Talk:Ocarina

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Musical Instruments (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Musical Instruments, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of musical instruments on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Toys (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Toys, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of toys on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

The Troggs - Wild Thing[edit]

I originally wrote, "The instrumental break in the The Troggs's 1966 hit song "Wild Thing" contains an aggressive ocarina solo..."; Sonjaa deleted "aggressive". I don't think the deletion is merited; "aggressive" is not a purely subjective evaluation. "Wild Thing" is a primitivistic, proto-Punk song, and the ocarina break is played in that spirit. There might be a better adjective ("emphatic"? "rowdy"?), but please let's do better than a bare bland reference. --David Sewell 02:02, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

I listened to the song and didn't feel that the solo was "aggressive" at all. Maybe "rhythmic" or "lively" or something like that? What do others think?--Sonjaaa 11:34, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Sonjaaa - it isn't really aggressive. I would say lively. Ck lostsword|queta! 17:57, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

No, "rhythmic" or "lively" sounds like a brisk gavotte or a nice little minuet. Aggressive - le mot juste. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.10.107.12 (talk) 03:03, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Invention[edit]

I removed the following:

The ocarina is thought to have been first conceived when it was discovered that blowing across the mouth of a water vessel or pouring jug that had broken could produce different tonalities when the holes or cracks were (un)covered with the hand or fingers.

It seems to me that this is nothing but baseless conjecture and has no place in an encyclopedia.

1) Trying to describe coincidences that might or might not have occurred in prehistoric times is not history.

2) Even if this is did happen and happened only once (originating all ocarinas), or happened many times independently, why is it important? Even if it could be established to be the truth, what does it tell us about the ocarina? or about anything?

If anyone can provide a reference to meaningful academic discussion of broken pots, they should replace it.

TomViza 01:02, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I completely agree. Aaron Walden Tsalagisigline.gif

Right at the begining of the article it claims that the ocarina was invented by Shigeru Miyamoto. Can this be removed as it's a blatantly untrue.

Sweet potato[edit]

The sweet potato is only one variety of ocarina, made popular by legend of zelda: ocarina of time. It is not synonmous with ocarinas in general.

The word ocarina was coined, in 19th Century Italy, to refer to what today are called sweet potato ocarinas. The sweet potato was not originally popularized by Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, though said video game certainly led to a revival of popularity in some quarters. But you are right that it ought to be noted that the term sweet potato is more specific than ocarina, in modern usage, as ocarina is widely used to refer to any vessel flute with a whistle mouthpiece. Aaron Walden Tsalagisigline.gif
Could it be possible to add a more or less comprehensive list of different types of ocarinas (perhaps with photos of each)? Ocarinas certainly come in many shapes and sizes and base notes and ranges. For example the ocarinas at http://www.hindocarina.com/ are rather different from "standard" ones. Also this link shows a quite comprehensive list of different types of ocarina by the amount of holes: http://www.stlocarina.com/ocarina-by-type.html

Here is a better list:

  • Transverse Ocarinas (also known as Sweet Potato, Classical, or Zelda) these are the "Modern" day ocarinas. The name derives from the finger system where the ocarina is held like a Transverse flute. The real name for this is a Transverse ocarina, but many people call it a "Sweet Potato" because it's body, naturally looks like a Sweet Potato
  • Inline Ocarinas are ocarinas are similar to a recorder. This type of ocarina is shaped more like a rectangle then a transverse ocarina. The fingering system looks similar to the recorder as well. The major difference bettwen the recorders fingering system is that the ocarina has 2 different rows of holes, instead of one big row. I am actually going to add a picture of an inline to the gallery, to show the difference.
  • Pendant Ocarinas (Also known as Necklace ocarinas) are very common ocarinas. It has a circular shape and a whistle mouthpiece. Most Pendants are for beginers, rather then advanced players. Although there are more advanced pendant's the most common pendant ocarinas have only 4 holes and are actually harder to play, due to having a combination finger system instead of a logical system (going up all the holes in order)
  • Peruvian Ocarinas (Also known as Painting Ocarinas) are not technically a classification. They are only classified because of how the Peruvian Ocarinas are unique. Peruivan Ocarinas are made out of cheap clay, and have paintings on it. Another thing is that these ocarinas also have 8 holes (6/2 system) usually with all the holes the same size (Typically making the ocarina flat)
  • Double/Triple Ocarinas (Also known as Chambered Ocarina) a Double or a Triple ocarina is made with two to three different chambers. This allows the player to play monophonic pieces, or polyphonic. Usually Ocarinists only blow into one chamber, but to make an extra sound, blow into both chambers at the same time. These ocarinas also have more holes (naturally) Usually around 16 to 24 holes.



