Talk:Taiko/Archive 1

Archive 1

List of Taiko Groups

I would like to suggest that the list of taiko groups does not constitute spam. Although I agree that most of the groups listed in the lists go directly to that groups' website, I do not believe that the lists qualified as spam as defined by wikipedia as "primarily exist to sell goods or services, use objectionable amounts of advertising, or require payment to view the relevant content." I believe most taiko websites exist to provide information about the specific taiko group and not primarily as a commercial website. I liken the lists of taiko groups to lists of professional sports teams.

After the lists of taiko groups were removed by Karlbrezner, I created 4 list pages by geographical area: North America, Japan, Europe and Asia-Pacific and added links from the main Taiko page under the "See Also" heading. I believe that this is a resonable compromise that keeps the main article to a suitable length while still maintining the information provided by the lists. I would like to propose that the links to the lists of taiko groups be kept under the "See Also" header.

TMo 23:53, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I would appreciate having the list of groups available. I don't think this amounts to advertising so long as the list is a comprehensive as possible and doesn't favour any particular group. I don't see a link to this list now on the page.

Reirreug 18:14, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Taiko Music CD

This section is a joke. Many of the groups listed above have numerous CDs available. More importantly, taiko performances are better captured on video. And, again, there are simply too many good ones to mention. 64.60.145.50 21:15, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Types of taiko

Regarding the Byou-uchi/Tsukeshime categories, I always thought tsukeshime was a subset of shime. What is needed is a superset that would include the various oke-daiko. Also, I think there is a typo: "Tsukushime-daiko" 64.60.145.50 20:07, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Translation of taiko

In the article the author says "taiko" means "big drum". But the kanji for "tai" means "fat" as in "Super Size Me". Is "big" really a good translation for that?

The character for o (大) means "big", I think, whereas tai (太) would be better translated as "grand" or "great". --Yu Ninjie 03:11, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Normally I have seen "Taiko" translated simply as "drum". Although tai (太) by itself can be translated as "big", another translation is "plump" or "big around" suggesting the round shape of the body of the drum. When speaking of drums, prefixes such as O-, (大 Large) and Chu- (中 Medium) are usually used to describe (relative) size of the drum. --Tmguchi 16:43, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

In Japanese "taiko (太鼓)" means "drum": "A membranophone (膜鳴楽器 ). A percussion instrument with the body made from worked wood, metals, gourd, etc., an instrument hit by the mallet or hand in general. Drum.” from Nihon Kokugo Daijiten. 2nd ed. Tokyo: Sougakukan, 2001. If you want to break down the word, 太 means "big or thick," but "taiko" need not refer to a large instrument. I would argue, though, that the Japanese word "太鼓" and English "taiko" are not the same word. The English word "taiko" means both "ensemble drumming of Japanese derivation" and "a Japanese drum." We should provide both definitions.--Dbensen 17:00, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

If "Taiko" is a transliteration of 太鼓 then how is it that Taiko has another meaning ? Both mean drum and "ensemble drumming". Japanese people say that Taiko is both drum and ensemble drumming. Does ensemble drumming have another kanji ?

Bibliography

Too long for such a short article, in fact, too long even for a very long article. I don't see any usage of it as a reference tool, but a cut-and-paste job. Needs to be cut down or completely removed altogether. Books should be listed if they are used in the writing of the article or are important, not to show off one's book list on the subject. --Charlie Huang 【正矗昊】 12:33, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I would like to reopen the bibliography discussion. The purpose of the bibliography is not to cite works used in this wikipedia article, but to inform readers about taiko literature in general. As such, I think it is a document of inestimable worth, and of great importance to the continuation of taiko scholarship. I will wait to add it back onto the taiko article page until I hear other opinions. --Dbensen 16:50, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Any word against my suggestion above? If I hear a good argument against including the bibliography I am willing to be convinced (the best reason I can think of for not including the bibliography is that it is long and clutters up the page). I think that a bibliography would be extremely useful to anyone doing research on taiko and so until I hear dissenting opinions, I will put it back up on the page.--Dbensen 17:08, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Charlie was correct, the bibliography is too long and is pretty pointless if you ask me. If someone wanted to know that much about taiko they'd research more by themselves. I say remove it. Comrade Pajitnov 02:15, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the bibliography is much too large. I understand the importance of informing readers about taiko literature, but this is pretty excessive. I think it would be extremely difficult for anyone who doesn't want to be a taiko scholar to wade through it in search of the more accessible literature. Is the language actually specified on any of the entries? (for example, whether or not a particular article/book is in English or Japanese) If not, that's going to hinder people's research more than help it.

