rave: hammer dulcimer

[cellio]

tigerbright requested a rave on the hammer dulcimer. (See? I haven't forgotten after all! :-) ) The hammer dulcimer is a nifty instrument -- neat and distinctive sound, adaptable, and not nearly as hard to play as it looks. Really. Don't be scared off by all those strings -- it's a very logical instrument.

One of the nice things about this instrument is that if you correctly play even a naked melody line -- no chords, no ornaments, no fancy frills -- it will sound good, in a way that doing that on a piano doesn't. And then you can add in some of that other stuff and move from sounding good to sounding great. And the dulcimer is a percussion instrument, so some issues that come up with other instruments -- like intonation -- just don't apply. Sure, there are other subtleties, like in how you hold the hammer, but failures there do not result in playing the wrong notes. The dulcimer isn't the magnet that the harp is, quite, but it's pretty easy to sound decent even when you're a beginner. And then there's all sorts of room to do spiffy stuff that will impress you, your friends, and other dulcimer players.

Mind, you do have to tune all those strings, and that kind of sucks. Once an instrument settles in, though, it's not that big a deal for casual play. I've played concerts where I spent more time tuning than performing (and much moreso for recordings), but rehearsal-grade tuning absent wacky weather or long-time neglect takes 15 minutes, maybe 20. That's not bad at all. (As for weather, any wooden instrument is going to be sensitive to changes in temperature and pressure. But the dulcimer seems to be a little worse in that regard than guitars and woodwinds.)

The dulcimer lends itself particularly to diatonic music. For the non-musicians, very loosely that means playing a standard scale without accidentals, like playing C to C using only the white keys on a piano. (Musicians should forgive me the over-simplification.) Now if you're playing folk music, or even renaissance music (the types of music I most often play), there are certain accidentals that you need to add in and they're in useful places on the dulcimer. So really, if you're not trying to play some of the wacky 20th-century stuff, it works. And you can play very complex music on the dulcimer, though you're more limited than on a keyboard because you only have two hammers versus ten fingers. For those who know the piece: I once had Earl of Salisbury Pavane -- all of it minus about three notes -- up to performance level. It was high-maintenance, though, so it didn't stick around. Should have recorded it first; oh well.

Oh, and using hammers does not require the same kind of dexterity that playing many other instruments does, which has two implications: first, people who have problems with dexterity, like from arthritis, may find the dulcimer easier to play, and second, you can impress the hell out of people by playing very very quickly.

Comments

[akitrom.livejournal.com]

For an SCA competiton, we arranged Earl of Salsbury:
-- hammered dulcimer, me, unchanged from the Pickow arrangement
-- bowed psaltry, Eyja, basic melody line
-- guitar, Lena, arpeggiating and plucking chords
It was magic. Any combination of two parts sounded fine, but the three together were terrific.

[hobbitblue.livejournal.com]

..and people who are dextrous and play lots of instruments find the whole hitting things with hammers utterly impossible! ::giggle::

[cellio]

That sounds like it would be pretty.

When I did it solo I worked from the facsimile of the virginal arrangement. IIRC, there was one place that called for five notes simultaneously and I couldn't do that (you can sort-of fake four if they're the right four, but five is very different), and I had to drop a couple other notes, but overall, it worked. Mind, it was a real bear, and later when playing with others I did either one line of a four-part arrangement or the top two lines together. Much easier. :-)

[cellio]

Really? Are you serious? From my perspective, that sounds sort of like saying that a master painter can't draw a straight line using a straight-edge, or something.

Or is it the holding-things-in-your-hand thing, as opposed to direct contact? Do you ever play guitar with a pick, or only with your fingers? I agree that using an intermediate object would be weird to someone who's not used to that.

[hobbitblue.livejournal.com]

*giggle* does it really sound that weird? Oh dear... Mind you, I really truly and honestly cannot play a kazoo.

Actually you've hit the nail on the head exactly there - I prefer fingers on instruments always, am still struggling with the mandolin mainly because of having to use a pick (though a fiddle bow doesn't seem as odd a tool). Piano is fingers, harp, banjo, everything. I don't even play the guitar with my nails, its the pads of my fingers.

To be fair I've not tried playing a proper hammer dulcimer but have "practiced" the basic concept on a couple of zither type objects and it felt very unnatural, my hand eye coordination at a distance like that just wasn't working, whereas most other things I can pick up and play reasonably well in a matter of minutes.

