Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2011 November 7

= November 7 =

The Three Ravens -Suitable Ochestration
Hi, I was attempting to score this using MuseScore and would like some suggestions on what instruments might be sutiable.

Given that it appears to be an Elizabethan tune, I'm currently using a vocal instrument and a (Soprano) Recorder. However the tune sounds a little weak.

Your thoughts on suitable instrumentation would be much appreciated.

Posted to humanities rather than Entertainment, as this is more a question relating to historical instruments and musical theory stuff than the desk deals with.


 * I don't know the tune, but viols were common back then and have a wonderfully dark and rich tone. Pfly (talk) 08:32, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Perhaps virginals, the predecessor of the harpsichord? --TammyMoet (talk) 10:42, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Why not a lute? Deor (talk) 11:00, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, My next question is of a technical nature, How to 'fake' the sound of an old instrument using modern ones given that MuseScore is seemingly limited to MIDI instruments? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:42, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Does it not allow you to select a harpsichord? --TammyMoet (talk) 12:38, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It does, but it was more how to fake a 'viol' using combinations/transpositions  of string options Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:24, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

I've uploaded a temporary version of the current arrangement I have here. File:Three_Ravens.mid - feedback appreciated. Currently it's scored for 3 recorders ( 1 Soprano, 2 Bass) and a tenor voice part (which is using a SynthVoice effect in the MIDI uploaded.) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:24, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I listened to that MIDI file. It sounds reasonably "old". The The Three Ravens page says it was published in 1611 but could be much older. The year 1600 is commonly used to divide Renaissance music from Baroque music, although there was a broad transition period. I'm assuming you are aiming for something more Renaissance in sound, rather than Baroque. Some thoughts:


 * Instrumentwise, recorders do a good job of evoking early and pre-Baroque music, I think. Viols sound a lot like violins, cellos, etc. You could fake it with a cello or viola type sound. The main difference I usually hear is a slightly darker tone, somewhat "softer" yet "richer" (mainly due to the use of gut strings instead of steel strings, I think), but it is fairly subtle. Examples abound on youtube, but here's a short example from a Medieval song I like Fumeux fume par fumee, . I just discovered there's a MIDI version of that song on The Commons: . The vocal part is imitated by a MIDI "choral" sound (and sounds pretty bad/synthy on my computer). The other parts seem to use MIDI harp and/or guitar sounds to reasonably good effect. Another idea is the MIDI oboe sound, which might evoke a Renaissance feel. So, some General MIDI instruments that might be able to evoke the right mood that come to mind: dulcimer, acoustic guitar (nylon), viola, cello, harp, oboe, english horn, bassoon...


 * Fumeux fume par fumee is a deliciously "chromatic" example of Ars nova--usually heard with vocals only. There's some vocal-only versions on youtube, but to my ears they all sound rather shaky in terms of tuning. Which brings up another thing that you could try--modes and tunings. It looks like your MIDI file has the piece in G minor. You could try using G dorian (as described in the "Modern Dorian mode" section--the "Greek" and "Medieval" sections are quite esoteric). The main difference with "modern minor" would not using F# to make D major "dominant" type chords. I only glanced at your MIDI file and it looks like you have some D minor and some D major chords. I don't know if sticking strictly to dorian would help much--by 1611 things were rapidly evolving beyond strict modal music. Still, modal music can evoke a Medieval or Renaissance feel. You could also try tweaking the tuning out of standard equal temperament and into, say, just intonation. MuseScore probably can't do this, but the (free) program Scala can create MIDI files in basically any tuning. It would take a lot more work and the result might be subtle--but perhaps noticeably "Renaissance" sounding (that Fumeux Fume excerpt linked above is performed in impeccable just intonation).


