Talk:Harpsichord

message: If anyone can translate French to English, there is an excellent (huge) featured article on the French wikipedia which could usefully be translated to English in its entirety. The Italian one, while featured, is nowhere near as comprehensive as the French.
there are 2 copyright free harpsichord images on the french Wiki 212.234.182.154 15:53, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Should we use material from the French Wikipedia?

message: This is a short quote from the Discworld book "The Truth" by Terry Pratchett:
::'Your friend Mr Tulip would perhaps like part of your payment to be the harpsichord?' said the chair.
::'It's not a --ing harpsichord, it's a --ing virginal,' growled Mr Tulip. 'One --ing string to a note instead of two! So called because it was an instrument for --ing young ladies!'
::'My word, was it?' said one of the chairs. 'I thought it was just a sort of early piano!'
::'Intended to be played by young ladies,' said Mr Pin smoothly. '
While, of course, no authority on the subject, do you feel there might be something to this idea? Daniel Lindsäth 13:47, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: hahahahahaha this is great! 169.233.52.4 03:40, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re the name "virginal" 

message: At Wikipedia:Music encyclopedia topics/7, it lists Cembalo traverso and Cembalo verticale, which I figure are probably types of harpsichords, possibly mentioned here but not under those names. (Or they might be other instruments; I'm not familiar with the terms). Can somebody identify them and, if appropriate, use the names here, so they can be linked? Rigadoun 19:54, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This vertical harpsichord is a Clavicytherium (page on de: and fr: ) You can see such an instrument at  Gérard 17:29, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

text: The New Grove tells us that "cembalo traverso" is an Italian term for "spinet."  I'll try to put these in soon if no one else does first.  Opus33 05:35, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cembalo traverso and Cembalo verticale

message: I'm moved this passage to the talk page:
:In most European languages, the word for "harpsichord" is some variation of clavicembalo (Latin clavis "key" + cymbalum, an instrument similar to the psaltery). This word is also occasionally used in English, sometimes in the form clavicymbal or clavisymbal.
If you look at cymbalum, you'll find it says that it is a folk instrument of Eastern Europe.  I have never seen it said anywhere that the harpsichord originates from the cymbalum, and I'd be very reluctant to put this in the Wikipedia without citing a reference source.
This edit, by Keenan Pepper, apparently derives from a wish to delete a former stub article on clavicembalo that merely defined what it is and redirected to harpsichord.  But my impression is that clavicembalo is virtually never used in English.  We don't normally provide a list of foreign synonyms (i.e. we don't include "pomme" in Apple or "uva" in Grape)), so it's not clear we should be discussing it at all.  
I would also suggest that any further editing on this point be preceded by consultation of reference sources.
Opus33 17:31, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Not derived from the cymbalum

message: I added a brief note on the harpsichord's recent use by session musicuan Larry Knetchel.  As Peter Isotalo said above, "It's always nice to have some connection to modern popular music." Since millions of people were introduced to the harpsichord by Knetchel's work, I would appreciate it if my reference to him were not vandalized again. Cranston Lamont 05:07, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use in popular music 

message: I'm quite concerned with the edits that Cembalo has been putting in this article.  I judge that they are very much in violation of the policy posted at Wikipedia:NPOV, and also that since they are not including any reference sources, they violate Wikipedia:Verifiability.  Opus33 23:11, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cembalo's edits

message: Hello, Why replace those images?  I thought the ones we already had were clearer.  Opus33 16:12, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Images

message: In this section there is a nice drawing of the push coupler system as featured by french and english harpsichords.
Unfortunately the french system is to push in the upper manual, not draw the lower manual (I have heard about the latter but never seen it). Also the registers are in the wrong order, should be: a=8, b=4, and c=8.
As to the image: it is a modern instrument, which is not a correct historical copy (Zuckermann kit?). I think the article should be accompanied by a picture of a historical instrument too.
80.164.17.212 22:22, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controlling multiple choirs of strings 