I'll add a more detailed list into this article later on. Maybe tomorrow? Gliabrant 22:43, 24 October 2007 (UTC)


sweet potato[edit]

I clarified a statement, but want others to check it please! It says that one style of Ocarina is called the Sweet Potato. I looked through my materials and ocarina music and I see "sweet potato ocarina", which is what I changed it too. Otherwise some less-intelligent browser may think the term "sweet potato" means an instrument exclusively... or maybe I don't have enough faith in humanity?

Liastnir 05:37, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Appeance in video games[edit]

Fans of video games tend to be devout to their supporting games, and not seeing their favorite game with ocarina appearance on the list makes them add it. The list has grown to a significant size -- too much for an ocarina article, I believe. I know that the list is never meant to be comprehensive, but I don't think that would convince the users who add the games. An incomplete list makes users want to add more to it, but since we can't let the list to grow forever, I am proposing to delete the list completely before the growing list gets out of hand; with the exception of The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time which has the instrument in its title and might be notable. But even so, we don't have to mention all of its roles. I think just "various magical tasks" would be fine. --朝彦 (Asahiko) 01:05, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree completely. I have removed all fancruft from the article per wikipedia policy on cruft. Ck lostsword|queta!|Suggestions? 22:18, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I think that it might be relavent to note that despite the relative obscurity of the Ocarina (That might be a mis-comment. It's obscure where I come from. anyway) it has appeared in a tremendous amount of video gamesJoeldipops 11:48, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

"Older boys"[edit]

This article references "older boys". Older relative to what? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.189.175.230 (talk) 00:39, 10 December 2006

Ah, the curse of absolute relativity and bad vocabulary! "Older boy" is common English (US & UK both) parlance for a teenager. It doesn't require comparison. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.10.107.12 (talk) 03:05, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Pictures[edit]

It looks like this article is getting a little too cluttered with pictures. Maybe we could start to consider which ones should go/stay?Mikeg1179 22:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Alternatively, we can consider using the gallery tag. IMHO all the pictures are informative, so:
  • "A blue and white pattern ocarina" -> gallery
  • "20th Century Japan" -> gallery
  • "English pendant ocarina " -> gallery
  • "Giuseppe" -> History section
is my proposal. --朝彦 (Asahiko) 00:09, 13 April 2007 (UTC)


i like ocarina-mateus


I think the Double and Triple ocarina must also be included. They are a major part of ocarinas, and their advancement in modern music. 203.193.210.110 (talk) 16:48, 9 September 2008 (UTC)Samuel Lee

Cleaning Up and Re-organizing[edit]

I worked on cleaning up and therefore re-organizing the article this evening. I removed some redundancies and re-categorized some things. Please look it over and carefully consider my changes. I think it looks a little better now. Thanks! -RobbyPrather (talk) 08:59, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

