To put it succinctly you need to rub two pieces of wood long enough to get fire.

Likewise you need to meditate continuously for some stretch of time to see results.

As Goenka says "Continuity of practice is the secret of success".

buddhism.stackexchange.com/users/295/Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena

Q.What is gained by learning Vipassana meditation in long retreats?

A.

You get to observe your mind and body.

By observing sensations arising in your mind and body and knowing that it is impermanent, you learn not to react to it as you did in the past.

So, as you practice the art of non reaction to your sensation, slowly then you become free from all sufferings.

They key here is "non-reaction", no war whatsoever with mind (craving and aversion).

Just acknowledging the sensation as they are and non reaction to it is my friend, the only way to liberation.

Non-reaction again

i stress which i believe is the heart of this technique and logically is the only way to liberation.

You learn this technique in a 10 day retreat.

Its up to you to practice the technique for rest of your life and later after you get well versed in this technique 24 hours a day.

Note: If you are going to vipassana retreat as taught by Mr. Goenka, it is tough retreat and you have to work hard but very "gently" to train your mind.

It will not be easy but will be very worthwhile if you understand the technique properly.

I just give you sketch, the retreat will give you whole picture.

Wheel of dhamma is spinning, since it was first launched into action by samma sam buddha.

Background.

15 years ago I went to a 10 day Vipassana Retreat.

I lasted 4 days.

10 years ago I went again and finished the Retreat.

I went for a 3 day Retreat this last winter.

It doesn't seem to get easier.

I have learned something different each time.

I had been meditating 30 mins.

early in the day (anapana not Vipassana)

4 months ago I decided to meditate 40 mins.(Vipassana)

twice a day.

I am noticing subtle changes ....

changes that are giving me insight into myself.

I see thoughts before they become words.

I see my thoughts before becoming engulfed in them.

It has given me space to see before I talk or act.

I am still a victim of my thoughts at times ....

but experiencing these subtle changes and the results has made all my effort a pittance in comparison to what I am starting to realize.

Perhaps I am a slow learner .... and my token gesture for daily meditation was not sufficient to realize progress.

The difficulty in the 10 day is part of the the process ... for me.

It helped me realize that I am capable of overcoming my thoughts.

I always had been one for short term rewards.

Maybe until 4 months ago .... I wasn't ready for a more dedicated practice.

Now I am beginning to make a conscious effort in my daily life.

Body sensations and anapana when not doing sitting meditation are something I'm trying to use more in day to day life .....

I still forget much more often than not.

It's okay.

I have seen progress.

Part of the process of progress is being okay with where I am now.

You gain an intense and unbroken continuety in meditative practice.

That can be a deep and profound way to experience the dhamma through practical realization.

Especially in beginning of ones practice it is useful to get a point of reference .

Buddhism is big and wide and holds a tremendous amount of teachings.

One can read book after book but without any reference-point to reality, i.e. experiental knowledge gained through insight meditation, one can easily fall into the "believe or not-believe" category.

By doing an intense retreat with a teacher one will achieve insights for oneself that will serve to make one develop the first path factor of the noble eightfold path which is "Samma Ditthi, Right View" .

That is like our steering-wheel on the path.

If one does not achieve any insights on the retreat one will at least get a good feeling of what buddhism and meditation really is.

One will also have a teacher to interact with and thats a great thing since in beginning of practice there will be a lot of questions.

Other than that one will learn a lot about oneself in such an intense retreat.

One will learn about ones own limitations, sitting postures, habits, aversions, likes, wantings etc.

When one spends so much time with oneself one is bound to experience the content of ones mind.

That can be a profound experience, even just to get a glimpse of what really happens inside ones own mind.

One begins to see that phenomena are causally connected, that phenomena can cause new phenomena to arise and that objects will not spawn if the supporting conditions are not there or if they fall away.

In an intense retreat like the 10-day retreat one could also get to see the impermanent nature of phenomena on a deeper level than the day to day level.

So there are definitely a lot of advantages of these retreats.

There are also disadvantages as with everything in life.

Maybe one has bodily limitations that limit one from sitting for long hours in the same position.

Maybe one is stressed out and cannot focuz the mind.

The point is that even if there are "bad" things that will affect one on the retreat one will get to know these things and be able to work with them.

That is powerful because how often do lay-people have the oppertunity to really work deep on themselves in everyday life?

I've done 6 days of the 10 day Goenka course after which I left due to irreconcilable philosophical disagreements both with Goenka and with the teacher.

Nevertheless, I found the course to be a powerful way to improve my meditation.

After meditating for 12 hours a day with no distractions, I found it very easy to meditate for an hour a day with the usual daily distractions.

10 days of meditation is what led Siddartha to enlightenment.

Question: My understanding of S.N. Goenka's method for learning Vipassana meditation is that the student is introduced to meditation in a 10 day retreat in which he or she sits in silent meditation for almost all his or her waking hours. This seems  a daunting way to introduce meditation to a newcomer. Also, for many people, it could be difficult to arrange for 10 days without family or work obligations. Thus, I ask: What does the student gain by through an introduction to meditation via a "marathon" retreat?

What is gained by learning Vipassana meditation in long retreats?

You need to meditate continuously for some stretch of time to see results.  You gain an intense and unbroken continuety in meditative practice. Especially in beginning of ones practice it is useful to get a  point of reference. As you practice the art of non reaction to your sensation, slowly then you become free from all sufferings. Other than that one will learn a lot about oneself in such an intense retreat. If one does not achieve any insights on the retreat one will at least get a good feeling of what buddhism and meditation really is.

A long period of time spent practicing is likely to enable the participant to progress and achieve results. participants will have the opportunity to explore their own minds and learn about their own limitations. They will also have the opportunity to develop non-reaction to sensations. For those new to meditation, guidance and interaction at the start of the journey will help to answer the many questions and lead down the correct path. Participants will find that phenomena are interconnected and the 10-day format allows them to meditate without the usual day-to-day distractions. This enables people to meditate better when they return to their normal lives.

Intense meditation  leads participants to explore their own minds and learn about their own limitations. They will have the opportunity to develop non-reaction to sensations.

Guidance and interaction at the start of the participant's journey will help to answer the many questions and lead down the correct path.


The practice of monks getting a Dharma name upon ordination is very old and widespread.

(It would be interesting to know the flip side question- is there

any Buddhist order than doesn't involve Dharma names?