message: Hello, anticipating growth in the history section, I have made it a separate article and inserted a brief summary with link to main article.  This is a bit tricky, since in my experience it's hard to keep the summary section short.  I will try to transfer detail edits on history to the satellite article, with the goal of a short summary in mind.  If this strikes you as not good strategy please discuss and we can consider going back.  Opus33 15:25, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Moving history out

message: Removed this line from the popular music section: "Rock band Incubus uses a harpsichord for their song Aqueous Transmission on the 2001 album Morning View." The Aqueous Transmission page mentions the Chinese instrument pipa being used so it would seem the person who added the sentence mistook it for a harpsichord. I also suppose that this is the kind of information that is considered irrelevant. Nothingbutmeat 15:43, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incubus. 

message: Figure 4 is meant to show the french shove coupler. I have never seen a french (or any other historical) harpsichord where you draw the lower manual to engage the upper manual. Rather the upper manual is pushed to engage the dogs on the lower manual. Do anybody know a harpsichord with a draw coupler? Anyway the figure should be corrected, as the push-system is the typical featured coupler system. E. Kristiansen 80.164.17.212 20:36, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello, EK, Hubbard (1965) says both kinds existed, but the shove coupler was was more common.  You're right, we should change the figure and I hope a person with the right expertise will take it on.  Opus33 21:24, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shove coupler 

message: don't get me wrong, i love the harpsichord. but, does anyone know who it was said the harpsichord sounded like ' two skeletons copulating on a tin roof'?Toyokuni3 (talk) 14:49, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Welcome to Wikipedia.  I think it was Thomas Beecham.  --RobertG ♬ talk 15:03, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A Google search certainly supports the idea that it was Sir Beecham. But it also introduces doubt as to the exact wording and as to whether he was the first to say it. Willi Gers07 (talk) 20:55, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a reference to this in The Collector. A woman who irritates the artist GP is viciously put in her place when she brings up the quote. First, the instrument being played on the record at the time was not, in fact, a harpsichord. Second, GP was no fan of Beecham. PDAWSON3 (talk) 01:24, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quote 

message: I wonder whether "contemporary harpsichord" is a term in general use?  (Googling casts doubts on it.)  In any case, that article is only a few paragraphs, which doesn't seem to warrant splitting off the content from this article.  I suggested a merge which I am happy to do myself if people agree.  --RobertG ♬ talk 07:57, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, a merge is definitely in order. --Jashiin (talk) 09:02, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No, a merge is not in order, but a renaming might be. This article (harpsichord) is quite long enough as it is, and there is much to say about the modern use of the harpsichord outside the period instruments movement. Even if the term "contemporary harpsichord" is not in common use, the concept is certainly worthy of its own article, whatever it's called. Willi Gers07 (talk) 17:41, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you mean by "concept"? The article in question simply describes the history of harpsichord music in 20th century. I am not aware of any special, widely spread new playing techniques (i.e. analogous to string piano or prepared piano); if there are any, they may merit their own articles. But simply creating a separate article to describe the history of the instrument during a particular time... I mean, isn't that what this article and History of the harpsichord are? --Jashiin (talk) 17:53, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No, Merge is for sure not the way to go with this article, it is a very valid article given the number of performers who dedicate themselves to playing contemporary harpsichord these days (and books written on the subject, Larry Palmers Harpsichord in America springs to mind). Whilst it should be noted on the history of harpsichord page, of course, it merits its own page. I think the article should detail more information about the modern type of harpsichord, such as the Neupert & Pleyel. --24.203.229.110 (talk) 19:38, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: I'm moving the list below from the article to here.  I don't think WP generally does undigested lists like this; we ought to be covering everything in the list in the normal way, with verbal discussion in articles.  Opus33 (talk) 23:28, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Lexicon