As part of my clean-up effort, I have moved the references to the Wikipedia:Footnotes format (places the references at the end of the document, with links to said refs throughout the text). Details are at that link. -RobbyPrather (talk) 09:49, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Is there any other work that needs to be done or any concern with article before removing the Cleanup tag? -Barkeep 20:47, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Removed without any objections Barkeep 20:50, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
How about the trivia sections? I'd say we only keep those items where the ocarina plays a central and exceptional part. I can understand why you'd want to have Ocarina of Time in there; on the other hand listing every song played on an ocarina seems odd. Do we have articles containing all songs played on the violin? I hope not. Anyway, with "central" I mean it should not be some reference on the side, but if it's e.g. a movie, it should be central to the plot. With "exceptional" I mean that it should be exceptional within the field that the ocarina features in such a central (as defined before) role, so music won't do, since the ocarina is a musical instrument and therefore songs played on the ocarina are to be expected. But a book would qualify. I hope I'm making sense. Shinobu 21:21, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

References in Media[edit]

Was it an ocarina being played in Pokemon 2000?Joeldipops 11:50, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Do we really want to list every single occurrence when an ocarina shows up in some television show or video game? Some of them are somewhat trivial and the purpose of a "Ocarinas in popular culture" is to help people identify what an ocarina is and should be an occurrence that is familiar to the broader public. Barkeep Chat | $ 12:57, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Exact formula?[edit]

the tone is dependent on the ratio of the total surface area of opened holes to the total cubic volume

That is to say: f ~ A / V (?)

Does anyone know what the constant of proportionality is? If the formula I guessed is correct, it must be dimensionless m/s, and probably depends on the medium, which would normally be air. Considering the unit I guess the speed of sound in that medium will factor in. Shinobu 21:43, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Also note that if you scale the ocarina so that its length is l, f ~ l² / l³ = 1 / l, so if we'd double the ocarina, the frequency would drop by one octave. Or you could go like: A ~ f V = l³ requiring relatively larger holes (by a factor of l). Shinobu 21:51, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I found the answer. For the correct formula, see the article. Shinobu 23:28, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

The formula: cannot be right if is the shell thickness around the holes. According to this formula, my paper ocarina (with near zero) would blow microwaves. --Rick MILLER (talk) 14:03, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

" = shell thickness" above is misleading, or rather, misled. should be interpreted as sum of the "chimney correction" for each open hole, which is known in the acoustics of regular flutes. The shell thickness does matter, but is usually overshadowed by the length of the viscous air column above each hole. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.10.107.12 (talk) 02:57, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Formulas for frequencies of instruments in terms of their physical properties are always approximate, as the physics of sound waves in restricted spaces is far too complex to allow the production of a simple formula. Thus, for example, the formula which I learnt at school for the frequency of a string instrument is based on a number of assumptions, such as that the tension in the string does not change as it moves away from its rest position. Likewise the usual formula for the frequency of a pipe ignores end effects, and to apply the same formula to a pipe with finger holes introduces further complications. Moreover, it must be perfectly clear to anyone with any experience of playing an ocarina that the usual pipe formula is totally inappropriate, despite the fact that the differences between an ocarina and a recorder are only quantitative: where do you draw the line? Yes, it is possible to produce quite simple reasons why any of these formulas cannot be exactly correct, but that does not invalidate the use of them as good approximations within a range of situations. For the majority of ocarinas treating them as Helmholtz resonators is a very good approximation; a paper ocarina is outside the usual range. I suggest it would be a good idea to restore the formula, but with an explanation of its limitations. Before doing so, though, I am explaining my thoughts on the matter to allow comments. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:12, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Fingerings?[edit]

This article needs more information on the various fingerings (John Taylor, modern Japanese, ...) and the mathematics behind them. Shinobu 00:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I know all of the ocarina fingerings I'll add them all in the article. Gliabrant 22:43, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

On "Appearance" and "Popular culture" sections[edit]