I can't think of one)

Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dharma_name

This article discusses the modern practice in Zen of giving Dharma Names where in he mentioned that this is an Indic tradition that probably pre-dates the historical Buddha.

Ref: http://hardcorezen.info/dharma-names/2733

Since the renunciates were renunciating family and householding, it is not surprising that they took on a new name, which makes it perfectly clear to the surrounding community that you don't plan to carry on the Jones family name by having kids, you aren't going to take advantage of the hereditary titles that go with the Jones family nor keep the Jones family estate.

If we're lucky someone familiar with the history of the early vinaya might know more about this, since the practice of Dharma names would have been promoted in the vinaya.

In India, during the time of the Buddha, the vast majority of monks and nuns didn't change their names.

Notable exceptions are Sariputta and Moggallana , whose original names were "Upatissa" and "Kolita" respectively.

It is not clear why the Buddha chose to call Upatissa by the fact that he was the son (putta) of Sari, or Kolita by the name of his village.

The Mahavagga calls them by these names before they met the Buddha, so it may have been that they took these names earlier.

Other examples that may also have been acquired earlier are Kundala-Kesi, Bakkula, etc.

Cases of adding a descriptive to the name are common, e.g. Kumara Kassapa, Lakuṇṭaka-bhaddiya, etc.

One case stands out, that of Angulimala, who actually had his name changed by the king: Then the king's fear, his terror, his hair-standing-on-end subsided.

He went over to Ven.

Angulimala and said, "Are you really Angulimala, lord?"

Yes, great king.

"What is your father's clan?

What is your mother's clan?"

"My father is a Gagga, great king, and my mother a Mantani."

"Then may Master Gagga Mantaniputta delight [in staying here].

I will be responsible for your robes, almsfood, lodgings, & medicinal requisites for curing illness."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.086.than.html Apart from all this, the biggest reason for later name changes is simply because names in other languages don't work for the Pali recitation required for ordination, e.g.: ayaṃ Noaho āyasmato

Tongassa upasampadāpekkho doesn't really work, so giving monks Pali names is considered appropriate: ayaṃ yuttadhammo āyasmato sirimaṅgalassa upasampadāpekkho

It seems that early on there was a tradition of naming monks after arahant disciples of the Buddha, so we get various Moggallanas and Sariputtas throughout the ages.

In modern times, there seems to be some greater variation in the practice, and choosing a name for a monk has taken on significance that pretty clearly wasn't there in the time of the Buddha.

My name, for example, is chosen because I was born on a Wednesday - in fact

, I was given the wrong name, because one monk thought that me being born in the morning in Canada meant that he should give me a Wednesday night name (it having been night in Thailand when I was born).

In the end, What's in a name?

That which we call a rose By any other name would smell as sweet;

So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd, Retain that dear perfection which he owes Without that title.

-- William Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet

I think this relates to the fact you are starting a new life when you get ordained.

This does not seem to be the case in the Buddha's time but more of a later development.

The name changing practice refer here

is more perticulaly in referece the practice in Sri Lanka where a monk takes the name of the village or area he is from followed by a new name he would be addressed by.

buddhism.stackexchange.com/users/295/Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena

It’s worth remembering here that general naming practices in different Asian cultures often differ from our own.

In traditional Thailand (before 1935 or so), government officials received a new name when they took up a new rank in the hierarchy, besides the actual rank title.

For example, there is a scholar of Thai culture who is now known as Phraya Anuman Rajadhon (1888-1969).

Phraya was his official title, the rest is the name he took when he received the title.

(His descendants use A-R as their family name.)

Earlier in his life, he had other names: since his family was Chinese, he was born Li Kuang-jung, and in Thai he was known as Yong Sathienkoset.

When people have multiple names like this, each used in a different context or life phase, another name taken when ordaining would seem perfectly natural.

Note also: in Thailand today, parents seeking a name for a new child will often go to a monk for suggestions.

And a person who wants change his or her given name for luck or some other personal reason will also usually consult a monk.

It may be that this is “not Buddhist,” but anyway it’s common practice.

I practice with the Triratna Buddhists .

For us the renaming of a person symbolises spiritual death

e.g

the passing away from an old life/way of existence.

Fortunately this is followed by spiritual rebirth or it would be all a bit bleak.

The full process (system of meditation) is Integration Positive Emotion Spiritual Death (new name) Spiritual Rebirth Just responding to @MatthewMartin.

Though it isn't a Buddhist order as such - the Insight Meditation Society doesn't rename as far as I'm aware.

Jack Kornfield is still Jack Kornfield irrespective of his commitment and progress on the path (both formidable I'm sure)

Question: In the Theravada tradition, and perhaps others, monastics take a new name when becoming bhikkhus/bhikkhunis. Where does this tradition come from, and what is its significance? Others don't - what's the difference?

Why do monastics in certain Buddhist traditions take new names?

S0: The practice of monks getting a Dharma name upon ordination is very old and widespread.  I think this relates to the fact you are starting a new life when you get ordained. However, in India, during the time of the Buddha, the vast majority of monks and nuns didn't change their names.  In modern times, there seems to be some greater variation in the practice, and choosing a name for a monk has taken on significance that pretty clearly wasn't there in the time of the Buddha.  Apart from all this, the biggest reason for later name changes is simply because names in other languages don't work for the Pali recitation required for ordination, e.g.:   ayaṃ Noaho āyasmato.

An old and widespread tradition, the practice of changing names often symbolises a movement away from an old life or way of existence. This is sometimes referred to as a spiritual death or new life. In India, during the time of the Buddha, the vast majority of monks and nuns didn't change their names. It seems that early on there was a tradition of naming monks after  disciples of the Buddha, with various Moggallanas and Sariputtas throughout the ages. This practice has changed in modern times and the significance of changing a name for a monk is not the same as it was in the time of the Buddha. For example, in Sri Lanka, a monk may take the name of his home village, followed by a new name by which he would be addressed. Names may also have been changed for regional linguistic reasons, because some names did not work in other languages.

Names may have been changed because some names did not work in other languages.


It's said that enlightened person feels single pain (only physical), while not enlightened feels two pains (physical with mental pain).

SN 36.6

, Sallatha Sutta: The discerning person, learned, doesn't sense a (mental) feeling of pleasure or pain: This is the difference in skillfulness between the sage & the person run-of-the-mill.

An enlightened person feels the sensation corresponding to pain, but it does not feel as pain, rather as pure (informational) sensation.

My teacher taught me an exercise thanks to which I had this experience first-hand.

