Talk:Requiem (Mozart)/Tuba mirum

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tuba mirum is a section of the Requiem Mass. That might be considered the primary usage, even for Wikipedia. ...or perhaps not... --Wetman 08:45, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

I thought the same thing when I saw this article. Someone, I guess, was gung ho at getting this extremely obscure and somewhat ridiculous (if amusing) "instrument" up on Wikipedia, but you're absolutely right. I'm not good with disambig pages but if you want to go for this cleanup, please do! Badagnani 08:53, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
I agree - I wish this (unamusing) crap would be removed entirely, or at most a footnote in a decent write-up of a section of Mozart's Requiem Mass that is important in its own right --BarryNorton 14:03, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Seems to have tuba mirum and pastaphone confused. The tuba mirum is a mere tube containing a measure of wine; the pitch varied when the column of air changes as the tube is moved up or down. One blows across one end of the tube as one would a soda bottle to make the pitch. The pastaphone is two pieces of manicotti played as one would use a mouthpiece of a brass instrument. Cornyrob 18:46, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

If you're absolutely sure of this, please make the change in the article. It's hard to find information online about this. Badagnani 21:19, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Doesn't the Professor prefer Ronzoni (no. X) for his pastaphone? Why is it two pieces? Are they duct taped together to make the instrument longer? Badagnani 21:18, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please move former content

Please move this former content elsewhere rather than deleting it entirely:

Tuba mirum is an instrument invented by the American composer and musical parodist Peter Schickele, who often writes under the pseudonym P. D. Q. Bach.
Although it might be assumed that it is a brass instrument (its name deriving from that of a movement of the Requiem Mass translating, from the Latin, as "wonderful trumpet"), it is actually made from an uncooked tube of manicotti pasta. Schickele facetiously states that "tuba mirum" translates as "a mere tube." He further specifies that the Ronzoni brand should be used.
{{Musical-instrument-stub}} Badagnani 05:19, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Attention to this would be greatly appreciated. Badagnani (talk) 02:46, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I was going to heed your call and do this, but what stopped me was the mention in the section of the Shickele article that describes this instrument (I'm assuming it's the same one) as the "pastaphone". Is this in fact the same thing? If so, I think I can shoehorn the description above into that section. +ILike2BeAnonymous (talk) 02:56, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

It's possible to keep the info about Schickele's invented instruments all at his own article, if a redirect exists from a "Tuba mirum" disambig page (which doesn't appear to exist yet). The same could be done for the section of the liturgy, though I think it's notable as discrete "Tuba mirum" movements exist in a lot of compositions. Badagnani (talk) 02:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, but you didn't answer my question: is the "tuba mirum" described above the same thing as Shickele's "pastaphone"? +ILike2BeAnonymous (talk) 03:05, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah, this has been asked before. I think they are different. The pastaphone is made from a Ronzoni manicotti tube and the "tuba mirum," as Schickele says in his recordings, translates from Latin as a "mere tube." I think both of them are used in one recording, so they wouldn't be the same instrument. I think the "tuba mirum," then, isn't made of pasta but might be made from cardboard. He often uses cardboard mailing tubes, which are struck on the head. I could always find out by writing to the Schickele website. Badagnani (talk) 03:35, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

See this search. The "Folk Song Upsettings" contain both the pastaphone and tuba mirum. I'm thinking the tuba mirum is the cardboard mailing tube. Badagnani (talk) 03:39, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

OK, got it. The mailing tube is "schlagenfrappe." The pastaphone is the manicotti tube. The tuba mirum is a flexible plastic tube filled with wine. Source. Badagnani (talk) 03:40, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

OK, so now I'm totally confused about all those instruments. Do you think you could move that material above into the Shickele (or P.D.Q Bach) article yourself? +ILike2BeAnonymous (talk) 04:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but we'd still need a disambig page to redirect people looking for the "tuba mirum" (musical instrument); right now "tuba mirum" redirects to Dies Irae or something. Badagnani (talk) 04:59, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

If anybody wants to have an article about the instrument, Tuba mirum (instrument) would be the correct title. One might place a {{Redirect}} template in the Dies irae article, resulting in Tuba mirum redirects here. For the musical instrument, see Tuba mirum (instrument). No disambiguation page needed. Personally i do not see any necessity for an article about the instrument. Though I really love Schickele's work and P. D. Q. Bach, I can hardly see anything that might be said about the instrument except what is already in the article about Peter Schickele. --FordPrefect42 (talk) 14:40, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Delete?

What is this article about at all? Liturgically it makes no sense, since the Tuba mirum is only a section arbitrarily taken from the Dies Irae sequence of the Requiem. Musically it makes no sense either, because composers of the requiem may chose to subdivide the sequence at different points. At its current state, the article deals with the Tuba mirum from the Mozart requiem excluively, so it should rather be named Tuba mirum (Mozart Requiem) - but I think the best thing to do would be to move its contents to Requiem (Mozart). The same holds for the Recordare article btw. --FordPrefect42 16:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I was just going to ask basically the same question: why does this article even exist?. But the odd thing I noticed is that you seem to be the one who created this article, and others like it, in the form "Requiem (Mozart)/[section name]". What's up with that?
I agree that these articles should cease to exist, and their contents poured back into the Mozart Requiem article. +ILike2BeAnonymous (talk) 21:36, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
I certainly did not create these articles (see revision history), I just moved them to their current location. I may have been wrong doing so, and I admit it was some act of desperation, receiving (almost) no reaction to the merger and deletion proposals. I thought it was necessary, to move these articles, that deal with aspects of the Mozart Requiem only, away from lemmas, that would suggest articles about the "Tuba mirum" or "Recordare" resp. as such. Merging or deleting the articles is still possible and my preferred solution, it was just the quick thing to do. --FordPrefect42 (talk) 22:08, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Agree to delete the articles Requiem (Mozart)/Tuba mirum and Requiem (Mozart)/Recordare and the REDIRECT at Recordare. Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:57, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. This was originally describing an instrument invented by Peter Schickele and was then changed to an article about a notable and valid subject. Badagnani (talk) 02:46, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Given the trivial nature of these articles (if you leave out the lyrics, which are available fully at s:Dies Irae, there is only one sentence left for each of the movements), the articles might easily be deleted completely. --FordPrefect42 (talk) 10:06, 31 December 2007 (UTC)