Talk:Flûte d'amour
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | It is requested that one or more audio files of a musical instrument or component be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons and included in this article to improve its quality by demonstrating the way it sounds or alters sound. Please see Wikipedia:Requested recordings for more on this request. |
Lowest note?
[edit]It says the lowest note is Ab, but is that written or sounding? I assume it's the former, but I'm not expert on these instruments, so for all I know the could be manufactured with low A & Ab keys. ChaosMaster 20:45, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- Total arrogant and disrespectful nonsense! His name is Christophe Graupner, and not the English CristopheR, as we do not speak about John Sebastian Bach neither about Wilhelm Shakespeare. That this WP lemma can not be edited is also arrogant and disrespectful! Or tries Britain now rule the Wikipedia waves? Nicolaas19 (talk) 18:01, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Nicolaas19 I'm not sure who you're having a row with, and it doesn't seem to about the lowest note either, but could we not simply amend the article to the correct name? Jon (talk) 21:51, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- An excellent idea, as you changed already the name in the correct German spelling in contrast to me. Concerning the text about J.S. Bach using this tenorflute, I consulted an Bach expert Eduard van Hengel here in Holland, and he replied me: "the flauto d'amore is an traverso which is a terce lower tuned (and so a bit longer)than the normal traverso, like the hobo d'amore alias English horn to the normal hobo. The lowest tone is thus an A. It is also called an altflute. To my opinion nowhere Bach prescribed the use of it; probably he did not know the existence of it, but if one finds it more beautiful, because of its softer timbre, one can of course play Bach his parts on it. The litterature suggests that the De literatuur suggereert the Hirtenmusik (Sheperds music) opening van part II of the Weihnachts (Christmas) oratorium was written for the hobo d'd'amour, but that is nonsense: the part nowher comes lower than the C', but one can naturally choose to use this instrument for it". Regards, Niek Heering Nicolaas19 (talk) 07:35, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
- You're complaining about misspelling someone's name and then not only go and write "hobo" instead of oboe, but are completely incorrect about the oboe d'amore being the same thing as an English horn. I smell a troll. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 13:31, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Nicolaas19 I'm sure that's all true but unless they've written all that down in a WP:RS we can't use it in the article. Jon (talk) 18:42, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
- OK thanks for your reply. @ ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 1) Indeed I mispelled hoboe: I wrote in Dutch 2) i agree that the Engish horn is different from an hoboe d'amore: that was a mistake! But your nose misked you. Nicolaas19 (talk) 06:35, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
- An excellent idea, as you changed already the name in the correct German spelling in contrast to me. Concerning the text about J.S. Bach using this tenorflute, I consulted an Bach expert Eduard van Hengel here in Holland, and he replied me: "the flauto d'amore is an traverso which is a terce lower tuned (and so a bit longer)than the normal traverso, like the hobo d'amore alias English horn to the normal hobo. The lowest tone is thus an A. It is also called an altflute. To my opinion nowhere Bach prescribed the use of it; probably he did not know the existence of it, but if one finds it more beautiful, because of its softer timbre, one can of course play Bach his parts on it. The litterature suggests that the De literatuur suggereert the Hirtenmusik (Sheperds music) opening van part II of the Weihnachts (Christmas) oratorium was written for the hobo d'd'amour, but that is nonsense: the part nowher comes lower than the C', but one can naturally choose to use this instrument for it". Regards, Niek Heering Nicolaas19 (talk) 07:35, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Nicolaas19 I'm not sure who you're having a row with, and it doesn't seem to about the lowest note either, but could we not simply amend the article to the correct name? Jon (talk) 21:51, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
DON'T remove anything!
[edit]- there's nothing controversial in what is said here, it's exactly what we need to know to lay the foundation, and everyday experience is enough to confirm or deny whatever is said: by all means point out *once* that sources aren't quoted (but we don't even need that, anyone can see it, we're not that stupid) and repeating these 'police' comments is just pedantic and interfering, and in this case inappropriate. David Kettlewell (talk) 11:12, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
@David Kettlewell
[edit]Did you write this? This is borderline vandalism; it's your unfounded opinion; none of it is properly cited; you yourself admit the source is "just trust me bro." Save it for a blog or something; this doesn't belong on Wikipedia. 74.101.251.49 (talk) 20:33, 12 January 2022 (UTC)