Talk:Kalimba

The language of this article seems too poetic for an encyclopaedia text. Reflections about intuition and notes mapping are unnecessary (although what the author says is true). What do you think? Ivan.Lt (talk) 04:15, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

i think thunb piano is just a stupid name infront of a better name like kalimba.All pianos are played with thumbs and fingers so kalimba is no different,moreover kalimba gives it a unique name which it deserves for a unique instrument like this...thumb piano is too stupid and too common....would you call a unique flute "mouth flute"...? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.3.195.155 (talk) 13:18, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments
I just want to commend the contributors who made this page as nice as it is, and to offer one minor but important suggestion: whenever you put a 5-line staff in for an example, the note heads don't mean anything in terms of pitch until you also include a clef. In this case, it's almost obvious that what's intended was a treble (G) clef, but it's much better form to explicitly include the clef than to omit it. This is coming from a professional musician who's been reading music since childhood. Some rules are unbreakable in written (western) notation. FYI I am equally critical of rhythmic notation, which tends to be even looser in construction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fjeinca (talk • contribs) 01:54, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Thumb piano
I too think that Thumb piano should be part of the kalimba artical A.K.A. thumb piano or something —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.42.157.90 (talk) 00:38, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Marimbanation (talk • contribs) 20:31, 31 May 2009 (UTC) Thank-you for the discussion. It's wonderful to see people caring and writing about it! Speaking as an African music professional and someone who has worked with the Tracey family, and at the Kalimba factory in South Africa, I feel that the term "Thumb Piano" should be stamped out before it catches on yet more than it has already! This instrument has nothing whatsoever to do with the piano, and this term adds further credence to the piano instead of to the kalimba family. I am under the impression that in the United States the word "kalimba" is said to be a generic term. If that is so, then let it set precedent. Calling a kalimba, mbira, etc an "African thumb piano" is like calling a violin a "European neck guitar". Worse, actually: at least both guitar and violin have strings... -Gareth Marimbanation (talk) 20:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

I think the "kalimba" article and the "mbira" article overlap a lot - and each needs to include a lot of stuff that's in the other - so if any two pages are combined it should be those two, not the "thumb piano" article. I think the "thumb piano" article should be reduced to a brief note that the term is not authentic, widely criticized, and/or widely considered culturally offensive, with cross-references to "mbira" and "kalimba" (or better yet to an article combining the two). Discussing this topic feels worthwhile, if only because listening to the music that's actually played on a mbira/kalimba can be magical or uplifting. Thanks to everyone who cares. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.249.251.152 (talk) 01:52, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I didn't even look at the thumb piano article because I have heard African musicians use the term; in fact one rather famous one said that kalimba is a word from one tribe and it doesn't mean anything to other tribes so they all just call it thumb piano. You can argue about the purity of the term but it's real and in use. It IS a genuine and generic term. So I say use it, and put both mbira and kalimba under it since they are both thumb pianos. ;Bear (talk) 17:19, 9 April 2010 (UTC)