Jump to content

Talk:Bagpipes/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

Early text

I have a request. If you write on a subject about which you are so obviously ignorant, as the author of this article obviously is, please do the research you have to do in order to make sure that it's accurate. I'm not going to fix this article, but I am mightily tempted to just remove it. Among its current problems: it makes it sound as though the Scottish Highland bagpipe were the only type of pipe in existence (there are many other types of bagpipe, e.g., the Uilleann pipes in Irish music, Greek pipes--the list is long; by no means is it obvious that pipes are most common in so-called "Celtic" lands); it fails to introduce such essential terms as "drones" and "chanter"; it fails to acknowledge the existence of the Highland pipe bands which are to be found in not just the countries listed but all around the world (I know a piper who played in a Montevideo, Uruguay pipe band!); finally, the remark about how uneducated tastes find bagpipe music is simply silly.

I'm breaking one of my own rules, namely complaining about an article instead of just changing it myself, but to change it, I would have to do the research, and I don't have the time right now. --LMS

Thank you for adding the /talk link. It didn't occur to me to do so, but if/when I do any more articles I will add such a link.

I am a newcomer here, but I carefully read the Wikipedia FAQ and editing instructions before making any changes. I further studied the Wikipedia policy before doing any but the most minor changes.

Nowhere did I see anything about "do[ing] the research you have to do". On the contrary, one of the points that was stressed on How to start a page (under the heading "Some thoughts:") was that

Full-blown articles are not required. Adding any (accurate, helpful)
information to Wikipedia is welcome!

The only claim to inaccuracy that you make is "it makes it sound as though the Scottish Highland bagpipe were the only type of pipe in existence". First, this article is not about all pipe instruments, but about bagpipes. Second, all the bagpipes I have ever seen (or seen pictures of) match my (incomplete) description. I have never handled a bagpipe nor thoroughly studied their special terminology. AFAIK, the Irish (and other Celtic) bagpipes all have a similar construction. Third, If the Greeks have a long tradition of bagpipes it is news to me, but I am not an expert. I specifically did mention Ireland, Wales, and Britanny as well as Scotland. Fourth, while I did not use the specific "essential" terms of "drones" and "chanter", I think I described them. It would seem that "drones" are the pipes that I said "played a constant tone" and that the "chanter" is the pipe that can be fingered to play a melody. That would make my description technically correct if not "music theoretically" correct.

History of this article:

I saw the word "bagpipe" in some article and decided that it should be a link. Then I noticed that the link didn't go anywhere and decided to write a short article describing what I did know, something of the construction (if not the terminology) and cultural background of bagpipes. This seemed to me to be just what you were encouraging people to do.

Now, some things I sort of agree with:

  • As per How to start a page, it would have been a good idea to explicitly state that this was incomplete and ask some kind soul to "fill in the blanks".
  • The "it is most common" part may be incorrect or misleading. Better wording would have been something on the order of "The bagpipe originated among the Celts and is traditional in ...", which is true as far as I know.

My further statement about bagpipes in the USA is true and does not imply that they are played nowhere else in the world. OK, you know of one "pipe" band in Uruguay. You have the advantage of me there, I have never been to any American country except the US and (briefly, occasionally) Mexico. On the other hand, do you really have evidence that bagpipes are played "all around the World"? Was the fellow you knew a native Uruguayan? How about the other members of the band?

The USA (my country and I think yours) is noted for more cultural diversity than just about anyplace on the planet. Pretty much any cultural/ethnic activity from anywhere on the Planet can be found somewhere in the USA, and in particular in NYC (where I live). Where else, outside of of Australia, would one find a Dijeree Doo (sp?) being played. I have seen and heard one (once) here in NYC. I have also seen and heard pan pipes being played (and well) by native South Americans, along with a wooden Xylophone and other simple percussion instruments. These are all simpler instruments which could well (and probably were) independently invented all over the planet. (Now that might be a good topic for an article all by itself.)

In closing, if you thought my final remark about musical tastes "silly", why didn't you just delete it? That wouldn't have required any research.

The whole result of your remarks has been to totally turn me off the idea of contributing anything more to Wikipedia. While I have some knowledge about a lot more things than most people, the only thing about which I have anything close to expert knowledge is computers and programming. Nor am I willing to spend the time researching any topic simply to write an article here. If those are the rules, then I don't care to play your game. You should also eliminate or change the part of How to start a page that I quoted above.

Further, I am inclined to take your (not very friendly) comments and post them to K5, along with the article and the "How to start a page" quote, under your article there. Give people an idea how you *really* seem to be operating.

