The contents of the Types of trombone page were merged into Trombone#Types on 28 July 2022. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Types of trombone redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
In regards to:
"Scottish Music Foundation" and "Kang, Mandip" Trombone only returns hits to this article and mirrors. "Mandip Kang" Trombone returns no hits. Im running out of ideas. John Vandenberg 06:41, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
as a moderately serious amateur player in the northeast US, I've been playing a large bore symphonic tenor with F attachment (a Conn 88H) since the mid-80's and have never heard anyone call this sort of instrument a "tenorbass" trombone. where is this terminology still in use? -- Sommerfeld 13:50, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
I believe this to be antiquated, but legitimate usage. I have read this all my trombone playing career, from 1971 to now. Most westerners seem to refer to the particular instrument as you do. A symphony tenor with F attachement, or more generally (some have smaller bores) a "Bb/F Tenor trombone", or "Tenor trombone with F attachment". I have such a horn in my Vincent Bach 42B, very similar to your Conn 88H. Crtune ( talk) 19:44, 22 September 2015 (UTC) User:Crtune 12:42, 22 September 2015 (PST)
I believe that the term "tenorbass" is no longer in use, but once referred to a slightly larger version of the common tenor trombone. This tenorbass trombone was slightly smaller than the bass, so it became known as the tenorbass. I realize this is very helpful, but I do know that the term was used in the 20th century. Obsolete10 03:21, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
What kind of mouthpiece does a soprano trombone use? A friend says all trombones use the same size mouthpiece but this seems impractical. Badagnani ( talk) 07:53, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm removing the tag (template) that states that the neutrality of the article is in question. (I've poked around the policy and template pages and can't find anything that says this is a no-no.) The edit summary upon adding that tag says that some descriptions may be derogatory. I've just read through the article and can't see any support for that. - Special-T ( talk) 00:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Image:Slidepos.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 05:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
The very notion of a valve trombone sounds like an oxymoron. Could somebody add a photograph of one? -- MiguelMunoz ( talk) 23:36, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I'd love for someone with knowledge and a citation to clear this up. Does anyone currently make a distinction between the two? They're (mainly) cylindrical slide instruments pitched in Bb and played with a trumpet mouthpiece. The histories of how a slide trumpet and soprano trombone came about are different, though. I have no idea if any of this is even correct - it's mostly uncited stuff from Wikipedia, and conversations with knowledgeable brass players. - Special-T ( talk) 21:17, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
A request originally at Talk:Pitch (music) where it got no reaction:
Contact Basemetal here 15:05, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
This article has annoyed me for years. For almost every other type of musical instrument, there is a separate article for every minor variation. Is it time to split this article into its components? There should be separate articles for alto trombone, tenor trombone, bass trombone, contrabass trombone and valve trombone. Then we can delete this article, or at least drastically cut it down to size to include only material relevant to comparing the types with each other. Anything left that is about the trombone in general (or rarer beasts) can be put into Trombone if not already there. Tayste ( edits) 00:28, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
I know this might be difficult to pull together, but if the photos were retaken with a yardstick or some other object next to the instrument, readers would get a better indication of the size of the instrument. 173.19.233.252 ( talk) 06:38, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
I'd like to suggest that a few other prominent trombone oriented orchestral works be mentioned:
Mahler "Symphony Number 3"; movt. 1: With its feature of the principal trombone all through the first movement, and the section soli adjoining it, the trombone dominates here. This is a serious audition piece for those wishing to work in a symphony orchestra.
Ravel "Bolero" - which features, along with many other instruments of the orchestra, a couple of repeated themes. On trombone it's very "high tessiatura" playing and thus is considered a defining moment in professional playing. This passage is easy to botch and thus also appears on most orchestral audition lists. Also the work features prominent glissandi (loud "smears") at the ending climax section.
I cite this from academic and professional experience. These are well known items in the trombone playing community. Also, I'm not attempting to be exhaustive, but to add a couple of very big items.
