Mujitsu and Tairaku's Shakuhachi BBQ

World Shakuhachi Discussion / Go to Live Shakuhachi Chat

You are not logged in.


Tube of delight!

#26 2009-11-28 05:44:18

Toby
Shakuhachi Scientist
From: out somewhere circling the sun
Registered: 2008-03-15
Posts: 405

Re: What features give more timbres?

How can you argue with a guy who has an avatar like Atilla the Hun and German language skills to match?

Toby

Offline

 

#27 2009-12-16 01:37:24

Peter Kororo
Member
Registered: 2008-06-21
Posts: 82
Website

Re: What features give more timbres?

Tairaku wrote:

Peter Kororo wrote:

Bigger holes make the tone brighter, so I like shakuhachi with a larger bore but holes that are "classic" size (10mm +/-) vs. 11 +/-. I feel such flutes "hold the sound" more and that may make the tone nicer. Again that's somewhat a matter of taste.

That's a fair generalization but a lot of it depends on what room you're playing in and it is really a matter of taste. Some large holed flutes sound incredibly sweet in a room that's large enough to let the sound open up, but harsh in a small room. I have two tea houses I play in and one is tiny. In that one I only use small holed flutes which sound incredibly sweet in the tiny space and don't overwhelm. But they sound dead in other rooms.

I think we're talking about different things here, I meant specifically the brightness/darkness of the tone, but maybe it's just a semantic difference. Of the two Satoh Gesshus I have, one has very slightly smaller holes and the tone is darker....could be due to other factors.

But yes good point, I should have said "relative size" of hole size to bore size....I was referring to the majority of flutes with a middle bore diameter of 17-19mm +/-, with the very large-bore flutes you like to play larger holes would still sound dark. As to which is preferable I guess it's a matter of taste really.

Last edited by Peter Kororo (2009-12-16 01:38:15)


“Many people come, looking, looking. Some people come, see.”
                        —Nepalese saying

Offline

 

#28 2009-12-16 02:13:33

Peter Kororo
Member
Registered: 2008-06-21
Posts: 82
Website

Re: What features give more timbres?

Toby wrote:

I know that no one into the mysticism of it all wants to hear this, but it is completely, 100% about bore profile and smoothness.
Toby

Toby, I appreciate your input, and don't want to sound dismissive, but you're doing exactly that to the input of myself and others--most of whom are....very experienced players! What you're labeling as mysticism (never mind that mysticism may indeed be capable of discovering truths beyond the scope of science) actually isn't so nebulous, or divorced from the practicalities of making shakuhachi.

I'll add that what you're talking about is theory, even if tested with certain instruments--but it would appear not with shakuhachi--whereas I'm speaking from a lot of experience playing and listening to all kinds of shakuhachi with sensitive and developed hearing. So in fact what you're writing is more "mystical" than what I am because it's not based at all as solidly on real hands-on experience with shakuhachi.

Yes, bore shape, and the smoothness of the urushi, are certainly very important factors--quantitatively--in the sound of a flute. After looking down the bores of quite a few, I can tell pretty much how a flute will sound before playing it by just checking the bore profile visually.

But on that point in particular, it's the "last 5%" that makes a great shakuhachi in terms of sound quality..so as is often the case quality and quantity are not collateral. What's more, it's the feeling of the sound, of the resonance and/or vibration of the flute, that can be just as important, and just as enjoyable, as the "sound," I use quotes because in fact I don't agree with such reductionist analysis (that should be obvious).

As and example, I recently had the chance to play three Miura Kindo shakuhachi side-by-side. They are all from the same period, and the bore profiles were basically identical (I checked visually and by touch). Kindo was really the first maker to be able to make many flutes of very high quality and reliably similar sound--his sound. But, while all three sounded quite similar, they were by now means interchangeable; I for one far preferred one of them to the others, but it was only due to that last "5%." To people--not spectrographs--that is really the most important 5%.

Then, it's maintained by many, not just me, that the particular quality of the material is another very important factor, in the case of shakuhachi of course it being bamboo. Looking again at another instrument, it's been put forth within the last couple of years that the "little ice age" that took place in Europe at the time Stradivari and the Guarneris were making violins may be an important factor in the wonderful sound of their violins, because the summer-winter growth of the trees from which they obtained their wood was more regular. The info is on the web somewhere. Also, it's well-known among violin repairmen that you never touch the varnish on an old violin---if it sounds great already, of course!

And although it's true that in blind tests educated listeners weren't able to distinguish Strads from high-end modern violins, nevertheless any violinist who can get his/her hands on one will keep it, and there are Strad fans and Guarneri fans. To argue otherwise is to say that the many great violinists over the last 200+ years who were crazy about particular violins by these makers were not clear in the head.

