Contents

Talk:Monochord

Music theory Start‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Music theory, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of music theory, theory terminology, music theorists, and musical analysis 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.Music theoryWikipedia:WikiProject Music theoryTemplate:WikiProject Music theoryMusic theory articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Musical Instruments Start‑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.Musical InstrumentsWikipedia:WikiProject Musical InstrumentsTemplate:WikiProject Musical Instrumentsmusical instruments articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that one or more audio files of a musical instrumentorcomponentbeuploadedtoWikimedia Commons and included in this article to improve its quality by demonstrating the way it sounds or alters sound. Please see Wikipedia:Requested recordings for more on this request.

I've heard the monochord attributed to Boethius, amd Guido certainly makes reference to it, but Pythagoras? Do we have a source for this? - Rainwarrior 02:04, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't believe Pythagoras has a monochord attributed to him until extremely late in the M.S. tradition. -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 19:55, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The first monochord treatises is Sectio Canonis (Division of the Monochord) and is believed to be written around 2-3 cent. BCE. Author is disputed. It is commonly called "the Euclidian" Sectio Canonis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.193.169 (talk) 20:53, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the following:

The monochord was also used to determine Mersenne's laws (Mersenne prime, Mersenne conjectures?), which determine the frequency of a string depending on its tension, mass, and length.

Neither of the suggested ideas of Mersenne are relevant here, but it is true that he studied tuning, and may be true that he used a monochord in his experiments. However, the statement as it is appears to be too vague to be useful. - Rainwarrior (talk) 02:50, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why does the monochord pictured in the article have two strings? JSC ltd (talk) 18:47, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many have two strings because it makes the comparison of tones easier. It does go against the main parsing of the name of the instrument, agreed. It would also be great to a picture of a simpler version of the instrument that emphasizes the movable bridges more. -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 20:02, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the picture is not actually a monochord, but a "tromba marina" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.30.0.165 (talk) 15:45, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This paragraph, which was in the article, seems to me to belong on the talk page:

[This following section needs significant revision to include Boethius, Ptolemy (his own harmonic system for the cosmos, as well as his lengthy descriptions of monochord theory), Pythagorean tradition, Plato, Platonism, and Neoplatonic material and probably some Aristoxenus as a counter to numerical idealsim, not to mention Gaffurius, Ramis, Euclid, Kepler, and a host of other references. Jumping to Robert Fludd and the description provided is misleading, although his image of a monochord in the work cited is much more accurate than the marine trumpet (a bowed harmonic instrument) previously shown in this article.]

And boldly I have moved it here. Good to hear someone mention the word references.

Bob Burkhardt (talk) 13:26, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is incorrect: "A misconception of the term lies within its name. Often a monochord has more than one string, most of the time two, one open string and a second string with a movable bridge."

A monochord has only one string: mono = one ; chord = string .

An instrument with two strings would be a bichord. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.43.249 (talk) 00:26, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can't make up a new name for an instrument based on your logic. In your case a "piano" would be a misnomer too because it doesn't always generate soft sound. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.193.169 (talk) 20:56, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not true. "Piano" isn't a misnomer, it's an abbreviation of the original name, which was pianoforte -- e.g., "soft - loud".

"Monochord", OTOH, specifically describes an instrument with only one string. This is borne out through instrument naming conventions across multiple cultures. With the Greek bouzouki for example: "trechorde" = three courses; "tetrachorde" = four courses; the Venezuelan "cuatro" = four courses; the Bolivian "seis" = six strings; etc.

To add to article: did the Ancient Greeks call the monochord κανών? 173.89.236.187 (talk) 00:29, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article referenced by the claim of monochord having been mentioned in Sumerian texts seems to be rather rare and inaccessible to me. I haven't been able to verify the claim by any assyriological sources, and knowing how hard it is to determine exactly what is described by any technical term in Sumerian, I'd say the claim is somewhat doubtful at least, even if not impossible. Should be checked by publicly available sources focusing on Ancient Mesopotamian musicology. --Oop (talk) 13:47, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]