Talk:Serpent (instrument)

Removed text

Removed text:

, and eventually evolved into the saxophone

I don't think that's accurate. Certainly one of the Sax family (I forget which) was noted as a competent serpent player, but I think it's a stretch to say either the serpent or ophicleide was a direct ancestor of the saxophone. Willing to be proven wrong of course! Andrewa 05:24, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Serpent sighting

It might be a little silly, but I spotted a serpent being played in the ensemble in one of the scenes in Pride and Prejudice (TV serial). anybody else have any sightings? --W0lfie 01:36, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

A woman used to attend Tubachristmas events in the southern New England area and play the serpent. I haven't seen her recently. Counterfit 05:52, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

In the 1956 film The Case of the Mukkinese Battle Horn (starring Peter_Sellers, Spike_Milligan and Dick_Emery), the eponymous instrument appears to be a serpent. Heraldica (talk) 21:17, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

@Heraldica: I don't know why it's taken me 14 years, but I've added a sentence to the film page! — Jon (talk) 11:38, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

I recently saw a serpent in a Depeche Mode video. I unfortunately did not make a note of which one and when I looked for it later, I could not find it. Will update here when I do. In a semi-related note, the music video for Everything Counts features a shawm, even though the sound is produced by a synthesizer on the studio recording. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riaanvn (talk • contribs) 07:30, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

@Riaanvn the music video for "Frontier Psychiatrist" by The Avalanches features the serpent. Perhaps we need a § In popular culture Jon (talk) 01:25, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

I am adding a new subsection, where we can stage the edits. Once we have 3 good entries, we can transfer to the main article (and leave the less notable or incomplete entries in Talk). Riaanvn (talk) 08:49, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

In popular culture

• In the 1956 film The Case of the Mukkinese Battle Horn (starring Peter_Sellers, Spike_Milligan and Dick_Emery), the eponymous instrument appears to be a serpent.
• A serpent is being played in the ensemble in one of the scenes in Pride and Prejudice (TV serial).
• The music video for Frontier Psychiatrist by The Avalanches features the serpent.
• The International Tuba Euphonium Association adopted the serpent as its emblem when it was first established (as T.U.B.A.) in 1973.
• The Alien (soundtrack) to the 1979 film features the serpent for when the alien Xenomorph appears.

References

The saxophone/serpent discussion

Andrewa is correct that the saxophone did not evolve from the serpent. In fact (not an apocryphal story), the saxophone came about after Adolphe Sax experimented with an ophicleide (Charles Sax was a prolific ophicleide maker) by putting a bass clarinet mouthpiece instead of a cup shaped ophicleide brasswind mouthpiece on it. The resulting sound (try it) is remarkably like the modern saxophone. Sax subsequently modified the ophicleide adding more keys and making modifications to its shape, resulting in the saxophone family. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yeodoug (talk • contribs) 23:25, 2006 June 2 (UTC)

Alien

Jerry Goldsmith used the serpent in his score to Alien. It's sometimes part of the orchestral fabric but, every now and then, it gets a solo! Gingermint (talk) 21:08, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I just found it on the Internet when googling, and saw your edit on this page after an entry to section In popular culture. Riaanvn (talk) 08:59, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

characteristics

This section seems very confusing to me. I think it could be written better. I have never played a serpent, but I was a dulcian player, and also played numerous other Rennaisance instruments starting about 30 years ago. Anthony Baines in his books describes the serpent very well. Perhaps his books could be used as a reference for the unique characteristics of the serpent.

As I understand it, the lower hand supports the instrument and therefore the three fingers used are in the reverse order compared to straight woodwinds such as recorders, clarinets, etc. This section in the article could express that idea, but as it stands, it does not.

Just pointing it out. Nice to see such an article in Wikipedia. I am not prepared to do the editing. I read and make suggestions. Thank you.

69.166.29.13 (talk) 14:39, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Contrabass ("anaconda"), Tenor ("serpent") and Soprano ("worm").

The article is confusing at this point. The normal serpent is a BASS instrument, not a tenor. This section needs to be amended. I am a reader of Wikipedia and I rarely edit things, except for the few little grammar things I see. I don't rewrite much of anything. I am just suggesting that there is a problem here. I have played Rennaisance instruments for 30 years. Perhaps one of the editors will sort out this obvious error and re-do it. 69.166.29.13 (talk) 14:57, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

However, later models added keys as on a clarinet

"However, later models added keys as on a clarinet"...