I have deleted the two sections "Appearance in works" and "Ocarinas in popular culture". While I personally love watching the scene where Totoro plays an ocarina, these sections have been easy targets of crufty listings, where a user adds his/her favorite video game to the list because ocarina makes an appearance in them, one of the character uses it, etc. It is clear that this kind of trivial lists do not add to the encyclopedia article on ocarina; it contained many subjective statements like "a memorable part in the movie..." or "featured prominently..."; and it distracts readers from understanding about the instruments itself IMO. If you think I have make the article worse by deleting it, I wouldn't object to bringing it back provided that you avoid making it into a list and properly cite sources (preferrably a secondary source that mentions ocarina as a musical instrument, not merely a minor plot device). --朝彦 (Asahiko) 05:49, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't really know about all the other "popular culture" featuring the Ocarina, but I think that it would be nice to include Totoro given the prominence of the movie and the fact that the ocarina features several times in it (Including in the lyrics of the ending theme: 月夜の晩に オカリナ吹いてる. Not that that's really either here or there). The amount of merchandise featuring Totoro playing the ocarina is also quite sizeable.
Personally having never played any of those Zelda games the only place that I know the ocarina from is Totoro playing it. Though a large number of people have been exposed to the Ocarina by Zelda I think that perhaps a wider demographic would know it from Totoro. Aurickandrien (talk) 06:38, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Nose bending[edit]

Could someone add some information about nose-bending? I would, only I have no idea how it works, but its certainly effective and gives my ocarina a greater range. Francis Davey (talk) 17:55, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

The Ocarina of Time[edit]

I've removed the detail of the range of the Ocarina in the Zelda game, as it is unsourced, and has to be untrue. It stated that the ocarina ranged from B to F, but this cannot be the case, as the notes corresponding to UpC and A on the controller are an octave apart, and the player can extend this to one semitone more on either side with the analog stick, for a total of 15 semitones. Further, the game itself, which plays extended versions of the songs, sometimes plays outside the player's range, up to six semitones above the player for Zelda's Lullaby, for a total of 21 semitones. Some extra ones are added on the bottom for the Nocturne of Shadow, but not so many as to push the ocarina's rage up to three-and-a-half octaves. In any case, the range doesn't fit for B to F, though I have no source which says what it actually is. Reveilled (talk) 18:03, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

removed recent history[edit]

I removed recent history, as it really only has three things in it. One is a reference to 1900, if you can consider 108 years ago "recent" history. The other one was an entry with a bunch of 'citation needed" tags on it, so removed that. That left pretty much zelda which would just be misplaced. That brings me to the other edit; I removed the "see also" in ocarina of time, as this is a music article on an instrument and to lead to an article on a video game is ridiculous. I do not think the fact that most people relate ocarina's to ONE video game as a reason to infringe on actual content on the ocarina; its selective and unencyclopedic. Articles are meant to cover their subject and to inform people content on that subject, not reinforce people's only knowledge on that subject through an unrelated subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.76.60.163 (talk) 20:04, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Ocarina of Time, once and for all[edit]

I understand that a mention of The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time on this page could potentially lead to an increase in cruft, but I don't think it should be ignored. The game is the only reason a lot of people know what an ocarina is, and it brought the instrument into focus more than it usually is these days. Some have said we can't cite these ideas, but the fact is, one of the sources already cited in this article mentions it:

"With the release of the popular video game “The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time” in the 1990s, the ocarina has reached a new level of popularity in America and Europe." --http://www.stlocarina.com/ocarina-history.html

As that and many other sources show, there have been many ocarinas produced based on those in the game, and books written on how to play songs from the game on a real Ocarina. To deny the game's impact on the popularity of the ocarina would be to ignore a significant aspect of the instrument's history. As such, I have added a reference where I believe it is appropriate. If you disagree, please post your reasons here instead of just reverting the edit. Thank you. --Unknownwarrior33 (talk) 21:17, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

