Talk:Solfège

message: Learning to Sight-Sing: The Mental Mechanics of Aural Imagery Clhtnk (talk) 19:11, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed External Link

message: What are the syllables for augmented 3, diminished 4, dminished 1, and augmented 7? I guess you could use "De" and "Fe" for dim 1 and dim 4, respectively, but I've never heard of those. Do such things exist? -- Merphant
It has to do with the number of half steps between the scale degrees.  For example, between "si" and "la" there is only one half step.  Because there is only one half step between "mi" and "fa," there is no theoretical need for a raised 3 (likewise a lowered 4 or a lowered 1).  If you find one, I would assume you're either in the middle of a modulation, in which case solfege is generally tossed, or in a less tonal piece, in which case, again, solfege is tossed.  I'm sure there are exceptions here, but this will be generally true. -- GDPmumin
: This system was created at a time when such questions didn't even exist. (Chromatic notes didn't exist, chords didn't exist.) It is possible to extend the system by various methods, and if you like those you should use them, but none of them are part of the original. TooManyFingers (talk) 23:18, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing solfege syllables 

message: Vocalists are often concerned with the proper singing of diphthongs, not only in singing text but also in sight reading/solfege situations.  I would say that (especially depending on dialect) the pronunciation hints given in the chart are very conducive to unpleasant diphthongs if used as a reference.
Perhaps IPA or SAMPA pronunciation guides would be more appropriate?  Ideas? -- TrbleClef 03:57, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diphthongs 

message: We call the perfect fifth sol, not so and the major seventh si, not ti. Then, augmented fifth becomes sil and diminished fifth becomes sel. On some occasions, we even call the minor seventh si flat, the augmented fifth sol sharp, and we do similar thing to the other notes. -- ErikDT
:We? Who? --Haruo (talk) 04:22, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The user is Indonesian so maybe he means "we in Indonesia" Signed: Basemetal (write to me here) 17:57, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sol, Si, Sharp-Flat 

message: I took out the table "Solfeggio frequencies" table for the lack of explanation about its origin and the potential misunderstanding as to its meaning. I strongly feel that, if this belongs in Wikipedia at all, it should have its own article. I'm afraid that the "healing powers" aspect of the information leaves me reluctant to see it inline with more conventional writing. WikiWikiPhil 01:34, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I made no mention to the Healing Frequences.  The Solfeggio Frequences are true, regardless of "correlations" with ideas you disagree with.  Until you can show that these frequencies are wrong, they should be left in. Michael.Pohoreski 01:15, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can show the frequencies are not musical. A perfect fifth should be in the ratio 2:3, but here Ut1 -> Sol1 is *1.87, and Ut2 -> Sol2 is *1.37. Could you cite a couple of sources to show the link with the rest of this article? WikiWikiPhil 01:07, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Healing Codes frequencies 

message: :"In Continental Europe and East Asia, si is the seventh major, instead of ti"
I don't know about other European countries but here in Hungary we call the seventh major ti. (And I think Hungary is definitely part of Central Europe.) So the statement above is not true in this form. I recommend the following change: 
:"In many countries of Continental Europe and East Asia, si is the seventh major, instead of ti"
or if we know more about exactly how many countries are using ti and si maybe
:"In most countries of Continental Europe and East Asia, si is the seventh major, instead of ti".
::Do Hungarians use movable do or fixed do? Would you mind translating the Hungarian page on solfege and posting it somewhere? Perhaps at Users:Gheuf/sandbox/hungarian solfege or something like that? I'm trying to revamp the article to make it as inclusive as possible. Information on how solfege is done in different countries would be valuable.--24.199.120.71 23:50, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hungarians mostly use the Kodály method which is movable do Signed: Basemetal (write to me here) 18:02, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

text: I'm Taiwanese and we use si instead of ti, as well as so instead of sol. Chenhsi (talk) 21:08, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

text: The reason why "ti" is used instead of "si" in English is because "si", the seventh of the major scale, can be confused with "C", the note. I actually don't know why "ti" is chosen over any other syllable, but this is the reason why "si" is usually not used in English. But in modern solfege classes where only "do", "re", "mi", etc. are used and no confusion of "si" and "C" is possible, then "si" is used, correct? --  () 04:59, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: But that introduces a collision between  and  in chromatic solfège. Double sharp (talk) 09:22, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ti - si? 