Would it be silly to suggest putting the bibliography online externally and linking to it, similar to other subjects with extensive bibliographies? Jaclyn 07:15, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I just saw a taiko performance tonight (in Japan) and came to this article to research a little bit more. The bibliography includes a student paper! Surely this is too much, this is the largest bibliography I've ever seen. BaikinMan 13:58, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

(Sorry to come back to this discussion so late---I though I told wikipedia to inform me of updates to this page and when it didn't I thought nothing was going on here) Putting the bibliography on a separate page is a good compromise. I'm entirely happy with it. To clarify the purpose of the bibliography, though, I should say that it's very difficult for researchers of taiko to find anything of worth on the subject. The few scholarly articles available on taiko rarely research the work done by other authors, and as a result promulgate factual errors. I included student papers in the list because many times they are no less insightful or factually correct than peer-reviewed artcles, and some contain ideas found nowhere else. I know many people who would find a bibliography like the one I posted useful, and I'm glad you found a way to keep it on wikipedia.Dbensen 00:54, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I am about to do some research on Taiko and the bibliography is very helpful, thank's. The article itself could certainly be extended in due course.

Reirreug 18:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

From Talk:Japanese Taiko Drumming

Merger

Should this perhaps be merged with the existing article Taiko? Trdaisuke 20:50, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Done! - ∅ (∅), 21:54, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Elements of Basic Taiko Rhythms

I thought the word "ju-uchi" might be a typo for "ji-uchi (地打ち）", but it is repeated throughout the paragraph so I am hesitant to change it... Can we either get this typo fixed, or have a Japanese kanji added to alleviate confusion with ji-uchi? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Muscateer (talk • contribs) 02:10, August 24, 2007 (UTC).

Disambiguation

There is also a Taiko bird in New Zealand. The English term for the bird is "Petrel". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xurizaemon (talk • contribs) 03:37, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Bibliography

I've merged the content from taiko bibliography here, as there is no precedent for such a thing on Wikipedia, and I doubt very strongly that there will ever be a consensus for such a thing. It looks like the stuff listed there was used as a source for this article, so I've put it in a References section. Anything that wasn't used as a source for this article, should be in a Further reading section instead. Tuf-Kat (talk) 02:27, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Changed my mind and made it a Further reading section myself. Tuf-Kat (talk) 02:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the correct thing is to do here, but the Further Reading section now is simply enormous -- half the page is Further Reading, and it's about 10 screenfuls long here. I guess it's not *bad* to have so much information, but I wonder if this is the best way to present it. Frequently when we have 10 screenfuls of data which are basically a list, it becomes a "List of _" article, though I've never seen this for a bibliography. Ideas? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.172.85.9 (talk) 23:28, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Dbensen, you are motivated to keep this bibliography for good reason, but it's far too unwieldy for wikipedia. Might I suggest that you house the list on a website outside of wikipedia, and link to it in the External Links? Then the Further Reading can be edited down to the few most relevant. Percussionblack (talk) 03:53, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

GOCOO

"GOCOO is also the first Taiko ensemble to exhibit free-spirited Taiko MUSIC, rising freely between the East and the West, tradition and pop, rite and party."

I don't even know what that means. Part of it is taken verbatim from GOCOO's self-description on Youtube, but even there they never claim to be "first" at ... whatever it is they're claiming to be here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.16.40.113 (talk) 05:51, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

taiko history

Lack of early history of taiko - the long period of time till the 1950s, beginning with the 7th century.