I think that is midleading. What sort of clarinet? Maybe the earliest clarinets made by Denner, but not the modern clarinet. Many people reading this article will think that the serpent had modern key systems added. The serpent had keys added, yes... but they were like the keys added to the Dulcian, and the Crumhorn. Thank you. I am not amending the article, just suggesting repairs to it. I was involved in old music for 30 years. Recently sold my Dulcian and other inmstuments after health issues. So, just looking at articles here on Wikipedia, and suggesting ways in which things could be improved.

69.166.29.13 (talk) 15:10, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Relation to cornett

The first sentence says the serpent is not related to the cornett. This is followed almost immediately with a sentence saying it is closely related to the cornett, though not descended from. Suggest a different word than "related" in order to clear up the contradiction. 24.217.34.210 (talk) 22:51, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

I wonder if the first one is a reference to the Cornet (with one "t"), but if so, that statement should go after the one saying the serpent is related to the Cornett (with two "t"s) as a clarification since "cornett" and "cornet" are nearly identical words but refer to two different instruments not related to each other. — al-Shimoni (talk) 06:47, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

I suggest using language similar to Britannica: "It was probably invented in 1590 by Edme Guillaume, a French canon of Auxerre, as an improvement on bass versions of the closely related cornett." 2600:1700:30D0:2390:653E:2E87:3261:814E (talk) 02:41, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

This page regarding the lizard clearly places it as midway between the cornett and the serpent: https://www.music.iastate.edu/antiqua/instrument/lizard 2600:1700:30D0:2390:9CBF:3620:43AD:A277 (talk) 18:29, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

I've copy-edited the opening paragraph, which should avoid too much detail, and then provided an explanation in the Characteristics section, with the ref from Clifford Bevan's Tuba Family book. As one of the few references that goes into the serpent's history in detail, and re-reading the chapter, the History section really needs a good re-write and could be considerably expanded. Douglas Yeo has more to say about the serpent too, in various journals (not just his website). If nothing else we need to at least mention the late 20th century English revival of the instrument propelled at first by Christopher Monk and other members of the London Serpent Trio. I don't have much spare time right now but I'll try and make a start in the next week or two if nobody else does :-) Cheers—Jon (talk) 03:56, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Modern revival

The article barely mentions Christopher Monk, who possibly even deserves his own page(?). History section needs a "modern revival" section, covering his work, the English Serpent Trio, revival of interest spread to Europe and North America (Doug Yeo, others), use in historically informed performance practice, and so on. Dumping this here as a note-to-self, or in case someone else notices it and wants to get started.—Jon (talk) 00:10, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Anaconda

I've added CC-BY photographs of the truly stupendously large 1840 restored contrabass serpent (sometimes called the "anaconda") from Musical Instrument Museums Edinburgh to Commons, ready for deployment here at some stage (1, 2). Good refs in Bevan's Tuba Family (2nd ed.), the Cambridge Encyclopedia of Brass Instruments, and Doug Yeo's Illustrated Dictionary. — Jon (talk) 11:50, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Playing technique, historical repertoire

For some reason (probably an excess of enthusiasm combined with its lack of citations) some of the material from earlier revisions has been removed, covering historical repertoire, playing technique, methods, fingerings in particular. I'll have a go at re-introducing it with citations (Myers, Baines, Bevan, Yeo, etc.) Jon (talk) 01:53, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Serpent (instrument)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Marshelec (talk · contribs) 22:16, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

I am planning to review this article over the next week.Marshelec (talk) 22:16, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Prose is of a high standard. No issues found with spelling or grammar.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Follows manual of style guidance.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	References and bibliography listings are provided in suitable sections
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	There are comprehensive in-line citations throughout. Sources are good. A sample check of readily accessible sources was satisfactory.
	2c. it contains no original research.	No evidence of original research
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	The copyvio report returns nothing of concern
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Covers main aspects. No obvious gaps.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Stays on topic, and there is no excessive detail
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Content shows fair representation without bias
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Edit history shows the article is stable and free from edit wars etc
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	All images are tagged with appropriate copyright licenses
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Images are interesting, relevant, and with good captions
	7. Overall assessment.

