hangforum.com - The Archive

Hi,

if something is new, it needs maybe a new word creation for a category. Why not?
I think about suggestions the next days.

Frank

The handpan term certainly extends to people outside of our forums (unless the chap in this video is a poster here? I think not)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOPBShTGMhU
and here another reference to the Hang as a handpan, most likely from outside the forums
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwUPKsdkf3M

Now, is this a handpan? - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoqpCQ79nLE

by the way thanks for your posts on this topic Aaron which have been very interesting to read.

There is a problem with the term handpan used as a meaningless word with no historical or cultural connections only pointing at a group of instruments and these instruments shall be Hang, Halo, Bells and (perhaps) Caisa.

The problem is: What are the properties that build the group. Which properties are similar at the different instruments, so that they are members of this group?

Normaly the term tells us what are these properties. For Example the Idiophones. The Term isn't meaningless, it means "self sounding". And this meaning gives us the definition of the term Idiophon.

Well, we are at that point that "handpan" doesn't mean anything but only points on the group of instruments. Where is the definition of the term? Does anybody know it? What is, if I would say: The Halo don't belong to the group. Or the Hang don't belong to the group. How will one argue that this is write or wrong without a definition?

If you put a group of items together you need criteria that decide wether an item belongs to the group. And then you need a term that caries the definition. And a good term consists of words that stand for the definition. Term like those Gothang proposed are bad terms, because they can only be understood by those who know the secret definition. A Term like Idiophone is a good term because it includes the central aspects of the definition: A self sounding instrument.

So if I think of Kyle Cox when he invented the term handpan I don't think that he thought of a meaningless word like LidBox. He put two elements together: hand and pan. And hand stood for the playing hands and pan stood for the steelpan. What else? Remember Kyle is a pan tuner. He will never use the word pan as a meaningless word or in the sense of Bratpfanne.

So if we want to find out the definition Kyle had for his term we find easily the criteria: Instrument played with the hands. And I think this isn't controversal in any sense. But what means pan? I firstly think that it means that the family of steelpan instruments gets some new sisters and brothers with the property to be played with the hands. But I don't know which definition Kyle realy gave his term.

If we dispense with a definition for the term handpan, then the term that builds the group only say: These instruments are similar or equal. And then the term handpan is probably part of a program that wants to put the instruments Hang, Halo, Bell and ??? on one level without looking at the details. And behind this program stands marketing. It is easier to sell a Halo if it is equal to a Hang.

I think we need a term that clearly defines the properties that are equal so that the different instruments belong to the same group. Then it is clear that they can differ in all other properties. And this differences can be discussed. I think there are two properties that define the group of instruments we speak of: 1) They are played with the hand. 2) They are instruments of tuned sheet steel. "Tuned sheet steel" is here a working title. By now I don't know whether a term already exists that describes what I mean with "tuned sheet steel". I think before we say "Oh handpan is so nice" we should do a research to find this out. If we find a practicable term to describe the second property we will have a meaningful term that desribes what is equal at the instruments of the group.

So there is a research program:
1) Find out whether categories and/or terms already exist
2a) If yes, are they applicable to the new hand played instruments?
2b) If not, how can we find a new term that is adequate

Ix

Ix,

Wonderful example of exactly the opposite perspective that I advocate. Your questions demonstrate the philosophy of language issue I mentioned in its pure form, because they demonstrate a fundamentally different set of assumptions about what a language is or should be and how it operates, than mine.

You say, "the term tells us what are these properties," but I would not say that. I would say, "we can collect the properties by examining what the word is used for."

You say, "the term isn't meaningless," but your example, "idiophone," is a rare precise technical term -- very very few words tell us so much; and when they do, that meaning is usually obscure to 99% of users.

My examples "piano" and "cello" illustrate this. The word "Hang" is another example. It does not have any "internal" meaning. Its coinage was not unmotivated, but it tells us nothing for certain about the object, before we know that object. ("Television" is another example. A motivated coinage that communicates nothing essential about the device.)

My argument is that "handpan" is like "cellphone." No portable phone today is a technical cell phone, as far as I know, in the original sense; but we all know what that means... at least, in the US, where "mobile" is not used... at least, not in my circles!

When you ask for a "definition," you overlook (not maliciously!) my point -- the definition is and only is in the set of objects pointed to. It is not necessary to have before hand, or abstract afterward, the specific properties that we use to make our distinctions.

To put that more plainly, I know a handpan when I see/hear one. That is (truly) enough.

There does not need to be any "rule based" definition or set of instructions for determining what it "really means." What it means is only what people use it for.

Incidentally in pragmatics these things are a matter of empirical study. Specific usages are offered to native speakers, who are asked to judge their "correctness" by intuition. (Usually this is done not for word usage, but for syntactic structures, in practice...)