It is called kuem chok in Korean (I'm probably misspelling it badly).

kuem chok is performed by taking one of especially designed postures,

"eagle posture" or "sleeping tiger" and others, which are inconvenient enough to generate bodily pain, but simple enough to maintain for a long time.

The idea is to "go through" pain by exercising willpower, by not succumbing to the feeling of self-pity, until the experience of pain toggles and becomes something else.

After I was holding my posture for about 15 minutes, and had all my body shaking with pain, the sensation toggled, and instead of pain I felt heat and lightness.

I could effortlessly maintain the posture and was surprised it felt difficult to me in the beginning.

This only happened once, and now the teacher moved on to a more difficult posture, "sleeping tiger", with which I was not able to switch yet.

Needless to say, if I were you I would not try this at home without a guidance from qualified teacher, otherwise you may hurt yourself.

I am not referencing any suttas for this answer, it comes from my own experiences (I am not an arahat).

One who has obtained nirvana can choose whether or not to experience pain and can choose the level of suffering that is associated with that pleasure or pain.

Having obtained nirvana an individual has the ability to reside beyond pleasure and pain and it also gives them complete understanding of pleasure and pain and things can not be understood without being experienced.

After some research, Sakalika Sutta: The Stone Sliver talks about how buddha cut his foot and endured the physical pain.

Excruciating were the bodily feelings that developed within him — painful, fierce, sharp, wracking, repellent, disagreeable — but he endured them mindful, alert, & unperturbed.

Although an Arahat would not have any mental pain arising with physical pain, that doesn't mean that everything would be just fine.

Arahats could still find it burdensome, for example, in that it is constantly pulling on their attention

and they wouldn't be able to do much as a result, so pain could still be quite debilitating in that the Arahat wouldn't be able to function by teaching, traveling, or other such things.

Of course enlightened people experience pain!

Even the Buddha did.

For example, in the Maha-parinibbbana Sutta, it is said of the Buddha: When he had eaten Cunda's food, I heard, With fortitude the deadly pains he bore.

From the sukara-maddava a sore

And dreadful sickness came upon the Lord.

But nature's pangs he endured. "

Come, let us go To Kusinara," was his dauntless word.

There is some evidence (and the exact source is escaping me now) that he was only free of physical discomfort when he entered into the base of cessation (i.e. nirodhasamāpatti).

The Buddha even had to deal with a bad back on occasion (as in MN 53).

Of course, the experience of physical pain in not equal to the suffering of physical pain.

While techniques do exist to deal with physical discomfort,

only enlightenment liberates you from the anguish it causes.

Question: In other words, by not conceptualizing sensations of physical pain, do fully enlightened people still experience unpleasantness and simply not label it as such, or is the experience fundamentally without anything that an unenlightened mind would label as unpleasant, so that the degree of pain becomes like pitch in music?

Is there any extreme of physical pain that a fully enlightened person would find unpleasant on any level?

It's said that enlightened person feels single pain (only physical), while not enlightened feels two pains (physical with mental pain). Sallatha Sutta:   The discerning person, learned, doesn't sense a (mental) feeling of  pleasure or pain: This is the difference in skillfulness between the  sage & the person run-of-the-mill.  Having obtained nirvana an individual has the ability to reside beyond pleasure and pain and it also gives them complete understanding of pleasure and pain and things can not be understood without being experienced.   Of course, the experience of physical pain in not equal to the suffering of physical pain.

There is a distinction between physical and mental pain. It is said that the enlightened only feel physical pain, whereas the non-enlightened feel both physical and mental pain. Some say that the enlightened feel the sensation corresponding to pain, but an  informational sensation, and can choose the degree of suffering associated with that sensation. Although the mental pain would not be felt, there would still be a burden on the person experiencing the sensation. However, some say that of course enlightened people feel pain! Even Buddha even had to deal with a bad back at times.


I found several interesting Wiki pages: This one gives a basic idea about the growth as a comparison between 1910 and 2010.

This is the List of religious population.

This one gives the population groth rates http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_growth_rate By briefly analysing all of the above

, I feel like Buddhism is decline according to the statistics.

Further found this article which gives a projections for the Next 200 Years : http://www.wnrf.org/cms/print_next200.shtml

According to it from 1900 to 2025 Buddhist world wide % changed ( and will be change) from 7.8% to 5.7%.

Although it sound like depressing, please think as a Buddhists this is quite expected and all align with Buddhist teaching.

Going forward, It is quite clear that world is not going be a better place than today.

As people moving more towards to materialism, consumerism they tends to distract from the reality.

So be mindful and practice the Dhamma.

According to the commentaries, Buddha Sasana will last 5000 years.

That means about another 2400+ years.

In the 1st millennium, there were Arahaths with special Jhanic powers.

In the 2nd millennium, there were Arahaths with no specials powers.

In the 3rd millennium, i.e. at present, it's said that there are only Anagami Sangha at most.

In the 4th millennium, there will be Sakadagami Sangha at most.

In the 5th, there will be Sothapanna Sangha at most.

At the end, monks won't even be wearing robes.

They will wear ordinary clothes and will just use a yellow string to indicate that they are monks.

In addition to the other answers, I believe there is a global decline in many major religions as you can see in this Google trends graph .

I would argue that especially in the western countries choice and interest of religion is subject to change, e.g., due to trends and/or major events.

Main aspect leading to Buddhist decline or growth as per

The Dharma-ending Age : the admission of women into the monastic community; the lack of respect toward various elements of the Buddhist tradition; the lack of diligence in meditation practice; carelessness in the transmission of the teachings; the emergence of divisions within the Sangha; the emergence of false or “counterfeit” Dharma; and excessive association with secular society.

Later texts also mention external causes of the religion’s decline of which there are two: the invasion of India by foreign, non-Buddhist powers; and excessive state control.

Out of these we already see many elements today.

So naturally Buddhism is in the decline.

The way to get over this decline can be as follows: Every Buddhist should operative the 4 frame of mindfulness diligently to attack 3

Should teach this diligently and sharing Dhamma realized empirically to attack 2 Should try to source as much from the Suttas strengthened though empirical understanding to attack 4 and 6 Be mindful of the Vinaya and how the Sangha is organised without trying to bring variations 5, 7 and 2 Look at the Dhamma as it is without a mixing personal or cultural beliefs to attack 2 and 7

buddhism.stackexchange.com/users/295/Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena

In the modern age of world-wide education & science, all religions that have superstitious beliefs will inevitably fall into decline (statistically).