Come to think of it, that "intermediate object" idea explains in an instant why I took so poorly to the bodhran, which needs a beater, yet am doing quite well with the hands-on doumbek, hadn't occured to me that it boiled down to something so basic, so thankyou!

I love the sound of the hammer dulcimer but unless I could tuck it under my arm and pluck the strings I've no chance!

[cellio]

my hand eye coordination at a distance like that just wasn't working, whereas most other things I can pick up and play reasonably well in a matter of minutes.

Ah, there's something I hadn't considered. With a pick, your hand is very close to the string. Even with a bow, while your hand is far away the bow spends more time in contact with the strings (moving from the one you just played to the one you're about to play). All of that probably gives you more context than trying to strike a target with a 6- or 8-inch-long hammer.

Err, all I can say is that it does get better. As with all things, you just have to develop a feel for it. Yes, beginners miss a lot and tend to be heavy-handed, really pounding the strings rather than lightly brushing them, but it's a phase you get through.

[kyleri]

It reminds me, rather, of the difference between accuracy with a thrown object, and accuracy with a fired object (whether using a bow, a trebuchet, or a gun). They're quite different skills, at least in my experience...

[dagonell.livejournal.com]

Ya know, you should give some consideration to becoming a ducimer salesperson. :D You've got me wanting to go out and buy one and try learning a musical instrument again and I really, really don't have time for music practice right now because of grad school, I haven't even touched my juggling clubs in weeks.

[lyev.livejournal.com]

You've got me curious about how much these cost. Not that I need another instrument that I don't practice with at this point ;-)

[sue-n-julia.livejournal.com]

I tried the hammer dulcimer but, with poor depth perception and hand-eye issues, was hitting between the strings more than I was hitting the strings. So I moved to the harp (and have been happy since). I just need to start making more time for her.

S

[hobbitblue.livejournal.com]

I don't think my eyesight is that great, is half the problem, one of the reasons I prefer to memorise sheet music then I don't have to keep glancing at it...

If I were more keen on the results I'd persevere but I've enough instruments to play that come to me more easily so I'll not try.. for now at least :)

[hobbitblue.livejournal.com]

I also personally like snuggling into my instrument rather than sitting formally at it, do you find that too? (hello fellow harper, btw!)

[hobbitblue.livejournal.com]

Ooh, also good point. I'm not half bad with a bow but can't even get stuff thrown into the bin to land in there most of the time. Which means I do better with a tool, which is the opposite of how it works with music, hmmm...

[kyleri]

Interesting indeed, innit...?

Hm...I tend to do better with throwing things rather than using a tool, but I'm afraid I don't have enough diversity in experience using instruments-with-tools to tell if there's any corrospondence either way...

[cellio]

When you're using something like a bow, you don't have to worry about propulsion -- just aim. When throwing, you have to integrate propulsion and aim.

I can shoot but I can't throw very well. :-)

[cellio]

I am not trying to lure you away from the harp, of course, but I'd just like to point out that while I might not be the poster child for poor depth perception, I'm in the running. :-) So you could do it too, if you didn't have more important and appealing things to be doing.

[cellio]

Right -- no need to add yet another instrument to your queue. But just FYI, my vision corrects to about 20/40 and I wear bifocals and have wacky astigmatism and stuff like that, so poor vision isn't an automatic barrier.

[cellio]

:-) I'd hate that, though, because as soon as something becomes your source of income, money and not passion rules your day.

[kyleri]

You know, you're right...hadn't thought it through that far.

So why, then, am I better at throwing than shooting...? :)

(Admittedly, it's probably a matter of practice; I throw things at the cats all the time...)

[cellio]

The canonical place to look for hammer dulcimers is Dusty Strings. Which doesn't mean there aren't bunches of fine alternatives out there from individual craftsmen and smaller companies, but their info may be harder to find. Dusty Strings gives you a baseline to look at.

[hobbitblue.livejournal.com]

Sorry, was short-handing it, wasn't really saying "I'm short-sighted" more saying I have trouble with certain things eyewise and it seems the things involved in hand-eye co-ordination for playing something like the dulcimer fall into the area where I already have a few weaknesses (maybe its my brain-hand co-ordination instead! :> ) I can play the guitar with my eyes shut so the seeing things thing isn't an issue so much.

[akitrom.livejournal.com]

To my way of thinking, Dusty Strings is the standard that all other manufacturers attempt to surpass, and which all other manufacturers, indeed, do surpass.

I have found their instruments often out-of-tune (as in, the bridge isn't set at a perfect fifth), and weak-voiced.