19 Facts about Taiko

Ignite talk featuring a Taiko performance: youtube.com Notjim (talk) 21:40, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Taiko/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ChrisGualtieri (talk · contribs) 16:26, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

I will be taking this one, I need some resources to come in before I can give it a proper review. I have previously discussed some ideas for improvement on my talk page. This could take more than a week to assemble the required books and may need some sources to be added from RX. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 16:26, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Bad news. They will not lend me some books; including one that was in the listing but apparently cannot be found. I will do the review with what I have. Should be done within 24 hours. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:40, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Review time!

• Lede: The "relatively recent" is ambiguous, since you can date this. Please do so. The line afterwards begins with "While Taiko have"... but dropping "While" results in a bit of awkward prose showing up and it being a run on sentence. The next paragraph reiterates kumi-daiko comment from above. And is a bit awkward. Also, "Today, kumi-daiko" isn't specific... pet peeve, but do with it as you wish. Paragraph three's opening can be stronger if you drop the "not only" and tighten up the prose a bit. Major omission is the types of drums and its construction from the lede.

• History: Second sentence: "taiko came from the". Came is a weird word choice. Is Ame no Uzume's visage of an old woman relevant? Minor, but you decide. In "Use in Warfare" you want it to be "According to the Gunji Yoshu" instead of "According to one of the historical chronicles..." It reads better that way. For "traditional settings" Drop the "For instance" at the beginning of the second sentence. And drop "Taiko also appear" at the start of second paragraph. I'd move it up and combine it with the other paragraph. Some the next lines have redundant words. Like "Taiko were and continue to be used in the classical..." with the whole "were and continue" being unnecessary. And an extra "continue to do so" which follows two sentences later. "Kumi Daiko" as a section is even worse, "He was considered a master" - "was" as in not anymore? Possible issue with "incidentally" in the same paragraph, but the second paragraph's issues are even bigger. I'd open with "Oguchi's ensemble, Osuwa Daiko, incorporated..." instead.

The rest could use a bit of copy editing... but I haven't gone through everything in detail. A couple of "further reading" seem questionable to me. Like why, "Copyrights. Taiko.us, July 6, 2005. Accessed April 21, 2006." or "Deschênes, Bruno. Japanese Taiko Drums. December 4, 2004. Accessed April 9, 2006." which is a personal page. "Gojinjo Daiko: The History, the Tradition, the Spectacle. May 15, 2003. Accessed March 4, 2006." is 404 and is a personal essay it seems. Archive.org can probably get it back. "History of Osuwa Daiko". May 5, 2006. Accessed February 6, 2006." is a geocities... but is it an official site? "Whiteside, Wendy. "The Beat Goes On". Student Paper, Washington University of St. Luis, 2001." seems like a student paper and thus not a RS and is likely all but inaccessible. With so many "further reading" I wonder why their isn't more usage of the sources if you can incorporate them. Over all, its very good. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:21, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

OK. Lead should be taken care of; it's a little longer now, but I believe it works better. I've made all the suggested changes under History, except for "He was considered a master" - "was" as in not anymore?. The "was" is because Oguchi is dead. We can get around this by making this clear in the previous sentence so it looks like this:

Kumi-daiko was developed by the late Daihachi Oguchi in 1951. He is considered a master performer...

Let me know what you think. I've also removed many of the sources under further reading because they were either personal websites, group websites (which might be appropriate on articles about the group, but not about the instrument), or because they were not recoverable using archive.org. I'll look through the rest and do some additional copyediting tonight. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 04:40, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Generally speaking, Wikipedia does not use "the late" to precede the deceased's name. And I still believe that Michaelangelo and other painters are still "masters" regardless of the era. But that's me being nitpicky. Since the further reading is rather excessive, can you organize it by subject matter? And if you can, throw some more into the article as sources and expand whatever you want. And if you could, please cover some of the most notable drum makers for the subject and anything on the current technology for modernizing and getting the best sound from the drums would be helpful; as industry information on drums produced per year. Sorry to add more on you, but I just noticed it was missing. Though I'm fairly certain it meets the broad aspect. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:53, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