Asian cultural 'Buddhism' is no different to Western Christianity or Judaism.

Many Asian cultural Buddhists will stop believing in unknowable superstitious ideas (such as 'reincarnation-rebirth' & external 'heavens & hells') & thus reject (what they believe)

Buddhism (to be).

The Buddhist scriptures (such as MN 95 ) report the Buddha criticised religions that adhere to blind faith yet, since that time, Buddhism has become the same.

For example, today, there are famous teachers that will insist you cannot be a Buddhist if you do not believe in post-mortem-rebirth.

"Master Gotama, with regard to the ancient hymns of the brahmans — passed down through oral transmission & included in their canon —

the brahmans have come to the definite conclusion that "...this is true...

" What does Master Gotama have to say to this?

"Tell me, Bharadvaja, is there among the brahmans even one brahman who says, '

This I know; this I see...this is true..'" "No, Master Gotama."

the Dhamma... is deep, hard to see, hard to realize, tranquil, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise..

I speculate Buddhism only historically grew as a cultural religion due to a change of emphasis towards 'rebirth-reincarnation' (which was also the primary reason why Buddhism became extinct in India due to it becoming undifferentiatable from Hinduism).

Therefore, it is inevitable cultural Buddhism declines for the same reason that it grew; in that it was never ever True Buddhism.

In conclusion, (in ordinary circumstances) the True Dhamma will not decline since those that comprehend Ultimate Knowable Truth do not change their convictions.

I don't have statistics for you

but I do want to point a few things out to give you hope against the dire (skillful means) predictions of a Dharma Ending Age: Statistics lie.

There must be a huge amount of "unnanounced Buddhists" who practice meditation with the quest for Awakening (freedom from suffering).

This to me qualifies as Buddhist, especially because some of these "untracked" people spend far more hours in the day practicing the essence of Buddhism than those affiliated to a softcore branch of Buddhism

I myself am one of those people who announces themselves as multiple religions/none.

Buddhism is more of a spiritual lifestyle than a '-ism'.

Therefore anyone of any religion can practice it in the cover of their communal Abrahamic (or otherwise) religion.

Buddhism can never die.

The quest for freedom and happiness will never end and due to the information age, the Buddhist teachings/suttas are forever preserved even if a major portion of humanity is decimated.

So long as you yourself are interested in Buddhism for its life-benefitting knowledge, you can be sure many others are, too.

Question: I was listening to a  podcast  a while ago and it stated that Buddhism worldwide is in decline. I found that surprising. Is that true? Does anyone have any references or better still statistics to prove or disprove that.

Is Buddhism in a worldwide decline?

According to it from 1900 to 2025 Buddhist world wide % changed ( and will be change) from 7.8% to 5.7%.   In the modern age of world-wide education & science, all religions that have superstitious beliefs will inevitably fall into decline (statistically).  Many Asian cultural Buddhists will stop believing in unknowable superstitious ideas (such as 'reincarnation-rebirth' & external 'heavens & hells') & thus reject (what they believe). The invasion of India by non-Buddhist powers is also believed to have had an effect.

According to a study, the percentage of Buddhists worldwide will change from 7.8% in 1900 to 5.7% in 2025. Trends and major events in the Western world have an effect on religious practices. Religions with superstitions beliefs  will inevitably decline as a result of world-wide education and science. External causes for this decline include the invasion of India by foreign, non-Buddhist powers and excessive state control. However, those that comprehend the Ultimate Knowable Truth will not change their convictions.

Those that comprehend the Ultimate Knowable Truth will not change their convictions.


For Theravada sutta study is considered part of the overall practice.

It is an important part that goes along with practicing Sila and meditation.

So I'm not sure if it is considered " a meditation" but it is a large part of the practice which includes more than just meditation.

Across time and location meditation has been stressed over sutta knowledge, or sutta knowledge stressed over meditation, but there is one Sutta I am failing to find in which the Buddha basically shows that one who listens to dhamma(aka learns the suttas) and practices is one who is developed in dhamma.

"And how is a monk one with a sense of Dhamma?

There is the case where a monk knows the Dhamma: dialogues, narratives of mixed prose and verse, explanations, verses, spontaneous exclamations, quotations, birth stories, amazing events, question & answer sessions.[1]

If he didn't know the Dhamma — dialogues, narratives of mixed prose and verse, explanations, verses, spontaneous exclamations, quotations, birth stories, amazing events, question & answer sessions — he wouldn't be said to be one with a sense of Dhamma.

So it's because he does know the Dhamma — dialogues... question & answer sessions — that he is said to be one with a sense of Dhamma.

This is one with a sense of Dhamma.

When, on observing that the monk is purified with regard to qualities based on delusion, he places conviction in him.

With the arising of conviction, he visits him & grows close to him.

Growing close to him, he lends ear.

Lending ear, he hears the Dhamma.

Hearing the Dhamma, he remembers it.

Remembering it, he penetrates the meaning of those dhammas.

Penetrating the meaning, he comes to an agreement through pondering those dhammas.

There being an agreement through pondering those dhammas, desire arises.

With the arising of desire, he becomes willing.

Willing, he contemplates

[lit: "weighs," "compares"].

Contemplating, he makes an exertion.

Exerting himself, he both realizes the ultimate meaning of the truth with his body and sees by penetrating it with discernment.

"There are these five rewards in listening to the Dhamma.

Which five?

"[1] One hears what one has not heard before.

One clarifies what one has heard before.

[3] One gets rid of doubt.

One's views are made straight.

One's mind grows serene.

"These are the five rewards in listening to the Dhamma."

Contemplate sutras and you are doing vipassana meditation .

Vipassana meditation is the form of meditation Lord Buddha preaches we do.

Blindly reciting sutra's might lead to miccha ditti.

Nichiren .

Nichiren gongyo, or daily practice, involves changing the title of the Lotus Sutra, but also large chunks of the sutra itself.

Since it's usually chanted in Japanese, followers may not actually understand it.

So it works like a dharani, a mantra that you don't know the meaning (as opposed to mantras, which have some meaning that is clear, or at least clear after it's translated from the Sanskrit) Chinese .

Chinese monks chanted entire sutras.

A leader would hit a drum shaped like a wooden fish.

Nowadays this shows up in the service manuals of modern Chinese Buddhist organizations.

Here is a youtube vid where you can get a feel for the pace.