I heard Midori Goto play again recently, she plays, I believe, a very old violin by Amati--I could be wrong, if not it's a (probably del Gesu) Guarneri--and that tone, which is obvious, not being the bright and somewhat in-your-face sound of modern violins (just like shakuhachi, hmm, how about that) is part of her communication via music. To change that would change her expression. The bows too are a factor, certain violinists over the years, so I've heard, have felt nearly as strongly about their bows as their fiddles.

Back to shakuhachi, older bamboo is of better quality--on good old flutes for the most part, but I've also seen many no-stamp or middling-quality older shakuhachi made from fantastic pieces of bamboo, of a quality nearly impossible to acquire these days, thus of a quality that would not be "wasted" on beginner-oriented flutes. And those makers out there with very good bamboo "guard it with their life."

So while pure physics of sound may have a lot to say about "machine" made (even if hand assembled) instruments like those in the woodwind family, with traditional (not necessarily modern, made also to strict pattern) shakuhachi, there are ineffable, if not mystical, factors as well. Anyone who plays well and has played very fine shakuhachi can tell you that.


“Many people come, looking, looking. Some people come, see.”
                        —Nepalese saying

Offline

 

#29 2009-12-16 02:20:59

Peter Kororo
Member
Registered: 2008-06-21
Posts: 82
Website

Re: What features give more timbres?

Tairaku wrote:

edosan wrote:

I would aver that, the more a particular flute is played, the better the player sounds.

Bamboo can change with time, but not nearly as much as a player...and probably not enough to make a perceptible difference.

I once asked John Singer how much he thought the tone changed due to the flute being played a lot and he said "5%". This is based upon having had the experience of playing (for example) Yamaguchi Shiro flutes which sat in a cupboard unplayed for 50 years against ones that had been played constantly.

I you ask (not asked ;-)) me, I'd say more than that. I've played the same flutes for a few years constantly and heard the sound improve, or in one case traded to get an old but like-new flute back and it sounded better than when I first had it in it's like-new state. Yes, all impressionistic, but strong impressions.

It's said flutes that crack, if they don't crack so badly the bore gets altered, sound better afterwards because the tension that lead to them cracking has been released. All hearsay, of course....but my best flutes are all of that sort.

I know this won't stand up to the scrutiny of science, but then science doesn't stand up to the scrutiny of art!


“Many people come, looking, looking. Some people come, see.”
                        —Nepalese saying

Offline

 

#30 2009-12-16 02:25:59

Tairaku 太楽
Administrator/Performer
From: Tasmania
Registered: 2005-10-07
Posts: 3226
Website

Re: What features give more timbres?

Peter Kororo wrote:

Tairaku wrote:

edosan wrote:

I would aver that, the more a particular flute is played, the better the player sounds.

Bamboo can change with time, but not nearly as much as a player...and probably not enough to make a perceptible difference.

I once asked John Singer how much he thought the tone changed due to the flute being played a lot and he said "5%". This is based upon having had the experience of playing (for example) Yamaguchi Shiro flutes which sat in a cupboard unplayed for 50 years against ones that had been played constantly.

I you ask (not asked ;-)) me, I'd say more than that. I've played the same flutes for a few years constantly and heard the sound improve, or in one case traded to get an old but like-new flute back and it sounded better than when I first had it in it's like-new state. Yes, all impressionistic, but strong impressions.

It's said flutes that crack, if they don't crack so badly the bore gets altered, sound better afterwards because the tension that lead to them cracking has been released. All hearsay, of course....but my best flutes are all of that sort.

I know this won't stand up to the scrutiny of science, but then science doesn't stand up to the scrutiny of art!

Anyway it's certain that playing instruments does improve the tone and keep the instrument happy. That's why they have someone come through a museum and play all the instruments periodically.


'Progress means simplifying, not complicating' : Bruno Munari

http://www.myspace.com/tairakubrianritchie

Offline

 

#31 2009-12-16 02:31:12

Peter Kororo
Member
Registered: 2008-06-21
Posts: 82
Website

Re: What features give more timbres?

PS who changed my under-my-name thingy to "über sensei?" I thought I was a moderator with a small m.....

While on the topic of names.....I chose "kororo" because like shakuhachi it's a simple thing that's very, very hard to do well. I've had a couple people already refer to me as "Peter Kokoro."

As Wurst Zenscheisster (sp?) might say, "Kororo not Kokoro. Both good for shakuhachi but not same. Importand for Xen kapieren."