( talk) 19:51, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
I've merged in our entire Cimbasso article. It is clearly a type of trombone, and the amount of content that we have can easily fit within this article as a section. I am not opposed to splitting it out again if someone has a significant amount more content to add. Mamyles ( talk) 04:11, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
http://www.virtuosityboston.com/p-601-c-mahillon-calvary-trombone.aspx calls the Sax-style valve trombone a "cavalry trombone". Is this a common-enough usage to include in the article? -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:29, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
I removed the (recently changed) range info for sopranino & piccolo trombone - they seemed inaccurate. If you're familiar with these rarely-used instruments, please add accurate range info. - Special-T ( talk) 14:33, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
As articulated here already by @ Tayste (2015) I think a summary of this article should go in Trombone and the rest should be split into individual articles and linked, and this article be deleted; the opposite of an article merge, I guess. It seems ridiculous that Cimbasso should redirect here, for instance; I see @ Mamyles was only trying to help at the time but it's just highlighting how strange it is. Cimbasso should absolutely have its own article, and defer to information in the Trombone and Tuba articles where necessary. No other principal instruments of the orchestra have their articles organised this way. It seems to be an artefact of Wikipedia's article coverage and notability priorities having evolved with time, particularly since the original decision was made in 2007 to split it out from the main Trombone article. Just to add some quasi-empirical evidence for this position, and to highlight the possible disservice this arrangement makes for the ease of finding, accessing and presenting the information on Wikipedia about instruments in the trombone family, compare these two lists:
Therefore, I suggest that the following articles have every right to exist, deferring a fair amount of the content of this article and trombone into:
I think it's decision time... a "request for unmerging" discussion; I'll investigate the process in the next few days when I get a bit more time. — Jon ( talk) 00:26, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
Okay, I'll start by adding the split banner to the two articles, which will attract attention from more editors to provide comment. Jon ( talk) 00:31, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
I've split out the contrabass trombone article, and added citation needed everywhere (it needs work). Wheee, this is fun! Jon ( talk) 11:55, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
I've split out material into a Draft:Bass trombone to work on for now - bass trombone has a lot more material! — Jon ( talk) 10:41, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
I've split out alto trombone into a separate article. I'm not certain that soprano, valve or superbone deserve separate articles, but /shrug — Jon ( talk) 04:08, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi @ Why? I Ask: and @ Daniels688:, interesting and great to have a discussion finally; I thought I was talking to myself for a long time! Two things, 1. shall I have a go at collecting together a soprano article (perhaps in Draft space?), and 2. what do you both think about merging the current text of this types of trombone article with the existing text in the "Types" section of Trombone article (§ Types)? In the meantime, there is a lot of work updating links in articles, see Special:WhatLinksHere/Types_of_trombone, although I'm sure there's a bot for that... — Jon ( talk) 08:26, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi all - the split has been going well so far, and I think we now have good-ish articles for alto, bass, contrabass, cimbasso, and to my surprise, even soprano. That was the low-hanging fruit, but now we come to some trickier items that require a bit more thought and consensus first. These items, and my thoughts for what they're worth, are:
Once these items are decided and done, this article can then be reduced to a concise summary of the various types of trombone, with links to the separate articles using {{
main}}. This can then be nicely merged back into the existing
§ Types section in the main article.
