- 1 Merge
- 2 Tubular Bells in Chart: Discrepancy?
- 3 Chart
- 4 Other Brass Instruments
- 5 Violin Rage
- 6 Xaphoon Range
- 7 Additional citations
- 8 Bassoon range
- 9 Heckelphone range is in the wrong octave
- 10 Double Bass extension?
- 11 Timpani ranges
- 12 Cello Range
- 13 Double bass range
- 14 What is 'Typical' range
- 15 Legibility and layout
I believe this should be merged with playing range. They are the exact same thing in two different spots and there is no need for two stubs as opposed to one full article.
- Agreed. 220.127.116.11 09:23, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
- Agreed as well --Psx137 01:26, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- Agreed +Fenevad 19:17, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Tubular Bells in Chart: Discrepancy?
The Harvard Dictionary of Music (2nd edition, page 655) lists a range from middle C to the F an octave and a half above. That's an octave above what's currently in the chart. Wikipedia's own page on tubular bells says it goes from C5 to F6, which seems to be yet another octave higher. Does anybody know what the range is actually supposed to be?
The pitches sounded by the tubes are actually C5-F6, but our ears perceive them as being C4-F5, because of the hum tone and they also are written as such (C4-F5 or G5). Some manufacturers make them down to F3, as indicated on the chart. Célestin le Possédé (talk) 03:35, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
18.104.22.168 17:05, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I find it interesting that the typical range chart would include the range of the octocontrabass clarinet, an instrument that is one-of-a-kind. That seems rather odd. Additionally, if we're including one-of-a-kind stuff, shouldn't we note that the 64' pipes of a pipe organ (rare though they may be) would go to the C below that? I don't see how it matters, since I can't figure out how to change the chart. ha ha. :-) --W0lfie 02:24, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- Never mind that last bit, I found the template. Is this still the proper place for the discussion? Or the template? -W0lfie 02:38, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Other Brass Instruments
Can someone put the euphonium, baritone horn, alto horn and flugelhorn under a new category called 'saxhorns', because these are not in the horn family. The euphonium could also be placed in the 'tuba' category. The cornet is a member of the horn family, however.2A02:F6E:202C:0:15ED:7E0F:D0F9:E1C9 (talk) 16:22, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
The Violin Range is larger than the chart suggests: it can reach, according to the violin wiki to the D four octaves above middle C the chart only says three.--SJ3000 (talk) 17:06, 18 September 2008 (GMT)
Heckelphone range is in the wrong octave
Double Bass extension?
Since this chart includes one of a kind instruments and other unusual instruments, maybe it should include the (now standard) extended range of the bass to C1 or B0. Célestin le Possédé (talk) 03:40, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
I've never seen these names for the 5 drums, and I think the chart should either show the general timpani range (C2-C4) or show the different drums with their diameter : (33"-)32" (C2-Bb2), 29"(-28") (E2-D3), 26"(-25") (A2-F#3), 23" (C3-Bb3), 20" (E3-C4). I would rather have it written as one general range, as most people don't write for them as different drums, but as one instrument. Célestin le Possédé (talk) 03:54, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
The cello range given is only for intermediate cellists. Typical orchestra parts go well over C5, and solo literature goes above C7. The range should be five octaves, not three. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 03:01, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Double bass range
Depending on definition, the double bass typical range goes over that which is in the chart - indeed the double bass wiki page lists a much higher upper range (Stopped note is G4 which is fully doable). Even though the double bass page goes into non-typical but still practically doable, most solo pieces go higher than the this chart suggests. I suggest at least raising the range to match the stopped note on the wiki page (in other words, raising the range to G4, one octave above the violin's lowest note), if not just for consistency across the different pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 23:47, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
What is 'Typical' range
The 'Typical' range is shown on the chart, yet is not defined in the text. Would it be more accurate and informative if the range of the instrument confortably accessible to a good amateur player were shown, and also in a different colour shade as an extension to the amateur range, the expected range for a competent professional player.
Notes, or some other indication should be included to clarify where the range of instruments has been extended by additional keys or other devices e.g., double bass and trombone keys, inserts etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 20:58, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Legibility and layout
This is a great attempt to put all the instruments together, but i think the following suggestions would enhance usability and improve presentation.
1. Blue on green is a poor choice of colours such that much of the text is barely legible. Please use contrasting colours and test for legibility on both screen and print-out. Black for the instrument names would be best with a much lighter background, if any. More or less any font colour is going to come out at lower resolution than black on white. A better font selection would improve legibility.
2. To facilitate legible print out on A4 or similar size paper, the height of the chart could be lessened by removing the lines used to group similar instruments, and grouping with an additional column bracket to the side where there is plenty of space. This would enable row height and font size to be increased.
3. Faint vertical lines at middle C and probably at all other Cs would help to illustrate the ranges more clearly.
4. The note in the header explaining the limitations of range definition leaves a number of questions unanswered, especially as the ranges are bounded by a black line which suggests a definite cut-off. A clearer note explaining whether the ranges shown are 'typical' or indicative and not definitive ranges (since these depend not only on the skill of the player, but gradually change with instrument design and addition of extension keys), and perhaps as to whether they are amateur or professional. Maybe two charts, one for each would be better.
5. An additional column could indicate which instruments are transposing and the key used in writing the score for the instrument. Then confusion between variously pitched instruments such as clarinets and trumpets could be substantially removed by clarifying exactly which instrument range at concert (sounding) pitch is indicated. E.g., clarinet in Bb. This would be really useful, even though it is already shown on other pages.
6. Should the baritone and euphonium be in the horn section or with the tuba in the brass section ? Maybe a general indicative chart such as this should not prescribe such things - they are better left to the discussion of each section or type of instrument since opinions often differ.
7. What are the un-labelled numbers along the bottom - cut off at each end ?
8. Inclusion of 'one-off' and extreme instruments is interesting, but really not very useful. There are quite a few common instruments not listed which would be a better use of available space. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 15:48, 10 February 2014 (UTC)