Instrumentovedenie |
The branch of musicology that deals with the study of the origin and development of instruments, their design, timbre and acoustic. properties and music.-express. opportunities, as well as the classification of tools. I. is closely connected with the muses. folklore, ethnography, instrument technology and acoustics. There are two extensive sections of I. The object of one of them is Nar. music tools, another – the so-called. professional, included in the symphony, spirit. and estr. orchestras, diff. chamber ensembles and applied independently. There are two fundamentally different methods of studying instruments – musicological and organological (organographic).
Representatives of the first method consider instruments as a means of reproducing music and study them in close connection with music. creativity and performance. Proponents of the second method focus on instrument design and its evolution. Elements of I. – the first images of tools and their descriptions – originated even before our era. among the peoples of Dr. East – in Egypt, India, Iran, China. In China and India, early forms of systematization of muses also developed. tools. According to the whale system, the tools were divided into 8 classes depending on the material from which they were made: stone, metal, copper, wood, leather, gourd, earthen (clay) and silk. Ind. the system divided the instruments into 4 groups based on their design and method of excitation of sound vibrations. Information about other east. the tools were significantly replenished by scientists, poets and musicians of the Middle Ages: Abu Nasr al-Farabi (8th-9th centuries), the author of the “Great Treatise on Music” (“Kitab al-musiki al-kabir”), Ibn Sina (Avicenna) (9th-10th centuries). 11 centuries), Ganjavi Nizami (12-14 centuries), Alisher Navoi (15-17 centuries), as well as the authors of numerous. treatises on music – Dervish Ali (XNUMXth century), etc.
The earliest European description of music tools belongs to other Greek. scientist Aristides Quintilian (3rd century BC). The first special works on I. appeared in the 16th and 17th centuries. in Germany – “Music extracted and presented in German” (“Musica getutscht und ausgezogen …“) by Sebastian Firdung (2nd half of the 15th – early 16th centuries), “German instrumental music” (“Musica Instrumentalis deudsch”) Martin Agricola (1486-1556) and Syntagma Musicium by Michael Praetorius (1571-1621). These works are the most valuable sources of information about Europe. music instruments of that time. They report on the structure of instruments, how to play them, the use of instruments in solo, ensemble and orc. practice, etc., their images are given. Of great importance for the development of I. were the works of the largest Bela. music writer F. J. Fetis (1784-1871). His book La musique mise a la porte de tout le monde (1830), containing a description of many music instruments, in 1833 was published in Russian. translation under the title “Music understandable to all”. Prominent role in the study of music. tools diff. countries played “Encyclopedia of Music” (“Encyclopédie de la musique et Dictionnaire du Conservatoire”) of the famous French. music theorist A. Lavignac (1846-1916).
Early information about the East.-Slav. (Russian) music. tools are contained in the annals, administrative-spiritual and hagiographic. (hagiographic) literature of the 11th century. and later times. Fragmentary references to them are found among the Byzantines. historian of the 7th century Theophylact Simocatta and an Arab. writer and traveler late 9th – early. 10th century Ibn Rusty. In the 16-17 centuries. explanatory dictionaries appear (“ABCs”), in which the names of muses are found. instruments and related Russian. terms. The first special Russian descriptions. nar. tools were implemented in the 18th century. Y. Shtelin in the article “News about Music in Russia” (1770, in German, Russian translation in the book. Y. Shtelin, “Music and Ballet in Russia in the 1935th Century”, 1780), S. A. Tuchkov in his “Notes” (1809-1908, ed. 1795) and M. Guthrie (Guthrie) in the book “Discourses on Russian antiquities” (“Dissertations sur les antiquitйs de Russie”, 19). These works contain information about the design of tools and their use in Nar. life and muz.-art. practice. Music chapter. instruments from Guthrie’s “Reasoning” has been repeatedly published in Russian. language (in full and in abbreviated form). In the beginning. XNUMXth century great attention to the study of Russian. nar. instruments were given to V. F. Odoevsky, M. D. Rezvoy and D. I. Yazykov, who published articles about them in the Encyclopedic Dictionary of A. A. Plushar.
