hangforum.com - The Archive

You may be pleased to hear I have thought about this aspect...

I chose the word "form" carefully in the definition.

In English the Greek root "morph" can mean "shape" but also "form." Form has a more subtle meaning than "shape," it implies something about the "deep" structure -- the *reason* a thing is shaped the way it is.

Actually, for my first attempt here, I was careful to *not* include specifics about the shape in the (proposed) definition -- I was thinking, maybe some day there will be Hanghang, or hangomorphs, that are essentially the same as the Hang as we know it, but in a different shape...?

I remember that Blackbells claimed they had identified alternative shapes that could work -- I am not sure I believe that claim, but in *theory* there is no reason the Hang must be in its current shape. For example, Hemholtz resonance may exist in other shapes... I have just been reading about that in some detail in a fantastic book, actually, which I could not recommend more:

http://books.google.com/books?id=CuHi9e ... ign&pg=PP1

I got this book to make my own freebar instrument in tunings I like... it's just wonderful.

In practice of course there are reasons why the Hang itself is shaped as it is -- to fit the lap of a single person, for example, while providing access to the whole playing surface...

And I think it is shaped as it is for more subtle reasons, to communicate its sound energy through touch directly to the body of the player, not just through the ears...

...but who can say, maybe there are other shapes that could work.

For example, I would love a shape that allows two people to play an instrument facing one another, sharing both laps? Who knows...

Maybe someday Funky and I will stop talking and play such an instrument together, in the woods!

aaron

Yes, if only...

=)

THIS sounds like a very nice experience. Hopefully you will tell us how it goes. "Have fun!"

hehehehe !

Hey Danny.

I addressed this in my mind, and did not write anything about it because it is a HUGE subject.

I mentioned a LOT of what you have said here about a year and a half ago on Gidda's forum. I made a post that discussed Felix's emotional trauma from his rejection by trinidad, and the resulting actions and drama that have ensued as a direct response to an emotional blockage with Felix that he has obviously still not healed. However, when I made the post I was asked to censor (edit) it by Cheap because a lot of what I was conveying was in response to his direct experience in Bern, that he shared with me on the phone. So I cut out a lot of the part about his rejection.

To hear you speak about it again is a redemption for me. I think it is a core issue in ALL the drama that surrounds the Hang. I am not sure if it is relevant to this conversation though.

But I validate your theory as being quite accurate. With the request for censorship when I first posted this, it became more clear to me that this subject is a little invasive to Felix, and perhaps their are slight ethical issues in openly speaking about someone's emotional/psychological turmoil on a public forum?? Perhaps is is not an ethical issue, but it did bring another level of sensitivity to my oft direct-and-to-the-point perspective on these issues. But, as time has passed and this community grows deeper, I think this issue is relevant and worth talking about...

But this is an entirely different subject. I do agree with Frank that it is hard to discuss another man's emotional state. But in response to your appology Danny, I can only say that this aspect of discussion IS in fact real and was in fact experienced by Cheap in direct and extensive conversation with Felix. It was conveyed to me a few days after he returned from Bern, and it was fresh in his mind. So it is not just "heresay" as you say Frank. It was "straight from the mouth," and it in fact DID give us some clarity about the reasons behind a lot of actions that have come from the Hanghaus. Actually, I think it is sort of sad that you would have to appologize Danny. I mean, yes, if it was just out of speculation, that would be one thing. But we so often want to suppress the real truth behind certain deep psychological issues. This paradigm is changing. If we as humans do not directly confront our darkness (which is "that which we are not aware of and suppress"), then it will continue to be the forefront of what we manifest.

Anyhow, if you (danny) or anyone wishes to discuss it further, perhaps it deserves more PMs, rather than open discussion? But I repeat, this topic is an extremely important key to understanding some of the mystery behind the Hang. And again, it is not very relevant to this conversation...

What is a Handpan? There is a more basic problem that must be tackled first. Read the opening paragraph of this article on Miles Davis's "Kind of Blue" (actually read the whole thing, it's great but off topic). How can we seriously consider the family name when we can't even control how a hang is called.?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/ju ... nd-of-blue

Hi,

the link dont work for me.

Frank

Thanks Frank. I fixed it. Sorry about that. Try it now.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/ju ... nd-of-blue

@Om - Thanks for the validation. But please let me re-iterate that I had no malicious nor slanderous intentions with my post. And my "source" if you will, is no one that is a member of this or any other forum, BUT has had a great amount of time with the Hang Haus. Enough said.

Again, thanks.

Upon thinking about this over the weekend, I began to think of numerous brilliant people that were laughed at, or not shown porper respect, within their lifetimes. Nikola Tesla, Thomas Edison........ to begin with. All good company, and all laughed at or chastised for their accomplishments. I know this community can probably think of many more.

So, with this said, know that despite outward appearances, this particular conversation CAN be discussed (perhaps in a different thread) with validity. And without embarassing or chastising the Hang Haus. If anything, we can acknowledge that Felix was in good company with this experience. There should be no shame attached to this, especially considering the outcome of the Hang, and it's obvious influence on the rest ofthe world.