Review comments

Lead

Lead

I am open to persuasion on this issue, but it might be clearer for readers to describe it in the first sentence as a wind instrument. Telling a reader that it is a brass instrument, and then telling them it is made of wood and leather is confusing (even though the article on brass instrument covers this (confusing) point. Another option is to add a sentence explaining the broad scope/classification of brass instruments. I sympathise :) Organologists have even started using the word labrosone to mean anything sounded by vibrating ("buzzing") the lips on an aperture or mouthpiece (confusingly called "trumpets" in the Hornbostel–Sachs classification system, 423), rather than confuse everyone with the word "brass". Obvious confusions are saxophones, sarrusophones, and even flutes which are woodwind instruments made of brass, and serpents, cornetts, and the didgeridoo, which are brass instruments made of wood. It doesn't help that the brass instrument article is pretty woeful. Anyway, I'll have a think about this one. — Jon (talk) 08:27, 14 August 2023 (UTC) in the first sentence, the phrase (later with keys) breaks the flow, and does not seem essential here. This point is covered in the body. the wikilink for wood seems unnecessary. It is an everyday word understood by most readers in context, as per MOS:OL however, it would be useful to link bass to Bass (instrument) an additional sentence or two is needed about repertoire and recent revival

Construction

Construction The original serpent is typically built in 8′ C from hardwood, .. I suggest "was built". Also, it is a bit confusing for readers to introduce the 8′ C in this way. I suggest a separate phrase or sentence about the fundamental pitch of the instrument (or whatever is the most appropriate term), leaving this sentence about construction with just the materials. Each piece is made by gluing two hollowed halves together to make a tubular segment, which are then bonded together and bound with an outer covering of leather. This would be better either split into two sentences, or reworked as "Each piece is made by gluing two hollowed halves together to make a tubular segment, and the multiple segments are then joined together and bound with an outer covering of leather" ..improve the serpent's inherent intonation problems. This begs the question: "what problems ?" I am open to persuasion, but I think that the section Contrabass serpent would be better relocated under the History heading. (This would also overcome the problem of serpent ordinaire being introduced here, when it is currently defined in the History section below.)

History

History ..sprang up in the early 19th century. suggest ".. were developed in the early 19th century" (I have visions of serpents springing up to attack passersby !!) ..the layouts of these instruments more resemble that of a bassoon, delete "more" ..a short U-shaped butte joint what is a butte joint ? Should this be just "butt" ? link Prussian to Prussia (I don't think Prussia is covered by MOS:OL) ..and wrote for it in several of his works would be better as: "and wrote for the instrument in several of his works" ..one of the last innovations of the upright serpent would be better as: "..one of the last incarnations of the upright serpent" ..which helped to propel interest and their more widespread availability. would be better as: "..which helped to raise interest in these instruments and increase their availability"

Repertoire

• The content of this section is currently about relatively recent repertoire. The section title could perhaps be "Modern repertoire" or similar (unless some additional content is added about early repertoire).

Soprano and tenor versions ?

• One of the cited sources appears to indicate that Soprano and tenor versions of the serpent are available ? [1]. Is this worth a brief mention ? ✔

  Added a § Sizes under § Construction

Closing

• @Jonathanischoice: - only a couple of small points left to go :) Marshelec (talk) 02:42, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

  I'll have a go at expanding on the early repertoire, depending on what is out there, and possibly a little bit about playing technique, since there are some public domain 19th C. serpent method books and fingering charts which might be good to include. The small soprano/alto "wyrm" serpent certainly exists, but is hardly more than a novelty; but then, so is the anaconda. Perhaps a "sizes" section. This all might take a day or two. Cheers — Jon (talk) 03:00, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

  ...or perhaps it just takes an afternoon re-reading some books :) try now. — Jon (talk) 06:42, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"Worn (instrument)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Worn (instrument) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 2 § Worn (instrument) until a consensus is reached. TartarTorte 19:45, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Yes that was me, sorry - a silly typo.—Jon (talk) 06:40, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Not a "brass" instrument

The third sentence in the lede is ridiculous: "It is named for its long, conical bore bent into a snakelike shape, and unlike most brass instruments is made from wood..." A "brass" instrument made from "wood"? The Hornbostel–Sachs classification is 423.213; there is no "brass" category in Hornbostel-Sachs. The instrument category is: an aerophone with an enclosed air column that is set into vibration directly by the player's lips. Most such aerophones are, indeed, made of metal, usually brass, but some are made of wood or other materials (e.g., bone). A "brass" instrument is an instrument in this category that is made of brass. Other instruments in the category share characteristics with brass instruments, but are not themselves "brass instruments"; the serpent is one of these. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.43.253 (talk) 20:18, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Labrosones are colloquially "brass" instruments. Is a saxophone a labrosone? Is a pumpkin a fruit or a vegetable? Depends if you're talking to a botanist or a member of the general public. Do we require the general reader to be familiar with academic classification schemes like Hornbostel–Sachs in the first three sentences of this article? — Jon (talk) 23:28, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

The Serpent Source Book

Dr. Beth Chouinard-Mitchell's forthcoming magnum opus The Serpent Source Book should make a great resource for this article... — Jon (talk) 23:17, 7 August 2024 (UTC)