If the word Dulcimer means sweet sounding instrument, then maybe the instrument is called a dulcimer for its sound and not the number of strings or how it is fretted.  There are a few cases of pre-revival chromatic instruments and many Virginia dulcimers had four equidistant strings.  There is also the case that, what we refer to as Scheitholts were called dulcimers as early as 1758 and in Ohio these fretted zithers were still being called dulcimers in the 19th century. And then of course we have the hammered dulcimer…now if you want to make a distinction between the Kentucky or Virginia or even the Pre-revival as opposed to post revival or even between traditional and modern dulcimers, then that is definitely legitimate.  But for me the dulcimer is a dulcimer because of its sweet sound.  I love the sound of the instrument and that’s why I play it.  I play guitar, banjo, Irish harp, a little mandolin and a few others, I play diatonic and semi-chromatic, but don’t enjoy fully chromatic dulcimers and that is because the limited scale forces me to be more creative and I love trying to get everything I can from a limited scale.  As was mentioned by Ken you can used the Virginia tuning and get to a lot of places on that scale..it’s just plain fun.  But it’s all dulcimer to me…just listen to that sound.

Amen, brother.

Been a bit since this thread was active but I enjoyed reading and thinking about it.

I think it's worth pointing out this discussion is really just about names. Whether some instrument is a "dulcimer" or not simply depends on how we define "dulcimer". Of course we will disagree on that. Should "dulcimer" be used in the strictest sense, or allowed to be used more broadly, referring to any instrument that had it's beginnings at least partially with the dulcimer? There cannot be agreement on this question because it is a matter of opinion. 

Honestly I don't think it matters. The purpose of words and names is to communicate. As long as there is no confusion of communication then the names serve their purpose. If I say "chromatic dulcimer" and everyone knows exactly what I'm referring to, that is sufficient. Of course we could discuss whether to use the term "dulcimer" or not. However, alluding to Shakespeare, what we call the instrument doesn't change what it is, its value, or its place in the musical world. Every instrument in the dulcimer world has it's strengths and weaknesses. Furthermore, everyone sees the relationships between different varieties of dulcimers differently because they all have different experiences. 

I totally agree with OverDrive; every instrument you play affects how you play other instruments. NateBuildsToys points out how he played the diatonic dulcimer first and later played the chromatic dulcimer, which then affected his view of the diatonic dulcimer. 

However, Dusty Turtle played chromatic instruments first, and later played the diatonic dulcimer. Because of this, his experience learning the diatonic dulcimer was very different than it is for others. 

For me personally, I learned the diatonic dulcimer as my first instrument. My understanding of the diatonic fretboard has shaped my entire understanding of music theory and how I play any musical instrument. I see the keys on the piano in terms of numbers from a dulcimer fretboard. When playing even a six or seven string instrument, whether guitar-like, zither-like or otherwise, I understand the tuning in terms of groups of three strings I can recognize as dulcimer tunings such as DAD, DAA, or DGD. For me, the diatonic dulcimer is absolutely fundamental to music, so when I play a chromatic dulcimer, I instinctively think of it as an extension of the dulcimer. Yet I know not everyone thinks this way. The cool thing is, that means I and other people have very different musical ideas, and we can learn from each other. 

Whether you want to play a chromatic dulcimer or not is totally up to you. People will be attracted to different instruments (including types of dulcimers) for a variety of reasons, whether natural playing style, preferred sound, desired musical genere, etc. I think the important thing is that we all make music. The value of us all making music together is we get to see everyone's unique approach and individual ideas, and learn from each other. I want to value and preserve the traditions of past generations, and explore new ideas at the same time. There are things I can do with a chromatic that I can't with a diatonic, and vice versa. Both have an important place. I love the stuff I do on the chromatic dulcimer, because it's just plain fun! I also love playing the diatonic dulcimer. Then again, I can't even play noter style, but I love that sound and am so thankful for people who play it well. In both cases, we're all making music, we just don't do it in the same way or with the exact same instrument. The dulcimer community will be the healthiest when we all value the music everyone makes, whether it's like our own or not. 

@ocean-daughter.  If you tune a Bagpipe tuning:  Ddd or Ccc for example, you can play both Ionian/Mixolydian and Aeolian/Dorian modal scales *without* having to have a 6+ fret!    

Well, I expect this question has been settled in the mind of the OP, at least with regard to the purchase that was being contemplated.  But it's still an intriguing question to consider. 