Development in the 19th century symp. music, the growth of solo, ensemble and orc. performance, the enrichment of the orchestra and the improvement of its instruments led the musicians to the need for a deep study of the characteristic properties and artistic expressions. tool capabilities. Beginning with G. Berlioz and F. Gevaart, composers and conductors in their manuals on instrumentation began to pay great attention to the description of each instrument and the characteristics of its use in orc. performance. Means. the contribution was also made by Rus. composers. M. I. Glinka in “Notes on Orchestration” (1856) subtly described express. and perform. the possibilities of the symphonic tools. orchestra. The capital work of N. A. Rimsky-Korsakov “Fundamentals of Orchestration” (1913) is still used. Exclude. P. I. Tchaikovsky attached importance to knowledge of the features of instruments and the ability to effectively use them in the orchestra. He owns the translation into Russian (1866) of the “Guide to Instrumentation” (“Traité général d’instrumentation”, 1863) by P. Gevart, which was the first manual on I. In the preface to it, Tchaikovsky wrote: “Students … will find in Gevaart’s book a sound and practical view of orchestral forces in general and the individuality of each instrument in particular.”
The beginning of the formation of I. as independent. branch of musicology was placed in the 2nd floor. 19th century curators and heads of the largest museums of muses. tools – V. Mayyon (Brussels), G. Kinsky (Cologne and Leipzig), K. Sachs (Berlin), M. O. Petukhov (Petersburg), etc. Mayyon published a five-volume scientific. catalog of the oldest and largest collection of instruments of the Brussels Conservatory in the past (“Catalogue descriptif et analytique du Musée instrumental (historique et technique) du Conservatoire Royale de musique de Bruxelles”, I, 1880).
Numerous people have gained worldwide fame. researches of K. Zaks in the field of nar. and prof. music tools. The largest among them are the “Dictionary of Musical Instruments” (“Reallexikon der Musikinstrumente”, 1913), “Guide to Instrumentation” (“Handbuch der Musikinstrumentenkunde”, 1920), “The Spirit and Formation of Musical Instruments” (“Geist und Werden der Musikinstrumente”, 1929), “The history of musical instruments” (“The history of musical instruments”, 1940). In Russian language, his book “Modern Orchestral Musical Instruments” (“Die modernen Musikinstrumente”, 1923, Russian translation – M.-L., 1932) was published. Mayon introduced the first scientific classification of the Muses. instruments, dividing them according to the sounding body into 4 classes: autophonic (self-sounding), membrane, wind and strings. Thanks to this, I. has acquired a solid scientific basis. The Mayon scheme was developed and refined by E. Hornbostel and K. Sachs (“Systematics of Musical Instruments” – “Systematik der Musikinstrumente”, “Zeitschrift für Ethnologie”, Jahrg. XLVI, 1914). Their classification system is based on two criteria – the source of the sound (group feature) and the way it is extracted (species feature). Having retained the same four groups (or classes) – idiophones, membranophones, aerophones and chordophones, they subdivided each of them into many divisions. kinds. The Hornbostel-Sachs classification system is the most perfect; it has received the widest recognition. And yet a single, generally accepted system of classification of muses. tools do not yet exist. Foreign and Soviet instrumentalists continue to work on further refinement of the classification, sometimes suggesting new schemes. K. G. Izikovich in his work on the music. South American instruments Indians (“Musical and other sound instruments of the South American Indians”, 1935), generally adhering to the Hornbostel-Sachs four-group scheme, significantly expanded and refined the division of instruments into types. In an article about music tools, publ. in the 2nd edition of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia (vol. 28, 1954), I. Z. Alender, I. A. Dyakonov and D. R. Rogal-Levitsky made an attempt to add groups of “reed” (including flexatone) and “plate” ones (where the tubophone with its metal tubes also fell), thereby replacing the group attribute (sound source) with a subspecies one (instrument design). Researcher of the Slovak Nar. music instruments L. Leng in his work on them (“Slovenskй lаdove hudebne nastroje”, 1959) completely abandoned the Hornbostel-Sachs system and based his classification system on physical-acoustic features. He divides instruments into 3 groups: 1) idiophones, 2) membranophones, chordophones and aerophones, 3) electronic and electrophonic. tools.