This guy confirms my idea that meditative sutra chanting isn't necessarily about reading comprehension: Some of the keys to retaining the conscious mind’s engagement with sutras is to recite them, rather than read them.

To recite them in your native language rather than the original language will also keep the mind engaged.

Some teachers, however, would argue that allowing the mind to become disengaged is the point.

As with mantra practice, repeated sutra recitation in Tibetan, Sanskrit or Pali, ultimately from memory, can allow the conscious mind to detach, one of the goals of mindfulness.

I couldn't find a reference, but I wouldn't be too surprised if the chanting came from the tradition of memorizing and reciting Pali suttas.

(Majursri's mantra, for example appears to be a mnemonic for remembering parts of a sutta)

OK this is an answer based on personal experience of study of the White Lotus Sutra .

The sutra itself is highly repetitive and plays with concepts of time and space throughout.

Although there are parables (for instance the burning house ) throughout which can be easily seen as teaching points the suta as a whole seems to be something else.

I believe it is the sutra itself that is the practice and the boredom, aggrevation and frustration with it is part of that.

I felt it was more like a very long koan.

The point wasn't to understand it as such just to bear with it almost and see what comes up in your own experience.

I often hear people complain about Mayahana sutras as been too long, too mystical, too rarified, too religious maybe or just ridiculous.

But if the sutras as seen as a (meditation) practice rather than a guidebook that i think that goes a long way to understanding what they actually are and understanding how to work with them.

Just my experience as I say.

Vimutt’āyatana Sutta mentions what reciting and studding the Dhamma can lead to liberation.

When doing this you have to reflect what the Dhamma trying to experience of it.

Study of and recitation of the Dhamma will lead to joy and from joy to zest and from zest to tranquillity and from tranquillity to happiness and from happiness to concentration and from concentration to clear vision which leads to revulsion .

Dhamma vicaya should be present though out.

buddhism.stackexchange.com/users/295/Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena

Question: When studying the sutras should that be considered a form of meditation, if so what are the guidelines for sutra meditation?

Sutra Study as Meditation?

It may not be considered "a meditation" but it is a large part of the practice which includes more than just meditation.  However, if the sutras are seen as a (meditation) practice rather than a guidebook then that goes a long way to understanding what they actually are and understanding how to work with them.

Studying the sutras may not be a meditation, but it is a larger part of the practice as a whole. If the sutras are considered to be a meditation practice rather than a guidebook, this might help with understanding them and how to work with them. Meditation may be stressed over sutra knowledge, and vice-versa, but teachings show that one who listens to dhamma (an learning the suttas) and practices is one who is developed in dhamma. Vipassana meditation involves contemplation of the sutras.

Meditation may be stressed over sutra knowledge, and vice-versa, but teachings show that one who listens to dhamma(aka learns the suttas) and practices is one who is developed in dhamma.

Contemplate sutras and you are doing Vipassana meditation.


As we know Bhumi is considered as Mata according to scriptures. माता

भूमि:

पुत्रोऽहं पृथिव्या: (Atharva Veda 12.1.12) Also see this and this answer which discuss about location and praising of Bharat Varsha.

So, Bhumi of Bharata have significance in scriptures and can be considered or worshiped as Mata (Mother).

Now, talking about Bharat Mata, there is history of freedom movement and bit nationalism is connected with it.

Kiran Chandra Bandyopadhyay first coined the term "Bharat Mata" as the title of one play/drama in 1873.

In 1882 Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay's novel Anandamath introduced the hymn "Vande Mataram" which soon became the song of the emerging freedom movement in India.

In which he called Bharat Mata as Lord and equated her with goddess like Durga, Laxmi etc.

त्वं हि

दुर्गा दशप्रहरणधारिणी कमला कमलदल विहारिणी वाणी विद्यादायिनी, नमामि त्वाम् नमामि कमलां अमलां अतुलाम् सुजलां

सुफलां

मातरम्

॥ वन्दे मातरम्

In 1905, Abanindranath Tagore portrayed Bharat Mata as a four-armed Hindu goddess wearing saffron colored robes, holding a book, sheaves of rice, a mala, and a white cloth.

In 1936, a Bharat Mata temple was built in Benaras by Shiv Prashad Gupt and was inaugurated by Mohandas Gandhi.

Two another temples at Haridwar in 1983 and at Kolkata in 2015 are founded.

In the Kolkata temple, Bharat Mata is portrayed through the image of Jagattarini Durga.

So, Bharat Mata is not goddess described in scriptures but the consideration of Bharat Bhumi as Mata i.e Bharat Mata is portrayed looking like goddess.

Thus, the practice of worshiping Bhumi as Mata is in accordance with scripture whereas consideration of Bharat Mata as goddess Durga is feigned (the word choice may be not appropriate).

Reference for historical points: Vivekananda Kendra .

For further information you may refer articles from

TheInidanExpress or from

The Hindu .

Btw, I also found one Sanskrit Shubhasita praising Bharat Mata!

We all know there is no such lady like Bharat Mata.

It is just the creativity of an artist.

I can show you many examples on the Internet, where Bharat Mata stand with Bhagwa flag .

Seems clear eye creativity that shows a sign to be proud on our country and give respect to it as a Mother and visualize the importance of Tiranga Flag.

Goddess The Bharat mata is [primarily] goddess Durga .

However in general she is an amalgamation of various goddesses.

Bharat Matā

(Hindi, from Sanskrit Bhāratāmbā भारताम्बा; अम्बा ambā means 'mother') is the national personification of India as a mother goddess.

She is an amalgam of all the goddesses of Indian culture and more significantly of goddess Durga .

She is usually depicted as a woman clad in a saffron sari holding the Indian national flag, and sometimes accompanied by a lion...

The Tiranga flag was also started being included during this period.

In 1930s, the image entered in religious practice .

The Bharat Mata temple was built in Benaras in 1936 by Shiv Prashad Gupt and was inaugurated by Mahatma Gandhi. ...

The motto Bharat Mata ki

Jai ("Victory for Mother India") is used by the Indian Army.

[Wikipedia]

This is a rare combination of religion and nationalism ( a part of Dharma ).

Etymology

It was actually a painting work, which was named as "Bharat Mata".

Eventually it got transformed into a worshippable figure for indpendence movement of India.

The very early history of Bharat mata dates back to 1905 from a painting of Abanindranath Tagore :

Bharat Mata depicts a saffron clad woman, holding a book, sheaves of paddy, a piece of white cloth and a garland in her four hands.