On a related note, I do realize that the game is linked as a "see also" on this article, but as was previously mentioned, that doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Not because of any perceived threat to the sanctity of the ocarina as an instrument, but simply because that's not the kind of thing the See Also section is for. I think the reference I added is more appropriate and have deleted the See Also link. Again, please post here if you disagree. --Unknownwarrior33 (talk) 21:20, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
If stuff is already mentioned in the article, it doesnt go in the See Also. If you find a reliable source that links Ocarina of time to new popularity/style of playing, we can include it. But the stlocarina.com site is a commercial vendor and not a reliable source. -- The Red Pen of Doom 21:22, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
How about The New York Times? Pagrashtak 21:27, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
That would indeed appear to work. -- The Red Pen of Doom 21:37, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Great, then how come it hasn't been included yet since that agreement was reached? Ok, I'm going to take the result of this discussion as green lighting the addition of a LoZ:OoT mention. I don't know if it's worth its own section, but it don't see a way to include it in any of the current sections...
Either way, IGN is considered a reliable source, cited in most game articles on Wikipedia, so this should be another viable source: http://gear.ign.com/articles/927/927008p1.html. I see the iPhone app has already been mentioned once previously, and though I don't really think it's got much of a place here, it's no secret that the app was inspired by OoT - as evidenced by the "Zeldarian" mode, present in the app and specifically mentioned in the official site of the developers. So if the app really needs to be mentioned, it could just be rolled into the OoT section if one were to be made.
This discussion seemed to make it clear that LoZ:OoT should be mentioned in the article. Let's proceed then to discussing "how" it should presented before I go and add anything. Or before someone else does (again). Sage of Ice (talk) 08:54, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
I think a mention about the Ocarina of Time is worth noting in the article; perhaps a statement on its affect on raising awareness of the instrument or its impact on the instrument itself in the intro. However, anything beyond a sentence or two would seem to be too much and would likely be more appropriate for the The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time article. On another note, I do not believe this article is appropriate for the Ocarina iPhone application; it seems to constitute spam (depending on its presentation) and it does not meet the article's definition of an ocarina. Any relation of the iPhone to the Ocarina of Time shoulde be mentioned in that article, not here. Barkeep Chat | $ 15:46, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Today I found a reference to "The Legend of Zelda" which was very poor: firstly it was placed in the section "Budrio, Italy", and secondly the language in which it was written was poor. It said that The Legend of Zelda "caused a rucus". A search reveals that rucus is an acronym for Rhodes University Computer Users Society, for Reducing Unwanted Communication Using SIP Skills Society, for REG-Reporter User Community of the United States, the name of a company selling "collectibles", etc etc, none of which makes sense here. Probably an error for Ruckus, but I don't feel that is appropriate. I considered simply deleting the sentence, but decided instead to rewrite and move it, for 2 reasons. Firstly, the above discussion seems to indicate general support for some brief mention. Secondly I thought that putting in a brief mention properly written might reduce the risk of further inappropriate additions by editors of limited skill. If anyone wishes to improve on my version that is fine, but I suggest not leaving it out altogether. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:54, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I find that "TheRedPenOfDoom" has removed part of the single sentence which I left referring to "The Legend of Zelda", giving as an edit summary "the rest is unsourced". Actually the whole of the sentence is unsourced, and so is a great deal more of the material in the article: why single out one bit to delete? However, what strikes me as really odd is that, when another comment above suggested an article in the New York Times as a reliable source, TheRedPenOfDoom replied "That would indeed appear to work". How can lack of a reliable source be the reason for deletion once one has accepted that there is a reliable source?
Also the bit deleted was the bit saying that the appearance of the ocarina in Zelda had led to an increase in the ocarina's popularity. It seems bizarre to delete this and leave the rest of the sentence: if it did not lead to an increase in popularity then there is no reason for mentioning Zelda at all, any more than any other "popular culture" mention of the ocarina.
I thought it was clear from my comment above that the sentence I left was meant to be provisional, a "better than nothing" attempt, and I explicitly invited other editors to improve on it. Giving a citation would have been an improvement; deleting one half of the sentence and thus leaving the other half looking pointless does not seem like an improvement.
I propose to restore the deleted material, adding the reference which TheRedPenOfDoom has stated "would indeed appear to work", and also another reference mentioned in the discussion above to which TheRedPenOfDoom has not objected. Presumably, if "unsourced" is the reason for the deletion it will not be deleted again.