OK, I'll buy that. I've changed it to "is." Further reading has been categorized, and I'll see if I can get any of these tonight and add them in. Asano is pretty easily the most recognized name in taiko manufacturing, but there is precious little discussion in sources of specific companies (other than that they exist) or their reputation. I've added another discussed in the Bender. As for modern practices, they're really not that "modern" in that the companies I've read about still use ropes / cords to tie down skin heads, and use wheels or dowels with a little elbow grease to tension them. It's (still) a lot of manual labor. "Getting the best sound" basically comes down to a matter of initial tensioning, materials used, and care, but I'm hesitant to go into detail on this per WP:NOTHOWTO. And besides, materials and tensioning are already discussed in the article. I've also added Asano's drum production numbers per year. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 06:40, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

As for "NOTHOWTO" there is a big difference between explaining how something is constructed or operated versus an instructional manual. But I understand. I like such details as the method of construction for instruments. Like the construction of tin cans and the can opener; the information can be called encyclopedic and beneficial if only to answer the "how" aspect instead of trying to come across as "how to make a taiko drum in 50 easy steps". Information about the trees used is helpful, about the tightening of the drum head and such are all insights into something that helps understand the drum itself. But its not a GA issue. I could likely end up passing this as it stands. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:39, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

OK. Was there anything else, or are you considering passing this? I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 03:14, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

• Almost. Just a few quick little things. This ref is 404ed.[1] Archive.org maybe? Three almost trivial issues with the links.[2]. I am rather concerned with the Haniwa with Drums image being up for deletion - as this is part of the criteria. I don't think I formerly need that resolved to pass it - but I am starting to itch for its passage as well. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:09, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

OK, refs and wikilinks are fixed and the image has been removed from the article. All set? I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 21:38, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done Yep, GA passed. An interesting read. Good work Jethro, sorry about the wait. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 21:41, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! (And no problem about the wait. You know what they say about all good things.) Let me know if you ever need me to look over a GA. :) I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 21:46, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

(Actually, just realized that could be interpreted "all good things come to an end"...eep!) I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 21:48, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Changes to history sections

@Lilac12: I've been noticing your changes to the article, specifically changing large sections under the origins portion of the article, specifically removing references to possible origins of the instrument from India. I'm not really sure I understand why, considering several sources have specifically discussed Indian instruments bearing similarity to some taiko:

[3] - It resembles shime-daiko. Taking its history even further back, it is a hand drum which arose in India and was brought to China via the western route in the third to sixth century.

Varian (2005), p. 21: While it is possible that taiko drums originated in Japan, the use of drums throughout human history and the similarity of modern Japanese taiko to instruments in China, Korea, India and Mesopotamia suggests cultural influence from the Silk Road...

Bender (2012), pp. 26-27, where he discusses the use of drums in gagaku and Indian influence on the tradition in the seventh and eight centuries CE.

So, it seems inappropriate to remove Indian influences as a possible origin considering they are a common point in the literature. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 06:28, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

@I JethroBT: Please don't exaggerate and make any false accusation. I didn't change large sections or remove the possibilities of the Indian influence or its reference, even though I believe Taiko's Indian influence is more of a speculation comparing to its Korean and Chinese influence. I simply changed the overview "inventor" section of the instrument being solely from India to it having great resemblance of drums in China and Korea, the two countries which are believed to have far more significant influence on Taiko than India or any other country. It is a more accurate description than it was before the edition. I don't know if who is the original editor and why he/she is under the wrong impression that Taiko is originated from India.

It's interesting to see you citing taiko.com that Dengaku Taiko, may have arose from India while ignoring the large paragraphs talking about where Taiko comes from. The edition I made is quoting taiko.com.

Btw, shime-daiko is also similar to African walking drum, not just tabla drum from India and it's not mentioned in the section. I see you've edited India back, but in that case you should add Africa, Thailand and etc. Lilac12 ^{drop me a line}7:24, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

@Lilac12: Do you have reliable sources to support those claims that Indian influence on taiko is considered more speculative? You said that China and Korea "are believed to have far more significant influence," which I think is certainly likely, but that is just my opinion-- this kind of claim requires sourcing and I've honestly been unable to find a great deal of books/articles that talk about its origins at length. Same consideration with the claim that shime are similar to the walking drum and other influences. Otherwise, we can't really add that in because it's considered original research. The section had already made it clear that Korean and Chinese influences discussed in the literature. Indian influences are also discussed. You did remove them here, here, and moved info about India to the bottom of the section here. I suppose it's not a big deal, but I see no great need to separate the claims as though one is less important than the other. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 08:48, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

