Talk:Percussion notation

message: Think about how this article begins. First we have the article title: "Percussion notation".
Then we have a remakably tautological circular definition: "Percussion notation is a type of musical notation for percussion instruments." Finally, we have the title of our single section: "1 Notation of percussion instruments", a slight variation on the title of the article itself.  
I contend that an article with only one section does not need a section heading and that a definition that says nothing is superfluous. I will now undertake to remove both this section heading and the definition. TheScotch 07:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Headings

message: This page is incorrectly named. It should be, "Drum notation" Percussion notation uses the same notation system as all other orchestral instruments, except the instrument name is printed above the staff. 82.41.85.72 18:28, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Drums are of course percussion instruments, although not all percussion instruments are drums. Yes, most pitched percussion instruments use more-or-less standard notation, but there are variants, and even if there weren't, I would see nothing objectionable about an inclusive article pointing this out. TheScotch 02:39, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article name

message: Though not a professional musician, I have been a percussionist in a concert wind band for close to six years, and have never seen some of the percussion notation stated in this article. Legato notes and "anti-accents" in untuned percussion, for example. (Although I've seen the use of parenthesis to indicate ghost notes.)
"Open hi-hat: o above high-G X. Closed hi-hat: + above high-G X." -- I should think that the o and + are usually just above the staff and all other notes and not a particular note.
"Mounted triangle: ledger-line high C with "X" replacing notehead. Maraca: high-B with "+" replacing notehead. Mounted tambourine: high-B with "X" through conventional notehead." -- This may be too sweeping a generalisation. Having played many pieces with these auxiliary percussion instruments, I can safely say that there are no standard lines on the staff on which these instruments' parts are notated.
Also, I contest the claim that the percussion clef is "usually preferred now". (Moreover sometimes it contains only one line, not two.) It might be more plausible to say that this clef is preferred for snare drum and bass drum parts in marches. Many contemporary scores still have percussion parts notated on the standard five-line staff.
I think we need some proper citations here.
Maeglin (talk) 16:13, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inaccuracies? Generalisations? Need citations. 

message: Evidently there are two different styles of notation, and this article only gives one. Here's the other style: http://www.freedrumlessons.com/drum-lessons/reading-drum-notation.php
This should be investigated. (75.65.220.111 (talk) 18:18, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The introduction explains "The notation of non-pitched percussion instruments is less standardized" and then gives some general guidelines. I don't consider it necessary to cover every possible variation. --dbolton (talk) 03:12, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two different styles of notation