# Talk:Ocarina

WikiProject Musical Instruments (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
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  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)
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  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

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

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

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

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
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

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

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"

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

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

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

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? 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: ${\displaystyle f={\frac {v}{2\pi }}{\sqrt {\frac {A}{Vs}}}}$ cannot be right if ${\displaystyle s}$ is the shell thickness around the holes. According to this formula, my paper ocarina (with ${\displaystyle s}$ near zero) would blow microwaves. --Rick MILLER (talk) 14:03, 1 April 2009 (UTC) "${\displaystyle s}$ = shell thickness" above is misleading, or rather, misled. ${\displaystyle s}$ 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? 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 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 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 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 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 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)