I do not expect nor wish for an apology, simply a clarification of the rules of your game. Lacking such clarification, or if the clarification displeases me, I will simply not play. If the (clarified) rules are as they seemed to me to be, then I think that I can be a useful contributor, even though not an expert.
--
Jason Scribner

Jason, I'm speechless. Stick around a little longer, and you will understand what's going on here a bit better. --LMS

Removed: Historically, the bagpipes could have a 'war drone' attached, which generated subsonics, which while inaudible caused fearful reactions in troops who were unaccustomed to the subliminal sensations induced.

Google shows Wikipedia as the only mention of a "war drone". And the pipes were plenty scary enough without one. --rmhermen

I am a piper, and I have made a correction to the use of the Gaelic term for "bagpipe." It should be "piob mhor" = "great pipe" instead of the misspelled "piobrach."

The use of the term "war pipe" or "war drone" to refer to a type of Irish pipe with two drones is an English mistake. The Gaelic "mhor" = "great" is pronounced similar to "vor" or "wor" and was heard by English speakers as "war."

I would like to contribute some more editorial changes to the article, and I shall after I've taken some time to read it closely.

Bagpipes exist in many forms and places. Poland, Germany, Italy, Portugal, Bulgaria, among others, all have their own version of the "gaida," the "bock," etc.

Seumas

Great! An expert! :-) Feel free to correct and expand on the article. BTW, registering a username gives you a user page on the Wikipedia: User:Seumas. Welcome aboard! -- Tarquin 16:52 Dec 18, 2002 (UTC)

Hi, I've done a pretty radical rewrite to the whole page, and added a fair bit of info on some of the main types of bagpipe; I've also created a page for each of them and seeded it for others with more knowledge on it than me; at some point I'll do the Great Highland Bagpipe page properly, as this is my area of expertise. I'll add a bit more to some of the other pages, but my work there is done (mostly). I think a second piobaireachd page makes most sense, as well; it's not a small subject.

I like the war drone thing above; to make the fundamental of the bass drone inaudible, it would have to be over thirty meters long (according to the back of my envelope). And the overtones would still be easily heard. I love how bagipes seem to generate all this nonsense... :)

Cheers, Calum (yes, I will register when I get round to it)


Greetings

When image uploading is re-enabled, I'll put up a photo of some pipes with nice annotations and so forth, as that image seems a bit random to me. On a totally different note, should what I've written on various types of pipes be on this page? I think it's a good one page overview of the subject, but OTOH, it's supposed to be a page on bagpipes in general, not a description of the half dozen most common types. -- Calum

PS - since the hot and bothered subject of the above flamage has long been reworked out of controversy, am I safe to delete it? Or should I move it to an archive page of some sort? -C

Unfinished post / factual issues

I'm going to remove "in ??? - see Piper and Drummer's obits!", on the theory that if a contrubutor never returns, the article should look as near to finished as possible. Ditto for the "(sp)" that follows it. -- Finlay McWalter 20:52, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Oh bugger - I meant to look that up *before* posting. Oh well. It would have been easily found using Google (unless it hasn't been spidered yet). OTOH, there's a case that potentially inaccurate information should obviously be such, and I understand that that's better than no info at all, or authoritative looking incorrect info. But that's just me. I'm off to bed now, but I shall try and remember to look it up at some point soon. I've yanked the old discussions, as it has long since been edited out of existence. -- User:Calum

OK, not zzzing yet - http://www.piperanddrummer.com/news/default.asp?articleID=3518 if anyone feels like writing it in before I get round to it. 'nite, Calum.

There's probably no consensus, but I'd say that information that is likely to be significantly wrong shouldn't be in the article at all, but that information that is either likely to be correct, or likely to be incorrect in only a fairly trivial way (such as the spelling of someone's name) should be included in a "best effort" way. Most Wikipedia articles are wrong about almost everything, but they generally converge (asymptotically) on the truth. -- Finlay McWalter 21:27, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Most Wikipedia articles are wrong about everything? Maybe I should start to worry. ;)

By the way, I wonder if it's possible to note in an NPOV manner that many people don't like the sound of bagpipes? ;)

--Furrykef 09:28, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

I just typed a long rant, and then deleted it.
With any kind of artistic endeavour, there's folk that don't like it. Some don't like Bob Dylan, some don't like reel-to-reel tapes of Tommy Reck (an Irish folk musician). Some don't like piping. Their choice. Not very interesting, to be honest.
The bagpipes do have the handicap that it is very easy to be very bad at them. Indeed, until fairly recently, for a bagpipe to be correctly tuned was unusual in any kind of public performance. So, a lot of people don't like bad piping. Me neither. Unfortunately, a lot of folks have never heard good piping. -- Calum 16:32, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
But there is undoubtedly a lack of neutrality in the first statement of the article. -- Anon.

