration

[edit]

The caption under the first photo is wrong. The photo showns only Japanese and western flutes. Definitely not from "around the world" as it claims. Where are all the others, Asian, African American, European etc? Either the picture or the caption should be changed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.82.179.36 (talk) 20:14, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request April 2017

[edit]

Change image caption "Western concert flute with musical notes" to "Western concert flute on top of sheet music". "Musical notes" is just an inaccurate (imprecise) description (I'm a musician, I should know...) 69.165.196.103 (talk) 02:58, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Partly done: Strictly speaking, it's not inaccurate—sheet music does contain musical notes—but I agree it's imprecise (and potentially misleading, since it could mean notes about music). I'm not persuaded, however, that it's important to say that the flute is "on top of sheet music". In fact, the background seems quite irrelevant. So I just changed it to read "Western concert flute". If you really think it should mention the sheet music, feel free to reopen this edit request by changing the "answered" parameter from yes to no. And thanks for your help in improving the article. RivertorchFIREWATER 06:23, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, my though exactly (about it being irrelevant), but I proposed a rather conservative option since there is another, similar, image nearby with an almost identical caption. 69.165.196.103 (talk) 20:51, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Low B

[edit]

The article has the standard flute's lowest note to be middle C, but i've heard of flute players playing down to a B. I might be wrong, flute is not by principle instrument — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ironsolute (talk • contribs) 15:04, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps this is covered by the phrase "or one half-step lower, when a B foot is attached to the instrument", found immediately after the statement you cite?—Jerome Kohl (talk) 15:08, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Flute. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:42, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 10 March 2018

[edit]

Under the heading about the etymology: change "...the earliest quote cited by the Oxford English Dictionary" to "...the earliest quotation cited by the Oxford English Dictionary"

Why? Quote has been used/written as a noun, when the form of the word as a noun is actually Quotation. It was never otherwise, despite what common modern beliefs there may exist around usage of this word, just as with the erroneous use of Invite/Invitation in a similar manner. 94.234.33.3 (talk) 00:22, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Gnome de plume (talk) 00:39, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Murli Instrument

[edit]

I believe we don't need a standalone entry on Murli Instrument which is Sindhi name of flute. @Aziz Kingrani: Raise your concerns here before I merge it. --Saqib (talk) 18:21, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is it actually a flute, though? The New Grove article on Pakistan, by Regula Qureshi, says that murli is the same as the instrument called pungi or been, which is a reed instrument. However, the NG article "Pūngī", by Alistair Dick, does not include the name murli among the many alternative names for the instrument.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 18:30, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is earnest request that consider over the type of Murli Instrument which is different from flute. Murli instrument has three portions. single pipe+ swollen+ double pipes. it is different from flute and been. Flute is Bansri. Thus it cant not be merged in flute. See link http://www.dekulture.com/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=353 . --Aziz Kingrani (talk) 18:53, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sindhi name of flute is Bansri --Aziz Kingrani (talk) 18:58, 3 April 2018 (UTC) BEEN IS NOT PUNGI[reply]

This is BEEN

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMFng6sy1Hg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.188.19.167 (talk) 11:27, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Murli

[edit]

It is highly requested that there is a lot of different between flute and Murli. Flute has only single pipe but Murli has three portions. in starting single pipe which connected with swollen portion and then two pipes are connected with swollen portion.Thus It can not be merged in flute.--Aziz Kingrani (talk) 18:38, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is it like [[1]], then?—Jerome Kohl (talk) 18:40, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think Flute is duffernt from Murli, though it seems like Pungi, but sometimes I saw the Murli has construction as described by User:Aziz Kingrani. Jogi Asad Rajpar, Talk to me 19:13, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Several Indian writers and experts has mentioned it as Murli instead of Pungi. I think pungi is Punjabi or Hindi name. This instrument is mostly common and well-known as murli in Pakistan including India. Thus Murli Instrument should not be merged in any other instrument. --Aziz Kingrani (talk) 19:26, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In that case it is especially important not to merge the article into this one, since the murli/pungi/been is a reed pipe, and not a flute at all. However, I see no reason why the murli article should not be merged into the pungi one, if they are merely two different names for the same instrument. My own very brief acquaintance with this instrument was under the name been (also spelled bī ṇ). Fortunately, I was not required to enchant any poisonous snakes, but I did have to coax the reeds into playing properly.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 21:18, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I guess I made a bad call I would go with merging Murli article with Pungi as Jerome Kohl suggested. --Saqib (talk) 06:09, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So should I go ahead and merge Murli into Pungi? --Saqib (talk) 07:44, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see why not. The discussion seems to have reached consensus.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 16:24, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It is requested that undoubtedly there is some similarity between both instruments but from point of construction the Pungi or Punji is smaller musical instrument than Murli. In Sindh Pakistan Murli is used to construct in large size having three portions. where as Been is single reed musical instrument different from flute which is also called Alghoza. However, it is suggested that Murli should not be merged in Pungi or Punji.-- --Aziz Kingrani (talk) 20:25, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is getting complicated. When I look up "alghoza", both on Wikipedia and in the New Grove, I find it described as a double "beak flute" (also known as a duct flute), which is indeed a type of flute, not a single-reed instrument. Could you provide some reliable sources for us that would help clarify this situation, please?—Jerome Kohl (talk) 22:57, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Aziz Kingrani: You need to provide a RS which can verify your claims or I'm afraid I will have to merge it. --Saqib (talk) 09:45, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jerome Kohl: Since no reliable source was provided to backup the claims made by Aziz Kingrani, I've merged the Murli article into Pungi. --Saqib (talk) 17:33, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the notification. If a reliable source should be found, it sounds to me like it would only verify a difference in size. The instruments would still seem to be essentially of the same type.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 18:39, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Native American Flute

[edit]

The generic flute article associated with this talk page contains little information on the Native American Flute, except that the substantiated article is listed in the “See Also” section, with a brief history in the main flute article frontmatter/introduction.

I propose that this instrument type is significant enough that we need a summary section for it in the main flute article. I am hoping that a copy editor much more experienced than I may be able to do this, otherwise I may endeavour to do this myself.

The summary should probably contain, at the least, the following:

  • Brief general description in a couple of sentences;
  • Brief history;
  • Design and functional variations of different existing instrument models.

Any thoughts? Njsch (talk) 09:25, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Euler and flute acoustics

[edit]

Was Euler the first to give a correct explanation of how wind instruments produce sound? If this is the case, perhaps something should be added about it in "Acoustics".

See Euler's "Tentamen novae theoriae musicae" (E33) - Chapter I, sections 28-45. AresPi (talk) 11:04, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A recorder is not a flute

[edit]

The caption of the first photo is inaccurate 217.45.110.113 (talk) 07:42, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request December 2024

[edit]

I came across a research paper that found that many windpipes, flutes included, actually increase the risk of cancer. I was looking to add this information, but after edits were reverted I was recommended to come here. 2 in every 132 cancer cases are caused by windpipes. 207.163.34.239 (talk) 23:17, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That paper says that two wind players participated in the study and both had cancer. Both were former smokers. It's very, very far from claiming a causative link. Special-T (talk) 23:21, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Flute&oldid=1262969783"