Discussion:Gubal

Some mistakes in the article

There are some mistakes in the article. As I don't speak French I am not able to correct them. Here they are:

1) The componay PANArt was not founded by "Felix Rohner et Sabina Schärer". It's history is a bit more complicated. See: http://www.lex.hangblog.org/de/panart-hangbau-ag.htm So "fondée" is the wrong term.

2) The Gubal is falsly classified as an idiophone. The Gubal inventors describe the résonance de Helmholtz as main property of the instrument that is combined with the modes in the ringding: Du Hang au Gubal. It is a problem with the Hornbostel-Sachs classification that it is not possible to assign an instrument to two classes. But this is necessary for the Gubal. Usually an instrument is assigned to the Hornbostel-Sachs class that is seen as its main property. If we follow this rule, it makes more sense to assign the Gubal to the aerophone class than to the idiophone class. But this would be own research and is forbidden in Wikipedia. But also assigning the Gubal to the idiophone class - as currently done in the article - is own research or personal point of view.

3) It is also problematic and invites to misunderstandings when assigning the Gubal to the "Family" of "percussion instruments". The main medium the Gubalist is playing with is the air. Adjusting the pitch of the Helmholtz resonance and exciting it has nothing to do with playing percussion. In the Pang ensemble (for example see here)the Gubal has mainly the function of the bass, not of the percussion section. The Gubal inventors have described the Gubal also as an orchestra on the lap (when played alone and not as part of the Pang ensemble).

4) The function of the Gugel is falsely described as an enhancement or amplifying of the sound. The main function of the Gugel is lowering the Helmholtz resonance to Eb2.

The main invention in the development of the Gubal is missed in the article: The ringding. This elastic and tuned structure makes it possible to excite the Helmholtz resonance much stronger. --Ixkeys (discuter) 29 décembre 2015 à 13:57 (CET)

As there wasn't any reaction to my previous post for two months I have tried to modify the article myself. I have also deleted all statements about classification, because there isn't any reference for it. Classifying the Gubal would be own research. This is forbidden in Wikipedia. --Ixkeys (discuter) 7 mars 2016 à 10:21 (CET)

Article rewritten

I have rewritten the article from the scratch. This is the French translation of the English Wikipedia article en:Gubal (instrument). --Ixkeys (discuter) 15 août 2016 à 20:02 (CEST)