(Sorry to make fun of your English, Wurst, but after all those years in Tassie I'd think you'd be a bit more conversant in the local lingo.)


“Many people come, looking, looking. Some people come, see.”
                        —Nepalese saying

Offline

 

#32 2009-12-16 02:37:42

Tairaku 太楽
Administrator/Performer
From: Tasmania
Registered: 2005-10-07
Posts: 3226
Website

Re: What features give more timbres?

Peter Kororo wrote:

PS who changed my under-my-name thingy to "über sensei?" I thought I was a moderator with a small m.....

You may have a small m Peter, but it was Horst who bestowed the honorific "über sensei". Well anyway "moderator" is definitely not sufficient, so if you want any particular upgrade let us know.


'Progress means simplifying, not complicating' : Bruno Munari

http://www.myspace.com/tairakubrianritchie

Offline

 

#33 2009-12-16 11:38:32

Matt Lyon
Member
From: North Eastern Oregon
Registered: 2009-06-30
Posts: 92

Re: What features give more timbres?

I have been wondering why a flute that has been played more sounds better.

One thought that I would like to throw out is that maybe the friction of the air and the effects of it on the bore in relation to the pressure and flow nodes.

Would the friction be able to gently refine the bore?

IMHO the mysticism that is involved is just a reflection of not fully understanding the physics of what is truly happening.

Matt

Offline

 

#34 2009-12-16 14:05:39

purehappiness
Member
From: Connecticut USA
Registered: 2009-01-13
Posts: 528

Re: What features give more timbres?

Perhaps the moisture over time does get into the bore and smooths out certain areas. Even if it is lacquered. Just a guess.

Or, the heating and cooling down of the fibers from being played has something to do with it. smile

Last edited by purehappiness (2009-12-16 14:06:43)


I was not conscious whether I was riding on the wind or the wind was riding on me.

Lieh-tzu

Offline

 

#35 2009-12-16 14:44:54

radi0gnome
Member
From: Kingston NY
Registered: 2006-12-29
Posts: 1030
Website

Re: What features give more timbres?

Matt Lyon wrote:

IMHO the mysticism that is involved is just a reflection of not fully understanding the physics of what is truly happening.

How very true. I'm sure it all can be explained with morphic field theory: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphic_field


"Now birds record new harmonie, And trees do whistle melodies;
Now everything that nature breeds, Doth clad itself in pleasant weeds."
~ Thomas Watson - England's Helicon ca 1580

Offline

 

#36 2009-12-16 16:00:23

Tairaku 太楽
Administrator/Performer
From: Tasmania
Registered: 2005-10-07
Posts: 3226
Website

Re: What features give more timbres?

Sound is vibration. When an instrument vibrates the material it's made of settles and that changes the sound. Not a big mystery.


'Progress means simplifying, not complicating' : Bruno Munari

http://www.myspace.com/tairakubrianritchie

Offline

 

#37 2009-12-16 16:29:32

edosan
Edomologist
From: Salt Lake City
Registered: 2005-10-09
Posts: 2185

Re: What features give more timbres?

Tairaku wrote:

Sound is vibration. When an instrument vibrates the material it's made of settles and that changes the sound. Not a big mystery.

"...settles"?

Now THAT's a big mystery.

Where is your evidence for that, and what is the definition of 'settles', other than what, to you, is your direct experience, and/or wishes?

To me, this is tantamount to throwing chicken bones, or quoting from the Bible.

And yes, I fully realize that I'm kicking a large hornet's nest here  smile


Zen is not easy.
It takes effort to attain nothingness.
And then what do you have?
Bupkes.

Offline

 

#38 2009-12-16 16:45:33

radi0gnome
Member
From: Kingston NY
Registered: 2006-12-29
Posts: 1030
Website

Re: What features give more timbres?

Tairaku wrote:

Sound is vibration. When an instrument vibrates the material it's made of settles and that changes the sound. Not a big mystery.

Do molecules that are bound together by electrons darting about trying to fill holes settle? Your theory makes sense until you think about what science has found about how solid objects become solid. Still could be true I guess, but from what I've read the quantum world doesn't always follow the rules you'd think it should.


"Now birds record new harmonie, And trees do whistle melodies;
Now everything that nature breeds, Doth clad itself in pleasant weeds."
~ Thomas Watson - England's Helicon ca 1580

Offline

 

#39 2009-12-16 19:23:29

Tairaku 太楽
Administrator/Performer
From: Tasmania
Registered: 2005-10-07
Posts: 3226
Website

Re: What features give more timbres?

edosan wrote:

Tairaku wrote:

Sound is vibration. When an instrument vibrates the material it's made of settles and that changes the sound. Not a big mystery.