Classification systems such as those mentioned above find use almost exclusively in the AD literature. instruments, which are characterized by a wide variety of types and forms, in the works devoted to prof. tools, especially in textbooks and uch. manuals on instrumentation, has long been used (see, for example, the above-mentioned work of Gewart) is firmly established traditional. subdivision of instruments into wind (wooden and brass), bowed and plucked strings, percussion and keyboards (organ, piano, harmonium). Despite the fact that this classification system is not flawless from a scientific point of view (for example, it classifies flutes and saxophones made of metal as woodwinds), the instruments themselves are subdivided according to different criteria – wind and strings are distinguished by the sound source, percussion – by the way it sounds. extraction, and keyboards – by design), it fully satisfies the requirements of accounting. and perform. practices.
In works on I. pl. foreign scientists, ch. arr. organologists (including K. Sachs), the so-called. geographical research method based on the reaction put forward by F. Grebner. ethnographic theory of “cultural circles”. According to this theory, similar phenomena observed in the culture of dec. peoples (and therefore musical instruments) come from a single center. In fact, they can occur in dec. peoples independently, in connection with their own socio-historical. development. No less popular is comparative typology. a method that does not take into account either the convergence of the emergence of the simplest species, or the presence or absence of historical and cultural communication between peoples who have the same or kinship. tools. Works dedicated to problems of typology are becoming more widespread. As a rule, instruments are considered in them in complete isolation from their use in music. practice. Such, for example, are the studies of G. Möck (Germany) on the types of Europ. whistle flutes (“Ursprung und Tradition der Kernspaltflöten…”, 1951, ed. 1956) and O. Elshek (Czechoslovakia) on a working method of typology of folk musical instruments (“Typologische Arbeitverfahren bei Volksmusikinstrumenten”), publ. in “Studies of Folk Musical Instruments” (“Studia instrumentorum musicae popularis”, t. 1, 1969). A major contribution to the study of folk musical instruments was made by such modern. instrumentalists, such as I. Kachulev (NRB), T. Alexandru (SRR), B. Saroshi (Hungary), a specialist in the field of Arabic. tools of G. Farmer (England) and many others. etc. Institute of Ethnology of the German Academy of Sciences (GDR) joint. with the Swedish Musical History In 1966, the museum began publishing the multi-volume capital work Handbook of European Folk Musical Instruments (Handbuch der europdischen Volksmusikinstrumente), edited by E. Stockman and E. Emsheimer. This work is being created with the participation of many instrumentalists decomp. countries and is a complete set of data on the design of instruments, how to play them, musical-performing. opportunities, typical repertoire, application in everyday life, historical. past, etc. One of the volumes “Handbuch” is dedicated to the muses. instruments of the peoples of Europe. parts of the Soviet Union.
Many valuable n.-i. works appeared on the history of prof. musical instruments – the books “The history of orchestration” (“The history of orchestration”, 1925) A. Kaps (Russian translation 1932), “Musical Instruments” (“Hudebni nastroje”, 1938,1954) A. Modra (Russian translation . 1959), “Ancient European musical instruments” (“Ancient European musical instruments”, 1941) H. Bessarabova, “Wind instruments and their history” (“Woodwind instruments and their history”, 1957) A. Baynes, “The beginning of the game on stringed instruments” (“Die Anfänge des Streichinstrumentenspiels”, 1964) by B. Bachmann, monographs, devoted to otd. instruments, – “Bassoon” (“Der Fagott”, 1899) by W. Haeckel, “Oboe” (“The Oboe”, 1956) by P. Bate, “Clarinet” (“The clarinet”, 1954) by P. Rendall and others.
Means. The multi-volume publication “History of Music in Illustrations” (“Musikgeschichte in Bildern”), which is being carried out in the GDR, is also of scientific interest; will enter. articles to sep. volumes and annotations of this edition contain a lot of information about the muses. various tools. peoples of the world.
