Jump to content

Talk:Alphorn

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


Cor Anglais? I think not!

[edit]

Some of this article seems inaccurate. The alpenhorn is nothing like the "cor anglais" or english horn which is more or less an alto oboe. I believe the author of this article is referring to the french horn more commonly known as just the horn. The horn and the alpenhorn are both conical brass instrument that produce similar sounds. Brahms in his first symphony has a section which is said to be inspired by alphorn players in the alps themselves. This melody is played on the natural horn in the orchestra to produce the desired effect. I'll look up the references from the article when I get the chance to see what exactly the author is referring to.

Horndude77

Thanks for the Rewrite!

I note that the article has been rewritten and much improved. I do appreciate the effort. I will make a few other comments as I have some knowledge of the Alphorn: I teach at the Swiss Alphorn School in Gstaad, Switzerland.

First of all, the instrument is called simply the "Alphorn" by the Swiss, who are the people who originated the instrument and who consider it their national instrument. The title of the article should be "Alphorn" and inquiries about the "Alpenhorn" (whatever that is!) should be redirected to "Alphorn". The issue of the proper name for the instrument is important and needs to be addressed.

The length of the Alphorn is defined in Swiss folklore as "the length of two men". Most Alphorns in Switzerland are approximately 11 - 1/2 feet long, which puts them in the key of F#. Because the Alphorn is increasing being performed with other instruments (such as organ, brass groups, and even symphony orchestras), and the key of F# is rightly seen as a problematic key, the Alphorn is evolving toward the key of F-natural (approximately 12 - 1/2 feet long) in many places, particularly in North America. As the author of the original article points out, the historical instruments were much shorter, and this evolution toward a longer Alphorn is the continuation of a trend.

William Hopson, Rocky Mountain Alphorns Calgary, Alberta, Canada Email: hopson@alphorn.ca

Dispute tag

[edit]

The issues raised above seem to have been addressed. I'm going to remove the Dipsute tag. -Willmcw 01:24, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

Now it just needs major clean up. I have hard time following the paragraphs because of incomplete sentences and other details. I don't know the melody Ranz des Vaches. It would be nice to see it written out or hear it in order to fix the later sentences. Did Rossini put it right in an opera? which one? Did Brahms use it for the horn part in his first symphony? or was it just the alphorn in general that he was trying to mimic? Also it needs some wikification. I'll help out where I can. Other than those issues I would generally agree that the accuracy of the article is better than before. (a side question: when do we remove the Encyclopædia Britannica notice? How can I look at the original article to see if this one has changed enough to remove the notice?). Thanks! Horndude77 04:19, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The 1911 article is here: [1]. Thanks for your work. Cheers, -Willmcw 04:40, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

Back to you from William Hopson, and again, thanks again for the editing.

There are several recordings of "Ranz de Vache" available. See the linked websites (including mine) for more information.

I've been told that Rossini's original opera "William Tell" does include Alphorn music, but I can't confirm this. The opera is rarely played in its entirely in modern times and we mostly know it from the overture. Certainly the English Horn melody in the Pastoral section of the overture works well on Alphorn. Rossini was a student of the orchestral Horn in his early years, which accounts for why he wrote so well for the instrument. It is my personal belief that he must have been thinking of the Alphorn when he wrote the melody, but I cannot imagine that there were any Alphorn players in Rossini's time that could play the melody with the precision required for orchestral playing.

Brahms certainly used an Alphorn melody from the Rigi in his first symphony, but he never expected that anyone would ever actually play the melody on the Alphorn. To begin with, the melody is not in a key that Alphorns generally play in, and again, the quality of the Alphorn playing at that time would have been an issue for Brahms. I am sure that Brahms had in mind only an orchestral setting of a beautiful Alphorn melody that he had heard. As a composer, Brahms was notoriously scrupulous with all of his orchestrations, and what he wrote is exactly what he wanted. For me - after so many years of playing in a symphony orchestra - this section of music is still one of the grandest moments in music.

Naming

[edit]

This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. There wasn't much discussion, though I agree with the move based on the Google Test. violet/riga (t) 22:16, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sorry about that, on closer inspection I see it was two comments by the same person. Thanks for doing the administrative work. Cheers, -Willmcw 01:24, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)


"For a long time, scholars believed that the alphorn had been derived from the Roman-Etruscan lituus, because of their resemblance in shape, and because of the word liti, meaning Alphorn in the dialect of Obwalden." - "For a long time"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drsruli (talk • contribs) 20:39, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

I re-added this message because as stated in the note, it is discouraged to have a bunch of random photos of alphorns in an article about alphorns. I don't think any of these photos add any value to the article that isn't had by having just one of them. See WP:Galleries. --Taylornate (talk) 21:58, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

