World Shakuhachi Discussion / Go to Live Shakuhachi Chat
You are not logged in.
This thread is sparked by the ji-ari / ji-nashi discussion in the Ji-nashi Forum. I've started this thread in the Flutemaking Forum because it is directed towards shakuhachi makers. I think the collective experience of makers can offer a unique perspective for players in terms of what goes into the styles of shakuhachi we all play.
Specifically, I'm interested in the experiences makers have had making both ji-ari and ji-nashi shakuhachi. Do you find the two styles similar? Are they identical? Are they different? How so? I'm not interested in the defense of what we prefer but rather our direct experiences making shakuhachi.
Hopefully our varied experiences will add some insight for others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've had experience making both ji-ari and ji-nashi shakuhachi. In my experience, I've found both concrete and philosophical differences between the two which have ultimately influenced how I work.
With ji-ari flutes, I notice the precision and control this approach offers. It brings out the scientist in me. By concentrating on the negative space of the bore, it is possible to fabricate around this space to find a particular sound desired.
I find a precision to the tone as well. There are exceptions of course, but more often than not, the tone is relatively clear, focused and pure. I've recently been making very wide bore ji-ari shakuhachi. Although they are obviously breathier, I've noticed they also have a voice of precision in their tone.
With ji-nashi flutes, there is much less control. The yield of good flutes per batch is relatively low. For me, the focus is on the connection with the material more than the empty space of the bore. It brings out the artist/philosopher in me. Instead of fabricating, I'm trying to adjust and nudge as little as possible to make the most dramatic improvement.
Although there are exceptions, I generally find more complexity in the tone of ji-nashi shakuhachi. They often play with a raw, unpolished, diffused tone quality.
Personally, I find it endlessly fascinating that we are all wired differently, and as a result, approach the shakuhachi in many different ways. My direction as a flute maker is based on some of the head scratching differences I've experienced between ji-nashi and ji-ari shakuhachi making. I'm curious about the varied experiences that other makers have had.
Ken
Offline
Hi Ken, what a great idea!
Both my processes with Jiari making and Jinashi making involve playing traditional shakuhachi music. When I first started, I used to just blow against a digital tuner. Then I learned shakuhachi music and that changed the way I play AND make shakuhachi. Since playing any of the traditional styles of music pushes the flute to it's limits, I think it's important to be able to play a style well in order to make good shakuhachi.
When I make Jiari shakuhachi, it's usually the 1.8 or 2.4. I make them according to the specs given to me by Kinya. The specs came from Chikusen Tamai's shop but I'm sure Kinya made some minor adjustments in the bore measurements. Everything is precisely measured: the utaguchi angles, length of each piece (top and bottom), length of nakastuki joint and hole placements. Every centimeter of the bore is worked to exact, precise measurements. This work is very time consuming. It takes about one year for me to produce a professional quality Jiari and about three months for a student grade flute. In that span of time, the flute will go through several stages. After all the initial hands on work such as drilling, filing and sanding Ji paste, the tuning stage is the place where the most time is spent. This is when I bring my Sankyoku music lessons (from Ralph Samuelson, Christopher Blasdel, Ronnie Seldin and Brian Ritchie) into the shop. In learning the Sankyoku ensemble music, I developed the lips and ears that enable me to make critical assessments in tonal quality and response. Since, this is how the experienced players I respect judge a flute, this is what I make a priority in tuning. Although I craft with as much technical accuracy as possible according to my specs, no two jiari 1.8s ever turned out identical. Even though the bore specs are predetermined, making a 1.8 that begs to be played still requires a certain amount of intuition (a little bit of art thrown into the science .)
When making the Jinashi shakuhachi, I listen to the flute to see what it wants to do. There are no predetermined bore specs, only the air vibrating in the chamber to tell me what it wants. The finger holes are drilled and adjusted one by one. The utaguchi angles are cut according to the diameter of the bores and how fat the walls are. Sometimes a flute will be perfectly fine with nothing to do in the bore, but this is rare. They often need what I call Spot Tuning to be able to play with balance. When making jinashi, I like to use wide bore bamboo. This way, all I need to do is add some material at certain resonance spots to squeeze a weak note. To me, adding is easier than removing. Could just be me. As with jiari, I also play music during the tuning stage of my jinashi flutes. But instead of Sankyoku, I play the Dokyoku music I learned from Kinya. I make mostly Choukan, bass flutes so they are not used in Sankyoku anyway. A typical day with Kinya went like this: I show up for a playing lesson (on time and with my 2.4 jinashi) and then we go into the shop after. He puts on a cassette tape of Watazumi and we file and drill holes into bamboo. Often, Kinya would stop to listen to a passage being played. And then with a puzzled look on his face, would say something like, "Hmmm, he is playing that differently." Early on, when we came to a road block on a flute, Kinya would ask me what I would do. I thought he was testing me. Then, I realized he was truly asking me what I would do! For me, making a Jinashi flute is more about revealing the soul of the piece of bamboo with as little work as possible done in the bore. The music lessons with Kinya showed me a way to make those very important decisions. Nothing like blowing Komi Buki into a newly opened piece of bamboo to see if there's life in there.