In Russia at the end of the 19th – beginning. 20th century in the area of music tools worked pl. researchers – A. S. Famintsyn, A. L. Maslov, N. I. Privalov, V. V. Andreev, N. F. Findeizen, N. V. Lysenko, D. I. Arakchiev (Arakishvili), N. Ya Nikiforovsky, A. F. Eikhgorn, A. Yuryan, A. Sabalyauskas and others. They collected the richest musical and ethnographic. materials, especially in Russian. tools, published mean. number of works and laid the foundation of the fatherlands. I. Special merit in this belongs to Famintsyn and Privalov. Exemplary in terms of breadth of coverage of written and iconographic. sources and their skillful use are the works of Famintsyn, especially “Gusli – a Russian folk musical instrument” (1890) and “Domra and related musical instruments of the Russian people” (1891), although Famintsyn was a supporter of organological. method and therefore studied Ch. arr. tool designs, almost completely bypassing the issues associated with their use in nar. life and art. performance. In contrast to him, Privalov paid main. attention to these issues. Privalov wrote numerous articles and major studies about Russian. and Belarusian. instruments, about the formation and initial stage of development of the Nar. instruments of V. V. Andreev. The works of Famintsyn and Privalov served as a model for other instrumentalists. Maslov wrote “Illustrated Description of Musical Instruments Stored in the Dashkovsky Ethnographic Museum in Moscow” (1909), which served as unities for many years. a source from which foreign instrumentalists drew information about the instruments of the peoples inhabiting Russia. Studying Russian. nar. tools, conducted by Andreev, was completely subordinated to the practical. goals: he sought to enrich the composition of his orchestra with new instruments. Thanks to the works of Lysenko, Arakishvili, Eichhorn, Yuryan and other muses. the instruments of the Ukrainians, Georgians, Uzbeks, Latvians and other peoples have become widely known outside the territory where they have long been used.
Owls. I. seeks to study music. instruments are inextricably linked with music. creativity, art. and household performer. practice and general history. the process of development of culture and art-va. Music development. creativity leads to an increase in performance. craftsmanship, in connection with this, new requirements are imposed on the design of the instrument. A more perfect instrument, in turn, creates the prerequisites for the further development of instruments, music and performance art.
In the Sov. The Union has an extensive scientific and popular science literature on I. If it was previously created by Ch. arr. Russian forces. scientists, now it is replenished by musicologists from almost all Union and autonomous republics and regions. Studies have been written on the instruments of the majority of the peoples of the USSR, experiments have been undertaken to compare. their study. Among the most significant works: “Musical Instruments for the Ukrainian People” by G. Khotkevich (1930), “Musical Instruments of Uzbekistan” by V. M. Belyaev (1933), “Georgian Musical Instruments” by D. I. Arakishvili (1940, in Georgian language. ), “National musical instruments of the Mari” by Y. A. Eshpay (1940), “Ukrainian folk musical instruments” by A. Gumenyuk (1967), “Abkhazian folk musical instruments” by I. M. Khashba (1967), “Moldovan musical folk instruments ” L. S. Berova (1964), “Atlas of Musical Instruments of the Peoples of the USSR” (1963), etc.
Owls. instrumentalists and musicologists created means. number of scientific papers about prof. music tools and prof. perform. claim-ve. Among them are B. A. Struve’s The Process of Viols and Violins Formation (1959), P. N. Zimin’s The Piano in Its Past and Present (1934, titled The History of the Piano and Its Predecessors, 1967) and others. ., as well as the capital four-volume manual “Modern Orchestra” by D. R. Rogal-Levitsky (1953-56).
The development of problems of I. and the study of music. instruments are engaged in historical. and perform. departments of conservatories, in musical research institutes; in Leningrad. in-those theatre, music and cinematography there is a special. sector I.
Owls. I. also aims to provide assistance to practicing musicians, designers and instr. masters in the work on the improvement and reconstruction of bunks. instruments, improving their sound qualities, technical-performing and artistic.-express. opportunities, creating families for ensemble and orc. performance. Theoretical and experiment. work in this direction is being carried out under major nat. ensembles and orchestras, in institutes, music. uch. institutions, houses creativity, factory laboratories and design offices, as well as dep. master craftsmen.
In some owls. conservatories read special. music course. I., preceding the instrumentation course.
References: Privalov H. I., Musical wind instruments of the Russian people, vol. 1-2, St. Petersburg, 1906-08; Belyaev V. M., Turkmen music, M., 1928 (with V. A. Uspensky); his own, Musical Instruments of Uzbekistan, M., 1933; Yampolsky I. M., Russian violin art, part 1, M., 1951; Guiraud E., Traité pratique d’instrumentation, P., 1895, Russian. per. G. Konyusa, M., 1892 (before the publication of the French original), M., 1934; Farmer H., The music and musical instruments of the Arab, NY-L., 1916; his own, Studies in Oriental musical instruments, ser. 1-2, L., 1931, Glasgov, 1939; Sachs K., The history of musical instruments, NY, 1940; Bachmann W., Die Anfänge des Streichinstrumentenspiels, Lpz., 1964 music tools.
K. A. Vertkov