"...settles"?

Now THAT's a big mystery.

Where is your evidence for that, and what is the definition of 'settles', other than what, to you, is your direct experience, and/or wishes?

To me, this is tantamount to throwing chicken bones, or quoting from the Bible.

And yes, I fully realize that I'm kicking a large hornet's nest here  smile

SOMETHING happens when an instrument gets played a lot. I don't know any musician or instrument maker who doesn't agree with that. I use the word settle because that's my intuition, I can't prove anything.

Another thing that happens to certain materials that changes the sound is drying out (usually) or getting more moist (sometimes). That has a HUGE impact on the sound of instruments. I know this for a fact because I have recorded the same instruments in the same room with the same mics by the same engineer and with the same settings and gotten consistently different but predicable results depending upon the season and relative humidity in the air.


'Progress means simplifying, not complicating' : Bruno Munari

http://www.myspace.com/tairakubrianritchie

Offline

 

#40 2009-12-16 20:38:46

edosan
Edomologist
From: Salt Lake City
Registered: 2005-10-09
Posts: 2185

Re: What features give more timbres?

Tairaku wrote:

SOMETHING happens when an instrument gets played a lot.

Yup, what happens is that you get better at playing that instrument, so it sounds different, usually better.

As far as not knowing any makers or musicians that don't agree with that, I think that may require a bit more inquiry. 


A few questions come to mind:

Do all species of bamboo settle the same, and improve
with a lot of blowing, or do some species 'improve' more than others?

How about wall thickness, how does that affect the settling?
Or greater or lesser amounts of ji in the bore?

Do crappy and/or mediocre shakuhachi improve also with
age and blowing? How can you tell how much they've improved,
if they're crappy/mediocre?

How much blowing does it take, and what kind of blowing,
i.e., does it require expert blowing, or will any blowing do? Every day?
Every other day? XX hours?

If it were possible to go back in time, to when it was newly made,
and blow the shakuhachi in question with your current
quality of embouchure, would you be able to tell that it just hadn't
'been blown/aged enough' yet, or even that it was new?

What if it's a pre-war, or older shakuhachi, i.e., older that you are?
How can you tell whether or how much it changed? Who do you ask?

Even if you started playing 30 years ago on the same shakuhachi,
how could you separate the change in quality of your playing from
the supposed change in the flute? Or can you tell the difference
in just 10 or 15 years of pretty steady playing?

Isn't it just as likely that it was YOU and your playing that changed,
and not the material the flute was made of, or what
happened–if anything–to that material?

This is not at all to deny that there are many very significant
differences among shakuhachi: bore profiles and perturbations
particular to different flutes, wall thickness, hole diameter and
chimney depths and shapes, blowing edge bevel angles, and
so on, but these are FIXED variables, unless someone messes
with them along the way.

As to your point about the studio, and all things being equal (?)
except the season: relative humidity alone will affect the sound,
not to mention which side of the bed you got up on.

Last edited by edosan (2009-12-16 20:40:48)


Zen is not easy.
It takes effort to attain nothingness.
And then what do you have?
Bupkes.

Offline

 

#41 2009-12-16 22:05:12

Tairaku 太楽
Administrator/Performer
From: Tasmania
Registered: 2005-10-07
Posts: 3226
Website

Re: What features give more timbres?

The vibrations emanating from a musical instrument affect everything around it. I find it hard to assume that these vibrations would have no effect on the instrument itself.


'Progress means simplifying, not complicating' : Bruno Munari

http://www.myspace.com/tairakubrianritchie

Offline

 

#42 2009-12-16 22:07:19

Moran from Planet X
Member
From: Here to There
Registered: 2005-10-11
Posts: 1524
Website

Re: What features give more timbres?

edosan wrote:

What if it's a pre-war, or older shakuhachi, i.e., older that you are?
How can you tell whether or how much it changed? Who do you ask?

This is where holdling a Shakuhachi Séance would be in order -- with the shakuhachi-in-question present, of course.

Once your spirit-medium connects with the spirit of the long dead shakuhachi maker, you can ask him yourself, presuming you can speak and understand Japanese. (I don't think there are any dead American shakuhachi makers, yet.)

There are a number of questions you can ask the past master craftsman about your shakuhachi:

1. Was your bamboo twisted? This may get a variety of responses.

2. What type of chicken did you use from which to procure your chicken-dung bamboo seasoning? This may either wonderfully impress or utterly confound the spirit of the deceased shakuhachi maker. But again, it is certain to elicit an interesting response.

3. Boxers or Fundoshi?

--- there are really too many crucial questions to list.