For me, the answer would be--I don't wanna.  At least, not at this time.  I mostly play melody-drone fingerdance (with a few sort of chords occasionally), and I don't feel a need to get a chromatic.  I do retune to get different modes (and I keep my various dulcimers in one of a couple of different tunings most of the time).  One reason I appreciate having a 6 1/2 fret is that it gives me two modes in each tuning--for instance, in DAC Aeolian I can also play in Dorian...

I've been wanting to add a 1 1/2 fret (along with an 8 1/2) to one of mine, to explore what it gives me.  I already know I'd appreciate that subtonic note on the middle string.  (I can play it on the 6th fret of the bass string when tuned DAD, but that doesn't really satisfy me.)  I guess for me it's discovering and deciding what music I want to play and how I want to play it, and how I get my instrument(s) to contribute to that. 

#1 Reason NOT To Get a Chromatic Dulcimer:
You don't have to defend or rationalize it's place as a dulcimer. 

It's too bad that this conversation, which started with such a reasonable question (even if it demands a parallel conversation on reasons to get a chromatic) has descended into a series of diatribes in which people offer differing definitions of an instrument that has been innovative and evolving for its entire history.  None of this has anything to do with the original question.

Yes, as Nate says, "qualifiers."  

There are guitars, 12-string guitars, solid-body electric guitars, tenor guitars, baritone guitars, etc.

There are dulcimers, baritone dulcimers, octave dulcimers, chromatic dulcimers, electric dulcimers, etc.

No controversy needed.

The dulcimer is a young instrument. For its entire history, it has been evolving.  Those first dulcimers had frets only under the melody string.  Does that mean that dulcimers with strings across the fretboard are not dulcimers?  Those first dulcimers also used friction tuners.  Does that mean dulcimers with mechanical tuners are not dulcimers?  Those first dulcimers were likely made solely of local hardwoods.  Does that mean a dulcimer with a redwood top is not a real dulcimer? Any effort to define a dulcimer by a limited number of construction characteristics is random and denies the long history of creative innovation among dulcimer builders and players.

The Jean Ritchie model dulcimer (made in that great Appalachian state of California!) has a Honduras mahogany fingerboard, rosewood overlay, ebony nut and saddle, mechanical tuners, and a 6-1/2 fret.  Those first dulcimers on which Jean learned had none of those elements, yet she recognized that they improved the instrument and supported them.  The rest of us might do the same.

Sitting here looking at a dozen or so instruments...staples, frets, wound wire, straight wire, oak, maple, rosewood. No two are alike, yet I would call them ALL dulcimers. If I spoke in elizabethan english I may say "dulcimore", and if I was a kid in the mountains I might say "that stringy thang"... And guitars with hollow bodies, solid, whammy bars etc are ALL guitars...But as for men with only a mustache and no beard.....well...."technically".....

Let me help you with that, Ma'am!  The misty dulcimore past is calling out to you...

I guess I don't have any mountain dulcimers.  waaaaaahhh!   😭

@nate Your perspective was one I hadn't considered-- I'm glad you wrote of it!  

Colloquially, although my newer Jean Ritchie model Blue Lion has "extra" frets, I'll still call it a mountain dulcimer.    

Happy strumming, y'all!   

If it has more than diatonic frets, or more than 3 courses of strings, technically an instrument is no longer a dulcimer, it is a Fretted Zither.  "Tomay-to tomaatoe", but diatonic fret spacing is part of what defines a dulcimer.

A guitar player friend once said about my dulcimer: Too bad some of the frets are missing. But then, too, are some of the strings, compared to a guitar. I wanted more strings, but instead of getting a guitar, I built a dulcimer with five separate strings. Is it a dulcimer? I would say it is 'quite' a dulcimer.

Just for fun, I added frets to a 4-string dulcimer to make it chromatic, and I can now play tunes that would otherwise be impossible. For strictly diatonic tunes, I use one of my diatonic dulcimers (well, they all have both the 6 and the 6+ fret, but I still consider them diatonic--that has become the tradition). 

Those of us who have been playing for a while probably have more than one instrument. Meanwhile, I play five dulcimers with different string/fret configurations: 3 strings, 4 strings with the double melody course, 4 separate strings, 5 separate strings, some with the 1+ fret, one chromatic. Each of those instruments has its own allure, its own possibilities and restrictions. I see no reason not to get a chromatic, and no reason not to call it a dulcimer.

