Re: length - tuning

From: PH (bamboomuse@yahoo.com)
Date: Tue Nov 13 2001 - 22:51:36 PST


Nelson, very interesting analysis. But in the old days, the 1.8 was the statndard, and it didn't
matter what that pitch was. So despite the 1.6 being mathematically the size where shaku and pitch
coincide, so to speak, couldn't the 1.8 still be the standard? I'm probably talking past what
you've said, but be patient with me.

Something that occured to me after my last post is about the nishaku. It's the only length about
which I've heard the terms "Seiritsukan" and "Seisunkan" used. The former is a flute with exact
pitch (i.e.C), and the latter a flute with exact length (i.e exactly 2 shaku). This is because a
2.0 in C is already over 2 shaku, but by less than half a sun, so it can't be called a 2.1. After
that, it's just a convention, as most 2.1s are close to 2.2 and so on, but there's no need to
differentiate. Also, most old 2.0s are exactly 2 shaku long and thus not "in pitch." This probably
doesn't throw any light on anything, but it's a little shakuhachi trivia, and if you're looking at
old 2.0s be sure to check the pitch if it's important your flute play in C. I have to add though
that I think the sharp 2.0 is a great pitch, along with 1.9 my favorite for Kinko-ryu honkyoku,
Esashi Oiwake, and so on.

Peter

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither
Liberty nor Safety." —Benjamin Franklin

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 08 2002 - 09:19:37 PST