In our case, the "native speakers" are just our small group and other people equally obsessed over these things.

You (or any of us) can have an opinion that differs from the rest of the group, but what the word "means" is simply the aggregation of how everyone who uses it, does use it.

That can and will evolve over time, of course. You may make an argument, perhaps a good one, that the Halo or the Hang or the Caisa is or is not a handpan, and you may "nudge" the boundaries of how the term is broadly understood.

That's relatively easy now, while this debate is still alive, and the actual world is changing so quickly...

...but my original point was only that from where I sit, it seems like the biggest question, which is what "those things" are going to be called by people who care about such things, is already over.

I could be wrong of course! I'm all ears for more options...

...but my money's on "handpan".

aaron

Sometimes I have heard the hang referred to as the UFO Drum. Well, drum just will not do because Felix & Sabina say it is not a drum. But how about UFO-PAN -- Unidentified Frying Object?? Or UF-OVERTONER.

Some folks hear a harp in the hang: PaNHarp

Others see a wok in the hang: WOKGONG or WOK-A-DOODLE
Or since the Gamelan instruments also influenced the sound of the hang:
GAMELAWOK or GAMELAPAN
or MUSI-PAN
or PANTREAT
or PanMaster
or PanMuse
Hmmmm....this is fun

On the walk up the hill into the wind and fog tonight, I thought:

manuphone

"hand sound"

Avoids "pan" and makes it clear it should be played by hand (and hence alludes to Hang, as well).

Or

tactophone

"touch sound"

Btw thinking grateful thoughts for the thinking this forum makes me do, I played a soft accomplished piece tonight when I got home, and wished I had recorded it to share by way of thanks.

In case it isn't obvious, I come from the kind of family where long opinionated debate is a way of life. Long and loud but respectful and fun... that means "family" to me.

So when I engage in long opinions here, it's coming from that kind of place...!

I mention this is as it's so impossible to tell tone from email...

aaron

Hehe, kinda like Jimitar or ZAkirbla or Pastoribass, or .... well, that's all subjective to whom you think best represents an instrument, but fun nonetheless.

I think Ix makes a good point that it would be good if the name actually reflected what the instrument did or sounded like. But why hasn't there been more contention with the word Pan? Sure, you can separate the Hang and make a fine dinner over a hot stove with it, but in its current state it is NOT a Pan because is is not concave, as per the "technical definition". In regards to the connection with Trinidad, they rejected the hang and Felix as having anything to do with their culture. So logically for me, there is no disrespect to culture whatsoever IMO because Felix went his own way after being rejected.

I think Aaron's analysis of the linguisitic approach is quite insightful and deeper and more accurate than all else that has been laid on the table. But that doesn't give a name to the family of instruments. I agree that "Handpan" may be the most forthcoming name that will stick, but that doesn't mean that it is accurate and should hold true, as Ix pointed out, simply because a handful of people call it that, that happen to be at the forefront of a movement. So far, if you want to find the most accurate hits to find videos of the Hang, one will probably find more under the search for "Hang Drum" than anything else. And we all agree that the Hang is not a drum (oooooh but how I like playing it like one). But yet, that is the easiest way to find it.

I think this is a very valid discussion, and we are far from a clear answer. We still haven't defined exactly what it is that a hang can do, and there are certainly opinions here that want to categorize the Hang as separate from the Halo and Bell, etc. And equally, there are motivations from some parties to want to classify the Hang, Halo and Bell in the same category. What really sets them apart at this point becomes a matter of subtle interpretation. There are various degrees of subtlety. The Hang is certainly more rich and refined an instrument than the Bell or Halo at this point in time, but does that justify giving them separate categories? Separate threads on a forum, yes, but separate family names? For some, yes, it is important , but for others, no. There are pragmatic/logical opinions, and there are esoteric opinions, and probably a whole lot in between. I am glad that we have both. Getting everyone to see eye to eye is nearly impossible...

ANother key point, perhaps already mentioned, is that PanArt uses PAN in their name, which implies the acceptance of that term for their instrument. If they are the end-all be-all authorities on the subject, which they are not, but which seems to be a common theme for some members, then HOW can we deny the word PAN in the family that describes the instrument? The name itself is PAN Art Hand. Art played by hand on a pan. If there is any other interpretation of their name, please I am all ears....it sounds like HandPan to me, whether than name fits the instrument or not.

OM

Hi,

it seems, that the most people here have no problem to say to the people from Trinidad that their object of cultural asset (Pan) has new members.
I think this is disrespectful against this people. Who we are, that we can do this?
The Pan has a history. It is closely connected with the live from this people.

http://www.panonthenet.com/history/panhist.htm

They have in mind what "Pan" is. So, lets go to this people and bring an european or american new music instrument with a short history to them and say: "This is also Pan".

