I’ve enabled page “subscriptions” (see the button at the botton), at least on a trial basis. Simply sated, you’ll be emailed any time the page changes. One good use is to monitor this page to be notified of all the discussion.
An alternative, if you wish to monitor all changes, is to use the RSS feature (see the button below) if your browser or newsreader supports it.
Andrew Barrett, 2007/04/04 19:02:
I have a few suggestions:
outside of the present categories (ex: “disc music box”, “player piano”, “dance organ”, etc.), could there be larger inclusive categories? These could be:
1. comb-based instruments (this includes all types of music boxes playing from discs, cylinders, cardboard books (such as the Libellion), etc.)
2. piano-based instruments (disc-operated pianos, cylinder pianos and cylinder piano orchestrions, player pianos, expression and reproducing pianos, pneumatic coin pianos and piano orchestrions, etc.)
3. reed-based instruments (organettes operated by cylinders, books/cardboard strips, rolls; automatic home reed organs with keyboard and roll, cylinder harmoniums, player accordions, player harmonicas, etc.)
4. pipe organ-based instruments (organ clocks, cylinder organs and cylinder organ-orchestrions, roll operated organ-orchestrions such as those made by Welte, book operated organ-orchestrions such as those made by Mortier, small and large street, band, dance, and fairground organs operated from cylinders, books, rolls; automatic residence and theatre pipe organs, etc.)
Each section could have an introductory page with general remarks about the class/category of instruments, with maybe a few representative pictures as well. The left sidebar would then have links to the instrument type pages (ex: the sidebar of the “pipe organ-based” portion of the website could have “fairground organs”, “dance organs”, etc.). These in turn would have a main page giving a bit about the development of the instrument, how they’re typically constructed, etc., and a link to, say, a small “makers” page just listing the models, as opposed to the separate main makers pages with a large level of historical detail.
question: would instruments incorporating, say, an automatic violin with piano or automatic banjo with piano be classed in the “piano based” or “other” instruments category? In each case, the piano could be considered the musical foundation of the instrument, and provides important accompaniment to the violin or banjo (or guitar, etc). Some would say there should be a separate “orchestrion” category for combination instruments, but I am personally against this as there are many combination instruments (such as fairground organs, with pipes and percussion) that are not orchestrions, since this term connotes a different sound-idiom.
Sometimes it is hard to categorize a particular instrument precisely, since there are several schools of thought as to category:
Was it originally used indoors or outdoors (outdoors can include roller skating rinks and carousel buildings)? Was it intended for home use or a commercial location/business (this includes amusements)? What is the primary instrument that the whole instrument is built around (That is, the categories above, comb, piano, pipe organ, reed organ, other)? Should What is the music-storage media and reading system that the instrument uses (example: cylinder with mechanical reader; cardboard book with mechanical action, cardboard book with pneumatic reader, paper roll with mechanical, pneumatic, or electric reader, MIDI with floppy disk or CD-ROM, etc.) In what country or continent was the instrument made? (Europe, North America, Germany, U.S., Switzerland, Netherlands, etc.)
I vote that there should be 3 ways to get to the detail pages of this website:
1. A “manufacturers” category/history tree (example: Hupfeld made many different types and models of instruments and these could all be listed here; the Mechanical Music Press historical page is organized in this manner; though they only list existing instruments, rather than all the known models with catalog descriptions, etc.) 2. The “main instrument” or “tonal foundation” category idea given a few paragraphs above. 3. “music storage media and reading apparatus” category. [Siegfried Wendel’s book, “Datenspeicher-Musikinstrumente” (Data Storage Musical Instruments, 2002) is organized in precisely this manner, and I kind of like it.]
Though at first it would seem that this would make the website impossibly large, cumbersome, and confusing, it actually wouldn’t be much larger than if only one of the three categories listed above were used. The bulk of the website would be the detail pages of the individual instrument models, complete with pictures, sound clips, and maybe a few animated technical diagrams of important features. The same detail page for a particular instrument could be accessed from links in the different categories.
(for example; the detail page for the “Seeburg KT Special” would be accessed through the model listing on the sidebar of the “J.P. Seeburg Piano Co.” manufacturer/history page, but the same detail page can also be accessed from the “piano-based; pneumatic piano; piano orchestrion; cabinet orchestrion (keyboardless); small size” instrument tree, and also the “paper rolls; pneumatic reader; vacuum(exhaust) system; pianos; piano-orchestrions” page on the music media and reading apparatus tree.
Instruments that didn’t really have set “models”, but were handmade one-at-a-time (like many cylinder pianos and cylinder music boxes) will present a bit of a problem as to how to describe them; but maybe a whole lot more technical detail could be included on the individual manufacturer and instrument sub-categories (so, for example, information about Palliard musical boxes could be included in great techical and historical detail on the Palliard page of “manufacturers; Palliard” and also in brief mentions in the “cylinder; mechanical; comb instruments” page on the music media tree.
