Hi Peter, Ed and Morris,
Actually it's not a typo. The precurser to the komuso shakuhachi is called hitoyogiri. It's 1.1 in
length and pitch is A, one octave higher than 2.4. The oldest extant shakuhachi in museums and
temple treasuries are short flutes like this. It is made from non-root end bamboo. When Ikkyu
mentions shakuhachi in his poetry he is referring to hitoyogiri. The only recordings I have of
hitoyogiri are by Shinku Dan and by Tsuzan Fujiyoshi. I got them from Mejiro. If anybody knows
of other recordings I'd be interested. There are also a few recordings of tempuku on the CD "A
Collection of Unique Musical Instruments" on King Records. Tempuku is an even more primitive
version of shakuhachi, also short. The komuso lengthened the shakuhachi to its current
standard and started making it from the root end to make a more effective weapon of it. Of
course this is an oversimplified version of history, but that's the broad outline.
Regards,
BR
> shakuhachi Sat, 24 Jan 2004 Volume 1 : Number 518
>
> In this issue:
>
> [Shaku] Re: Long Flutes
> Itty Bitty shakuhachi...
> Re: [Shaku] Re: Long Flutes
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 08:28:18 -0600
> From: Peter Ross <peteross@cloudhandsmusic.com>
> To: Shakuhachi@communication.ucsd.edu
> Subject: [Shaku] Re: Long Flutes
> Message-ID: <a05200f1abc36dfb90863@[196.40.50.245]>
>
> Hi,
>
> Is #4 accurate? A 1.1 shakuhachi? Did you mean a 2.1?
>
> Peter
>
> 4. Kyorei is the oldest honkyoku. Because the original shakuhachi
> length was 1.1 some players
> (including Yoshio Kurahashi) recommend playing it on 1.1. My
> observation is that in reality most
> players do it on their longest flute.
>
> --
> Peter Ross
> http://www.cloudhandsmusic.com
> APDO 542-4100
> Grecia, Costa Rica
> Central America
> 011 (506) 494-5170
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 08:32:00 -0700
> From: edBeaty <edosan@boulder.net>
> To: Shakuhachi e-list <shakuhachi@communication.ucsd.edu>
> Subject: Itty Bitty shakuhachi...
> Message-ID: <f05100301bc36eebb0d64@[204.151.43.187]>
>
> --============_-1137250455==_============
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> boundary="============_-1137250455==_ma============"
>
> --============_-1137250455==_ma============
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
>
> Brian, thanks for your notes--very interesting. Assuming that your
> reference to a "1.1" must be a typo for a 2.1, I thought I'd pass
> along this pic and note about a VERY teeny shakuhachi:
>
>
> 1.02 (1 shaku, 2bu) By Kinya Sogawa
> http://www.fides.dti.ne.jp/~sogawa/englishpage1.html (Go to his
> 'shakuhachi collection' page to see more pics.)
>
> From Sogawa-san's web page:
>
> "The shakuhachi in the photo [above] is one shaku and a few
> millimeters in length with the lowest note at B. It plays an octave
> higher than a 2.1, and is 86mm in circumference.
>
> Even though it is a pon-nuki (or ji-nashi, made without plastering
> the bore with ji) the balance is very good and the instrument plays
> well all the way up to ura-hi (hi with the thumb-hole open). The
> utaguchi (mouthpiece) insert is in Kinya-style, based on a style
> predating both Kinko and Tozan styles, combining design and function
> in a way that protects and enhances the beauty of bamboo. I was so
> happy with this 1.02 that I had to use ivory for the utaguchi insert.
>
> The original bamboo stalk was dead at the top when I found it in a
> grove somewhere on the Kanto plane, (No, I'm not about to say where.)
> The shape was really interesting, but the diameter was so small I
> didn't know what I could use the bamboo for. So instead of digging
> the root out of the ground, I used a saw to cut the bamboo as close
> to the root as possible."
>
> Regards,
> eB
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 12:48:04 -0500
> From: "Morris M. Keesan" <keesan@alum.bu.edu>
> To: Shakuhachi@communication.ucsd.edu
> Subject: Re: [Shaku] Re: Long Flutes
> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.1.20040123124314.00b93c40@incoming.verizon.net>
>
> At 02:03 PM 1/23/2004 +0000, nemo2000@att.net wrote:
> >Because the original shakuhachi length was 1.1 ...
>
> Really? I've never heard this -- if the original length was something
> other than 1.8, what was the original name of the instrument?
>
>
> --
> Morris M. Keesan - keesan@alum.bu.edu (Note new email address)
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of shakuhachi V1 #518
> *************************
> _____________________________________________
>
> List subscription information is at:
> http://communication.ucsd.edu/shaku/listsub.html
>
_____________________________________________
List subscription information is at:
http://communication.ucsd.edu/shaku/listsub.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 23 2005 - 15:42:31 PST