Please add your thoughts below! Cheers —
Jon (
talk)
00:13, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
Progress update: I'm at peace with the existence of the superbone article now, and nobody seems to object, so I'm marking that as done and leaving it in. Which leaves the tenor trombone and F attachment. I'm now thinking that we don't actually need to resolve the problem of whether tenor trombone needs to be its own separate article yet; we can merge this article back into Trombone § Types and be in the same position. To that end, in the last few weeks I've gone through everything in this list of articles that point here, so that the only significant things left are the redirects from tenor trombone and variations of F attachment (ignoring User and Talk namespaces). I've also updated this article text so that it is a bit better organised, and I think it is now pretty much ready to transplant into the §Types section of the trombone article. Once that's done, we can update the remaining redirects to point to trombone, and we're done with this article. Say the word! (Update: actually, there will then be a bit of an edit flurry required afterwards, to find and re-attach missing references, since this article is not very well sourced) — Jon ( talk) 09:43, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Merger complete. Tis done, I've altered all the redirects here to point to the Trombone article, and added a {{ Cleanup merge}} tag to "Types" section, to flag tidying up refs, copy edits, etc.— Jon ( talk) 08:58, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
The contents of the Types of trombone page were merged into Trombone#Types on 28 July 2022. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Types of trombone redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
In regards to:
"Scottish Music Foundation" and "Kang, Mandip" Trombone only returns hits to this article and mirrors. "Mandip Kang" Trombone returns no hits. Im running out of ideas. John Vandenberg 06:41, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
as a moderately serious amateur player in the northeast US, I've been playing a large bore symphonic tenor with F attachment (a Conn 88H) since the mid-80's and have never heard anyone call this sort of instrument a "tenorbass" trombone. where is this terminology still in use? -- Sommerfeld 13:50, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
I believe this to be antiquated, but legitimate usage. I have read this all my trombone playing career, from 1971 to now. Most westerners seem to refer to the particular instrument as you do. A symphony tenor with F attachement, or more generally (some have smaller bores) a "Bb/F Tenor trombone", or "Tenor trombone with F attachment". I have such a horn in my Vincent Bach 42B, very similar to your Conn 88H. Crtune ( talk) 19:44, 22 September 2015 (UTC) User:Crtune 12:42, 22 September 2015 (PST)
I believe that the term "tenorbass" is no longer in use, but once referred to a slightly larger version of the common tenor trombone. This tenorbass trombone was slightly smaller than the bass, so it became known as the tenorbass. I realize this is very helpful, but I do know that the term was used in the 20th century. Obsolete10 03:21, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
What kind of mouthpiece does a soprano trombone use? A friend says all trombones use the same size mouthpiece but this seems impractical. Badagnani ( talk) 07:53, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm removing the tag (template) that states that the neutrality of the article is in question. (I've poked around the policy and template pages and can't find anything that says this is a no-no.) The edit summary upon adding that tag says that some descriptions may be derogatory. I've just read through the article and can't see any support for that. - Special-T ( talk) 00:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Image:Slidepos.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 05:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
The very notion of a valve trombone sounds like an oxymoron. Could somebody add a photograph of one? -- MiguelMunoz ( talk) 23:36, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I'd love for someone with knowledge and a citation to clear this up. Does anyone currently make a distinction between the two? They're (mainly) cylindrical slide instruments pitched in Bb and played with a trumpet mouthpiece. The histories of how a slide trumpet and soprano trombone came about are different, though. I have no idea if any of this is even correct - it's mostly uncited stuff from Wikipedia, and conversations with knowledgeable brass players. - Special-T ( talk) 21:17, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
A request originally at Talk:Pitch (music) where it got no reaction:
Contact Basemetal here 15:05, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
This article has annoyed me for years. For almost every other type of musical instrument, there is a separate article for every minor variation. Is it time to split this article into its components? There should be separate articles for alto trombone, tenor trombone, bass trombone, contrabass trombone and valve trombone. Then we can delete this article, or at least drastically cut it down to size to include only material relevant to comparing the types with each other. Anything left that is about the trombone in general (or rarer beasts) can be put into Trombone if not already there. Tayste ( edits) 00:28, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
I know this might be difficult to pull together, but if the photos were retaken with a yardstick or some other object next to the instrument, readers would get a better indication of the size of the instrument. 173.19.233.252 ( talk) 06:38, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
I'd like to suggest that a few other prominent trombone oriented orchestral works be mentioned:
Mahler "Symphony Number 3"; movt. 1: With its feature of the principal trombone all through the first movement, and the section soli adjoining it, the trombone dominates here. This is a serious audition piece for those wishing to work in a symphony orchestra.
Ravel "Bolero" - which features, along with many other instruments of the orchestra, a couple of repeated themes. On trombone it's very "high tessiatura" playing and thus is considered a defining moment in professional playing. This passage is easy to botch and thus also appears on most orchestral audition lists. Also the work features prominent glissandi (loud "smears") at the ending climax section.
I cite this from academic and professional experience. These are well known items in the trombone playing community. Also, I'm not attempting to be exhaustive, but to add a couple of very big items.
