Forum Activity for @randy-adams

I listened Alex. Not easy listening! But you're right your playing is a good reason not to buy a chromofone you got it all right there.

If a few people would post a audio or video of themselves playing a chromaphone that might be a reason not to buy a chtomadic : )

It seems we can all agree that the etymology of the word "dulcimer" relates to sweetness, but etymological origins have only a limited relationship to the evolution of words' meanings.  Take for example, the names of many of our states that have Native American origins.  How many of us even know the original meanings?

I'm happy to grant that sweetness one way many/most of us hear the dulcimer when played in familiar ways.  But we even have a group on this page for folk who like and use amplifiers, pedals, and other gear that produce sounds that are certainly something other than sweet.  Some of that sweetness may also owe to standard tunings and the music they inspire.

As a composer, I like the idea that sweetness is one possibility, but that the dulcimer is capable of quite a range of colors and that these yield many modes of expression.

Here's a piece that I think expresses that range of color and expression.  Three strings, no gadgets, but beautifully recorded to make me sound far better than I really am:

Have a great weekend.  This is a wonderful community.

I bow before thee. 

“Perhaps "dulcimer" is a state of being“
John P. Now that is funny….😂

Perhaps "dulcimer" is a state of being........

....and Strum a lay lees

Well, if the word dulcimer definition means nothing in regard to the instruments name, then we have a real puzzle on our hands. First what does the word mean in relation to the dulcimer..maybe diatonic scale? Or raised fretboard?  It would be hard to build a case for changing the name based on construction. I know some people who hate the sound of a hammered dulcimer as well, still the name seems appropriate and in my estimation the mountain dulcimer sings as sweetly as ever. But, definitions mean something and must matter or our discussions become frivolous and pointless. We are looking at this instrument from a 21st century viewpoint and not as the word was used in previous centuries. We didn’t name it nor can we randomly decide to change the definition. 

Brudar,

"it seems the only characteristic that all share is that the melody string faces the player while the bass strings faces the audience. "

Except for stick dulcimers! :)

Wow, amazing this thread is still alive after 3 years! With all the discussion of what a “real” dulcimer is in the face of discontinuous fretboards and bridges, varieties of stringing patterns and varying number of frets, it seems the only characteristic that all share is that the melody string faces the player while the bass strings faces the audience. 

But then if your right-handed self puts a left-handed acoustic guitar in your lap, would that act make it a six-string chromatic dulcimer?

I agree- "sweet sounding" is a highly personal defining criteria. A good example is a penny whistle-  many find it to be lovely and sweet sounding, while many others view it as unbearably shrill and annoying.

A couple of things about that, with apologies for veering off into banjos (but so many similarities exist between the mtn dulcimer and the banjo- both instruments being 'born' in early America from traditions of other cultures that arrived here)... I just can't help myself--

First to clarify a minor point, the fifth string that was added during the banjo's development was actually the low bass string. The higher/shorter "chanterelle" drone string was there from its very beginnings as a slave-made instrument, it was a rhythm and drone feature of the African folk music and the instruments that were the banjo's ancestors.

Indeed, aside from adding a low bass 5th string, when further form changes were added later on to the basic banjo to enable its being played in other settings and musical genres, out of practicality people applied more descriptive names to those "not quite banjos"- such as banjo mandolin, a tenor or jazz banjo, a banjo uke, octave banjo, etc.  These variations are today considered to be different instruments in their own right, and they definitely need their own names. Why? Because they have significant differences in playing techniques, tunings, and musical uses/settings/applications than the "regular" banjo.
To a casual observer, many of these banjo-y instruments might are described as "banjos" because that's what a lay person sees. But if you put a tenor banjo into the hands of a clawhammer banjo player, they'll have to learn an entirely new way of tuning and all new playing techniques in order to play it. To them it's a different instrument, like comparing a ukulele to a guitar. These are practical and real differences, not merely esthetic ones. Does the same hold true of the diatonically fretted mtn dulcimer and the chromatic mtn dulcimer?  IMHO it kind of debatable.

Lastly, as a person to whom the very early original forms of the banjo are most cherished, I must gently add that the later developments and elaborations of the banjo might be considered by some folks to be the nadir of the banjo's evolution rather than the apex.

Again, my apologies for veering off topic.
But then again, what exactly IS the original topic here in this thread? Reasons to not get a chromatic dulcimer? That's a topic that's ripe for this kind of meandering. It's almost inevitable!

