User talk:9frontier9

Your Ignorant Prejudice against the 10-string guitar
You clearly know very little about the repertoire of the 10-string guitar and as little about the difference between multi-string guitars and the type of guitar that Narciso Yepes invented (which is NOT simply a multi-stringed guitar or simply a 10-stringED guitar). It MUST be defined separately from multi-string guitars because of its primary characteristic and raison d'etre, which are characteristics NOT shared by other multi-string guitars. It belongs under Classical Guitar, and it deserves its own definition. Neither your ignorance nor your bias against Yepes nor your preference for your own favourite guitarists will stop the truth from coming out!

Also, please educate yourself as regards the repertoire for the 10-string guitar rather than claiming stupidly and falsely that no one of any significance but Ohana ever wrote music for 10-stringed guitars. You are not informing anyone, only showing your own bias and/or ignorance.

Viktor van Niekerk (talk) 08:26, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

You write "Neither your ignorance nor your bias against Yepes nor your preference for your own favourite guitarists will stop the truth from coming out!".

Excuse me? What truth? (Freud would have loved this.) It seems like your truth, is world domination of the ten-string guitar and your ideas.

If you always surround yourself with the ten-string guitar, then that's what you'll see in your world. Then the handful of compositions written for the instrument will seem like a real lot - because that's all you see.

If you step back for a moment and look at the world from a distance, you'll recognize the ten-string guitar and its repertoire to be marginal! That does not mean it's not interesting. (Nice Myspace page, by the way.) That does not mean that I'd never experiment with multi-string instruments. That does not mean that I'd never try a ten-string guitar. But the tone of your message, is such that I'd probably never want to try the ten-string guitar. You ruined it for me! ha-ha! 9frontier9 (talk) 11:23, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

re the above
1) No doubt you also haven't the slightest knowledge of Freud's work, so this should be immensely entertaining. Please do enlighten us as to what Freud would have loved about this. I insist.

2) What truth? The truth about what Narciso Yepes actually invented and what a modern 10-string guitar is actually about. The truth that has been repressed not only by the ignorant comments Segovia and his sycophants made (refer, eg., to some of the Bobri letters) against this instrument, comments that clearly reveal their lack of comprehension of the concept. The truth about the acoustics and the mechanics of playing the instrument that have likewise been repressed and further confused even by 10-stringed guitarists like Janet Marlow who have for decades spread misinformation about Yepes's instrument (like her deliberately false statement that "NARCISO YEPES heard that there were FOUR tones" without the same resonance, when to her knowledge Narciso Yepes always indicated EIGHT, which is in agreement with the laws of physics). There are MANY other examples, enough to fill tomes, of authors misrepresenting the truth about Yepes's invention, regarding many aspects from resonance to performance practice.

3) THE TEN-STRING GUITAR IS ALSO A 6-STRING GUITAR! So I have no need of seeing only "the handful of compositions written for the instrument". The classical guitar's ENTIRE REPERTOIRE is also the 10-string guitar's repertoire, only WITH expanded interpretative possibilities. As I thought (and stated elsewhere) these points have been lost on you. I wonder if the ironny is also lost on you that you should (as a 6-string guitarist?) accuse individuals, who have access not only to all the standard repertoire but also much more in terms of original works and transcriptions, of being somehow limited. And you, friend, which space do YOU in your ignoble anonymity occupy in all of this? You folks never have the courage to put your real name to anything when you go around your sneaky, petty, vindictive business. So I can only guess: you are a 6- or 7-string guitarist or an alto-guitarist (maybe you dabble a bit in 10-string guitar). You probably dabble, period. Yet you want to accuse people (or just me?) of being limited in vision/repertoire (or whatever your argument is supposed to be), for being (a) proponent(/s) of an instrument that gives access to anything you can play and more? Are you truly oblivious to the irony?

I, friend, see MUSIC first and foremost, NOT only the 10-string guitar. And this is exactly why I find it intolerable that certain folks have adopted the ten-string guitar only to butcher music, to put SIMPLIFIED MECHANICS OF PLAYING first (before musical integrity), even though they justify their use of the instrument with such empty claims as "Lute music of the Renaissance and Baroque eras composed on 14 strings or more can be transcribed and played as originally intended by the composer i.e. the lute music of J.S. Bach." This SHOULD in theory be what Yepes's instrument is about (and it is what he did with it), but these claims are evidently empty coming from folks who transpose individual bass notes in early music, have no regard for the aesthetics of the period or the structure of a particular composition, or introduce dissonances between open ringing bass strings that would NOT occur on the lute where the basses are tuned in steps and consecutive seconds are automatically muted by the RH thumb. This is putting simplified mechanics and thoughtless mechanical execution before musical integrity. This is NOT what the ten-string guitar is supposed to be about.

4) The tone I choose for folks like you is conscious and deliberate. I know full-well there is no hope of convincing you of anything. It is thoroughly hopeless. But I certainly will not be quiet and watch folks like you destroy an instrument I am passionate about, whether that be by criticising it (as you have done), or by spreading misinformation about it, or by appropriating it for purposes that do not serve a musical end but merely as a technical crutch or cheap trick.

Viktor van Niekerk (talk) 06:41, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia
Wow... you've chosen a particularly difficult article to start on at Ten-string guitar. Don't worry, you're not the only one to suffer abuse as a result of trying to improve it. See User talk:58.161.124.131 for another beautiful example.

They won't get away with it forever. See WP:ATTACK for the policy on this sort of behaviour, and thanks for not reacting more severely.

I hope you'll continue to improve this article, but obviously there are issues. Feel free to drop it if it's not for you, and I strongly recommend spending most of your time on easier articles which don't have these issues. But I'd also appreciate your sticking around, at least to watch what happens! It's a long term project for me, I think it must be.

Any other way I can help, drop me a line at my talk page. Or see user:andrewa/creed for where I'm coming from.

And again, Welcome. Andrewa (talk) 11:11, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Please consider
We're doing something about the ten-string guitar article.

While you have every right to leave this article and its probelem alone, I'd really appreciate some help with it! Andrewa (talk) 16:47, 18 January 2009 (UTC)