message: Can someone explain to me the meaning of this sentence? Robert K S 16:23, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no idea.--24.199.120.71 23:46, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Its equivalent since Early Modern English is sol-fa."

message: I think this article could use some major revamping. I've posted a version of what I think it might look like at www.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gheuf/sandbox/solfege. Let me know what you think. (The information on Tonic sol-fa would be moved to its own page, now at www.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gheuf/sandbox/Tonic_sol-fa)--24.199.120.71 23:45, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For the record (it's been a while now), I merged this and [Tonic Sol-fa] in mid-2005, however both articles have been expanded since then. WikiWikiPhil 21:05, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major Revamping 

message: Solmisation is the singing of music naming  the sounds. Solmisation is a very old strategy for memorising music. Its first documented used appears to be in ancient India (where the notes are named as sa, ri, ga, ma, pa, da, ni). Solfeggio (Italian), solfege (French), solfeo (Spanish) is solmisation using as note names the syllables derived from an Hymn to Saint John the Baptist (Sancte Ioannes) mainly by Guido D'Arezzo : Ut (changed for "Do" in Italy), Re, Mi, Fa, Sol, La, Si (the latter, added later, is an acronym of the hymn's name).
:You're right that "solmization" is not/has not always been entirely synonymous with "solfege": but in contemporary use in the USA "solfege" tends to be used for "solmization" and "solmization" not at all. I am not sure that any distinction is maintained between the two. Your distinction seems to be that "solfege" is a TYPE of solmization: in particular, the solmization used in Europe. This is not the distinction that I have seen elsewhere. As it is, the article discusses some of these issues in its second section.--Gheuf 04:58, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I took a stab at resolving this, let me know what you think (as if that ever needs an invitation on Wikipedia!).  I also added solfeggio as a synonymn in the first sentence MrRK 20:33, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

text: I typed “music theory” in Google’s English-to-French translator, and it came out “solfege”. I typed in “solfege” in French-to-Italian, and it came out “teoria della musica”. That suggests to me that in France “solfege” can mean more than simply do-re-mi. TheScotch (talk) 09:22, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Solfege is not synonymous with solmisation

message: Someone has appended "citation needed" to the remark in the introduction that in English-speaking countries, So and Ti are used for Sol and Si. I'm not clear on why this needs a citation: it's common knowledge. It appears in the famous "Do Re Mi" song by Rodgers and Hammerstein. Later on in the article, it says that Si was changed to Ti by Sarah Glover in the 19th century -- this is a much more specific claim that really could use a citation: and yet no "citation needed" has been added here. I think the "citation needed" should be taken away from the general common knowledge in the first paragraph, and put onto the specific remark about Sarah Glover later on. --Gheuf 04:56, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, that was me. I missed your comment here, but I pretty much did what you recommended already. Please feel free to correct as needed. You may also want to replace "Sol (or So)" with "So (or Sol)" in the intro. — Sebastian 01:07, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation needed? 