"I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass...and I am all out of bubblegum." —Rowdy Piper, They Live!

Offline

 

#43 2009-12-16 22:17:21

Tairaku 太楽
Administrator/Performer
From: Tasmania
Registered: 2005-10-07
Posts: 3226
Website

Re: What features give more timbres?

Chris Moran wrote:

(I don't think there are any dead American shakuhachi makers, yet.)
.

Clifton Karhu-good maker of Myoan flutes and excellent artist.


'Progress means simplifying, not complicating' : Bruno Munari

http://www.myspace.com/tairakubrianritchie

Offline

 

#44 2009-12-17 00:43:05

edosan
Edomologist
From: Salt Lake City
Registered: 2005-10-09
Posts: 2185

Re: What features give more timbres?

Taldaran wrote:

As far as acoustic coupling is concerned, do any of you owners of many kinds of shakuhachi, find that there are any losses of resonance to your ear with 2 piece flutes as opposed to nobe?

     How could you ever, EVER get an answer to this question, when every shakuhachi is unique? There are no 'control shakuhachi', nobe
         or otherwise.


Anyone care to weigh in on the idea?

     The question at hand is whether there is a significant change over time in the sound of a given shakuhachi due to its being used
         (blown into) a lot. I don't see how these questions of yours relate to that idea.

Last edited by edosan (2009-12-17 00:44:41)


Zen is not easy.
It takes effort to attain nothingness.
And then what do you have?
Bupkes.

Offline

 

#45 2009-12-17 00:51:48

Taldaran
Member
From: Everett, Washington-USA
Registered: 2009-01-13
Posts: 232

Re: What features give more timbres?

Sorry. I will remove my post and start a new thread.


Christopher

“Whoever can see through all fear will always be safe.” Tao Te Ching

Offline

 

#46 2009-12-17 00:56:16

edosan
Edomologist
From: Salt Lake City
Registered: 2005-10-09
Posts: 2185

Re: What features give more timbres?

Taldaran wrote:

Sorry. I will remove my post and start a new thread.

No need to do that; this is quite a fuzzy and loose thread to begin with...

Besides, getting into the 'sound' thang, in any way, shape or form, always makes everyone crazy.

Last edited by edosan (2009-12-17 00:57:45)


Zen is not easy.
It takes effort to attain nothingness.
And then what do you have?
Bupkes.

Offline

 

#47 2009-12-17 01:13:03

Tairaku 太楽
Administrator/Performer
From: Tasmania
Registered: 2005-10-07
Posts: 3226
Website

Re: What features give more timbres?

edosan wrote:

Besides, getting into the 'sound' thang, in any way, shape or form, always makes everyone crazy.

Music is about sound. I never understand the people who say, "In theory this factor or that factor shouldn't make a difference in the sound, therefore I don't hear a difference" as if it's a badge of honor.

"I can't hear the difference between jiari and jinashi" as a bragging point is funny.

I am in a mastering facility right now mastering an album with some pretty heavy duty musicians and engineers. If none of us could hear minute differences in tone that would be a waste of money and an exercise in trial and error.


'Progress means simplifying, not complicating' : Bruno Munari

http://www.myspace.com/tairakubrianritchie

Offline

 

#48 2009-12-17 01:32:02

Toby
Shakuhachi Scientist
From: out somewhere circling the sun
Registered: 2008-03-15
Posts: 405

Re: What features give more timbres?

Peter Kororo wrote:

My opinion is based on experience, not math; I think Ken's is too. And I agree....this is why I prefer flutes made from before WWII, though there are exceptions both ways. But in those days flutes were more "hand made" than nowadays where most makers use a profile and stick with it.

The bore diameter does matter, but as an example, I've owned five 1.8 shakuhachi over the years by one great Meiji-Showa maker, and while they all have a similar quality, their sounds are quite different. Some of that is from the bamboo differing. My two by another great maker are very different, as are the five flutes by another I've owned. The first maker's have medium bores, the second larger, the third very large. I have two by a Kyushu player-maker, one of Watazumi's teachers, so koten honkyoku oriented, with even larger bores (20mm for the 1.8, 22mm for the 1.9) and they are also very different-sounding, though in part that's because the 1.8 is kanjiri-shibori (closes down at the very end).

In all of the above the bores are irregular, somewhat, but also it appears each bore was shaped in accordance, to some extent, with the piece of bamboo. In other words the maker didn't add more or less ji to get the same bore profile. This is why I don't think you can just apply a mathematical formula or two to explain the sound of shakuhachi....better to play as many old flutes as possible to learn better what makes them sound like they do. The age and density of the bamboo matters too, soft bamboo gives a soft sound, dense bamboo a harder, more ringing tone, and IMO the more a flute is played the better it sounds, within its own limitations of course, so the above factors are more important.