And the other matter I should clarify is that I am the previous editor, as I've worked on this article for the past three months. While I hope it is better than when I started, it's definitely not "done," so I do appreciate you helping out, and I'm sorry that I came off a bit rough. I don't own this article any more than any other editors here, but I've done a lot of research, and I have a good idea of what Wikipedia's expectations are for article content, so we have to work in those parameters. I agree that sources have not said the drum came directly from India (and I do not think that is what this article was implying), but discussion from reliable sources seems to indicate that some Indian drums / drumming have had some nontrivial influence on taiko. I think it comes up too often in the literature to call it speculative, so I think it's important to note. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 09:21, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

@I JethroBT: You made me laugh. Please the reliable sources already on this wiki page.

Actually books/websites that touched on the topic talked on and on about Taiko's Chinese and Korean influence. For example, the chapter on Japan of the Percussion instruments and their history by James Blade.

p121: Historical writings tell us that in the Soshun era (AD 588) the young men of Japan who were chosen for the musical profession, were sent to learn their art from the Koreans, and to study specially the kakko (Korean, kol ko), the drum of Southern China, an instrument still found in Japan, but no longer associated with China. The fact Japan borrowed and appropriated from China follows the natural sequence of events, the Chinese being their nearest neighbors and related to them by blood. In music especially, the Japanese would find a source of inspiration in the Chinese and their instruments. That the young men of Japan became adept in performing upon the kakko is obvious, for their skill is reflected in Japanese drumming, past and present...

p123: The vellums and shell are frequently ornamented in the manner of many Chinese drums.

p125a small drum of Chinese origin

p126: Like his Chinese counterpart so admired by G. Tradescant Lay, the Japanese performer 'plies his sticks with dexterity.'

[4] -This music has ancient roots. The drums, which vary in form and use, probably came to Japan from China and Korea beginning around the fifth century, following the paths of Buddhism and theatrical arts.

The evidence of the origin of or the influence on Taiko come from historical documents, archaeologic findings and resemblance. The Chinese and Korean influence suffice all three. Indian influence is only speculated by the resemblance of one type drum tsuzumi. Other cultures such as Thailand, Vietnam, even Africa have similar minor influence, which was mentioned in this page because of not comparable to the influence of China and Korea. India's drum deserves a page of its own, but not on Taiko.

@Lilac12: I'm going to ignore your inappropriate comments like "you make me laugh" and assume that you're actually here to build an encyclopedia like I am. Based on the above, I think we agree that reliable sources contend that tsuzumi specifically may have originated from India or from China. I think it will be best to just state this influence relates to the tsuzumi specifically up front so as to make it very clear the influences does not extend to other kinds of drums. The same Blades book, for instance, in addition to the ones I've started above, provides support for this on p. 122 here:

Similarly, we may find the influence of India in the chang-ku...Galpin contends that this drum may have been introduced from India, where such methods of tuning are common. The fact that we only find rare instances of Chinese drums described as tuned to certain notes, and the absence of braced drums...with tunable heads, is surprising, bearing in mind that Southern China was the original home of the kakko...

So, would you agree that when India is mentioned as an influence, that we can stick to making sure that it's contextualized in reference to the tsuzumi class of drums? I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 20:29, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

@I JethroBT: I have never opposed to the idea of having India as a influence country on Taiko. As a matter of fact, in the first edition I made which triggered big response from you, I switched the order of influence and put India behind Korea and China. I made the correction that India is not the sole origin and later on elaborated why it is not even a significant influence, at least not as significant as Korea and China. Other possible influence from other cultures (such as Thailand and Vietnam) are of similar level and hereby I grouped India's influence together with the south Asia countries.

My intent has been to draw more accurate information out of the available literature. The fact that you reverted my edition several times before our discussion reached any agreement is rude and led me to think this is how wiki edition works. You also implied I was making claims without reliable sources. Not the case. You seemed to miss a lot of key information even after having researched on the topic for months. You may have devoted time on this topic. It's good. But please don't make it so difficult for other people to contribute.