I agree with Dusty. I too started out playing a guitar for nearly 30 years before picking up a dulcimer. Three strings and a diatonic fret board, should be a cinch, right? I'm still working at it. As Dusty mentions, the chord shapes that one may be accustomed to laying anywhere on the finger board for what ever chord needed doesn't work. But for all that, if I wanted to play the guitar, that is what I would grab instead. The fact that it is not the same as a guitar is part of the appeal for me.

"It may be true that there are no wrong notes on the dulcimer, but that doesn't mean that all the right ones are there" 

Dusty, that deserves a place in the fun sayings about dulcimer chat. 

I think of diatonic and chromatic dulcimers as two roads that lead to different kinds of attractions along the way. One will mainly take you to traditional music, both modal and pentatonic, and the other leads you to pop, blues, and jazz.  Both can cross over a little bit, but they have different emphases.

Of course, I mainly play a dulcimer with 6+ and 1+ frets, so I've chosen a kind of middle path.  I play mostly diatonic music but can occasionally add blue notes or switch keys in ways that would be much more difficult on a truly diatonic instrument.

I would like to caution us all not to assume generalizations hold for everyone.  I played the guitar, mandolin, and ukulele before discovering the dulcimer, and the diatonic fretboard did not make the instrument easier to learn.  On the contrary, the fact that I could not play so many of the songs in my head was very frustrating. It took about 2 years of playing everyday for me to get a sense of what melodies could be found on the diatonic fretboard and what couldn't.  (It may be true that there are no wrong notes on the dulcimer, but that doesn't mean that all the right ones are there!) 

And chording on the diatonic fretboard is more complex.  On a chromatic fretboard, a chord shape will be the same type of chord as you move up and down the fretboard, but on a diatonic dulcimer, that chord shape changes between major and minor.  That fact significantly slows down the development of dulcimer players who wish to play chords.

Never heard it put that way or thought about it that way Nate you're right on the money.

It's funny that you mention this. My experience with chromatic dulcimer is that it enhances my perspective of diatonic dulcimer. The cultural place of chromatic and diatonic dulcimers might be different, but to me, as a self taught dulcimer player, chromatic dulcimer provides me with useful contextual information that I can apply to diatonic.Specifically, hearing the ways that the same chords that I play in diatonic can fit into other keys helps me to think of them with a more open mind. 
Nate

Whenever I take up a new instrument, it gives me a fresh perspective on the other instruments I play. Somehow, it took me a lifetime to realize that the A minor scale is the same as the C major scale, just starting in a different spot. And it's called "Aeolian Mode". Suddenly I'm a music theory genius!  (Many thanks to Strumelia!) The diatonic dulcimer locks in the pattern that opens up all the modes for you. I feel like the chromatic dulcimer promises more but delivers less as a creative tool.

I have a nice chromatic but I seldom play it.It's too easy to make mistakes,laugh.

This is my feeling as well. I play (or played) several fretted chromatic instruments. The dulcimer is unique in its diatonic tradition. I find it simple, yet challenging; which in turn provides a refreshing approach to my music. 

That said, I respect others who have personal and valid reasons for choosing to play a chromatic dulcimer.

@Lisa-Golladay 's post covered the practical pros & cons quite well.

Yes, I agree with Jean Ritchie.  For me, the dulcimer is diatonic in nature, anything else is not quite a dulcimer.

I know I'm bringing up an old thread, but - oh well.  I play guitar, clawhammer banjo and am now learning dulcimer.  When I learn a mountain instrument, such as clawhammer banjo or dulcimer, I want to learn and play it the way the the original players played it.  I guess I want to learn the tradition, keep it, and maybe add a personal touch here and there.  But "old school" tradition is very important to me.  So, if I want chromatic, guitar or banjo is the way to go for me. With clawhammer banjo, I thought of transferring it to guitar - but why?  It was made for banjo. With a dulcimer I want that lovely sweet sound of the mountains and to keep the tradition alive as best I can.  I don't want to make them into something modern and into something they are not.  There are plenty of hybrids instruments - banjo dulcimers, guitar banjos, etc. out there if you want to come into the up to date modern world.

So, in my mind, let a guitar be a guitar, let a banjo be a banjo and let a dulcime be a dulcimer.

Every chromatic dulcimer comes with a free diatonic hidden in plain sight. Ignore the extra frets until you need them. For some people this is no problem at all. For others it's confusing and it sounds wrong and they just don't like it. Either opinion is perfectly valid. It's your dulcimer.