The bores on these older ones also aren't round....in the old days they said a "tamago" (egg-shaped) bore was best, and taller than wide on the great old ones that I've check out, at least. So wider bamboo feels better in the hands, but taller may well sound better, there's a life lesson in there too.

Mouthpiece shape matters too, wide and shallow like many Tozan flutes imparts a reedier tone IMO, one I personally don't care for but "de gustibus....." Kodo/Kindo type are pretty much a semi-circle, which is my favorite, whereas quite a few older Kinko flutes have a slightly V shape, which focuses the tone more and makes them easier to play for people without a lot of wind. 

Bigger holes make the tone brighter, so I like shakuhachi with a larger bore but holes that are "classic" size (10mm +/-) vs. 11 +/-. I feel such flutes "hold the sound" more and that may make the tone nicer. Again that's somewhat a matter of taste.

Last, I feel the maker's character and thus intention in making is important: are you devoted to shakuhachi? Do you love the culture(s) it came out of (love implies understanding, I don't mean infatuation)? Are you sincere in learning to make shakuhachi? Do you want to make the best flutes you can, even if it takes years to learn to do that? Or do you want to take short cuts, and/or make money quickly and easily, or become famous, etc? In other words how much of it is about YOU, how much about the sea of shakuhachi we're all waves in?

As a beginner, a senior player said a maker's character is in the flute, and I didn't believe him, though I do now. I've looked carefully (but not measured, though I would like to get the measurements someone else did of my best flutes some day, just out of curiosity) at many bores, and sometimes two flutes look identical on the inside but sound very different, some of that is I believe due to the makers' characters being different.

I don't make flutes, not yet any way, thus my perspective may differ from that of experienced makers. So I hope that clarifies more than it obfuscates.

[Edited for spelling and (relative) clarity]

Just to add a word or two: Of course making shakuhachi by mathematical formula is impossible, due to the extreme complexity of what is happening inside the flute. But that being said, what is happening *is* faithfully following physical laws, and is completely based on the bore profile and the inner smoothness (which are actually part and parcel of the same thing). Understanding the basics of how the bore makes the sound takes a lot out of the realm of guesswork and impression and mysticism, but of course the subtleties are where the art comes in.

I disagree about the effect of the bamboo density. Hard, soft--it is all so much harder than the air vibrating in it that it doesn't make a difference. The smoothness of the bore, however, is quite important, and it may be that there is a relatively consistent difference on this score between harder and softer culms. This would certainly be the case with micropores inside; but this wouldn't matter if the flute were lacquered, much less filled with ji.

Toby

Offline

 

#49 2009-12-17 03:19:35

Taldaran
Member
From: Everett, Washington-USA
Registered: 2009-01-13
Posts: 232

Re: What features give more timbres?

A foam rubber flute with a soft but smooth coating would sound the same as a flute with the same dimensions made from solid glass? Hmm...

I have made a cardboard tube shakuhachi almost identical to another PVC I had previously made, that I completely sealed with waterborne polyurethane so that the bore and fingerholes were smooth with a superglue hardened utaguchi, and they functioned similarly, but sounded very different.

I know in theory they should have sounded the same. At least in my practice, they didn't.

Last edited by Taldaran (2009-12-17 03:29:56)


Christopher

“Whoever can see through all fear will always be safe.” Tao Te Ching

Offline

 

#50 2009-12-17 03:32:08

Toby
Shakuhachi Scientist
From: out somewhere circling the sun
Registered: 2008-03-15
Posts: 405

Re: What features give more timbres?

Peter Kororo wrote:

Toby wrote:

I know that no one into the mysticism of it all wants to hear this, but it is completely, 100% about bore profile and smoothness.
Toby

Toby, I appreciate your input, and don't want to sound dismissive, but you're doing exactly that to the input of myself and others--most of whom are....very experienced players! What you're labeling as mysticism (never mind that mysticism may indeed be capable of discovering truths beyond the scope of science) actually isn't so nebulous, or divorced from the practicalities of making shakuhachi.

I'll add that what you're talking about is theory, even if tested with certain instruments--but it would appear not with shakuhachi--whereas I'm speaking from a lot of experience playing and listening to all kinds of shakuhachi with sensitive and developed hearing. So in fact what you're writing is more "mystical" than what I am because it's not based at all as solidly on real hands-on experience with shakuhachi.

Yes, bore shape, and the smoothness of the urushi, are certainly very important factors--quantitatively--in the sound of a flute. After looking down the bores of quite a few, I can tell pretty much how a flute will sound before playing it by just checking the bore profile visually.