The painting holds historical significance as it is one of the earliest visualizations of Bharat Mata , or "Mother India." ...

The "work" was painted during the time of the swadeshi movmement.

The movement began as a response to the Partition of Bengal (1905) [source]

She is not a traditional Pauranic goddess.

So in the oldest of paintings, there was neither tricolor flag with her, nor was there any lion.

The flag started to appear around 1930's when the independence movement was at its peak as described in the above Wiki article.

Trivia

Here is what Sister Nivedita, a famous student of Vivekananda has to say: From beginning to end, the picture is an appeal, in the Indian language, to the Indian heart.

It is the first great masterpiece in a new style.

I would reprint- it, if I could, by tens of thousands, and scatter it broadcast over the land, till there was not a peasant's cottage, or a craftman's hut, between Kedar Nath and Cape Comorin, that had not this presentment of Bharat-Mata somewhere on its walls.

Over and over again, as one looks into its qualities, one is struck by the purity and delicacy of the personality portrayed.

[Complete works of Sister Nivedita]

Bharat mata is a personification of the nation that is India.

No mythological records exist in the Puranas or Itihasas .

It was created by the nationalist leaders to inspire the national movement during the late 1890s.

And as for the flag, the Indian Tricolor is a modified version of the pre-1947 official flag of the Indian National Congress.

Originally the flag that Bharat mata was portrayed to hold, was the INC flag.

Bharat Mata is the presiding goddess of Indian Sub continent.

She is known as Bharti which is another name of Saraswati.

Indian people worshipped Saraswati in form of River and land since ancient times.

On holding tricolour.

It is a later variation of Goddess.

Bankim Chandra Chatterjee says that Durga, Kali and Jaggadhatri are different forms of Maa Bharati or Bharat Mata.

The Indian Culture could easily identify the Country with the Mother Goddess, because, we had in Sri Sri Chandi(chapter 11, mantra 4).

aadhaarabhutaa jagatas tvamekaamahisvarupena yatah stitaasi O Divine Mother!

You are the resort of all as you are present in form of land.

We also had in our culture janani janmabhumish cha svargaad api gariyasiMother and

Motherland are more glorious than heaven.

So Bharat-Mata was seen as a form of the Mother Goddess.

The Indian Tri-colour flag was introduced after independence I think.

Question: What is the story of Bharat Mata? What's her connection with the Indian national flag?

Who is the goddess depicted as "Bharat Mata" & why is she having Indian tricolor flag?

Bharat Mata is primarily the goddess Durga, however she is an amalgam of all the goddesses of the Indian culture. She is a personification of the nation of India.  She is usually depicted as a woman clad in a saffron sari holding the Indian national flag, and sometimes accompanied by a lion.  Eventually it got transformed into a worshippable figure for indpendence movement of India.

It started as a painting, portraying a four-armed goddess. She is often portrayed as holding the Indian national flag and sometimes accompanied by a lion. It eventually became a figure of worship for the Indian independence movement. Bharat Mata is primarily seen as an amalgam of all goddesses in Indian culture, and in particular of Durga. She is seen as a form of Mother Goddess. The Bharat Mata  temple was built in Benaras  in 1936 by Shiv Prashad Gupt and was inaugurated by Mahatma Gandhi. ...


Does breaking a bandsaw blade indicate something such as too much/too little tension?

It can

but it could simply be from material fatigue or a poor weld.

So anyway, blades break or go dull, what then ?

This is the interesting question for me since in the past worn bandsaw blades were routinely re-sharpened but like a lot of similar changes over time this is seen much less frequently today.

Many woodworkers aren't even aware resharpening is a possibility.

And even breaks are repairable (and easily, the work takes just minutes in the hands of someone who knows what they're doing).

Part of the reason for this type of thing is the lower cost of 'consumables' which makes repair "not economically viable" as they say in the industry.

But doing maintenance or repair yourself sidesteps that reality.

However, since a lot of woodworkers don't have welding equipment or the experience to re-weld a critical area like this

you are still left with a broken blade, but that doesn't mean it has reached the end of its life and should go straight for recycling.

A common use for broken bandsaw blades in the past was as stock for bowsaw blades and this is still perfectly viable.

And making the bowsaw frame is a great woodshop project in itself.

That is just the tip of the recycling iceberg.

Other potential uses include: shim material scroll saw blades scraper blades scratch stock cutters Just one broken blade could provide nearly a lifetime's worth of any of the above.

Blades fatigue over time because of the bending around the tires.

They will eventually break due to this.

Always inspect blades for stress cracks which usually appear in the gullets, before welding.

If a blade is found to have stress cracks, then its time for a new one.

I sold saw blades for a living to manufacturers, so I know a little.

If used absolutely correctly, the blade should wear out (dull) and not break.

In the Real World, we seldom see any absolutes.

RE repairing (welding)

blades; I've seen quite a few (industrial-size) bandsaws which had welders built right in; break a blade, count your fingers, trim the ends and weld them without removing the blade.

There are always compromises to be made to have a general, all-around BS blade.

Seldom is a wood cutting blade useable on metal, although metal-cutting blades can cut wood without too many problems.

But unless you're in a production environment (cutting the same thing, mechanically fed, changed before too dull or else they overheat & break)

you have to get the finest TPI, pitch, and set you can stand to use on the biggest thing you'll cut (sort of prepare-for-the-worst situation).

Good question.

Every bandsaw blade I've gotten rid of has also been because it broke.

While this can be an indication that there is incorrect tension on the blade, it also just happens from use.

If it snaps pretty early, likely the tension was wrong or you did something dumb.

(I broke one because I turned a piece to sharply).

Wider blades are more likely to get dull before snapping, and some of them can be respharpened, though for most band saws it is likely cheaper to buy a new one.

Some high quality blades can certainly be worth the sharpening.

Yes, the teeth become dull.

In my youth, there were shops that would take your blades and resharpen bandsaw blades and table saw blades for a small fee.

Too much tension, or too much lateral movement can cause problems in my experience.

Back in the day, sometimes the new blade would break at the weld, but I have not see this in a long while.

(If you cut wood then metal and then wood again with the same blade, it is easy to 'feel' the difference due to the duller blade.)

Also see http://www.bandsawblade.com/chart.htm Dulling may be symptom of other tuning issues.

My rule of thumb (still got both of mine, knock on wood) is... when the blade gets rewelded about the fourth time, it's probably not going to get welded again; by that time, the back has grown too brittle

and it's probably lost some teeth.

