Talk:Bowed psaltery

	Music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Musical Instruments, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of musical instruments on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Musical InstrumentsWikipedia:WikiProject Musical InstrumentsTemplate:WikiProject Musical Instrumentsmusical instruments articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

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.

Ukelins: do they rate their own entry?

Currently "Ukelin" redirects to this page. I'm no expert on musical instruments, but isn't the ukelin sufficiently unique in both design and history to rate its own entry? The current article even explicitly states that ukelins are not generally considered to be psalteries. Any ukelin experts out there who want to take a stab at this? --67.160.74.124 20:24, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IMO, this is simply a lumper/splitter discussion. I believe that in general the world will progress by lumping, but in this case, the splitters have a point or two. The two instruments are both bowed, but totally different actions are required of the other hand. Also, a different set of folks originated the two. Finally there is more to the history of the ukelin than is given here, and it would seem rather odd to discuss it on a page labelled "bowed psaltery." There! Now I have said my piece and avoided any use of the terms "contraversy," "trivia" or "original research." My credentials, BTW, consist of owning one each of these instruments and currently working on getting the ukelin restrung so it can be played before some unlucky open mic audience. Does that make me an "expert?" Ha! "Experts are only experts in what they know," meaning that any expert can make a mistake in his/her (pc!) field of "expert"ise--or, more succinctly: "Expert, texpert, choking smokers, don't you know the Joker laughs at you?"

Terry J. Carter (talk) 14:17, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cantus What?

The pic of the lady demo-ing bowing reveals a tee bearing the logo "Cantus Delictus," which conjures up a pleasant image of a group of dedicated souls striving to preserve "dead song." That's much more noble than the tee I sometimes wear to open mikes, which states merely, "Tune It Or Die." As a devoted folk musician and eager joiner of small, arcane organizations, I would love to find/contact/join said group, if it is a group and not simply a marketing ploy. Can the poster of the photo shine any light on this? PS. I Googled "Cantus Delictus" asking for bread, but was given a stone. I shall go ask the question on Mudcat.org now.

Terry J. Carter (talk) 14:24, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's because you want "Cantus Delicti." That will get you quick results. 71.23.141.223 (talk) 03:11, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bowed Psaltery as a 20th Century Invention

This seems to be the prevailing haughty wisdom on Wikipedia, but Groves (psaltery, section 3. Baroque, classical, and modern by Beryl Kenyon de Pascual) mentions a large body of baroque and classical works for "psaltery with bowed strings." Wiki also neglects to cite any sources for the claim other than discussing the 20th century patent for such things; keep in mind the patent system is a mess and rarely indicates innovation outside of pharmacology.

Please clear this up. 71.23.141.223 (talk) 01:17, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have you checked the scores of these works? I am guessing they will include a part for psaltery (plucked or hammered) and other parts for bowed strings (violin or viol family). Simonchadwick1023 (talk) 22:13, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bowed psaltery. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:35, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]