message: A good-faith edit added a link to the 1911 Encyclopedia Brittanica article, but this is not helpful, I think, because this article is inaccurate.  In 1911, scholars didn't know that the so-called "Bach harpsichord" didn't belong to Bach, and that it was modified at some point to have a disposition of strings unlike that of any true historical harpsichord.  You can read about this stuff in Hubbard's or Kottick's books, cited in the article.  For now, let's guide our readers only to the more reliable reference sources.  Thanks, Opus33 (talk) 19:28, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If you have a verifiable reference on this, as it appears you do, I think the better procedure would be to add a comment on the link with your citation of the particular pages where the "Bach" harpsichord is discussed.  Then people would have a heads up if they run into this factoid somewhere else.  I will give the article link here for those interested:  . It is interesting to hear about the "Bach" harpsichord. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 16:55, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: 1911 EB article

message: This article is excellent, but there is no mention of the harpsichord's dynamic range (or lack there of).  It's my understanding that due to the plucking mechanism, there is no variation in volume when the keys are pressed harder or softer, and that this is one of the main differences between the harpsichord and the piano.  A comparison to the piano is debatable for inclusion into the article, but certainly mention of the volume would be warranted.  ...And now I defer to people who know what they're talking about. Eeblet (talk) 04:16, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dynamic Range 

message: I don't mean to be difficult but I don't think any of three edits just made by an anon helped the article and so I reverted.  Here are the details.
*"and middle" for when Haydn and Mozart wrote harpsichord music seems a little verbose and pendantic to me; "earlier" suffices.
*Beethoven's piano music was often advertised as being for harpsichord by greedy publishers, but this does not mean that anyone took this seriously.
*All instruments should be attributed to their builders, even if they are modern instruments.  We might wonder if the top picture recently added to the article is spam, but that is a separate question; if we keep it, we should attribute it.
Opus33 (talk) 23:20, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Explaining reverts

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Harpsichord. 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:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130523193530/http://www.harpsichord.org.uk/pedal/pedalharpsichord.htm to http://www.harpsichord.org.uk/pedal/pedalharpsichord.htm
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070630211357/http://www.vam.ac.uk:80/collections/furniture/stories/virginal/index.html to http://www.vam.ac.uk/collections/furniture/stories/virginal/index.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090808194517/http://www.metmuseum.org:80/toah/hd/renk/ho_29.90.htm to http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/renk/ho_29.90.htm
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090219223051/http://metmuseum.org:80/toah/hd/cris/ho_89.4.1220.htm to http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/cris/ho_89.4.1220.htm
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081025034734/http://www.metmuseum.org:80/toah/ho/09/euwl/ho_89.4.2363.htm to http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/ho/09/euwl/ho_89.4.2363.htm
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090211072626/http://www.metmuseum.org:80/toah/hd/renk/ho_89.4.1778.htm to http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/renk/ho_89.4.1778.htm
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081011231812/http://www.metmuseum.org/TOAH/hd/renk/ho_53.6ab.htm to http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/renk/ho_53.6ab.htm
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090208013121/http://www.metmuseum.org:80/toah/hd/baro/ho_89.4.2929.htm to http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/baro/ho_89.4.2929.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:54, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Many instances of references to the 20th century indicate it began as the year 2000. It should instead indicate that the 20th century began on January 1st 2001.
Yours truly, 
Poreyspring (talk) 21:26, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I couldn't find the place in the article where we committed this mistake (I searched on "century").  Could you point out the location?  Thank you.  Opus33 (talk) 22:39, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Surely the 20th century began in 1901, and the 21st in 2001, but I can't find anywhere in this article where we get this wrong. --Deskford (talk) 00:05, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  20th Century.  

message: To the lay person, the obvious difference in appearance between a piano and a harpsichord is that the former has white keys for the C major notes and black for the sharps and flats, whereas the harpsichord keyboard (often) has the colours the other way round. How universal is this? What is its origin? PhilUK (talk) 22:15, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: This article https://livingpianos.com/piano-parts/why-were-the-white-keys-and-black-keys-on-the-piano-reversed/ answers my question. PhilUK (talk) 11:37, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Key colour