JamesBWatson (talk) 15:17, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

external links[edit]

None of the following links seem to fit into our external link guidelines I have moved them here for discussion to see if WP:CONSENSUS provides otherwise for any of the links. -- The Red Pen of Doom 21:26, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

external links[edit]

discussion[edit]

  • The link to the Ocarina Room seems to satisfy the question "Is the site content proper in the context of the article (useful, tasteful, informative, factual, etc.)," and the "Links normally to be avoided" criteria. Barkeep Chat | $ 14:49, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Is it a page about the Ocarina? Or about other instruments?[edit]

Ocarina born in Italy when Donati invented it, around the 19th century. Before that, the Ocarina didn't exist. We cannot write bullshits such as: "Both the Mayans and Aztecs had produced versions of the ocarina, but it was the Aztecs who brought the song and dance that accompanied the ocarina to Europe. The ocarina went on to become popular in European communities as a toy instrument.". That is disinformation. In addition, I let you know that in the Mediterranean lands similar instruments and toys existed ever since the VII millenniums BCE, and the same Sardinians, Egyptians, Etruscans, Greeks and Romans had flutes of different size, shape and material (terracotta, bone, ivory, wood, reed etc.) such as fistulas and so on. But they were not versions of the Ocarina. As I wrote, the Ocarina was invented by Donati. --Karanko 02:53, 7 Jan 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't call the information about the Mayans and Aztecs "bullshit" or "disinformation" since it is cited from a reliable source per WP:V. If you would like to further dispute this claim, either here in the talk page or in the article, or if you would like to add further information please do so while providing proper citations. Barkeep Chat | $ 14:07, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
It is unfortunate that Karanko has expressed himself in such aggressive terms, because doing so tends to antagonise others, and discourage them from considering any merit there may be in what he says. However, it does seem to me that it is questionable how far the word "ocarina" applies to similar instruments before Donati. It seems to me that the word is normally used only for the modern instrument, and while it is reasonable for the article to mention earlier similar instruments, the wording should perhaps be altered to indicate this. JamesBWatson (talk) 23:32, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Antiquity of the Ocarina[edit]

(See also the discussion above) The claim was made until my recent edit that the Ocarina is 15000 years old. The citation to back up this claim that the Ocarina is 12000 years old, so I corrected the article to that effect. That particular citation isn't very good though - it's very short and doesn't back up *its* sources. There are several other references, with rather divergent claims. Some of these are by people who sell the instruments. Given that this is a relatively unknown musical instrument, I can see there being some motivation to exaggerate claims of antiquity. Any academic paper we can refer to? I do propose severely toning down the claims of antiquity until more solid sources can be found. Martijn Faassen (talk) 18:43, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Merge discussion: Okaryna into Ocarina[edit]

Merely creating a place for discussion. The proposal was made by Caerwine in July 2008 (dif & dif). - Ev (talk) 21:17, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

  • It is a reasonable proposal to merge and make Okaryna a redirect, though perhaps not to the section. While it should be mentioned in the types, the alternative spelling may also merit mention earlier in the article. —Ost (talk) 14:32, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
I can find no evidence that the spelling has significant use in English. We do not mention every foreign word for the topic of every article, and I see no reason to make an exception in this case. The idea of mentioning as a type has more merit, but I can see nothing particularly distinctive about the Ukrainian ocarina. It is "made of clay with seven or eight and sometimes ten finger-holes", which is well within the range of ocarinas made elsewhere. In fact, there is nothing at all in the article about it to suggest that it is a distinct type at all. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:04, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
From what I can gather, there is an argument that the word "ocarina" only dates to C19th Italy, and so should not be applied to earlier instruments such as those of Ukraine. However it seems that the word "ocarina" is now used as a generic term for all such instruments, and in writing an encyclopedia we should reflect current usage. If there were to be a separate article on the Ukrainian instrument it should probably be at "zozulka" rather than "okaryna", but I would think it more appropriate for these terms just to redirect to the current article as they are not widely used in English. I note that the Ukrainian Wikipedia has separate articles for Окарина ("okarina") and Зозулка ("zozulka") but neither is more than a stub. The Polish Wikipedia is the only place I can find the spelling "okaryna" — the article refers to "zozulka" in the "see also" section but this is a red link. --Deskford (talk) 11:48, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Legend of Zelda[edit]