I know this is a whole lot of information at once, and a I have a rather vast future conception of this site, but I think you have a great site here with great potential, and outside of MMD (where finding information can often be somewhat haphazard), and the Ex-Terry Hathaway historical page, I can think of no other project on the web that has the kind of info, the amount of it, and the level of detail that I imagine this site having. ROMFI has a lot of original catalog descriptions/pictures, but little info on existing instruments (since it depends on input from others); also, ROMFI does not focus on automatic instruments like this site does and does not have the capacity for the level of historical and technical detail I envision for here.
I know you started this site, so you really have the ultimate say in how it is laid out; however, I am just giving you my suggestions as to a possible alternative to allow for maybe the greatest amount of information; ease of accessibility, and level of detail/organization.
Todd Augsburger, 2007/04/13 08:54:
OK, so I rearranged the menu system to make navigation more flexible and predictable:
By Category: navigates through several categories of instruments, directly to the instrument pages. This contains the only permanent instrument links–all other sections are filled automatically if/when tags are used. (see below)
By Sound Production: navigates through the categories (that Andrew Barrett suggested) to the instrument pages
By Storage Media: navigates through several categories of mechanism/media types to the instruments.
By Key Scale: navigates via key scales to the instruments
Manufacturers and Distributors: : navigates through geographic areas to the manufacturers; and perhaps from there to the instruments they made
So that the menu system does not constantly need updating as new pages are added, I instituted a “tag” system which will automatically include tagged pages. You can read all about it in the Editor notes on section pages.
I moved many pages around to accomplish this, so you might check to make sure that the links work in areas you’ve created.
Comments are welcome!
Andrew Barrett, 2007/08/15 02:51:
I like the revisions. It will take some getting used to it, but you can see that already I’ve started listing a few makers and fitting them in to the various countries. I am sorry I have been inactive here lately; I now have a job which uses a lot of my time. However, from now on, I resolve to work on this site at least once a month. I think it is a great idea which should start to get some attention once more is put on it. Once I get the basic info on here (at least for the instruments I’m most familiar with: American band organs and orchestrions), then I’ll try sending some polite emails to instrument owners and historians soliciting photos, more detailed information, etc. I realize that some people will not give anything for free, but some will, especially if it’s for a worthy (information/education) cause such as this.
I just sometimes kind of wish I was a big-time, long-time collector so that I could have immediate access to a collection of representative instruments from which to take apart, take pictures, etc. All I have right now are two player pianos and a lot of print and online material; though the shop I work at usually has several reproducing pianos in at any one time, and they’re good enough people that I’m sure they wouldn’t mind me snapping a few pictures of same when I’m on break (after I tell them what it’s for, of course).
Todd Augsburger, 2007/08/15 08:22:
I installed the latest DokuWiki code, so the site should be working at it's best.
general/discussion/home.txt · Last modified: 2007/04/09 18:10 by augsburger
Discussion
I’ve enabled page “subscriptions” (see the button at the botton), at least on a trial basis. Simply sated, you’ll be emailed any time the page changes. One good use is to monitor this page to be notified of all the discussion.
An alternative, if you wish to monitor all changes, is to use the RSS feature (see the button below) if your browser or newsreader supports it.
I have a few suggestions:
outside of the present categories (ex: “disc music box”, “player piano”, “dance organ”, etc.), could there be larger inclusive categories? These could be:
1. comb-based instruments (this includes all types of music boxes playing from discs, cylinders, cardboard books (such as the Libellion), etc.)
2. piano-based instruments (disc-operated pianos, cylinder pianos and cylinder piano orchestrions, player pianos, expression and reproducing pianos, pneumatic coin pianos and piano orchestrions, etc.)
3. reed-based instruments (organettes operated by cylinders, books/cardboard strips, rolls; automatic home reed organs with keyboard and roll, cylinder harmoniums, player accordions, player harmonicas, etc.)
4. pipe organ-based instruments (organ clocks, cylinder organs and cylinder organ-orchestrions, roll operated organ-orchestrions such as those made by Welte, book operated organ-orchestrions such as those made by Mortier, small and large street, band, dance, and fairground organs operated from cylinders, books, rolls; automatic residence and theatre pipe organs, etc.)
5. other instruments (player harps, banjos, guitars, automatic trumpeters, carillons, calliopes, stand-alone percussion, etc.)
Each section could have an introductory page with general remarks about the class/category of instruments, with maybe a few representative pictures as well. The left sidebar would then have links to the instrument type pages (ex: the sidebar of the “pipe organ-based” portion of the website could have “fairground organs”, “dance organs”, etc.). These in turn would have a main page giving a bit about the development of the instrument, how they’re typically constructed, etc., and a link to, say, a small “makers” page just listing the models, as opposed to the separate main makers pages with a large level of historical detail.
question: would instruments incorporating, say, an automatic violin with piano or automatic banjo with piano be classed in the “piano based” or “other” instruments category? In each case, the piano could be considered the musical foundation of the instrument, and provides important accompaniment to the violin or banjo (or guitar, etc). Some would say there should be a separate “orchestrion” category for combination instruments, but I am personally against this as there are many combination instruments (such as fairground organs, with pipes and percussion) that are not orchestrions, since this term connotes a different sound-idiom.