I'm just combing through this page yet again to try and tease out the unclear from the disputed from the Just Plain Wrong. I'm going to flag up everything here that I'm outright changing with a note as to why.

  • Where the GHB was developed. There is insufficient evidence as to whether it came first in Ireland or Scotland. Ireland's references are earlier, but Ireland was far more literate prior to the Reformation. In any case, the mouthblown nine note bagpipe with one or more drones on the shoulder was pretty much universal at this time. I would say the GHB didn't exist in a recognisably modern form until the high days of the MacCrimmons at the earliest, and even examples from this period that survive (quite a few) vary hugely in major ways, including such detail as the pitch of the leading note!
  • 400o year old pipes in Co Wicklow. These weren't bagpipes, dunno where the meeja got that from. They were basically pan pipes: the interesting thing is they seem to have played a major pentatonic scale in Eb.
  • Popping valve: this was actually invented by the Taylor brothers in America round the turn of the century, and although many modern makers will make one on request, none I know of fit one as standard. Those players who have used one suggest it is unreliable and doesn't offer a sufficient advantage to be worth having.

Enjoy Calum 16:39, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)


(the oldest bagpipes in existance were found in Co. Wicklow, Ireland, 4000 years old!). Yes that's correct, and not a lot of people know that. Ian

No, it's not. See above. Even if you were right, the correct place for this might be the article page, no? Calum 18:58, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

http://homepage.eircom.net/~bronzeagehorns/bronzeage.html The Wicklow Pipes are clearly NOT bagpipes

http://homepage.eircom.net/~bronzeagehorns/wicklowpipes.html But there is speculation that they were sounded by air from a bag and bellows They could have even been part of some sort of prehistoric organ. They could have been similar to panpipes or had some sort of fipple. It is hard to tell because only the pipes themselves were recovered.

On the musical side should there no be a mention of pipe band music and the dreaded pibroch?..dave souza 01:44, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)


Pipe bands have their own article, linked from here - Piobaireachd doesn't yet have an article (the shame), but it is linked from the GHB article, where I think it is best put. Long-term, I want to reduce, not increase, the amount of information on specific types of bagpipe on this page, and one part of that is avoiding excessive linkification (making pruning even more difficult). Calum 08:32, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)


Gallaecia

Is the Silius Italicus quote the earliest literary reference reference to the gaita? Please adapt as necessary. --Wetman 08:40, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

What quote is this? I have to say I am generally skeptical - most quotes about bagpipes from early literature turn out to refer to flutes, hornpipes, or other instruments, and have been translated as 'bagpipe' more on the grounds of optimism than serious academic likeliness (that said, there are quite a few references that have been mistranslated into other things, as well). In any case, any bagpipe in Roman Spain is most likely to have been very different to what is played in modern times. Calum 16:48, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Turkey

"The idea of taking a leather bag and comdining it with a chanter and inflation device seems to have originated in Turkey." The article was just talking about ancient Greeks and Romans using the bagpipes, and back then there was no Turkey as we know it. Is it talking about the ancient Turks of Central Asia? Or the region of modern Turkey, that is Asia Minor? Those are two very different origins. Fishal 21:30, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image

The above image was dropped from the article. Why? By the way, is it a swedish bagpipe or not? Can somebody identify it? // Liftarn

Bagpipe humour

I, like other readers and contributors, believe that the section on "Bagpipe humour" is totally out of place. I suggest that it be removed or possibly transfered to another article dedicated to "humour and stereotypes". F Sykes--81.255.174.7 12:36, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC).

Ahh, the ever popular "like other (unnamed) readers" gambit. Well, I'm a significant fan of the music, hang around once in a while with bagpipers, and at least for the joke the I inserted, was told the joke by a piper. And I'm fairly certain I've heard them tell the other joke that someone else inserted.
I think the section is entirely appropriate.
Atlant 15:51, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

......