I don't want to generalize since each flute is different regradless of style. But, for me, the main difference is that Jiari making requires the ability (and effort) to follow strict predetermined specs while jinashi making requires intuition (built on experience). Making both kinds back to back can be a little schizophrenic at times. It's like being in a foreign country. I need a map but also want to just follow the wind Both ways of traveling are fun and frustrating in different ways. But, exciting none the less.
The similarities: playing these flutes always give me deep respect for the culture or religion that begat this music, regardless of the style of flute
Namaste, Perry
Offline
I replied to the original thread and mentioned that as far as I've understood makers tend to have some kind of vision which they follow. He might be trying to make an instrument that sounds very fuzzy and captures that natural sound that is often associated with shakuhachi perfectly. What I'm curious about is, does this reflect the way you, the makers on this forum, make shakuhachi? Do you start out with a plan for the instrument you are working on or do you just make one and see how it turns out in the process? If you do have a plan in mind, is it clearly there from before you reach for the piece of raw bamboo or does the plan develop as you work on the flute to a point where you have a clear idea only after the flute is partially or even mostly done?
To take an example, Taimu flutes seem to have somewhat clear objective. Although they are all different in various ways they still aim for the "Taimu spirit" and try to capture the raw and powerful sound of the bamboo itself. It would seem logical that Mujitsu has to aim for that sort of result when making these instruments. I'd say that even if he used a bit of ji on some of those instruments they would still be made in the jinashi spirit and thus should be called that. Is this generally how it works for all of you or are there times when the flutes get made mostly by just making something until you find the best way to use that particular piece of bamboo? Can you always say "When I made this flute, I was aiming for the jinashi/jiari/broomstick kind of feel"?
Thank you for your thoughts.
Offline
amokrun wrote:
Is this generally how it works for all of you or are there times when the flutes get made mostly by just making something until you find the best way to use that particular piece of bamboo? Can you always say "When I made this flute, I was aiming for the jinashi/jiari/broomstick kind of feel"?
Good question Matti.
When making a ji-nashi shakuhachi, I like to start out with a dumb, idiot mind. Well, not exactly. I may be hoping that there will be a glow to the tone of the finished flute. Or, I may be thinking about developing the sweet spot as far as possible, or a number of other tweaks that I've learned from past experience that may be appropriate for the physical features of the particular piece. So, there is some strategy happening at this stage.
However, I find that once opened up initially, the bamboo reveals its individual voice. That's when I realize, "Ah, ok, it's going to be like this." From there, it's a matter of working in the most efficient manner to help that voice along. I'm not interested in changing the voice, but rather adjusting enough to help it reveal its full potential in terms of what I tune into individually as a maker. To me, it's similar to a parent-like relationship with the instrument.
When making a ji-ari shakuhachi, I usually have a clearer idea of what type of voice I'm looking to create, so I go at it with that in mind. Of course I'm limited in some ways by the size of the bamboo shell, but there is still more control over the voice. Each flute turns out differently and is unique in its own way, but clearly to a lesser degree than a ji-nashi approach. Maybe this is more of a God-like relationship with the instrument?
If I might add, regarding the discussion and debate over the material vs. empty space theories of sound. Working within the mindset of both ji-ari and ji-nashi flute making approaches has helped me suspend my beliefs about this subject. Each method seems to help support the other view. As a result, I'm afraid I'm a poor academic and happiest giggling with the bamboo, content with the mystery!
Ken
Offline
Yungflutes wrote:
The similarities: playing these flutes always give me deep respect for the culture or religion that begat this music, regardless of the style of flute
Perry,
Many thanks for your eloquent post. I know you're busy at the moment!
