 | This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | It is requested that one or more audio files of a musical instrument or component be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons and included in this article to improve its quality by demonstrating the way it sounds or alters sound. Please see Wikipedia:Requested recordings for more on this request. |
Physics question and response. edit
I asked at the Physics WikiProject if there was an explanation for the differing sounds coming from cylindrical and conical brass instruments, and was referred to this link. bd2412 T 15:08, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
- Discussion moved from my talk page.
Sorry, if bothering! I found your question interesting, the given answers quite cursory, and by chance had stumbled over this site a while ago and therefore passed it on. Now I want to know if you found this site worth to check it out. Thanks in advance. BTW, I'm from Vienna. Purgy (talk) 10:01, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Can the list be split? edit
Is there any way to split the list at the top? It creates a lot of white space. I tried, but my fix didn't work. Cheers! bd2412 T 00:09, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
- I saw your attempt, which was very instructive. Alas, I cannot think how to get around the problem except by creating a table, which doesn't seem quite the right thing to do. On the other hand, I wonder whether the list is really valuable enough to be worth the awkward layout.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 04:49, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
- It works under a subhead. Cheers! bd2412 T 01:17, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
- So it does. Would three columns be preferable? The two columns look oddly wide-spaced to me. (Maybe four columns? Six? Eighteen?).—Jerome Kohl (talk) 01:23, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
- I tried a different syntax with three columns. bd2412 T 01:31, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
- Much better, I think. What about the heading "Variations"? I find it a somewhat odd word, but cannot immediately think what would be a better choice. "Types", perhaps? The notion is also duplicated later on, at the head of the section titled "Variety".—Jerome Kohl (talk) 03:18, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
- I have no particular preference. bd2412 T 03:46, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
- I don't have a strong preference, either, but I do think it is better with headings that don't sound so similar ("Varieties" and "Variations").—Jerome Kohl (talk) 04:49, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
- I have no particular preference. bd2412 T 03:46, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
- Much better, I think. What about the heading "Variations"? I find it a somewhat odd word, but cannot immediately think what would be a better choice. "Types", perhaps? The notion is also duplicated later on, at the head of the section titled "Variety".—Jerome Kohl (talk) 03:18, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
- I tried a different syntax with three columns. bd2412 T 01:31, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
- So it does. Would three columns be preferable? The two columns look oddly wide-spaced to me. (Maybe four columns? Six? Eighteen?).—Jerome Kohl (talk) 01:23, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
- It works under a subhead. Cheers! bd2412 T 01:17, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Tacitus edit
Cornu is neuter, so Tacitus would write "cornu alpinum". But he doesn't. Anywhere. So you can remove the assertion. Vince Calegon 09:43, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you. This claim is repeated in a number of non-reliable sources (mostly in German), but an electronic search failed to turn up anything at all in Tacitus' actual works, hence the query in the article text. My grasp of Latin grammar, however, is nearly nonexistent, so thank you for pointing this out—it puts the frosting on the cake.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 17:46, 25 January 2016 (UTC)