I have changed a few things regarding Great Highland Bagpipe music (piobaireachd, light music, etc.), "Irish Warpipes"/Brian Boru pipe, "skirl" (stupid word anyway, i almost got rid of it again), please do not add incorrect info, I have been an active piper in an active pipe band for 12+ years, and read about the bagpipe for more, competed in the World's twice, worked for two years in a machine shop making pipes, I can document any changes made in these areas, I can also answer questions if need be; there is a whole world of real pipe band knowledge, music, that is beyond the notice of many. in fact lots more info about a lot on this page, like other bagpipes, history, music, good page - spettro9 2005/05/16

"The slight change from being exactly in Mixolydian mode is to allow it to play three different pentatonic scales." whoever wrote this gem had better write a really long explanation of why they think the bagpipe cannot be tuned in just intonation... and should also talk about how there really are 5 different modes one can play in on the Highland pipes, and all without changing any tuning (Mixolydian in A, Aeolian in B, Ionian in D, Dorian in E, or Lydian in G); They should also comment on how old chanters were quite compromised in their tuning, and generally by now we have gravitated to just about just intonated - listen to any and every winner of the World Pipe Band Championships in recent years (1990s on)- it is just intonation, no compromising of tuning,
And they wrote something about Auld Lang Syne - well it was removed, by me, as it has nothing to do with any bagpiping other than being Scottish..... (you can't play it, the notes go to high, I believe it is the part with the lyrics "...brought to mind...", and we don't bother transposing the high notes down in this case, unlike tunes such as Sean South of Garryowen or others....)... sorry to write so much about such spettro9 2005/07/22

In order for the D on the GHB to form a correct interval with the rest of the D pentatonic scale, it has to be slightly sharp to the drones(ie just intonation). I can't remember if I originally wrote what you're referring too (I didn't use those words, and I don't feel like combing the changelogs), but it is technically right. I think John MacLellan and Donald MacPherson were/are the last pipers to actually tune this way. As for modern pipe bands, there is plenty variation there too - the Vale's flat Ds and Fs and still a fair variety in choice of pitch for the high A. Soloists all choose slightly different pitches for low G, B, D, F, high G and high A.
On a totally different note, there is way too much stuff on this page. It really does need to be split into seperate articles; the discussion on different types of pipes has taken over and there is just way too much information for what is supposed to be an encyclopedia entry. Calum 11:56, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
In just intonation, a perfect fourth above the tonic is 2 cents lower than an equal tempered fourth. A perfect fifth is 2 cents higher than an equal tempered fifth. The difference is very small, though, in comparison to a just third, which is 13 cents lower than an equal tempered third. Badagnani 19:29, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
Apologies for being unclear. I'm not talking about the difference between just and equal temperament. With a nine note mixolydian scale there are three major pentatonic scales that can be played (A,D,G). Assume you tune the notes of the A pentatonic in line with the drones, which are tuned to A. Now in order for the D to sound in tune with the D pentatonic scale, it has to be sharp to its just tuning. Which means it is sharp to the drone. For the last hundred odd years or so, piping has been moving steadily away from revering the pentatonic, so this tuning has come to sound wierder and wierder. Bear in mind also that the majority of pipers just tune to what sounds, to them, correct. Calum (11-Oct-05)
I fully agree on the need for subdividing the article. --Craig Stuntz 13:34, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Military instrument

At the moment, the history section seems to make little mention of the use of bagpipes as a military instrument. I don't know the details, but I imagine they were used by Scottish regiments in place of the buggle during the 18th and 19th century. As with other military instruments, they would probably have a duel role in supporting moral on the battlefield, whilst also conveying simple commands. However, with the bagpipe, you also hear (possibly apocryphal) accounts of them being used to instill fear in the enemy. -- Solipsist 10:22, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

However, with the bagpipe, you also hear (possibly apocryphal) accounts of them being used to instill fear in the enemy.
I've heard that as well and could certainly believe it. I wonder if anyone has a good reference to that? Anyone? (Bueller?) (Bueller?)
Atlant 12:58, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
I added a quote in Battle of Prestonpans which discusses the GHBs causing fear in that conflict. But there is a difference between causing fear and being used with that intention. --Craig Stuntz 23:15, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Uilleann Bagpipe

Ntrobrn added this picture to the section on the Uilleann Bagpipe. But that's a Highland Bagpipe. The piper may be Itish, but the pipes are Scottish! I think the image should be moved out of the Uilleann section, because it is confusing there. Any other opinions? --Craig Stuntz 23:15, 28 August 2005 (UTC)


I have to agree on this one. It's presence under the Uillean pipe header is misleading. The picture may be OK, but it is the wrong picture for that place and it is doesn’t add anything to the article since it is a GHB. My thought is the picture should just be dropped and replaced with an Uillean pipe --Arle Lommel 00:30, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

I went ahead and moved the picture to the GHB section; at least it's not misleading there. But there are already two other pictures of GHBs on the page and only two other types of pipes pictured. I think a photo of the UPs would be nice here. --Craig Stuntz 13:12, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Great Highland Bagpipe

I just wonder why this page is independent of the Bagpipes article. It's even shorter than the Great Highland Bagpipe session here.