I'm partial to the Songbird dulcimers by Chris Foss, in particular the "Wren" (13/12 size, solid wood top). The weirdest drawback is that Foss' company sends little fundamentalist "Chick Publications" cartoon tracts with their instruments.

[cellio]

It could be a matter of practice. It could also be that you're not holding your body steady enough when shooting; minor variations in shooting do more harm, I suspect, than the same minor variations in the lead-up to throwing something. This is something a lot of beginning archers have trouble with; I can't speak to guns and trebuchets.

[cellio]

Thanks for the recommendation!

To my way of thinking, Dusty Strings is the standard that all other manufacturers attempt to surpass, and which all other manufacturers, indeed, do surpass.

Entirely possible. My Dusty Strings dulcimer is coming up on 17 years old, so I can't speak to current quality of either their or their competitors'. When I was shopping for one I went to a large music store some distance from here (House of Musical Traditions in Tacoma Park, MD) and spent much quality time with the dozen or so different dulcimers they had before choosing. Some years later I ran across dulcimers from Griffin's Den (no longer in business to the best of my knowledge), and they were very nice -- would have bought one back then had it been an option, but I wasn't ready to buy a second one. Anyway, I know there are good dulcimers out there that are not "national brands", so to speak; I just don't know how to guide someone through the option space systematically. Recommendations are the way to go, methinks.

So lyev (or anyone else), if you do go dulcimer-hunting you should check out Songbird.

[kyleri]

Likely the case. I know it applies to guns. Not really trebuchets, I'd imagine, but then I've never shot one bigger than the tabletop kind.

[lady-guenievre.livejournal.com]

So, not really knowing anything about period music yet somewhat inclined to learn...and since I really like the sound of the few dulcimers I've heard at events..

1. How far back does the dulcimer go? As far as 1410? (And, more importantly, if it's much older than that, was it being used in the early 15th?)
2. How hard is it to learn? I used to be a fairly good pianist, but found guitar challenging (having to coordinate two hands for ONE note? eek!).

[cellio]

How far back does the dulcimer go?

Unclear. The word is old. There is speculation that it came to Europe during the crusades. The first hard evidence I know of is a manuscript painting from the early 16th century. And, of course, even if it did come to Europe during the crusades, we shouldn't automatically assume that it was in continuous use from that point.

How hard is it to learn?

I found it very easy to get the basics. My background up to that point was: six years of childhood piano lessons; a year or two messing around on the mountain dulcimer; utter inability to grok guitar.

Of course, as with anything, you can spend years fine-tuning the craft. But you won't spend years sucking the way people do with some other instruments. Assuming basic musical clues (like rhythm :-) ), a beginner will be playing recognizable tunes correctly within the first few hours.

In an ideal world you'd be able to borrow time on one for a little while before committing to a purchase. Depending on what the folk-music scene is like where you live, this might be possible. Failing that, come to Pennsic. :-)

Now, about period music: the style of play that the dulcimer most easily lends itself to is a later folk style. Playford dances and Irish jigs will roll trippingly off your hammers -- but if you want to play 15th-century music, you'll be doing some different things. A lot of folk ornamentation revolves around chords, and earlier music doesn't have that approach. This doesn't mean you can't play earlier music on the dulcimer -- I certainly do! -- but you will do some combination of playing "naked" melody lines (which does sound fine) and working up your own arrangements (not as scary as it sounds, if you're starting with multi-part music anyway). By the way, the dulcimer works well in a dance band with other stringed instruments.

Good luck! Let me know if I can help you further.

[lady-guenievre.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the info - I don't know if it's something I'm going to follow up on, but I can't sing, and I'd like something musical to do in an SCA context. Needless to say, the 10 years of piano lessons just don't carry over! :-) It's not something I've researched at all yet, but ideally I'd like to play something that a lady in 1410 might have played (if they did play instruments, if not, well... something that SOMEONE would have played in 1410 then).

[cellio]

Needless to say, the 10 years of piano lessons just don't carry over! :-)

Well, 1410 is probably too early for virginals (I haven't checked), but I believe it's smack in the middle of when portative organs were played. I couldn't say if they were played by women, but it might be a line of research for you. (A portative organ is usually about two octaves; you play the keys with one hand while manning a small bellows with the other.)

I think of keyboards as being "linear" instruments (as opposed to guitars and most woodwinds). Another linear instrument that's solidly documentable is the harp. You might also be able to wrap your brain around some woodwinds.