message: Why does "Sol-fa" redirect here? I'm looking for an album by a Japanese band. 77.97.230.248 14:42, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Does the name of the album also happen to be "Sol-fa"? I'm not sure there's any article about it.--Gheuf 04:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sol-fa redirect 

message: The article says moveable do is not generally used in Continental Europe. It is exclusively used in Hungary instead of the "fixed do" system, and unless I'm much mistaken, also in many other countries with significant German musical influence (which means much of Central Europe).
In Russia, on the other hand, the fixed do is definitely used, but I'm not sure whether alternatively or exclusively. 84.2.212.45 (talk) 15:06, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Geographical range of moveable do

message: I would like to add the following to this section.  Please read the source and let me know if you have comments, questions.OpTioNiGhT (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This is really anachronistic and nonsensical. Guido never used si or do! They were not invented until 900 years later or so. On this point the article is woefully inadequate. Guido did not have a full scale with two halfsteps, only a hexachord with one halfstep (mi-fa) and that was very necessary in his days because the distance between the two halfsteps in the scale could vary a lot more in the modes of his day than today.
Jcwf (talk) 17:22, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the Alternative theories section as it breaks up the Guido to 'Elizabethian' narrative and didn't seem to claim a direct influence on the development of solfege. That is, until I checked here and also discovered an unsigned commented-out discussion in the wikicode, which I append below. I would love to see a well developed  Durar mufaṣṣalāt' article though, and a more thorough survey in the Solmization article. Sparafucil (talk) 22:40, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of symbols 

message: (I think this is closely related to the topic, namely
: Moveable do vs. fixed do as a source of confusion about syllables
that i've made it a sub-section of -- even if it is not properly part of that topic.)   The Dab page Do has an defective entry reading  
: * Do (musical note), the first note of the musical scale in solfege
It is most obviously defective bcz a single Dab entry may not have two blue lks: Contrary to earlier guidelines, if solfège cannot be counted on to be understood sufficiently widely, it should now be avoided by rewording, e.g. 
: * Do (musical note), the first note of the musical scale sung or described with "do, re, mi, ..."
I mention that much detail mostly bcz it bears on the deeper defect, namely that Do (musical note) is a Rdr to C (musical note), whereas it should probably be a Dab between C (musical note) and -- on the assumption that Do in its solfège sense cannot support its own article  -- (ta-da!) solfège.  If i were cleaning up Do, i would both convert the Rdr to such a Dab, and, i expect, split the Do entry i cite above into two:
: * Do, the first note C (musical note) of the C-major scale 
: * Do, the first note of any musical scale sung or described with solfège
I propose to do both -- and proceed up the solfège scale doing the corresponding 2 tasks on the other six syllables, and i suppose on the -- what, five? -- additional half-step syllables. I have only today learned of the fixed-do solfège, however, so i would welcome correction of the misconceptions that i probably still harbor, and discussion of any pitfalls in the approach i have just outlined. I'll endeavor to listen to your technically informed critiques with the same sensitivity that i will press you-all to show for such widely misunderstood issues as the perhaps 101 ways that Dab pages differ (and must differ) from articles. --Jerzy•t 20:02, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation of the solfège names 

message: The word 'sol-fa' is listed in my copy of Random House Webster's College Dictionary (2000) as both a noun and a verb and is dated to 1560-70. It seems strange to require a citation for a word that has been in the English language that long.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by SolfegeNut (talk • contribs) 06:49, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Anything challenged may need citation. The fact that dictionaries exist... Hyacinth (talk) 15:22, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does the word 'sol-fa' really need a citation? 

message: The article doesn't discuss the relationship with modern musical notation.  Are they complementary, is one better for certain tasks, etc. pgr94 (talk) 13:01, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relation to [[Musical_notation#Modern_notation|Modern musical notation]] 

message: I'm a little confused on the order of the chromatic scale.  It's listed so that the top is high do and the bottom is low do.  This makes sense visually, but it doesn't when reading it.  For ease of understanding the order, maybe should it be written like this:
do
di
re
ri
mi
fa
fi
sol
si
la
li
ti
do
Or, to avoid any confusion, maybe writing it all on one line would be best: do, di, re, ri, mi, fa, fi, sol, si, la, li, ti, do.
What do you think?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flowr6powr (talk • contribs) 20:14, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: For me, reading them going down, as you have proposed, looks very strange. Maybe because I have some musical training and expect higher notes to be higher on the page.  Maybe putting them all on one line is best for reading?  Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:12, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Order of ascending chromatic scale 