Until that point, reweld & resharpen.

I've never had a blade breakage that I could trace back to overtensioning, although I'm always just a bit tender with tensioning anyway

- my first bandsaw had a honeycombed cast-aluminum body, and "proper" tension was spooky with it

- it felt like the saw's body might give way at any time.

That was an illusion, of course, but it taught me not to overtension.

Lots of bandsaw blades (TimberWolf springs to mind) want very little tension - only enough to prevent the blade from fluttering.

Question: I suppose there are two alternatives for the death of a bandsaw blade:   The blade breaks.  The teeth get noticeably dull and the blade is discarded.   I have never experienced scenario #2 but I've broken a few blades on my bandsaw. Is this the normal way for them to go?  Does breaking a bandsaw blade indicate something such as too much/too little tension?

What is the normal end-of-life for a bandsaw blade?

The death of a bandsaw blade is usually the result of too much tension, or too much lateral movement can cause problems in my experience.

If the blade snaps early, it is possible the tension was wrong or there was too much lateral movement.


As everything teaching "device" (and there is a lot of academic literature studying this, across disciplines, this is not specific to bowed string instruments), fingerboard tapes or any kind of marks on or on the side of the fingerboard should not : be used systematically without observation phase

be permanent be used alone without having an exit strategy (see point 2.) be used as a way not to address underlying difficulties and fears of the pupil be used as some parents use a pacifier (see also point 4.)

given just to spend your time on what you like to teach instead of what needs to be done for the pupil (related to point 5.).

All these points are related, I will try to elaborate further later.

Other less common devices posing the same problems include special bow guiding devices, simplified or heavily modified music notations.

I use fingerboard tapes for beginning students, but only 4 of them.

I would not recommend using those pre-fab stickers that have placement lines for all the whole steps and half steps in first position.

This is overkill in my opinion and can create over-dependency, or actually be more confusing than necessary.

If you're teaching beginning children most likely they will need some finger guide to help train their ear.

As soon as they can hear where the fingers go then take the tapes off (when they move up to a new size instrument is a good time to assess their new tape needs!)

If you're teaching beginning adults it will depend on the experience of the adult.

If they have a good ear they may not need any tapes at all.

If they have trouble finding where to place the hand, but then are fine after that perhaps use just a first finger tape.

Using all 4 of the finger placement tapes in first position is also fine if they need it.

Again, just keep on top of when they don't need the tapes anymore

so they don't become to reliant on them as a crutch.

We're always looking to use the tapes as a tool to train the ear, not as an excuse to not have them listen closely and adjust their fingers by what they hear.

It is helpful to some, but sometimes can create dependency.

I have been playing the violin for a year and a half, and I sometimes take off a few tapes, just a few weeks after mastering a piece, just to see how it goes, and I can do pretty well without them.

I have been using them less and using my ears for intonation.

Though, they are important at the beginning, as it is hard to understand where the fingers go.

Tapes can be used as a good reference point for some positions, but it is different and may vary in people.

I know people who can play without tapes at the beginning, and some who struggle without them.

My teacher used a pencil to lightly draw a line on the board.

That way I got the benefit of seeing where I should place my fingers, and learning to hear where I should put them without learning to be dependant on them.

I personally never used fingerboard markers when I learned violin as a child.

However I see that here in US, most beginners use them.

I think they are helpful especially for the young child until they learn how to listen and hear the pitch, especially if they have not played piano before playing violin.

I would however remove them when the student gets better at identifying the correct pitch.

As a tech, it makes it very hard to have a properly set up violin, especially as most cheaper violins come with higher tension and lower fingerboard clearance steel strings.

To set these up to work, I would be replacing or shimming the nut, replacing the bridge, and setting up the instrument above height to accommodate for these ridges that are now added.

Even the appliqués require an increase in spec height by the thickness of the appliqué on both the nut and bridge.

Then again, most of the time, it's someone who has applied 2 layers of tape, effectively making frets...

I’m 41 and have been learning for just over a year.

I’ve taken off my tapes but found that over time my finger placement starts to become less accurate.

I can hear the difference but struggle to pinpoint where I need to place my fingers.

I put a black tape at 1st and 3rd positions and that seems to do the trick for me.

I’d rather spend the time learning a new piece than trying to get the intonation without tapes.

I don’t plan on playing professionally

but I’d like to eventually play without them, but for now, the tapes are staying.

Question: Some teachers use them and some don't. I've heard that they can become a crutch and cause delayed ear training development, but others say they are necessary at the beginning.  Can they really cause problems? Has this been studied in any kind of way? Has it been addressed by a respected author? Should they just be used because they make life easier?  Thanks,

Should fingerboard tapes be used for beginner violinists ?

Fingerboard tapes are needed for children learning violin. For beginner adults, it depends on their experience. If they have a good ear, they may not need tapes. They are important at the beginning, as it is hard to understand where the fingers go. As soon as they can hear where the fingers go then take the tapes off (when they move up to a new size instrument is a good time to assess their new tape needs!)

Finger tapes can be useful for beginner violin players, especially children For adults it will depend on their experience and their musical ear. They can cause dependency, so should be removed when they can itentify the pitch.

Finger tapes can cause dependency, so should be removed when they can itentify the pitch.


An exercise that I was taught, have seen many times, and also have used with others.

It can be done anywhere.

Instead of tapping my fingers, I do this exercise.

Place your hand on the table (or whatever surface) as though you were resting your fingers on the keys.

"Play" the sequence 1-3-5-2-4, repeating it over and over. Things to work on are your rhythm, make sure that each "note" you play is even.

(For instance, 1-3--2 are more dominant fingers, but make sure ---2-4 are doing their share of the work!)

Work on being able to keep that up for several minutes, keeping the 1-3-5-2-4 progression intact.

I find myself lapsing into 1-3-5-43-5-1 or something equally funky if I'm not careful.

The temptation here is to do this with your dominant hand, but make sure you also do it with the other hand.

The tempo will be much (much, much, much...for me) slower, so spend more timing working with that hand.

This should also be done with both hands, keeping each note in sync.

For me, it usually ends in disaster.

I used to do all kinds of things, including most of the things everyone here has mentioned.

However, I found that I got the most benefit from doing these things: Do nothing.

Rest.

Don't do anything strenuous with your arms, wrists, and fingers.

If you spend your time effectively at the piano, that's all the physical workout you need.

Most of piano playing is mental, not physical.