I think it´s a matter of developing this other article, since it seems to be a nice idea to develop each bagpipes model separatelly. Tonyjeff 18:40, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Restructuring the article

I think that this article has potential to rise to featured status. Not sure how much I could help (maybe it could be suggested for collaboration of the week?) but here are some thoughts on how it could be done; please comment.

First, I think that most of information about various bagpipe types should be moved to separate articles, with them being marked as main articles. As someone noted above, article on the Great Highland Bagpipe is shorter than its section here. Then, we could add an overview of various types. I don't like the practice of calling local bagpipes by their local name. First, because there are some kinds of bagpipes which are the same but could be called with various names in various countries. Second, because the same or practically the same name could refer to different types; there already is some confusion between gaida, gajdy and gajde. Third, because local name oftenly isn't proper name but simply means "bagpipes" (for example, Serbian "gajde" simply means "bagpipes", so I guess that great highland bagpipes are called "velike gorske gajde" in Serbian while northumbrian bagpipes are called "severnoumbrijske gajde" etc. You got the point.

Does a systematisation of bagpipe types exist, so that the we could structure the article according to it? Nikola 09:58, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

  • Agreed. I inserted some links to other bagpipes article in order to develop the idea. I think that only one article to talk about every kind of bagpipe would be insane. Tonyjeff 18:42, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

There was mention of a few German bands using the pipes, but it is more than just a few. It is quite popular, and some bands like Corvus Corax use various bagpipes exclusively. In other words, its not just an interesting side note as with KoЯn, but a bagpipe scene unto itself almost. Not sure what to do with this, but here are just some of the bands who use pipes in their music: de:Kategorie:Mittelalterband. Perhaps deserving of its own little section, or not?

Aren't these Medieval bands? Mittelalter means "Medieval," right? So they're not rock bands? You can go ahead and list whatever you know about that's not already listed and you think is relevant. Badagnani 03:06, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Plus on related instruments. I'm no musicologist, but in books I've read on the bagpipe they do make mention of the Pungi being very similar (especially to the chanter). May not be hisorically related, but in the sense of an instrument family I think it and the various reed instruments from around the middle east (i.e. those you hear accompanying belly dancers) might be worth a mention? Khiradtalk 02:47, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Except that the gourd isn't a bag. There are lots of instruments that have multiple pipes that aren't bagpipes, like the Chinese sheng and hulusi, Sardinian launeddas, etc. Badagnani 03:06, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

RYOFU and the smallpipes

I was just about to add Ryofu[1], a band that plays metal on the Northumbrian Smallpipes. They hit the headlines last year as the pipe player received death threats (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tyne/4075998.stm) from Folk Music Purists... They're quite well known locally, and it is interesting to have a link to a band that plays the Northumbrian smallpipes.. but I'm right in thinking they're _too_ local to go on the list of artists who play rock on pipes, aren't I?

What a strange combination. Go ahead and add them. We do, in fact, have contributors from Northumberland here. Badagnani 12:18, 6 January 2006 (UTC)


About Iberic pipes

The text about spanish and portuguese pipes is very poor. Firstly because "gaita" is a generic term such as "bagpipe" in English, and they do distinguish the models by toponims, like "Gaita Galega" or "Gaita Transmontana", exactly as "Great Highland Bagpipe". Futhermore, the article treats all these bagpipes -- Galician, Transmontan, Asturian, Sanabresa, Catalan -- as the same model, what is an absurd. In the case, it seems that the article is talking about the Galician bagpipe. Tonyjeff 15:50, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Sicilian bagpipe

Firstly, I would like to say that this is a terrific article and I am glad to see that the non-celtic forms of the bagpipe get a bit of a run. I have some very good references at home that discuss the Sicilian bagpipe. For the moment, the only thing I wish to clarify is that the Sicilian name is ciaramedda and not chiaramedda, and while it is a dying art, it can still be found in use not only in the province of Messina, but further south as well in the province of Catania, where it is also traditionally used at Christmas time. ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 00:34, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bagpipes/Archive_1&oldid=1082818611"