Hangomorph is an interesting suggestion. I kind of like it, although it assumes a knowledge of the hang, which makes it a little less appealing to me. (Of course handpan would assume that pan comes from steelpan, which is somewhat more valid, but maybe not everyone would know it.)

Could hangomorph be shortened further to hangmorph?

While I understand the strengths of hangomorph or hangmorph, the use of the Greek root morph seems to make it a little less accessible, I guess, for lack of a better term.

Okay, next topic. The history of Felix and the Trinidadian reaction (rejection?) of the hang as its descendant is interesting, and perhaps relevant to this topic. I have heard bits and pieces on the forums and some directly from Om himself. For me, it's beyond "hearsay," but it comes indirectly from Felix, and is lacking in the context in which it was communicated, which makes me wonder how full our understanding of it is. (I would also add that if Felix took the hang to Trinidad to present his adaptation, this only more clearly shows the musical lineage of the hang as descended from steelpan . . .)

In terms of personal relationships and trust, I do think that it is best to be careful when relating conversations, or even emails, that take place between two people, when the reasonable assumption is that what is related is between those two people, and is spoken in a specific context. Of course we all relate things from some conversations, but if something is shared in trust, especially something of a personal/emotional/psychological nature, it is best to be respectful and limit sharing that, especially widely, such as on a forum like this.

Of course, if the information has been shared numerous times with various people, it seems to be less private.

Useful? Yes, because it is a new proposal that can be discussed.
Right direction? Yes, because it tries to give a definition. No, because the proposed definiton must fail at this point of time in this collective of persons involved in this discussion.

My thesis is: Nobody of us (involved in this discussion by now) is able to formulate an adequate definition of the Hang.

Felix's thesis is, that the Hang can't be defined. So it is in vain to try it and wasted time.

My thesis at this point of the discussion is not so strong (but compatible with Felix's thesis). I only say: Nobody of us involved in this discussion has understood enough about the hang to are able to define enough properties of the "morph" of the Hang, so that the Hang is only nearly adequately defined.

Aaron mentioned the following properties of the Hang which are necessary and sufficient to define the Hangomorphic Idiophone:

- precisely tuned Hemholtz resonator body
- made of hardened steel
- soundfields tuned with odd-order harmonics

I think each of these three items has to be discussed and refined (for example wether a specific hardening process is to be defined or if "odd-order harmonics" is to unspecific becaus the octave fifths tuning is a much stronger definition even used for the pan before the Hang etc.). But more important for my thesis are items that are missing in this definition.

For example the domes and their function in the tone field geometry. I have to say that I have partly understood some aspects of the domes by reading the available PANArt papers, but I'm far from a complete understanding. Is somebody else of us in this status? I think not.

Another missing item is a topic that can be called "From Isolation to Integraton". This is a topic I also understood only partly by reading thoughts Felix sent me. The steelpan tuners try to isolate the tones from each other. The PANArt tuners changed this "paradigma" and follow the way of integration (this is the meaning behind the name "Integral Hang"). After the Hang was born they had found an instrument concept that allows them to follow this new principle. This is the reason why they give up to think in "scales". This is the reason why the mumber of sound models was reduced until they only had one with the IH. There is a complex interplay of the tones in the corpus of the Hang. As a player of 2nd generation Hang and a Low Hang I assume I have understood some of this practically when I'm able to let the Hang sound as a whole. But I'm far from understanding this satisfying. Is someone else of us?

As I stated in a discussion in Gidda's forum a while ago there are "invisible" aspects of the Hang's "morph".

My conclusion from this: We (defined as the group of people involved in the discussion by now) must fail to define the Hangomorphic Idiophone, if the Hang shall the model for it.

So perhaps we should change our viewpoint from a Hangomorphic Idiophon as a catogory or concept that want to define something to the obvious properties that could give us a concept that can be practically used. This was the advantage of the handpan concept. Using the idea of the "morph" we could define a concept that doesn't want to give any deeper insight of the instrument but relates only to the shape. This would mean to reduce the definition Aaron formulated for the Hangomorph.

Not
- precisely tuned Hemholtz resonator body
- made of hardened steel
- soundfields tuned with odd-order harmonics

but only
- nearly Hang shaped body
- made of sheet steel
- tuned soundfields

The difference to the handpan concept is, that the definition doesn't relate to the pan but to the Hang. But in the same way as in the handpan conpept isn't said whether the instrument really reach the pan concept, in the new concept isn't said whether the instrument reachs the Hang concept.

As a working title I propose "Hang shaped instruments".

The advantage of this concept is that you don't have to decide whether an instrument includes certain "invisible" items that belong to the definition or if it reaches certain quality requirements that belong to the definition. And on the other hand it invites to the discussion about the differences of the concret instrument to the Hang.

Ix

...Hence the reason I brought it up again.

Sorry Robert...

I will cease this non-relevant tangent in this thread.

I do think progress has been made with Hangomorph.