( talk) 19:51, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
I've merged in our entire Cimbasso article. It is clearly a type of trombone, and the amount of content that we have can easily fit within this article as a section. I am not opposed to splitting it out again if someone has a significant amount more content to add. Mamyles ( talk) 04:11, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
http://www.virtuosityboston.com/p-601-c-mahillon-calvary-trombone.aspx calls the Sax-style valve trombone a "cavalry trombone". Is this a common-enough usage to include in the article? -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:29, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
I removed the (recently changed) range info for sopranino & piccolo trombone - they seemed inaccurate. If you're familiar with these rarely-used instruments, please add accurate range info. - Special-T ( talk) 14:33, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
As articulated here already by @ Tayste (2015) I think a summary of this article should go in Trombone and the rest should be split into individual articles and linked, and this article be deleted; the opposite of an article merge, I guess. It seems ridiculous that Cimbasso should redirect here, for instance; I see @ Mamyles was only trying to help at the time but it's just highlighting how strange it is. Cimbasso should absolutely have its own article, and defer to information in the Trombone and Tuba articles where necessary. No other principal instruments of the orchestra have their articles organised this way. It seems to be an artefact of Wikipedia's article coverage and notability priorities having evolved with time, particularly since the original decision was made in 2007 to split it out from the main Trombone article. Just to add some quasi-empirical evidence for this position, and to highlight the possible disservice this arrangement makes for the ease of finding, accessing and presenting the information on Wikipedia about instruments in the trombone family, compare these two lists:
Therefore, I suggest that the following articles have every right to exist, deferring a fair amount of the content of this article and trombone into:
I think it's decision time... a "request for unmerging" discussion; I'll investigate the process in the next few days when I get a bit more time. — Jon ( talk) 00:26, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
Okay, I'll start by adding the split banner to the two articles, which will attract attention from more editors to provide comment. Jon ( talk) 00:31, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
I've split out the contrabass trombone article, and added citation needed everywhere (it needs work). Wheee, this is fun! Jon ( talk) 11:55, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
I've split out material into a Draft:Bass trombone to work on for now - bass trombone has a lot more material! — Jon ( talk) 10:41, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
I've split out alto trombone into a separate article. I'm not certain that soprano, valve or superbone deserve separate articles, but /shrug — Jon ( talk) 04:08, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi @ Why? I Ask: and @ Daniels688:, interesting and great to have a discussion finally; I thought I was talking to myself for a long time! Two things, 1. shall I have a go at collecting together a soprano article (perhaps in Draft space?), and 2. what do you both think about merging the current text of this types of trombone article with the existing text in the "Types" section of Trombone article (§ Types)? In the meantime, there is a lot of work updating links in articles, see Special:WhatLinksHere/Types_of_trombone, although I'm sure there's a bot for that... — Jon ( talk) 08:26, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi all - the split has been going well so far, and I think we now have good-ish articles for alto, bass, contrabass, cimbasso, and to my surprise, even soprano. That was the low-hanging fruit, but now we come to some trickier items that require a bit more thought and consensus first. These items, and my thoughts for what they're worth, are:
Once these items are decided and done, this article can then be reduced to a concise summary of the various types of trombone, with links to the separate articles using {{
main}}. This can then be nicely merged back into the existing
§ Types section in the main article.
Please add your thoughts below! Cheers —
Jon (
talk)
00:13, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
Progress update: I'm at peace with the existence of the superbone article now, and nobody seems to object, so I'm marking that as done and leaving it in. Which leaves the tenor trombone and F attachment. I'm now thinking that we don't actually need to resolve the problem of whether tenor trombone needs to be its own separate article yet; we can merge this article back into Trombone § Types and be in the same position. To that end, in the last few weeks I've gone through everything in this list of articles that point here, so that the only significant things left are the redirects from tenor trombone and variations of F attachment (ignoring User and Talk namespaces). I've also updated this article text so that it is a bit better organised, and I think it is now pretty much ready to transplant into the §Types section of the trombone article. Once that's done, we can update the remaining redirects to point to trombone, and we're done with this article. Say the word! (Update: actually, there will then be a bit of an edit flurry required afterwards, to find and re-attach missing references, since this article is not very well sourced) — Jon ( talk) 09:43, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Merger complete. Tis done, I've altered all the redirects here to point to the Trombone article, and added a {{ Cleanup merge}} tag to "Types" section, to flag tidying up refs, copy edits, etc.— Jon ( talk) 08:58, 28 July 2022 (UTC)