Sometimes it is hard to categorize a particular instrument precisely, since there are several schools of thought as to category:
Was it originally used indoors or outdoors (outdoors can include roller skating rinks and carousel buildings)? Was it intended for home use or a commercial location/business (this includes amusements)? What is the primary instrument that the whole instrument is built around (That is, the categories above, comb, piano, pipe organ, reed organ, other)? Should What is the music-storage media and reading system that the instrument uses (example: cylinder with mechanical reader; cardboard book with mechanical action, cardboard book with pneumatic reader, paper roll with mechanical, pneumatic, or electric reader, MIDI with floppy disk or CD-ROM, etc.) In what country or continent was the instrument made? (Europe, North America, Germany, U.S., Switzerland, Netherlands, etc.)
I vote that there should be 3 ways to get to the detail pages of this website:
1. A “manufacturers” category/history tree (example: Hupfeld made many different types and models of instruments and these could all be listed here; the Mechanical Music Press historical page is organized in this manner; though they only list existing instruments, rather than all the known models with catalog descriptions, etc.) 2. The “main instrument” or “tonal foundation” category idea given a few paragraphs above. 3. “music storage media and reading apparatus” category. [Siegfried Wendel’s book, “Datenspeicher-Musikinstrumente” (Data Storage Musical Instruments, 2002) is organized in precisely this manner, and I kind of like it.]
Though at first it would seem that this would make the website impossibly large, cumbersome, and confusing, it actually wouldn’t be much larger than if only one of the three categories listed above were used. The bulk of the website would be the detail pages of the individual instrument models, complete with pictures, sound clips, and maybe a few animated technical diagrams of important features. The same detail page for a particular instrument could be accessed from links in the different categories.
(for example; the detail page for the “Seeburg KT Special” would be accessed through the model listing on the sidebar of the “J.P. Seeburg Piano Co.” manufacturer/history page, but the same detail page can also be accessed from the “piano-based; pneumatic piano; piano orchestrion; cabinet orchestrion (keyboardless); small size” instrument tree, and also the “paper rolls; pneumatic reader; vacuum(exhaust) system; pianos; piano-orchestrions” page on the music media and reading apparatus tree.
Instruments that didn’t really have set “models”, but were handmade one-at-a-time (like many cylinder pianos and cylinder music boxes) will present a bit of a problem as to how to describe them; but maybe a whole lot more technical detail could be included on the individual manufacturer and instrument sub-categories (so, for example, information about Palliard musical boxes could be included in great techical and historical detail on the Palliard page of “manufacturers; Palliard” and also in brief mentions in the “cylinder; mechanical; comb instruments” page on the music media tree.
I know this is a whole lot of information at once, and a I have a rather vast future conception of this site, but I think you have a great site here with great potential, and outside of MMD (where finding information can often be somewhat haphazard), and the Ex-Terry Hathaway historical page, I can think of no other project on the web that has the kind of info, the amount of it, and the level of detail that I imagine this site having. ROMFI has a lot of original catalog descriptions/pictures, but little info on existing instruments (since it depends on input from others); also, ROMFI does not focus on automatic instruments like this site does and does not have the capacity for the level of historical and technical detail I envision for here.
I know you started this site, so you really have the ultimate say in how it is laid out; however, I am just giving you my suggestions as to a possible alternative to allow for maybe the greatest amount of information; ease of accessibility, and level of detail/organization.
OK, so I rearranged the menu system to make navigation more flexible and predictable:
So that the menu system does not constantly need updating as new pages are added, I instituted a “tag” system which will automatically include tagged pages. You can read all about it in the Editor notes on section pages.
I moved many pages around to accomplish this, so you might check to make sure that the links work in areas you’ve created.
Comments are welcome!
I like the revisions. It will take some getting used to it, but you can see that already I’ve started listing a few makers and fitting them in to the various countries. I am sorry I have been inactive here lately; I now have a job which uses a lot of my time. However, from now on, I resolve to work on this site at least once a month. I think it is a great idea which should start to get some attention once more is put on it. Once I get the basic info on here (at least for the instruments I’m most familiar with: American band organs and orchestrions), then I’ll try sending some polite emails to instrument owners and historians soliciting photos, more detailed information, etc. I realize that some people will not give anything for free, but some will, especially if it’s for a worthy (information/education) cause such as this.
I just sometimes kind of wish I was a big-time, long-time collector so that I could have immediate access to a collection of representative instruments from which to take apart, take pictures, etc. All I have right now are two player pianos and a lot of print and online material; though the shop I work at usually has several reproducing pianos in at any one time, and they’re good enough people that I’m sure they wouldn’t mind me snapping a few pictures of same when I’m on break (after I tell them what it’s for, of course).
I installed the latest DokuWiki code, so the site should be working at it's best.