message: [The use of only the four syllables mi,fa,'sol, and la, was ] "eliminated by the 19th century, but it was (and still is in a few rare circumstances) used in the shape note system." This should be re-worded. The use of only four syllable in the shape-note system is widespread, and in fact, is the most common system of solmization used in shape-note singing. It is not just a few rare circumstances.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.68.134.1 (talk) 19:43, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I don't think either statement is true. People who are aware of the widespread use of fasola shapenotes (the four-shape system) in Sacred Harp and Sacred-Harp-related singing, a tradition which is alive and well throughout the English-speaking world and not unheard of elsewhere, tend to be unaware of the lively survival of a seven-shape shapenote in certain Protestant church circles, mostly in the southern United States and among conservative Mennonites. And vice versa, the seven-note shapenote singers tend not to be aware of the currency of the Sacred Harp. Documenting this in a no-original-research Wp-appropriate way is another matter. Also note that these are movable-do(h) systems, even though they are predominantly used, past and present, in the US, contrary to an early assertion in the article to the contrary. --Haruo (talk) 04:19, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Four syllables in shape-note singing. 

message: What is the etymology of "fa"?  This needs to be included.Curb Chain (talk) 11:33, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: In this edit, I added the theory published by Boris Mouravieff where he presents 'fa' as corresponding to the Latin word FAtum, meaning "fate". Each note is explained by him in terms of esoteric cosmology. That's the most comprehensive theory that I am aware of, and it presents an understanding of the scale with a far richer meaning than other explanations.--Tdadamemd (talk) 23:41, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology 

message: The paragraph
:There are two methods of applying solfege: fixed do (used in China, France, Italy, Portugal, Spain, Romania, Russia, South America and parts of North America, Japan, and Vietnam) and movable do (used in the United Kingdom, Germany, Indian classical music, and the United States).
strikes me as vastly overlinked. I don't think it does readers any good to see blue links on every other word, unless the word is pertinent to the subject matter. Clicking on the names of various countries will add nothing to the reader's understanding of solfège. I think it would be much better to have it read
:There are two methods of applying solfege: fixed do (used in China, France, Italy, Portugal, Spain, Romania, Russia, South America and parts of North America, Japan, and Vietnam) and movable do (used in the United Kingdom, Germany, Indian classical music, and the United States).
Unless someone objects soon, I'll probably come back and implement this, as I see it, improvement. --Haruo (talk) 23:08, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excessive linking 

message: In the list of languages, the French link leads to fr:Solfège.  Based on reading that article, I would say that the French word "solfège" means "classical music education," as the article consists of an overview of what is and isn't encompassed thereby.  I suggest linking to fr:Notes_de_musique#Noms instead.  Envergure (talk) 20:32, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The link to the French page is erroneous. 

message: The article lists Japan as a moveable do country in one section and a fixed do country in another section. It seems to me that fixed do is correct based on the fact that my daughter, who is in fifth grade here in Tokushima City, is being taught fixed do in her music class. The curriculum in Japanese public schools is fixed by the Ministry of Education and there is essentially no chance that a Japanese Music teacher would teach anything other than the officialy-adopted system.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Henrodon (talk • contribs) 00:02, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moveable do in Japan 

message: Could someone please add some audio tracks to this page.  Since it deals with musical sounds the IPA seems a tad misplaced. Hearing the actual respective notes would help a whole lot more. THKS. 99.11.160.111 (talk) 06:11, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Audio takes ? 