Thanks to Alex for bringing this thread back to the original topic, with some compelling reasons for not getting a chromatic. Although I am capable of playing chromatic instruments, the one chromatic dulcimer in my collection mainly collects dust. Diatonic dulcimers are more fun, and instead of thinking about notes, I just play, focusing on sound and rhythm. Jerry Rockwell has called the dulcimer a musical possibility box, which is an apt description. And if we take Bonnie Carroll at her word, a standard three-course dulcimer has thousands of possible tunings. Let's explore these possibilities instead of getting bogged down in definitions.

Ha! I'm in Alaska. I can't blame the heat!

 "In fact, I know some people who do not find the dulcimer very sweet sounding."................

What a collection of wretched souls they must be.....You must endeavor to widen your circle...

Perhaps it is just the heat and humidity?

I gave this a couple of days to see who would chime in, and looks like (at least among those who bothered) I am decidedly in the minority! And yet I am unmoved!

And so, in good humor, and with the best goodwill I will point out that a "sweet sound" is a poor defining characteristic. Many types of instruments could be said to have a "sweet sound". In fact, I know some people who do not find the dulcimer very sweet sounding. And indeed, some poorly crafted dulcimers do not have that "sweet sound". Perhaps the issue is in the adoption of the name "dulcimer" in the first place, being already assigned to the hammer dulcimer? But it is the name we have. It does seem that "dulcimer"  is a catch all for any fretted (or unfretted) zither (or non-zither as in stick dulcimers) that are not already defined as an eppinette des vosage, hummel, scheitholt, etc. And perhaps I should modify my previous argument to pertain to the "Appalachain" or "Mountain" dulcimer, rather than simply the word "dulcimer" used by itself.

Words do change meanings over time. It is an undeniable fact. Such word meanings change with usage, and there are different mechanisms for that change. I would argue that the change is not ALWAYS legitimate. For example, the word "literally" used to very clearly mean that what ever was being referred to is not being spoken of figuratively. For the last few decades, the word is increasingly being used for emphasis, and quite figuratively! No. No matter how cold you were, you did not "literally" freeze to death! etc. I won't belabor the point with more examples, but sometimes ignorance, hyperbole, or deliberate efforts to truncate or obfuscate through slang are the drivers of linguistic change.

The banjo example Strumelia gave is a good one. Banjos hadn't reached the apex of their evolution. I would add the fifth string to that list of "improvements". But I will point out, there are defining characteristics that make it a banjo in the first place, and if you stretch that too far, it becomes something else.

However, as Alex Lubet pointed out, the original question is that of "why not to buy a chromatic". It appears I am guilty of hijacking the thread (or attempting to).

You're welcome. If you need any help with the replacement let me know. I've done it many times.

Ken

"The dulcimer sings a sweet song."

These are geared tuners, so I think I may just replace them. Will probably pick up a replacement bridge and nut too. It was well loved and modified. I figure it might be a good idea to replace those parts too. Thanks for your help!

If the screw has bottomed out you can place a washer between the wall of the peg head and the shaft of the peg to increase the distance the screw travels. Then you can tighten the peg again. If this method isn't to your liking, you can replace them with geared tuners. The Dulcimer Shoppe sells ones that they put on their instruments. I've used them on a few dulcimers as replacements. Tuning pegs They take a 10mm or 3/8 inch hole which is about the same size as the hole in your kit dulcimer. It is fairly easy to do the replacement.

Ken

"The dulcimer sings a sweet song."

I have a 1977 Dulcimer Shoppe kit dulcimer.  When I got it, it wouldn't stay in tune because the tuners wouldn't hold when tightened. I found out how to tighten the screw on the tuner and that has helped. But it doesn't stay in tune like my dulcimers with newer tuners should zi just replace them?  How hard is it and where would I go for replacements?

Hi All,

I hope you're doing well.

I'm personally more interested in the chromatic dulcimer question than the "what is a dulcimer?" question.  I would observe though, that the etymology of a word and its evolved meaning over time are someimes quite different (and sometimes not).

Writing only for myself, I've chosen not to get a chromatic dulcimer.  The following may sound like hubris, but that's absolutely not my intention.  I'm a classically trained composer.  I have a PhD in composition, which I've taught at the University of Minnesota for nearly fifty years.  I pretty much only play my own compositions and pieces written for me by others.  I mention this only because I'm fully acquainted with highly chromatic music.