While the article is very informative and goes into the history and design of the ocarina, I can't help but think that it needs a reference to Legend of Zelda. In popular culture, the ocarina is known little, if at all, outside of the fact that Link plays it. There seems to be some sort of collaboration amongst editors to keep any reference to the Ocarina of Time off this page. Obviously, there is at least some justification behind not further reinforcing a pop-culture stereotype about an instrument.

I must reccomend however, that a mention be given to the video game popularizing the instrument. It is common for ocarina manufacturers to produce replicas of the ocarina of time. The game also contributes to a lack of knowledge as to ocarina designs other than the sweet potato.

If you feel that such a mention affects the integrity of the article, feel free to include a sourced remark resenting the undue weight the video games carries when discussing an ocarina.

Also, please do not remove sourced content without first challenging it; I may be wrong, however when reading over the talk page it appears that sourced content has been introduced and arbitrarily removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.66.191.116 (talk) 20:04, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Pronunciation of Xun[edit]

Can someone include this in the article, or at least include it in the article on the Xun? Ailes Grises (talk) 22:40, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Rational For Project Classification[edit]

This article refers to the ocarina as an instrument only. It is neither introduced, nor discussed as a toy. Why then is it in the toy project? Tjohnso (talk) 01:44, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

It does make the referenced statement "the ocarina went on to become popular in European communities as a toy instrument." BarkeepChat 05:07, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
There are toy versions of almost all instruments. That does not make the instrument a toy in general. It would be like putting a stethoscope in the toy project because there are toy versions... not to mention swords, cars, etc. Tjohnso (talk) 17:22, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, but toy stethoscopes, swords, and cars are nothing like the real thing. A toy ocarina is just like a "real" one, except it's made from cheaper materials. Eman235/talk 19:35, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
It appears @Fortdj33 added the project template and may be able to shed some light on the rationale. BarkeepChat 17:46, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Because the article refers to its history as a toy instrument, and the article is included in Category:Clay toys and Category:Traditional toys, I included it in {{WikiProject Toys}}. I don't claim to know anything more about the subject matter, but that was almost 4 years ago, and no one has questioned it until now. Fortdj33 (talk) 01:04, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Umm...?[edit]

What does this have to do with sweet potatoes? --180.72.31.204 (talk) 10:28, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

For once, the infobox actually has some useful information in it. The term "sweet potato" is identified there as an "alternative name" for the instrument. Perhaps this fact should be stated somewhere in the article itself?—Jerome Kohl (talk) 15:35, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Ocarina#Types explains that "sweet potato" is used to refer to transverse ocarinas like the one in the infobox, as opposed to pendant ocarinas or end-blown ones. I see no evidence that they are ever just referred to as "sweet potatoes", though. Eman235/talk 17:58, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Pronunciation[edit]

The listed pronunciation is wrong. Every primary source I've checked (e.g. dictionary.com) indicates ocarina is pronounced with a short O sound. I corrected this a while back, but it's been reverted back to the incorrect long O pronunciation. [1] [2] 12.37.58.186 (talk) 21:24, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this here for discussion. I've seen this being switched back and forth between the two pronunciations several times recently. Better that we discuss it here and try to reach some kind of consensus rather than perpetual edit-warring. I agree with you (and the dictionaries you cite) in that I would pronounce it with the short O sound, but maybe some speakers in some variants of English pronounce it with the long O? If that is the case, we should probably indicate that it can be pronounced either way, but we would really need a source to back up the alternative pronunciation. If no such source can be found, I would support just giving the short O pronunciation. --Deskford (talk) 22:00, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

References

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ocarina. 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.

YesY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:54, 12 January 2018 (UTC)