 * The main difficulty with making "old sounding" music with MIDI is dealing with the obvious machine-like quality of most MIDI output. I'm guessing you "step entered" the notes. They all have the same MIDI velocity and fall perfectly on the beat. You could try recording the voices one by one "live". Tweaking note velocities and timing, even overall tempo, "by hand" can make rigid MIDI music sound more human, but it is hard to get right and quite painstaking. Sorry if I've said some things you already know about. I've done a fair amount of "step entering" MIDI music and like talking about it! Pfly (talk) 21:00, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Pfly, if you are able to improve on that arrrangment, consider this response a challange to improve it, (provided the sources I've used get attributed and the 'improved' version gets put back on Commons under an appropriate license) I've got no objections to it being 'tweaked'. I'm using MuseScore because as such I don't understand anything musical theory-wise, to an extent the MIDI arrangement show was done from i) an IMSLP score (and I'm suspecting in that version it's either a Piano or Organ arrangement), ii) some limited knowledge of the instrument limits (hence the split bass line), iii) a lot of luck playing it by ear so to speak.
 * Heh, oof, I might be tempted to try, but I have way too many things I'm already committed to do and am behind on. Pfly (talk) 04:13, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

I've also uploaded an OGG "recording" of the MIDI on Commons, with some post processing, on which comment is welcomed. - I know the OGG version doesn't sound exactly right yet, but it was felt close enough for Commons. The post processing was done to make it sound more like an 'archive recording' BTW.

With respect to the MIDI In places I also suspect that I've entered some notes slightly out of tune (but for a 'Renaissance' tune that might be expected ;) ). (NB ShakespeareFan00 is my main account, Sfan00_IMG is an alternate). ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 02:03, 8 November 2011 (UTC)


 * PS, I clipped out just a short bit of that Fumeux Fume par Fumee, but the whole song is worth hearing, if you like that kind of music--the whole album too. The album is Ars Magis Subtiliter by the group "Ensemble P.A.N. (Project Ars Nova)". It's an excellent and wonderfully performed set of Ars Nova songs, worth checking out. Pfly (talk) 21:34, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Question, How do I convert G minor to G dorian? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:23, 8 November 2011 (UTC)