But I choose not to own/play a chromatic dulcimer.  After fifty years of guitar, I added dulcimer to my instruments and it's by far my favorite now.  For me, a chromatic fretboard doesn't present particular challenges or inspirations, including discovering chromatic melodies and harmonies.  I have three principle means of deriving chromatic pitches:

1) Tunings:  I've found about 75 (on 3 and 4 equidistant strings) that I like.

2) Note bending:  Both sliding, blues style, and bending the note before I play it.

3) Harmonics that aren't available by stopping the strings.

I've come up with all kinds of, to me, interesting things that would never have occurred to me on a chromatic dulcimer or guitar.  It's one of the reasons I love it so.  I may discuss others in the future.

If any of this sounds interesting, I have channels on all the major streaming services and several albums, but I really only wanted to join this very interesting discussion, not to self-promote.

Have a great rest of the week.  It's no longer scorching here in MN, but we're having several days of heavy rain..

Although words do have to mean something, meanings change. Language adapts to accommodate a changing world. This has been confirmed to me many times in my 50-year career as a translator. And while I strongly believe that we need to respect tradition, there is no way to stop change. What I think we are seeing is that the term dulcimer is taking on a broader meaning. There will increasingly be a need to modify the term dulcimer with such adjectives as traditional or contemporary.  More and more makers are building a type of hybrid dulcimer with a guitar-type bridge, which to me is a positive development because it makes this wonderful instrument appealing to a wider range of musicians. 

I have always loved the sound of the dulcimer, but as a banjo and mandolin player, I was often disappointed by the lack of clarity. So I started building my own experimental instruments, which are designed for playing instrumental music using a mix of banjo, mandolin, and dulcimer technique. My attempts have been successful in at least one respect: the world has one more -- contemporary, hybrid, experimental -- dulcimer enthusiast.

My original quick release strap was the one from Folk roots it's okay but a bit bulky and you cannot interchange it with other dulcimers. so I decided to upgrade and add a little bling and spice to my life. Decided to upgrade to the Dunlop Straplok 

System, So I can use any Guitar strap. And Levts Have some great patterns hard to choose just one.  Also Ernie’s not too bad, but I think I'm leaning towards the Levts brand.

The good thing about adding the Dunlop Straplok System is you can use one strap and go from one instrument to the other great design love it I just thought I'd throw this out for those who are interested in using guitar straps that are easy to switch back and forth Very streamline system not bulky at all I give it two thumbs up. Just thought I'd share for those who are interested 

The first American-made instruments that were called 'banjos/banzas/banjars' were developed from traditional African instruments such as the akonting. The first official "banjos" had no frets. Then when banjo playing became popular through minstrelsy, banjos began to be mass produced, and with frets. They were called "fretted banjos".
Over time, fretted banjos became the norm and came to be called simply "banjos", while the unfretted ones became known as "fretless banjos" instead of just banjos.
It shows how common names can change according to what variations become more popular over time.

I understand what you are saying Ken, but my problem with the name is that both the hammered dulcimer and the lap dulcimers have their name because of their sound and not their respective structures.  I remember in the 60’s and 70’s discussions particularly from the hammered side was that, “we were first called the dulcimer and didn’t have to use the word hammered in front of it.” They went on to argue that the Appalachian dulcimer should be called something else.  The word dulcimer was a free and fluid word that described the sound of something and not its form. That led a Welshman to call a Pennsylvania fretted zitter (they didn’t call them Scheitholts) a Dulcimar, in 1757 and write it down as part of an inventory for a will. I doubt if the early players of the hammered or the Appalachian were thinking of build when they used the word, but instead added the words hammered, Appalachian or even mountain as descriptors.  I see stick dulcimers and the like as following that tradition.  Anyways, at this late date it is sort of hard to rename whatever these things are as they are already known by those names.

I know this is an old thread, and the disagreements have settled down, and trouble maker that I am (please forgive me), I'm going to stir the pot.

Ken Hulme is right about the definition of the dulcimer. The word has to mean something. If it doesn't, then it means nothing.

It is true that dulcimers have evolved over the last couple of centuries, but at some point what is being crafted would have to be called something different. We do this with other instruments: violins are not viols, citterns are not guitars, etc. And I would argue (not disparagingly) that stick dulcimers, chromatic dulcimers, dulcimers with an independent bridge and discontinuous fret board (al la guitar) stretch the definition of "dulcimer" beyond the breaking point. Again I am not disparaging these instruments. I am just saying we have to speak of them with modifiers such as "stick", "chromatic" etc. because they deviate from the norm, and that norm is the kind of instrument Ken is describing: a real dulcimer.

