Talk:Tanbur
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Musical Instruments, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Musical Instruments articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
The original version of this talk page was moved to Talk:Tanbur (Persian), so check there for additional relevant content. Right now, tanbur is a disambiguation page. Given the confusion surrounding the term I think even the disambig. page needs (or will need) its own talk page. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 03:36, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I am thinking perhaps this should be a set index article rather than a disambig page. Right now I don't think it's an issue, but I can imagine wanting to add at least a little more information to this article. In such case I think it would work better as a set index article. (At this point, all this would involve is removing the "{{disambig}}" tag and adding categories). -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- Also note that Tanbur/Temp exists. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
69.201.146.55 (talk · contribs) removed the list of similar instruments. These are straight out of the "Tanbur" entry in Grove. Just so there's no confusion, I've cited each instrument, though I personally think this looks sloppy (as I've already provided citations for every sentence in this article). -- Gyrofrog (talk) 14:31, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
I moved Tanbur/Temp to Tembûr. Tanbur (Persian) now redirects to Tanbur. See Talk:Tanbur (Persian)#Improvement, nomenclature etc. for details. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 14:10, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for posting this article. I had previously written the article about the Turkish tanbur and knew back then that there was need for a root-article which would give access to different instruments sharing this common name. Yet I do think a common effort should be put into rearranging the root-article, for a similarity in name, at least in this geography, means little. One shouldn't forget that derivatives of the word "tanbur" may also refer to percussion instruments and that a better genealogy should be presented on this page for each of the instruments. Notice that tambura, the Persian tanbur and many other instruments are carved out of a single (or at most, double) piece of wood; whereas the Turkish tanbur (which was most likely descending from a Byzantine court instrument) is built more to the resemblance of an oud, and its closest common ancestor with other long-necked lutes might be quite ancient. Most of the other instruments with a similar name resemble in their building and playing style the saz family. I wonder whether, thanks only to the community of name, taking for granted their kinship is justified. As a musician, I would be inclined to think that this might be linguistic confusion. The saz family, the Persian tambur etc. are apparently akin in their sonority; yet the Turkish tanbur has a sound closer to that of, say, an oud or a mediæval lute. I tend to think that West-European sources pay little attention to these differences, and while fervently distinguishing an English horn from an hautbois, they put in the same category many instruments "from elsewhere", which is a token of indifference to their particularities and of the unilateralism of their musical ear. Conclusion: I invite you, and others who are willing to work, to construe a more precise description of what the word designates and what it does not designate. Thank you. --Ekindedeoglu (talk) 14:55, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
And yes, one more thing: I do not think that we could say the tanbur is an "art variant" of the saz family. Historical evidence makes this layman-thesis very unlikely. It's as if you said of a concert lute that it was an "art variant of the Spanish guitar". Let's think of a better way to put it. --Ekindedeoglu (talk) 15:02, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
- There was a rather lengthy content dispute concerning this article (along the lines of "the tanbur is Persian, therefore there are no other tanburs." "No it's Turkish" etc. etc. - see Talk:Tanbur (Persian) if you are really curious). I created this root article, using Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians (the best source that was available to me), as a means of settling the matter. My primary concern was to resolve this dispute, so there is certainly more work to do (actually this started out as a sort of disambiguation page and as such it retains a rather skeletal format). I do wish to point out that some of what you mention contradicts Grove (or isn't mentioned in Grove) and so we would need additional sources for this. Grove could very well be wrong about the topic; on the other hand, judging from one of the author's names, I'm not sure that it entirely has a Western bias. (If Grove does contain mistakes, I personally wouldn't go so far as to call it a layman's analysis.) Thanks! -- Gyrofrog (talk) 16:39, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Removed text
This series of edits added some text, minus citations, to the "Origins" section, along with an external link to the "References" section. The external link doesn't really corroborate the new information so I have removed the text. Furthermore I am not sure the external link would serve as a reliable source so I have instead moved it to "External links". -- Gyrofrog (talk) 07:45, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