If you speak about a music instrument called "Pan" you have two reactions. The people dont know what it is, or the people know that you mean the Steelpan. And in case of the Steelpan the most people know that it is an instrument from Trinidad.

In the paper from the Burreau of Standart you can read a clear characterization what a PAN is and what not.
The shape from the Hang , Halo, Bell ist totally different. It is the exact reverse from a Pan.
Only if i seperate the two halfes I have something like Pan in my Hand. But than my Hang is only scrap metal.

Yes, the name from the Hangmakers small "company" is PANArt and this included also the name PAN. But this name is from the time where they only made Steelpan. This is another origin.

This has nothing to do with the question if the Hang, Halo, Bell and so on stand in a same category of instruments.

Greetings
Frank

"HandNap"

Your argument doesn't see the history of PANArt. When founded the full name of the company was "PANArt Steelpan Manufaktur AG". This name was chosen because at this time they build steelpans. After PANArt had given up building steelpans and concentrated exclusivly on the Hang they renamed the company in 2003 in "PANArt Hangbau AG". The short form PANArt only remained to save the continuity of the Company, not to give a programmatic insight in what a Hang should be looked at as you assume.

Ix

So, let me get this straight. PanArt SteelPan Manufaktur AG made steelpans, and then FElix and Sabina separated from the others and developed Hang, and changed their name to PanArt Hangbau AG. But in their opinion their instrument is not a HandPan despite the fact that both Hand and Pan are contained in their name.

I see your point about their history, but it doesn't make sense to me to keep a word in your name if you do not agree that it identifies with your creation simply for the sake of keeping something consistent in the name as you change directions with the creation. It defies logic, and if its true that F&S do not consider the HAng a Handpan, then from a business point of view, this is a marketing decision that is not a very good one. Then again, we know they don't care about business much.

Its like a company called World's Best Carrot Cake who decided to stop making carrot cake altogether and start making spanikopita, but they changed their name to World's Best Cake even though they don't sell cake any more. Does this analogy apply moderators?

Hi,

yes, I think they dont care much about such business things. The focus from Panart is not to find categorys or clever marketing concepts, i think. They have the Hang and the Sound.
I ask Felix a few weeks ago, if he agree that the Hang is a Handpan and he say clear that the Hang is not a Handpan.
He also make the clue that there is a standart what a Pan is and what not.

So, maybe it looks a little bit "wrong" in this context that the name of the company is Panart. But it is the name from the time they make realy Pan Art.

Greetings
Frank

Sorry Ix, but this sounds a bit paranoid to me . I mean, as if people that encounter an instrument that impresses them, rush home to check their dictionaries. This is just about sound. If people don't like the sound enough, they won't bother to buy the instrument.

I see why you are having this debate, but at the same time wonder what the use for it really is. I'm with Aaron on this one; I know a 'handpan' when I see it. For me it is only logical to see the HALO and Bells in the same family of instruments as the PANArt hang. The hang will nevertheless remain the hang and I'll still love mine just as much.. It seems as if some people have fears about the HALO or Bell tarnishing the hang's reputation . IMHO, when people hear a hang for the first time, they know what it is. At that moment the name of the people or the company that makes them is not important, and neither is the specific type of alloy used or whether it can be put under the same instrument classification as the HALO or Bells.

I'll keep my eye on this topic, get some more instrument categorie name suggestions and get a poll up ?

Hi,

this is not a quote from me.

Frank

PS: Pulp edit his mistake and now my posting make no sense anymore.

Yes... this sounds paranoid to me as well. It seems the underlying current is not so much about the proper usage of the term HadPan.... but moreso to define borders and differentiate the Hang from it's young counterparts. Perhaps to set the Hang in a class on it's own with all others falling under the HandPan category would be more savory for those involved. This would not only allow the Hang to be separate by name, but also by philosophy, business model and integrity. Thus creating the hierarchy, placing the Hang atop the other bourgeoisie instruments that follow. Ok, this may be a bit exaggerated, but the essence of my point is there.

To me, the debate seems to always revolve around a what I can only call a sonicentric (there's a new term to debate for you ) line of thought. Similar to ethnocentricity, but concentrating on dividing the sonic, and other, qualities of the Hang to define it as it's own entity. In most cases and debates among all the forums, this , IMHO, seems to revolve around control issues. The creators not being able to relinquish themselves of their art once it has been set out unto the world.... either, fiscally, philosophically or even categorically, as it may seem.

Despite these engaging debates, a new family of instruments is being developed before our eyes. And as Aaron has stated, I believe the collective conciousness is letting it grow as it will.