message: In the last paragraph of the "Comparison of the two systems" section, there is 
For choirs, sight-singing fixed do using chromatic movable do syllables (see below) is more suitable than sight-singing movable do for reading atonal music, polytonal music, pandiatonic music, music that modulates or changes key often, or music in which the composer simply did not bother to write a key signature. It is not uncommon for this to be the case in modern or contemporary choral works.
The "see below" reference seems to be of something that was deleted or simply never added, it should probably be fixed or removed.  
Kewne (talk) 18:32, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  See below seems to reference missing text 

message: I have a more intuitive naming scheme for the flat notes under https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solfège#Major, but is citation required to begin with?
If it's not in major publications (ones outside your control) already, it can't go on Wikipedia.  TooManyFingers (talk) 23:36, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Different Naming for Flat Notes 

message: The OED has the pronunciation as /sɒlˈfɛʒ/. I think that is the more common one. Acorrector (talk) 21:40, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  /sɒlˈfɛʒ/ 

message: You might want to add some stuff about the scale/hexachord originally beginning on A in the bass clef and then being lowered to G, known as gamma ut, whence the word gamut? Fuficius Fango (talk) 10:47, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  gamut 

message: I understand that "Si" came from combining the first letters, but I've removed the highlighting of the S/I in Sancte Iōhannēs for a few reasons:
* The text matches the highlighting of the music illustration
* It's confusing as "si" hasn't been discussed yet at that point in the article
* And indeed, from the sources, Guido was all about the hexachord, so it's not relevant yet
* "Si" was a retcon of sorts and devised afterwards and differently, taking initials instead of the first syllable
* The parenthetical ("from Sancte Iōhannēs") when "Si" is discussed explains where it came from perfectly well, and more clearly imo
The Human Spellchecker (talk) 17:50, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sancte Iōhannēs highlighting 

message: diff Numerology-based fringe hogwash, having little to to with actual music. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solfeggio frequencies. Just plain Bill (talk) 11:04, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Solfeggio frequencies again 

message: The pitch to color table in this section assigns colors differently than what the source describes how Newton did. So either it should be made clear that the table does not describe the associations Newton made or change it to match the color wheel as it appears in the source. 84.250.81.79 (talk) 09:12, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rainbow colours assigned by Isaac Newton 

message: The quotation given from Shakespeare's King Lear uses the word "divisions". At that time, the word was a pun with a reference to music: "divisions" meant what it means now, but it also meant "a piece of music in the form of variations on a theme". TooManyFingers (talk) 16:46, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use in King Lear 

message: The entire "Comparison ..." section looks and sounds like original research. Please show which page in which reliable publication each of these ideas comes from, or remove the ideas from the article. TooManyFingers (talk) 17:30, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Comparison of systems" 

message: The subsection called "Modern use / Comparison of the two systems" is all original research. I plan to delete that subsection soon unless someone shows that each individual idea in it comes from a published reliable source. TooManyFingers (talk) 20:10, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, please do.  Note that even the cited section ("Tone-Spectra and the Natural Elements of Music") is a book not held by any library in WorldCat and the author's other book (the only other book I can find published by the press called "Spectral Music") is held only in two copyright deposit libraries.  Therefore I would consider it self-published or S-P adjacent and not a reliable source to work into the article. I will remove. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 07:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleting "Modern use / Comparison of the two systems" 

message: There is NO reliable evidence (yet?) that "si" came from "Sancte Ioannes".
Please do not restore this claim, unless you show historic documents that prove it. (Not modern documents in which someone has decided to take a guess.) TooManyFingers (talk) 01:34, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  I have seen one "reliable" source that includes this claim recently, but it uses the same language as Wikipedia, is not a history of music (let alone solfège), and cites no sources. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 06:08, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Sancte Ioannes"? Not without proof. 

message: Solfège cannot be an education method, in the same way that the alphabet is not an education method. Each of them is merely a list, and it is what the teacher does with them that counts as method.
There are MANY methods that make USE of solfège, and the erroneous classification of solfège as a method may come from groups of teachers who believe they are teaching the "one true solfège" when they are not. (Not because I know the "one true solfège method" myself, but because such a thing does not exist.) TooManyFingers (talk) 02:05, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not an education method