 * "Minor" is actually a rather complicated subject, there are several kinds (natural, harmonic, ascending melodic, descending melodic), and a variety of common alterations; see minor scale for more. Dorian is straightforward though. Musical mode seems to be a decent page/section. (Wikipedia is not the best way to learn music theory--the pages generally assume you have a certain level of knowledge--they kinda have to--it would be unwieldy if every page explained everything from scratch) Basically, G dorian is just the notes G A B♭ C D E F. So to convert something in G minor (or G whatever) to G dorian, you would just remove all sharps and flats on any note except B, which would always have a flat. Whether one wants to stick strictly to dorian is a different question--could get boring. Aeolian mode is the other "minor-like" mode, which in G would be G A B♭ C D E♭ F. One of the main differences between these "minor modes" and "classical minor", to coin a term, is that in dorian and aeolian the dominant chord is minor instead of major, which can change the mood of most cadences. Pfly (talk) 23:05, 9 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:54, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Obtaining the Darwin notes from Britain in America
right|300px|thumb|A £10 Bank of England note. I don't know any way, besides paying exorbitant exchange rates and insisting on one denomination (would they even accommodate such a request?), of obtaining the notes. Any help would be greatly appreciated. 66.108.223.179 (talk) 02:14, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * You don't have to pay anything. They are availible free online.  See .  -- Jayron  32  02:18, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * He probably want's a 10 pound note featuring Darwin's portrait. APL (talk) 02:25, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * See, I type "Darwin's notes" into google, and I get transcriptions of the man's notebooks. I naturally figured that was what he was after.  I didn't realize he was on a banknote, and that's what the OP was talking about.  Silly me.  -- Jayron  32  04:29, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Here's a stupid question, have you asked at your local bank? They often carry small amounts of foreign currency as a courtesy to travelers.
 * You might try your local AAA office as well, however I think they'll want to sell you a "Tip Pack" of assorted small bills. They may not be willing to break one up to get just the 10s. APL (talk) 02:29, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * How many do you want? If you only want one might it be easier just to try some random money changer who doesn't say they have a minimum amount. Perhaps you'll pay $20+ for a single £10 but it may still be better then ending up with a lot of unwanted foreign currency notes. You can try looking around for the best rate which may vary wildly for such a small amount, but consider whether it's worth your time. Now if you want a lot, it's probably worth shopping around for the place with the best exchange rate. E.g. Travelex promise the best online rates, they make it clear their in store rates may not be as good (and they don't allow you to select the denominations when ordering online and anyway just I presume selecting £10 isn't going to guarantee you only receive Darwins so it's probably a bad idea to do this online unless the site allows you to select Darwins which I find unlikely) but perhaps still worth checking out their store rates. It's probably not that unusual for people to request specific denominations (although more whether they want large, small or a mix or large and small) and it's likely some would be willing to honour a request for a specific denominations (or actually specific notes) provided it isn't going to badly affect their stocks of said notes. At most they might give you a worse rate, so hence the greater importance of shopping around to see who offers the best rate (but if the one you find offering the best rate offers the same rate then you don't have to worry). Remembering paying a slightly higher rate and ending up with all Darwin notes is likely to be better then a slightly better rate and ending up with a few non Darwin £10 notes. Nil Einne (talk) 10:15, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The only legal £10 notes over here (excluding those funny Scottish notes) are the Darwin ones. The previous issue depicting Charles Dickens were withdrawn on 31 July 2003. My favourite was the fiver showing the Duke of Wellington - in the background, you could see a lot of French soldiers running away - manifique!. Maybe it didn't do much for the entente cordiale though ;-) Alansplodge (talk) 12:31, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * 2003 was not very long ago, surely there are still Series 2003 bills in circulation? Does the British Government actively take them out of circulation somehow? APL (talk) 20:55, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * As per the source, they were withdrawn from circulation and have no longer been legal tender since then. (I don't know when they were last printed.) I think by now you'll have trouble getting anyone, other then the Bank of England and perhaps your bank if you have a good relationship, to accept them so I would hope currency coverters aren't giving them out. It sounds like more likely you'll encounter the Northern Irish and Scottish banknotes. I believe I've heard before these are sometimes accepted in England and Wales although it's far from guaranteed. However our article suggests they're not normally accepted by currency exchangers outside the UK so they're probably also not likely to be encountered with them. Nil Einne (talk) 07:52, 8 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Have you tried looking at sites that sell currency to collectors? A quick web search turned up  (I can't vouch for their legitimacy, obviously), who have a number of Darwin notes on sale for £16, £22 or £28 plus postage (as far as I can see, the prices are based on the serial numbers or something?).  The best way of obtaining the notes probably depends on how many you want, and what condition you want them to be in. 81.98.38.48 (talk) 21:03, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * The easiest way would be to ask someone visiting the UK to bring some back for you (assuming you don't need a large number). (Are there restrictions on importing British Currency to the USA?)    D b f i r s   09:48, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Cook in Hawaii
What is the time frame of Captain James Cook's visit to Hawaii in 1778 and 1779 from the moment he sighted Oahu on January 18, 1778 to March 15, 1779, the date that Captain James King left Hawaii? Be aware that Cook visited Hawaii twice in that one year period, I think he went somewhere in the North before coming back. What I mean is like the "precise dates" he landed or sighted the different islands and how long he stayed on each one - the details. --KAVEBEAR (talk) 03:19, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Have you tried "A New, authentic collection of Captain Cook's voyages around the world"? It's not an easy read, but at a glance it seems to disagree with your dates. They seem to have moored the Reſolution in a bay in the 17th, having spotted the bay the day previous and the island before that. APL (talk) 03:48, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * (I don't know enough about that book to be convinced of its authenticity, but it claims to be compiled from first person sources.) APL (talk) 03:52, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, of course, I had my years mixed up. APL (talk) 03:55, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Probably not useful to you, but it's cool so I can't help point out that this site has high-res scan's of some of the Resolution's logbooks from that time period. I can't read the dense, old-fashioned script, though. APL (talk) 04:02, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * At the bottom of each page is a button to click for full magnification, which helps considerably. Textorus (talk) 04:27, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * For what it's worth Cook was heading "up north" in search of the Northwest Passage when he found the Hawaiian Islands. After his first visit he continued north (summer being the time for exploration of the far north), making a relatively rough chart of the coast between Oregon and Alaska (with a key stop at Nootka Sound). I don't know of a detailed, accessible, and easy to read log of exactly where and when he visited around the Hawaiian Islands. For such a famous and important voyage you'd think such info would not be hard to find. I have a book on George Vancouver's surveys of the Pacific Northwest with that kind of detail and readability. It seems strange there might be not something similar for James Cook in Hawaii (and elsewhere!). Pfly (talk) 08:59, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Captain Cook's World gives some key dates: --Melburnian (talk) 10:51, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * 18 January 1778 - sighted Oahu
 * 20 January 1778 - landed at Waimea, Kauai
 * 29 January 1778 - anchored at Leahi Point, Niihau
 * 2 February 1778 - departed for Oregon coast
 * 26 November 1778 - arrived at Maui but did not land
 * 17 January 1779 - anchored at Kealakekua Bay, Hawaii
 * 4 February 1779 - departed
 * 11 February 1779 - received by Kamehameha after gales force return to Kealakekua Bay, Hawaii
 * 14 February 1779 - death of Cook
 * 22 February 1779 - ships departed then "quickly investigated the islands of Lanai, Molokai and Kahoolawe" and stopped briefly on Oahu (Waimea Bay), Kauai (Waimea) and Niihau
 * 15 March 1779 - departed for Kamchatka
 * I don't think he ever landed on Oahu and what is Leahi Point, Niihau?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 15:42, 7 November 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.170.169.29 (talk)
 * Maybe it is related to Lehua island? -- Jayron  32  19:34, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Nm. Leahi is apparently the original name of Diamond Head, Hawaii.  Still, that's not on Niihau.  A good question.  -- Jayron  32  19:36, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Probably (var. Leahi). GNIS says it is in Kauai County, which Niihau is. For maps: 21.79528°N, -160.23611°W. Pfly (talk) 21:59, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The cited reference also has detailed maps, I'll check it when I get home again, but Pfly's location appears to be the one referred to from memory.Melburnian (talk) 23:51, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, that equates with the position on the map.Melburnian (talk) 09:00, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
 * If you haven't looked there yet, you might try Beaglehole's enormous biography of Cook. Adam Bishop (talk) 23:00, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