It's not rude, it's a process that is common here called Be bold, revert, discuss, which is exactly what has happened here. I think it has worked well. The purpose of your edits were unclear (using edit summaries can help) and the sources did not make it clear why the changes were helpful at first. I asked you to explain them, and you did. And yes, it's possible that I've missed some things. I'm just one person, after all. That said, I can't find mention of Thailand, Vietnam, and other countries in the literature compared to India. Are these countries mentioned in any sources that you are aware of? I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 15:49, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

meaning of gojinjyo- or gojinzyo-taiko?

could somebody please explain the meaning of gojinjyo- or gojinzyo-taiko? evidently demon-masks appear (examples see youtube). they seem rather to collaborate than to combat eachother... the german article speaks about the origin of taiko in shamanistic or shinto-rituals; here the myth about amaterasu, susanoo and uzume is given as aitiology... thankx! --HilmarHansWerner (talk) 02:04, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

@HilmarHansWerner: I actually didn't know much about this performance style myself, but there is a short article on it at Gojinjo-daiko with a few references in English, and most in Japanese. The performance is local to villagers of Nafune in Wajima of Ishikawa Prefecture, and [appear to maintain a website here http://www.gojinjodaiko.jp/en_top.html here]. Historically, the villagers had to fend off an invasion by Japanese daimyo Uesugi Kenshin, but did not have weapons. Instead, they used demon masks and their drums to provoke them in a surprise attack, and consequently, Uesugi's forces fled. Not sure whether there are reliable soruces to support the veracity of this claim, but that is what the village maintains. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 18:50, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

thanks! today, before seeing your comment, I found the Gojinjo-daiko-article myself... to me the villager's explanation seems quite plausible. we seem to see a very arcaic form of daiko, which definitely will have its roots in shamanic apotropaic rituals against demons (the drum being a standard-equipment of every shaman)... but we also see another interesting element of true nature-religions: the demons of nature aren't "devils", i.e. purely evil, they also cooperate; they are just a bit 'tricky', whence the "trickster"... and we see the 'ecstasy' of these early rituals: the management (mobilisation, usage, confinement) of anger... --HilmarHansWerner (talk) 03:39, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

threefold "yin-yang-sign" on drums - significance?

can somebody please explain the meaning of the sort of threefold "yin-yang-sign" on drums that you see very often on big drums (see youtube, e.g. in https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLzOZJYQgMpB-PQRdq4_axyZfjeXuiokEq)? thank you! --HilmarHansWerner (talk) 17:21, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

@HilmarHansWerner: Give me a little bit to look into this; I have a good idea of why, but I'd rather do some fact-checking to confirm my memory on the matter of this particular design. I do know the design is used prominently, but not exclusively by Kodo. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 08:23, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

thanx! waiting curiously! ;-) --HilmarHansWerner (talk) 03:56, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

@HilmarHansWerner: Hey, finally got around to checking into this. The design is called a tomoe, and is a common design in Japanese family emblems (as well as corporate logos). I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 04:15, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

meaning of the demons in taiko??

in my youtube playlist "taiko - wadaiko - japanese drums - background - context" I am collecting (among others) movies where you see demons or 'wild men' (as they seem to be known worldwide) appearing. they seem to be partly combatted, partly cooperated with, an there seem to be good demons and bad ones... can somebody please explain their meaning?! (unfortunately I do not understand any asian language, like many wiki-readers, so I can not read the japanese comments...)thank you! --HilmarHansWerner (talk) 18:21, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

@HilmarHansWerner: Hey Hans. I'm familiar with what you're talking about, but I don't have a strong background inJapanese folklore; you might consider posing this question over on the reference desk. Generally, you're more likely to get quicker answers to factual questions over there. That said, I will get to the above question sometime next week (I'm currently at Wikimania in London, and so I am a little occupied). I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 08:57, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

thanks for the hint to the "reference desk"! on my youtube playlist "taiko - wadaiko - japanese drums - background - context" there's one particularly interesting type of ceremony where a lone "wild-man"-dancer, accompanied by a drum, and also using the drum, is attacked by two dragon-like demons. he seems to fend them off with the help of the drum... hilmar --HilmarHansWerner (talk) 17:04, 13 August 2014 (UTC)