But on that point in particular, it's the "last 5%" that makes a great shakuhachi in terms of sound quality..so as is often the case quality and quantity are not collateral. What's more, it's the feeling of the sound, of the resonance and/or vibration of the flute, that can be just as important, and just as enjoyable, as the "sound," I use quotes because in fact I don't agree with such reductionist analysis (that should be obvious).

As and example, I recently had the chance to play three Miura Kindo shakuhachi side-by-side. They are all from the same period, and the bore profiles were basically identical (I checked visually and by touch). Kindo was really the first maker to be able to make many flutes of very high quality and reliably similar sound--his sound. But, while all three sounded quite similar, they were by now means interchangeable; I for one far preferred one of them to the others, but it was only due to that last "5%." To people--not spectrographs--that is really the most important 5%.

Then, it's maintained by many, not just me, that the particular quality of the material is another very important factor, in the case of shakuhachi of course it being bamboo. Looking again at another instrument, it's been put forth within the last couple of years that the "little ice age" that took place in Europe at the time Stradivari and the Guarneris were making violins may be an important factor in the wonderful sound of their violins, because the summer-winter growth of the trees from which they obtained their wood was more regular. The info is on the web somewhere. Also, it's well-known among violin repairmen that you never touch the varnish on an old violin---if it sounds great already, of course!

And although it's true that in blind tests educated listeners weren't able to distinguish Strads from high-end modern violins, nevertheless any violinist who can get his/her hands on one will keep it, and there are Strad fans and Guarneri fans. To argue otherwise is to say that the many great violinists over the last 200+ years who were crazy about particular violins by these makers were not clear in the head.

I heard Midori Goto play again recently, she plays, I believe, a very old violin by Amati--I could be wrong, if not it's a (probably del Gesu) Guarneri--and that tone, which is obvious, not being the bright and somewhat in-your-face sound of modern violins (just like shakuhachi, hmm, how about that) is part of her communication via music. To change that would change her expression. The bows too are a factor, certain violinists over the years, so I've heard, have felt nearly as strongly about their bows as their fiddles.

Back to shakuhachi, older bamboo is of better quality--on good old flutes for the most part, but I've also seen many no-stamp or middling-quality older shakuhachi made from fantastic pieces of bamboo, of a quality nearly impossible to acquire these days, thus of a quality that would not be "wasted" on beginner-oriented flutes. And those makers out there with very good bamboo "guard it with their life."

So while pure physics of sound may have a lot to say about "machine" made (even if hand assembled) instruments like those in the woodwind family, with traditional (not necessarily modern, made also to strict pattern) shakuhachi, there are ineffable, if not mystical, factors as well. Anyone who plays well and has played very fine shakuhachi can tell you that.

Hi Peter,

You make it sound as if I am some sort of nerd with a slide rule. Actually I too have quite a bit of experience as both a player and a maker of shakuhachi, and have tried and played hundreds of flutes over the course of the last 25 years or so. I own many old and fine shakuhachi, and I have many old and fine western woodwind instruments as well. There is no difference between them in terms of ineffability or mysticism. Come play my Selmer Super alto sax from 1933 or my turn-of-the-last-century handmade Hammig silver flute, and you will see what I mean. To claim a special place in the pantheon of musical instruments for the shakuhachi or any other instrument is, IMO, an unfortunate form of obscurantism.

Physical instruments in the physical world follow physical laws. It cannot be otherwise. Why this ruffles the feathers of most players is beyond me, but let me hasten to add that this does not contradict the notion that physical instruments can transport us beyond the physical. It is important though, IMO, to clarify which effect belongs to which cause. The instrument is nothing but a physical tool. The fingers and breath are physical as well, but the control of the fingers and breath, and thus the final sound, have roots in the divine.

While I state again unequivocally that the response of the shakuhachi is 100% based on known physical laws,  I do not mean to be reductionist. While it is theoretically possible to derive the sound of the instrument from the dimensions, the complexity of the analysis makes this practically impossible. However, the synthetic capabilities of the human mind allow a master craftsman to shape a bore to give a desired result without consciously understanding those laws, just as you can tell to some extent how a flute will play by sighting down the bore.

I once had the opportunity to play John Kaizan Neptune's performance 1.8 flute. It is an amazing instrument, with a big, rock-solid sound from bottom to top. Sighting down the bore was a shock. The inside looked like a rocky path in a zen garden; full of bumps and dips and irregularities. I, too, have a certain ability to predict the sound from the bore; but had I looked down that bore before playing I never would have guessed it would even be mediocre, much less singular. John had simply applied his acoustic knowledge and experience, making lots of local corrections over the years. Nothing mystical there, only a fine application of Rayleigh perturbation theory in the form of an empirically worked out chart of nodal points for each note of the shakuhachi.