I hate to sound so un-inclusive, and I don't mean to imply that such instruments are inferior (I actually own a couple of the "non dulcimers" I described above), or that there aren't sufficient similarities to true dulcimers with the deviation instruments that they shouldn't be discussed here. I am saying that words have to mean something (dulcimer included) or they are useless. If a luthier or craftsman wishes to innovate beyond the basic and general definition, go for it, but what comes from that may not still be a dulcimer. And that is okay.

Then you'll need a nice case. Then you'll need something not so fancy for outside jams, or travel. Then there will be that one that just sounds so pretty...

Yup....all about the priorities....

Sounds reasonable to me too.

Ken

"The dulcimer sings a sweet song."

$500 seems reasonable for a Mize.  Bob was a master craftsman of dulcimers, so if it's in great shape, then that seems like a fair price to me.

Great reminder, Ken. Thanks!
It's fun to occasionally catch a member in the chat room on FOTMD, and get to know them a little, or to just leave a message there for other members.

Others may chime in here with their own thoughts on this. But in my own opinion, if the dulcimer is in great shape (no cracks, scratches, pegs in good condition, etc) then i think $500 is a reasonable price for a Mize. It might even be a little low, if anything. Chestnut and walnut sound lovely as well.
Just because a price is above what we can pay, does that mean it's unreasonable?
Sometimes when i really want something wonderful that is a little above 'my budget', I will rebalance my budget to fix its priorities, because they are obviously faulty.

First post. A guy in town has a Mize dulcimer for sale. He wants $500, way beyond my budget, but it’s nice. He says it’s No. 857 is an early one from the ‘70’s. Chestnut and walnut. What is a reasonable price. I’ll have other

Well, this is really for everyone. There is a Chat feature on FOTMD and I'm not sure many people know about it. At one time we had a rather active group or folks who showed up in the chat from time to time to visit with one another. You can find it in the bottom right hand corner. It is a blue ballon with three red dots on it in a white square. If you click on this it opens the chat window. Sometimes folks log in early in the morning before work which is what I did for a long time. Since I've been retired I don't get up that early anymore. I usually check to see if anyone else is in the chat window when I check in to FOTMD. If you see me there, or anyone else for that matter, stop in and say Hello.

Ken

"The dulcimer sings a sweet song."

I have, currently - in - my - lap, a Heinrich dulcimer numbered 144. This is his very first baritone, and she told me her name is Aster. I am currently transcribing a heavy metal song called "Wizard" by Castle Rat, and Aster is light and well appointed, and interesting... I am very happy with Gerry's craftsmanship and customer service. Please give him a look. I highly recommend.

https://heinrichdulcimers.com/about-the-artist/

Thank you both!

Welcome back!

Ken

"The dulcimer sings a sweet song."

What Dusty said. That' what I do.

Ken

"The dulcimer sings a sweet song."

Unless you are going to play with a noter, definitely remove the outer string so that the remaining three would be equidistant.  That extra space on the fretboard is nothing to be feared and would actually make bending the string a bit easier.

If you play with a noter, you might want to remove the inner string so that the melody string is separated a bit more from the drones.

So, I'm back, as I forewarned you all. I got my walnut TK O'Brien yesterday and really like it... definitely sounds different from my traditional 1985 David Mahoney I'm keeping in DAA and free of 1/2 frets. I've decided I really like the DAD tuning as well, and may get more into chords and what not than I had previously anticipated. Anyway, the title of this post sounds pretty simple and self-explanatory and it ought to be obvious to anyone who can use a yardstick. But, it ain't clear to me. Please see the pic. I don't know which melody string to remove to make 3 equidistant. It appears that if I remove the outer melody string then the remaining three will pretty much be equidistant. But... that'll leave that side of the fretboard with a wider space than what is currently seen on the other side of the fretboard with that first drone string. So, if I do remove that outer melody string, and with that consequent wider space between that edge of the fretboard and the remaining melody string, is that gonna pose any sort of problem or future problem... problems in learning or transitioning to another MD? Options? Ideas? Thoughts? Thanks in advance!

 IMG_6522.jpeg - 142KB

Welcome back, with encouragement to get back to the dulcimer.  

Welcome back!