new ridings in Canadian politics
Prime Minister of Canada Stephen Harper said that there will be new ridings of House of Commons in Ontario, Alberta, British Columbia and Quebec. Is there website where I can get the name of the new ridings and how many seats will the House of Commons have in 2015? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.154.228 (talk) 03:32, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * This should have everything you need. The new ridings have not yet been drawn, though. This news report says 330 total seats. Mingmingla (talk) 04:04, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

A. P. Foster & Co.
A. P. Foster & Co. published a Holy Bible in the years before 1880. The address for this publisher was shown as 730 Elm Street, Dallas, Texas. One of these Bibles was presented as a gift from Blocker Brothers at Dodge City, Kansas in November 1880. Is there a history of this publisher and is there a history of "Blocker Brothers? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HomerPickens (talk • contribs) 14:44, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I can't find much in the Interwebz regarding the A. P. Foster & Co publishers, a quick scan of Google Books turns up only 5 books, all published in the late 1800s, which would be contemporaneous with your bible. See . The Blocker Brothers were apparently major cattlemen in Texas. See . There's enough I can find on Google Books to develop a good Wikipedia article on the Blocker Brothers, they seem to meet the minimum notability standards. -- Jayron  32  14:58, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Blocker Brothers of Texas
The Blocker Brothers were a family of siblings who operated a group of cowboys and drove huge herds of cattle, mostly from the Texas Panhandle toward rail heads in Kansas and other ranches farther north into Whyoming in the late 1800's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HomerPickens (talk • contribs) 14:54, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Do you have a question relating to this? Looie496 (talk) 15:59, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I think it was meant to be part of the previous conversation, without an intervening header. I've reduced the header.    D b f i r s   18:29, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Why, yes. It's there for those with eyes to see.  "Why oming?"  --   Jack of Oz   [your turn]  18:30, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Because if it wasn't oming it might be doing something far worse? -- Jayron  32  19:29, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Why oming? Why-a no pigeon? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 10:23, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Which Gray? Which Addison?
In the introduction to the Essays of Ralph Waldo Emerson, Matthew Arnold is quoted as saying:

Which person named Gray is he referring to? Which Addison? -- noosph e re 16:40, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * That would be Thomas Gray and Joseph Addison. Looie496 (talk) 16:43, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Let me add that Addison was a very famous essayist. Gray was a poet most of whose work was mediocre, except that he somehow managed to write one of the best poems in the English language, his Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard. Looie496 (talk) 17:03, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * You could write ten tons of utter crap, but if you also wrote ten lines as good as any in Gray's Elegy you'd still be one of the immortals. DuncanHill (talk) 21:24, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Church subsidies
Why has the Supreme Court allowed the government to subsidize churches and other religious organizations? Why doesn't this violate the First Amendment? --207.160.233.153 (talk) 21:08, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * The government is not allowed to subsidize churches or other religious organizations. Looie496 (talk) 21:19, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * The Supreme court does not "allow our government to subsidize churches and other religious organizations." The Supreme Court has set forth a set of rules which allow lower courts to determine if government action is permissible under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment or whether such action is impermissible entanglement with religion. The case is Zelman v. Simmons-Harris.  The school vouchers in that case were permissible because they were granted to the parents, not the schools.  If the parents wanted to send their kids to a religious school, that was their choice.  If the parents wanted to send their kids to a non-religious private school, that was their choice as well.  That is why school vouchers are constitutional. 24.38.31.81 (talk) 21:43, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Has any academic or nonprofit or government agency analyzed the outcome of the Zelman ruling over the past ten years since it was decided? That is a report I would love to read.  Comet Tuttle (talk) 00:02, 8 November 2011 (UTC)


 * See Jay P. Greene. His research was cited 4 times in the opinion and he has written extensively on the subject since then. 24.38.31.81 (talk) 15:12, 8 November 2011 (UTC)


 * What about the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships and the tax breaks the government gives to churches? --70.250.212.95 (talk) 21:54, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I believe that all non-profits (including Wikipedia) get those same tax breaks. See : Non-profit (501C3) organisation APL (talk) 22:17, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Note that this is the same IP that asked a week ago, "Why do feminists think that it's okay to oppress men?" ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:54, 8 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Also note that here on the reference desks, we answer all legitimate questions factually, regardless of the OP's beliefs on an unrelated topic. --140.180.16.167 (talk) 06:04, 8 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Since this question, like the previous one, is based on a grossly false premise, is it still a "legitimate" question? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 10:21, 8 November 2011 (UTC)


 * No, this is not at all legitimate, and constitutes a basic violation of the intended purposes of the reference desk. Since the OP might not know this, the best thing to do is to direct him/her to Reference desk/Guidelines, especially the points that this is not a soapbox or a place to debate controversial subjects. It's an ongoing problem; thankyou Bugs for finally drawing attention to it. It might also be good if the other editors could please bookmark the link, and refer to it just once in a while. Answering controversial questions cannot produce anything useful - we can reword the question and answer that, but the OP might not be interested. The best approach is to quickly draw attention to the misunderstanding of ref desk policy, and ask for something a little less exciting. If the OP is not interested in that, we have no business answering any of their questions. It&#39;s been emotional (talk) 13:01, 8 November 2011 (UTC)


 * On reflection, I think I should have said, it is tending towards a violation of the purposes of the ref desk, because it contains controversial content without any attempt to be moderate in one's assumptions. It&#39;s been emotional (talk) 13:03, 8 November 2011 (UTC)


 * They probably saw a report on a biased "news" org that said "The Supreme Court allowed the government to subsidize churches and other religious organizations in direct violation of the First Amendment", and came to us to clarify this statement. The OP may not even know if this concerns school vouchers or something else, like money for the homeless, etc. StuRat (talk) 16:01, 8 November 2011 (UTC)


 * A very inventive point, Stu, but if you click on the contributions for this IP, you'll see that Bugs is onto something. People seem to be getting sucked in by these strange contributions, and it is not good for the ref desk - it encourages more of the same, then many of the regulars want to go, and it implodes. I suggest people should avoid taking these things seriously. It&#39;s been emotional (talk) 17:42, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

also, there is no mention of "in the United States" in the question, nor any of the answers. just saying... --Soman (talk) 06:51, 8 November 2011 (UTC)


 * There's mention of "the First Amendment". It's highly likely to be an American who would mention that and not the country. HiLo48 (talk) 07:24, 8 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Agreed, from the context it's obvious this question relates to the US. It would be nice if they would say so explicitly, however, so we wouldn't need to figure it out.StuRat (talk) 16:07, 8 November 2011 (UTC)