Makers know that variations of as little as 1/10 mm in certain areas of the bore can have dramatic effects on the tone and response of a flute. When you sight down two "basically identical" bores, can you see the difference of 1/10 mm? I certainly can't, but I can certainly tell the difference when I play the flutes. There is a world of difference between "basically identical" and "identical", in shakuhachi as well as any other instrument.

For instance I have two handmade silver flutes. The bodies are 100% cylindrical, and identical within .01 mm in diameter, as far as I can tell with my digital calipers. And yet, using the same headjoint, they play quite differently. Why? Is it the spirit of the makers, or the fact that one has fewer small distortions in the body tube where the toneholes are cut out? It is well documented, for instance, that even microscopic changes in tonehole undercutting and rounding (both inside and out) account for most of the perceived differences in otherwise "identical instruments". Did you check that as well in your "identical bore" shakuhachi?

As regards violins; there are several different theories on the excellence of the instruments of that particular Cremonese period. Apart from the Maunder Minimum, a theory has been "floated" (pun intended) about the fact that the wood for those instruments was taken down from the mountains by river and stored in the salt water of the Venetian lagoon for several years, during which time bacteria and chemicals changed the properties of the wood for the better, at least insofar as violin-related resonances are concerned. However, neither violins made with woods similar to those growing during the Minimum, nor those made by Nagyvary using similar aging techniques seem to rival their earlier counterparts. Beyond dispute the violins of Amati, Stradivari and Giuseppe Guarnieri e figli were of superb craftsmanship, and unfortunately many of those techniques were lost during an economic crisis that saw the closing of many of those shops.

We must also be clear on another point: there is a fundamental difference between the way a violin and a shakuhachi produce sound. In a violin, a string excites resonances in the violin body, which vibrates sympathetically, amplifying the exciting impulse and radiating sound into the surrounding air. In this case, body resonances determine a large part of the sound, and thus the physical properties of the wood are very important to the final sound.

A shakuhachi, in fact any woodwind, is entirely different. In a flute, for instance (and the shakuhachi is a flute), an oscillating air jet couples with the mass of air in the body of the instrument and sets it in motion, in a way determined by the resonances of the tube. The tube itself doesn't vibrate significantly--less than a millionth of a meter in a cross-sectional expansion. The vibrations of the tube have absolutely no perceptible effect on the sound. This is the scientific consensus. Experiments on this subject have been going on for the past 150 years or so, and not one has ever demonstrated any perceptible effect of wall materials on the final sound, even when the walls are quite thin (metal at 15 micrometers). I am quite conversant with this particular topic, and can provide you with plenty of materials online, if you are interested.

I do quite concur that many musicians are not clear in the head; in fact it has been scientifically proven! In a classic experiment in the 1970s, Dr. John Coltman constructed three identical "flutes" using tubes of silver, copper and wood, and asked professional flautists to play them and give their impressions. Without fail, all the players expressed clear preferences for one or the other, and most could clearly describe the differences in sound and feel between the instruments. Coltman then had them play the flutes again in a double-blind situation in which they could not identify which instrument was being blown by sight or feel, and the players were uniformly nonplussed to find that they could no longer tell the instruments apart! Obviously, more is going on here than meets the eye.

I think that at least part of the answer is indicated by a psychophysical study that was done several years ago. In it, researchers asked subjects to sample wine while being hooked up to an fMRI scanner. The subjects were given two different wines to taste. One was a rare and costly vintage, the other a rather ordinary table wine. The subjects reported enjoying the fine wine much more, and brain scans revealed that when drinking that vintage one, the pleasure centers of their brains lit up much more--the subjects not only reported more pleasure, they were physiologically experiencing more pleasure. You can probably guess what is coming. The wines were identical, simply put in different bottles. But people who were told that one wine was finer enjoyed it more, and experienced more physical pleasure in drinking it, even though there was absolutely no difference between the two.

Perhaps this also helps to explain why violinists who love the incomparable sound of an old master Stradivari go somewhat mad when they mistake a modern violin for one in blind tests.

In short (well, perhaps not so short), there is a lot of mysticism surrounding the shakuhachi, but that is the point: it surrounds the shakuhachi, rather than being an intrinsic property of the instrument itself.

Toby

Last edited by Toby (2009-12-17 03:39:26)

Offline

 

Board footer

Powered by PunBB
© Copyright 2002–2005 Rickard Andersson

Google