Working with both styles also gives me a respect for the makers before me who have developed shakuhachi and raised the bar. Regardless of style, shakuhachi making is difficult!!!
Ken
Offline
Mujitsu wrote:
Many thanks for your eloquent post. I know you're busy at the moment!
Working with both styles also gives me a respect for the makers before me who have developed shakuhachi and raised the bar. Regardless of style, shakuhachi making is difficult!!!
Ken
Hey Ken, as you well know, it's really important to share information. When I first started, I didn't have a computer and Bill Clinton was just starting to talk about the Information Super Highway! I probably would be here if it wasn't for you and Monty!
I had a discussion David Duncavage about shakuhachi making a while back. I asked if I could post his response here. He thought it was a good idea. Here's what he wrote:
"In traditional shakuhachi making, much of the mechanics (bending, utaguchi insertion, nakatsugi, hole drilling, root shaving….) can be learned fairly quickly by anyone who is reasonably skilled at basic craftsmanship. But the bottom line is “birthing the sound”. There is a sound in each bamboo that we strive to release. In order to do this, you need to play reasonably well I believe. In fact, that was the first bit of advice Tom Deaver gave me well over twenty years ago. An equally important part has to do with ones spirituality I believe. Yes, being trained in physics and engineering, I understand that the sound is a result of fundamental principles of acoustics. But no human made measuring device can equal what happens when our basic senses become at rest within the dimension of the spirit. Yes, through the advances of modern science and technology we can “see” deep into the world of quantum mechanics, make incredibly complicated integrated circuits like the Pentium chips, and see evidence of the Big Bang in galaxies flying away from us at difficult to comprehend speeds. But measure the “holistic warmth” of a tsu sound, measure or gauge why some sounds from a particular piece of bamboo resonate in the chest of one person and not another … science may have a way to explain it, and perhaps point to it, perhaps measure part of it. But give one a solid roadmap to recreate it in a naturally varying medium like bamboo? I think not. Ultimately, it comes down to the craftsperson working with the bamboo in a spirit of gratefulness that “sets the stage” for the bamboo to sing its song. I always tell people who bought a flute from me that the flute is incomplete without a player. The last step in making a great shakuhachi is the person who plays it. - David Duncavage, September, 2007
Off to Ohio!
Peace, Perry
Offline
Yungflutes wrote:
… science may have a way to explain it, and perhaps point to it, perhaps measure part of it. But give one a solid roadmap to recreate it in a naturally varying medium like bamboo? I think not. Ultimately, it comes down to the craftsperson working with the bamboo in a spirit of gratefulness that “sets the stage” for the bamboo to sing its song. - David Duncavage, September, 2007
Powerful thoughts!
Tom Deaver has a very inclusive style of working which combines a scientific understanding and inquisitiveness with an intuitive approach. Once he showed me some of his notebooks completely filled with numbers and computations. They represented countless hours of thorough scientific inquiry and experimentation regarding shakuhachi making. I was fascinated and dumbfounded. I asked if he referred to those results when he made shakuhachi. He said something like, "Well, yes and no. I come up with the same results working by feel but it's interesting to see if the science and intuition add up equally!" Classic Tom!
On rare occasions I might get very lucky and experience a shakuhachi which seems to create itself nicely with very little effort on my part. When this happens, sometimes my worried mind takes over and I think, "Oh no, what if I'm found out?" Then, I realize I couldn't have been so lucky in the past despite using the same mehanical blueprint. So yes, there is some mysterious, unmeasureable phenomenon happening there.
Ken
Offline
Yes Ken, your "secret" is out... Luck favors the well-prepared!
Something re/ secrets and science... I recently visited some flute makers at their workshops. Most had formulae and numbers and scientific diagrams lying around. The scientist in me can't help but look at these sacred documents and wonder how I would fare by applying their conclusions to my own flutes.
One jinashi maker saw I had a camera and invited me to please take photos of anything, including all his magical papers, numbers, and poster-sized diagrams of bores and holes and measurements. (Mother lode! ) He quickly added that using those numbers would likely lead to a poor-sounding flute unless I employed many years of experience and intuition for bamboo and tone color and a strong ability to play whatever repertoire is in question. No doubt. Having used other makers' formulae for hole placements, including their adjustments for bore and taper and jinashi versus jiari, I'm 100% inclined to agree with him... Making something something basically in tune with holes in all the right places but that doesn't beg to be played (Perry's words) isn't the hard part at all.
Need to breathe more bamboo dust...
-Darren.
Offline