Hi,

I opened the discussion with the question if "Handpan" is the name for a category of instruments and with my feeling that this is not a good name. The reasons for me, you can read in my postings. This has nothing to do with seperate the Hang from other new creations.
I dont wrote this, and I cant find this statement in any of Ixkeys postings of this thread.
Please can you show me, where anybody make such an statement?

And Ixkeys comment about marketing has some true aspects, if you think a little bit about that. If you put all instruments in the same box, you dont must make longer discussions about quality aspects of this instruments.

With Halo and Bell it is not the end. It is only a question of time and we have a lot of instruments with different quality. For me the quality aspect is not marginal.

Greetings
Frank

If a heirarchy is to be established with the Hang at the top, I think that the parameters of the heirarchy that PLACE the Hang at the top will ONLY contain the sound of the hang. IMO the philosophy, business model and integrity of PanArt do not necessarily stand in the highest position. Only their sound does. Their philosophy is noble and honorable, but seen only through stubborn eyes, not clearly communicated, and certainly changes based on emotional stimulus. Thus it is not maleable like the metal upon which they bang (pre-nitrided ), and as they say, minds are like parachutes, they only function properly when they are open. Their business model, although also noble in being a non-growth company, well, I don't need to beat a dead horse on that one. I know I am not alone in thinking that they have some work to do on their business model, to put it nicely. Their integrity is solid, until you break an unwritten rule, and then.....they cast their once precious baby hang into the pit of hellfire and damnation, never to be tuned again by its creator. I don't know if that really touches on integrity or not, but you get my point...

I repeat, if a heirarchy is to be established, it will be based exclusively on sound capacity...

I think this is absolutely nosense, if you put all those instruments in the same family you can´t discussing about their quality, sound,...?
What?
So since both Fender and Guibson are guitars nobody discuss about their quality?? (and "guitars is a sub-family, we are speaking here about the name for a larger family...)

I'd like to understand this topic as a sort of workshop. Many thoughts, arguments, opinions are expressed here, some relating to the center of the topic some more relating to the circumstances around the topic.

Let's go again to the center of this topic. It is the question whether the term "handpan" is adequate to name a group of instruments that includes Hang, Halo, Bell, perhaps Caisa and other instruments that may follow in the future.

I think I can outline that "hand" is commonly not controverse. The discussion is on the term "pan".

I think I can also outline that is commonly not controverse that there is a need to name this group.

Aaron has a practial view on the discussed term (and other posters agreed with him) which I hope is adequately outlined so: The term "handpan" exists and is used and is understood. The term itself doesn't mean anything. It only points to the group of instruments and the definition is given through the group itself, not through the term. Therefore, because the term "handpan" exists and is convenient to a lot of persons, there isn't any reason not to use it.

Frank's central point is, that "pan" is a specific term if used in conjunction with instruments of tuned sheet steel: It is the short form for steelpan which is a specific instrument with a specific history and culture. Therefor it isn't adequate to use it for a group of instruments not being steelpans.

My central point is (in opposite to aarons point of view) that the "pan" in "handpan" isn't meaningless. It advises people who hear this term to a specific understanding of the instruments belonging to the group of "handpans". I think it is important that there are probably really contradicting opinons about the discussed group of instruments. Some may really think that this instruments are "pans" and should be named in this way. Other may say that it is important to understand, that they are no pans. And others may state that some of these instruments are "pans" and some are not. Therefor I think the term "pan" is not a good choice if we look for a name that can be used in consense by everyone.

I think it is better to do a step back and look on this issue. Where can we find the point above all contradicting positions. I think this point is that all instruments are made of tuned sheet steel. Under these point the instruments and opinions devides in seperated divisions, for example the world of pan and the world of Hang, ore maybe the world of Hang and the world of Halo or what sort of discussions may ever occure.

So - and this is my challenge to the community of posters that want to contribute to this topic (and certainly to myself too) - let's find a term that describes the property "made of tuned sheet steel", a term that probably already exists and must only be found by research.

Ix

Hi,

I think we speak a little bit at cross purposes. @synthi. Quality aspects means more than only sound. It is not clear for me, what is the criterion for these kind of instruments to put it in same or different categorys. The reason is, that they are new and nobody think about this before or made a discussion like that.
Only because Kyle Cox wrote on his website if anybody is interested in "Handpan" and a few people (insider) use this name from this moment it is not clear that this should be a category name for these kind of instruments.

While I wrote this, Ixkeys made a very substantial posting. I see, that he sorted a little bit the different views and find an interesting point. The lowest common denominator for this kind of instruments is, that they "made of tuned sheet steel". I think this is a good starting point.

Frank