I play chromatic. I play diatonic. I play half-breeds with 1.5 and 6.5 frets. Since you asked why NOT buy chromatic, here's what I got:

Chromatic is harder to play. It has wrong notes. This is not insurmountable. Think about the guitar players you know; are they all rocket scientists? If they can manage a chromatic fretboard, so can you. However, if you hate to practice scales you will probably be happier with a diatonic.

Noter speed bumps. Do you play with a noter? Can't stand the idea of your dulcimer sounding like a slide guitar? This is a dealbreaker for some. And some could not care less. Know thyself.

Lack of instructional materials. This is a big one. There are a few books and videos for learning chromatic dulcimer, but not nearly as many resources as diatonic. When an absolute beginner asks me about dulcimers, I usually steer them toward diatonic.

Modal scales get difficult. Dorian is my favorite mode for improvising, and it's so easy on a diatonic! Dial in the right tuning and off you go. Whereas learning all the scales on chromatic is a major learning curve.

Other dulcimer players fly into a panic. Seriously. A friend gets a dulcimer and wants to play together. Bring out a chromatic and they'll yelp in terror. It doesn't look the same. It's too complicated! I have to keep a diatonic around or I won't have any dulcimer friends.

It's not traditional. This matters to many people. And sometimes (living history events? tapping into your personal memories of dulcimers past?) it may matter to you. If the sound you fell in love with is the sound of a traditional silvery noter/drone modal dulcimer, a chromatic is unnecessary and will make it harder to replicate that old-time sound.

That said, if you already have a diatonic dulcimer and you're considering chromatic, and if you have the time and inclination to learn something new, then my advice is go for it.

A couple of other points I forgot, a chromatic will probably be a bit more expensive to buy and much harder to sell.

Both Ken and Robin are correct.

Your instrument is personal.

As Jerry Rockwell says: It’s a possibility box.

Look at lots of video clips of folks playing a variety of music on a variety of different fretted dulcimer configurations and, perhaps, that will give you an idea of what approach you'd like to take to making music.  First and foremost, lean into what music is in your heart to make and get the tool (instrument) with which to do it best.  It's a process and it can be lots of fun to explore.  

TRADITION! 

When asked about dulcimer with “extra" frets, Jean Ritchie replied “In a strict sense it has a different finger board, it’s not quite a dulcimer anymore.”    

You can find all the notes in the dulcimer's range, but you have to be willing to re-tune at least one string to do so (takes less than 30 seconds, with practice).

If you want a chromatic instrument lay a guitar on your lap and play that.  Or I can build you an  "acoustic lap guitar". Just don't call it a dulcimer.   Part of the essential definition of Dulcimer, to many of us, is the diatonic fretboard.

If you are playing mostly "classic dulcimer songs" especially from tabulature rather than SMN, it will be 'more difficult' because the fret numbering convention is different, and you'll have to find the fewer diatonic frets among the plethora of chromatic frets.  You won't be able to simply count 1,2,3,4... to find a tab numbered fret.  With a chromatic instrument that becomes
1/2,1,1-1/2, 2, 3, 3-1/2, 4, 4-1/2, 5, 6, 6-1/2,7......



Also, IMHO the 'sound' of a chromatic "dulcimer" is different when you slide from note to note -- because of all the intervening chromatic notes between diatonic notes -- I hear those slides as 'muddier'...

Shhhh!  I have traditionally fretted dulcimers, some with 1.5 6.5 and some that are chromatic. And two with nylon strings.

My favorite dulcimer is the one in my lap.

I think many of the reasons will be be focus on tradition and your music interests which will include style of play [N/D or chording] and need for the extra frets.

It will boil down to what you want plus a bit of DAD [dulcimer acquisition disease].

I am NOT a traditionalist but I find I play mostly traditional [diatonic] music most of the time when I play with others even though my main MDs are chromatic. I use the chromatic side mostly when playing by myself.

I forgot to add, there are 'chromatic tunings' such as DAA#d, but they are 4 equi-distant strings. These are done on the standard diatonic MD.

I am looking to purchase a new dulcimer and am considering getting a chromatic.  It seems the benefits of being able to play any note within the dulcimer's range is a big plus, but I am looking for reasons why I would not want to get a chromatic.  Can anyone provide some insight here?

For instance, does having a chromatic make it more difficult to play classic dulcimer songs, is it generally more confusing, etc...?

Convince me why getting a chromatic is not the way to go, and why a diatonic is better.

Thanks!