Talk:Organ flue pipe scaling

Technical
Good information but needs to be translated a little better to the non-expert.--Pmeisel 14:01, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Major issues
I have attempted to clean up this article, and I think it's much better now, but I simply do not possess the technical knowledge or the command of English necessary to make it understandable to a novice. The help of anyone with knowledge in this areas would be much appreciated! Furthermore, I am not sure that this topic can be fully explained without delving into the definitions of menial organ terminology such as rank, 8-foot, harmonic series, flue pipe, and so on. I placed the note in italics at the top of the page in an effort to fix this, but it's not a good solution, as it will probably scare away readers. Does anyone have any ideas on how to effectively explain scaling (a very technical subject) without devoting half of the article to term definitions? —Cor anglais 16 22:00, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Improvements
I've added a section explaining why scaling matters (musically; i.e. what the width of a pipe does to its timbre), and tried to make the connections between this and other Wikipedia pages. This mentions the basic idea that wide-scaled pipes have a different timbre. I've then added a section to deal with the next aspect of scaling: that the width must be reduced from big pipes to small pipes as you play up the scale, but the width unfortunately can't decrease at the same rate as the length, and this is a critical aspect of devising a pipe scale. I decided to take a historical perspective and mention this in connection with Dom Bédos. I've added references, though there aren't many. Nearly everything on pipe acoustics seems to be self-published pdfs by people who undoubtedly know what they're talking about, but are edgy as references because they're very primary and not even peer reviewed. The reference for Dom Bédos is from a very reliable book, but it's in German. I don't have a copy of Mahrenholz's book, so I'm quoting him second-hand via Adelung's book. This means the article is now at least referenced, and I hope I've made it more understandable at a technical level. I intend to come back this evening and add some references to the Töpfer section, and maybe add a little explanatory text. I'm sorry, these have been rather large changes, but I hope they make sense? I will also remove the comment about needing technical input as I think it quite likely to scare away other editors? Please feel free to put it back. I will leave the complaint about citations, because although it now has some, I really think it would benefit from more. Elemimele (talk) 11:13, 19 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I've now reworded the section on Töpfer and Normalmensur to make it follow on from the previous sections more smoothly. I hope I have retained all the information in the original article; please do complain if not! It would have been nice to show a line-graph describing a rank relative to Normalmensur, but the only examples I have are in copyright books, and the best examples I can think of are in Downes' "Baroque Tricks" which I do not possess, and is currently not available in electronic form, and ludicrously expensive in print. If anyone knows of a source, please do add it!


 * I've left Töpfer's name red-linked to a non-existent page in German WP as I'm not very familiar with that mark-up, and there's more chance of a page being written there than here. He probably deserves a page, but I can't write one, as the only sources I can find are other encyclopaedias. Elemimele (talk) 10:39, 20 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Update: I've translated the German WP page on Töpfer and submitted it, so it will now await patrolling. Elemimele (talk) 11:35, 21 June 2021 (UTC)