After reviewing WP:Galleries, I feel that the the section "...the use of a gallery section may be appropriate in some Wikipedia articles if a collection of images can illustrate aspects of a subject that cannot be easily or adequately described by text or individual images." applies. The photos show the wide range of venues where the alphorn is played. Are you interpreting the wide range as random? jmcw (talk) 11:52, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're right about my interpretation and you make a good point. I think your idea could be conveyed better if there was a new section explaining the wide range of venues, and the photos could be put there using one of the gallery formats discussed at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Picture_tutorial#Galleries--Taylornate (talk) 20:54, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have redistributed the images - does it look less like a gallery? jmcw (talk) 11:54, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
They seem to be placed sort of randomly. Did you understand my suggestion?--Taylornate (talk) 23:37, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps not - do you wish to remove the photos or to put them all in a box? jmcw (talk) 08:55, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You said that you are trying to convey the idea that the alphorn is played in a wide range of venues. These photos would work to show that point better if there was some text with them explaining that point. You could have a section explaining how versatile the alphorn is and have it explain something about the wide range of venues, and stick all the photos in a gallery or box in that section. That way, the reader understands what you are trying to show because you are directly saying it with words. Right now, there is no logical link between each picture and the text near it and that is confusing. Did I explain better this time? If you want, I can help with formatting the images if you write the section. I am ok with removing them too and that was my original suggestion, but it sounds like you want to keep them and I can support that if it's done right.--Taylornate (talk) 09:46, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(out-dent) Ah, I understand the mis-understanding- I thought it was about just placement of the images. Could we back up from the gallery and return to the 'random' image discussion? As the article is about alphorns and each photo is of an alphorn and there is text on each photo concerning the context of the alphorn, I see no need for any changes or a gallery. Would you reconsider removing your Cleanup-gallery tag on these grounds? jmcw (talk)

Placement is part of it, but let's focus on randomness like you ask. The fact that they are all images of alphorns is not sufficient, WP:Galleries is very clear on that. Ask yourself the following:
  1. What is the significance of Eliana Burki playing the alphorn at the Bardentreffen festival in Nuremberg 2009?
  2. What is the significance of D' Dieß'ner alphorn players?
  3. What is the significance of The military band of the French Chasseurs Alpins?
  4. What is the significance of A Swiss playing alphorn?
  5. What is the significance of Swiss farmer calling his cattle in the Bernese Oberland?
If the only significance is that they feature alphorns, then the article only needs one of these photos. If the significance is variety, then I think that point needs to be made more clearly. Right now it just looks like a bunch of random photos of alphorns.--Taylornate (talk) 01:10, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I do not understand why you feel that WP:Galleries applies: the photos are not in a gallery: they are one per section.
Wikipedia:Mos#Images has no statements about "random".
In Wikipedia:Images: "Images must be relevant to the article that they appear in and be significantly and directly related to the article's topic."
In Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(captions), "Other images (especially within standard info boxes) where the purpose of the image is clearly nominative, that is, that the picture serves as the typical example of the subject of the article and offers no further information – no caption needed."
So, it is not clear to me why you are tagging this article for changes to a gallery. Would you please move the tag to the section where you think it applies? jmcw (talk) 12:59, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you so opposed to the changes I have suggested?--Taylornate (talk) 02:31, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As I understand the changes your propose, I feel they would not improve the article. I am open to discussion: tell me how you think a gallery would improve the article. I feel that the distribution of images through the article adds to the interest. jmcw (talk) 11:38, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The photos appear to be distributed randomly in sections they have no relation to. It doesn't make sense. I touched on this before your out-dent. MOS:Images states "Images should be inside the major section containing the content to which they relate (within the section defined by the most recent level 2 heading)".--Taylornate (talk) 23:16, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Multimedia

[edit]

I think a cleared recording of one or more alphorns would be a great addition, if anyone can manage it. o0drogue0o 15:07, 23 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by O0drogue0o (talk • contribs)

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Alphorn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY 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.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:25, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alphorn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:25, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:32, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good article?

[edit]

I think this article is on its way to being a "good article." I've never yet helped to bring an article to "Good article" status, and I am not much familiar with the process, but I'd like it if we could get this there. It could use a bit more work, and I will do my part, but if anyone else could advise me or help out in that endeavor, I'm all ears! ♥Th78blue (They/Them/Their • talk)♥ 14:46, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

[edit]

Edits from March 2nd 2023 falsely deleted many references to Switzerland, substituting Bavaria instead. The same IP made similar edits to other articles in the same vein. 178.197.226.146 (talk) 19:57, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I found this article by googling 'Do swiss people have massive pipes' after seeing a portrayal of a swiss man, in a parody of an antisemetic cartoon.

[edit]

as title suggests, i expect this to be deleted. does this count as vandalism? trolling? what even is this? have people gone to low-importance wikipedia articles and just used the talk page as a means to state random things related to the main page? how frequently does this happen? 2001:56A:F888:1100:23B4:383:A747:E137 (talk) 03:21, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Alphorn&oldid=1256900685"