World Shakuhachi Discussion / Go to Live Shakuhachi Chat
You are not logged in.
So: Does anybody of You know about systematic research about contemporary shakuhachi techniques? There's a slowly but steadily increasing amount of publications on, e.g., the clarinet of the 21st century, there's volumes with concise & ressourceful lists for multiphonics on the saxophone, especially the extension of wind instrument playing & performance is increasing. Now I want to tap into coming up with this for the shakuhachi, multiphonics especially. I will resort to modern recorder playing for the theoretical part, mostly about accoustics, but as far as the practical, concise list of fingerings & the judgement I'm on my own, I suppose (I will mostly use the pragmatically reasonable structure of categories listing "easy to play, all dynamics" to "comes on hard, only soft" or so, relating it to "complete hole" " half hole"...to "shaded hole", including "meri/kari", of course.
So, what do You think, &, do You know about anybody else, however scribbled together, has undertaken such a thing? Ph. Gelb mentioned an article in "New Music Review", which I will check, but otherwise I have no information, nada.
Thank You for Your input,
Markus
Offline
This is great research!
Something along the lines of Robert Dick's "the other flute" but for shakuhachi!
the article i was referring to is by Yoshikazu Iwamoto and was published in the mid 90's in the Contemporary Music Review which i think comes out of England. The whole issue was about flute and shakuhahi. The Iwamoto article was a primer of shakuhachi techniques, with notation! geared towards introducing composers to shakuhachi.
phil
Offline
Markus,
Systematic, yes, completed, no. I am currently investigating 243 fingerings for multiphonic possibilities. 243 only allows for open, closed, and "half-holed", options. Allow for additional fingerings which include shaded, (or less than half), and barely not closed, (or more than half), and the number goes to 3125. Include all the above and the number goes to 16807. Additionally, narrow, average, wide bores combines with various lengths (aspect ratio) to produce different results for different instruments. No doubt different players will get different results also. Anyway, it's a fun, interesting and sometimes, frustrating project (for me), but please be sure to let us know what you come up with.
Regards to all,
Bruce
Offline
Bruce Hunter wrote:
Markus,
Systematic, yes, completed, no. I am currently investigating 243 fingerings for multiphonic possibilities. 243 only allows for open, closed, and "half-holed", options. Allow for additional fingerings which include shaded, (or less than half), and barely not closed, (or more than half), and the number goes to 3125. Include all the above and the number goes to 16807. Additionally, narrow, average, wide bores combines with various lengths (aspect ratio) to produce different results for different instruments. No doubt different players will get different results also. Anyway, it's a fun, interesting and sometimes, frustrating project (for me), but please be sure to let us know what you come up with.
Regards to all,
Bruce
16807 huh? Back to the woodshed! When are you going to publish this? There are huge differences between different flutes when it comes to this stuff. My experience has been that longer flute (2.7 plus) generally create a more complex tone, hence more distinct and musically useful multiphonics. Keep us posted on your research!
Offline
Markus, James Nyoraku Schlefer presented a talk alongside Iwamoto at the '98 Boulder Festival on the subject of extended techniques for the shakuhachi. James also has some compositions featuring these techniques. He might be someone you'd want to talk to about that.
Offline
Thank You all for Your rich advice, I'm going to check up on all this asap! Quite a load, I must say.
- Yes, it's true for all windinstruments that wider bores & other detailes of make do have an effect on the range of possibilities. But, as well as it is true that indeed not all of the numeric possibilities may make sense, musically speaking, from various reasons, for such a work it's important to relate to a "common ground" shakuhachi, but, of course, as every player is different as well as every instrument, without mistaking a concept of "normal" shakuhachi for the structuralist idea of a basic relation between signifier (word; a specific shakuhachi; a specific player) & singified (semantics; the what-it-means-to-be-a-shakuhachi). I will work with mine, all kinds of individual differences to however other shakuhachi granted. As well I try to avoid the term "extended technique", for it calls upon "nonextended, normal technique" immediatedly, & there's nothing like that; posttonaility is not an extension of tradition, it's the rupture & deterritorialisation of what tradition has as "how to play". The most fascinating thing with the shakuhachi, though, is, at the same time the very tradition this instrument holds a waggonload of techniques which any developed European ear would qualify as posttonal, avantgarde to the max, the use of noisesounds,e.g., or the treatment glissando/portamento receives. Well, I'm just at the starting point of my research, let's see what I'll find on the way...
Markus
Offline