Talk:Organ (music)/Archive 1

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Does "* the harmonica, where the musician effectively blows directly onto the reeds;" really belong on the list of related instruments? The common element to the rest of the instruments on the list is an air reservoir. The harmonica doesn't belong there just because a musician blows onto/across a reed to make a tone, or we'd put clarinets, oboes, English horns, bassoons, contrabassoons etc. on the list as well. I can think of two reasons harmonica might have wound up here:

1. The harmonica is called a mouth organ (similarity of name)
2. The harmonica has a separate reed for each pitch, unlike most other woodwinds which have one reed-based noise-making apparatus and vary pitch by using valves or covering holes.

I'm going to alter the description of harmonica to indicate that its "similar" in a different sense than the others, but would be interested in other opinions as to whether it belongs on the list at all... -- Someone else 07:23 14 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I think it's interesting to leave it in; I like the way you've currently separated them. --Delirium 07:41 14 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Hey, in the course of doing an E. Power Biggs page, I just noticed we don't have anthing about tracker organs. Should I make that a separate page, or a section of the general organ page? Noel 01:27, 14 Aug 2003 (UTC)

It could become a section here (now that we have sections). If it gets too big, it can be broken off into a separate article on tracker mechanisms but I think that unlikely unless we can find some nice diagrams... -- Someone else 01:41, 14 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Oh, I see, there's a separate "pipe organ" page (slightly confusing), and trackers are already mentioned a bit there. I'll tweak that a bit, then, and maybe make the separation of the two articles a little cleaner.. Noel 17:21, 14 Aug 2003 (UTC)

As I read these two articles clearly, I am bothered by the inclusion of a lot of material on this page (which some people seemed to be moving towards being a disambiguation page) that logically ought to be on the pipe organ page. There's also a certain amount of duplication between the two. Will everyone be OK with it if I do a major move of pipe-organ-specific stuff from this page to the pipe_organ page, followed by a cleanup over there of any duplicate material? Noel 18:50, 14 Aug 2003 (UTC)

No harm in cleaning things up, but removal of duplication shouldn't be a priority (see Wikpedia is not paper). I'd love to see a more comprehensive pipe organ page. -- Someone else 04:12, 15 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Can someone write about the influence on the organ and organ music in