These are very fine muscles that you're trying to develop and calibrate, and you would be surprised how much rest (physical and mental) you need away from the keyboard.

Rest all five fingers on a surface, in playing position, and then lift up and down the fourth finger in a very relaxed and isolated way.

The goal is to increase the height of the lift as much as possible, while keeping the other fingers so relaxed that they don't move.

As #2, rest all five fingers on a flat surface, let the weight of the arm be anchored at the fingertips, and then shift that weight from finger to finger, all without lifting the fingers from the surface.

Great exercise to remind yourself how relaxed your arm should be, and how much weight should be felt at the fingertips.

Similarly, do pull ups with your finger, while completely relaxing everything else.

Seated at a table, hook your finger on the table's edge, relax the arm completely, then firm up the hook little by little, and pull up the weight of your arm.

If done right, your neighbor should be able to push your elbow, and your arm should just dangle back and forth on its own.

This is much harder than you think, but helps to reinforce #2 and #3.

Notice that all of the above has to do with relaxing.

Although this may not be the answer you were expecting, consider whether the end result you're looking for (finger strength and dexterity) isn't best achieved by eliminating the natural tension in your playing.

This is the case for even the most advanced players, and you'd be amazed at how much progress can be made with so little work.

So many people, even professionals, forget that there are two parts to practicing – the actual physical and mental practice at the keyboard, and the time away to rest and mentally process what you've done at the keyboard.

One doesn't work without the other.

Book+video: Seymore Fink ,

Mastering Piano Technique ( search )

It has good full arm exercises, to practise both with and away from the piano.

The idea is to work out the muscles involved in playing piano - from shoulder to finger tips, and groove the patterns involved in playing, like the circular motion while playing an arpeggio.

I have used the various table-exercises mentioned above.

I suggest getting the Hanon The Virtuoso Pianist in Exercises and the Schmitt book on exercises.

These will give you plenty of patterns to choose from as well as some good stuff do while at the piano.

Now keep in mind that it is more fatiguing to play on a hard surface such as a table, and with fatigue you can get muscle stiffness.

Having said this, you'll find that if you do the above exercises carefully and with relaxed arms and hands while at the piano, for maybe 20 minutes per day, there's no need to do table playing unless you're going to be away from the piano for quite some length of time.

Keep in mind

what you are really strengthening are the tendons as there are no "muscles" in the fingers.

All the work is really done in your forearms and biceps and the tendons are pulled over your elbows by your finger movements.

There are many exercises you can do when not actually playing the piano.

one of my favorites is tapping my fingers on a desk in different rhythms.

Personally I like playing with both hands doing the same thing, but that is just personal preference.

I like with the right hand 1-3-5-4-3-4-3-2 on the right hand, which is 5-3-1-2-3-2-3-4 on the left hand.

Any organised program of mental practice can be very beneficial.

See Malva S Freymuth's Mental Practice and Imagery for Musicians.

See Greg Irvin's "Finger Fitness" on "youtube".

my contribution to this effect is to continually pratice your 12345123 for the right and the left 54321321

Question: Are there any finger exercises I can perform even when I am not near a piano to improve my dexterity and strength of my fingers?

Finger Exercises for Piano when not playing

Rest all five fingers on a surface, in playing position, and then lift up and down the fourth finger in a very relaxed and isolated way. Alternatively, seated at a table, hook your finger on the table's edge, relax the arm completely, then firm up the hook little by little, and pull up the weight of your arm. Another trick is tapping fingers on the desk in different rhythms. Finally, rest all five fingers on a flat surface, let the weight of the arm be anchored at the fingertips, and then shift that weight from finger to finger, all without lifting the fingers from the surface.

Here are some finger excercises for when you are not playing the piano. Taping rhythms onto a desk with your fingers. Using resistance against the edge of a table with your little fingers. Weight shifts between fingers and isolating finger movements

Finger exercises taping rhythms on a desk

Fingers exercises using resistance against the edge of a table, weight shifts between fingers and moving the fourth finger up and down in isolation from the other fingers.


You can try to soften the spine by opening it in various locations and flexing the book gently.

(Here's a nice version of the procedure , with diagrams, even; and here's another , similar graphic, this one from a bookbinder.)

If that doesn't work, you can get a piece of clear plastic and leave it over the pages; not an ideal solution, but it will let you use the book.

In the end, don't be too concerned with keeping the book in mint condition, unless this is a valuable or rare volume.

Break the spine if need be; you can always repair the book later, or hold it together with a rubber band.

A book of scores is of no use if you can't use it.

A great longterm fix that I've found for this issue is to just take the score to a kinko's or other copy center and have them replace the binding with a spiral binding.

This way, the book can stay open on any page and you don't have to worry about the binding breaking.

The only thing to watch out for is to make sure you don't lose any of the music when you have them change the binding over.

But other than that, it's a great $5 investment!

Book spines are intended to keep the book in its closed shape.

As they age and are repeatedly opened, they start to stay open because the spine gets damaged.

If you're careful, bending and folding won't make it any worse than the "natural" damage over time.

Another option is to cut out the spine altogether.

You could punch holes in the margins and use a binder or something to keep everything together.

I use clothespins to keep the pages open. :D

When I was growing up, my dad came up with a brilliant strategy for a stubborn binding: Bandsaw off the spine, then spiral-bind the whole book.

Voilà!

Well-behaved Mussorgsky.

The "Standard Method" for getting a book to stay open is to Place the spine firmly on a table.

open both covers and fold flat

(run your finger along the inside to help guide the fold on paperbacks) fold down each page in turn, alernating sides, until you get to the middle.

This way should leave the spine intact, but able to lay flat.

See my answer to another question Copy the sheet music to separate sheets and lay them out side by side.

If they don't fit, memorize the easy pages until you can discard them.

Eventually memorize the whole song and become more impressive to watch.

(this one can wait)

I know some people have a hard time with the memorize part, but I have gotten good at it

and I hate page flipping :)

Question: With some score books, if you try to open it and put it on a support, it will close itself.  For the moment I have to force and fold it but it damages the spine of the book.  Do you have techniques to open those books without damaging them too much?

How to handle a newly purchased score book that won't stay opened?

To soften a newly purchased score book you can try to soften the spine by opening it in various locations and flexing the book gently. Use clothespins to keep the pages open. Break the spine or have it replaced with spiral binding.

To keep the pages of a new book open you can try softening the spine, but careful bending, or use pegs or a piece of plastic to keep the book open. Alternatively you could break the spine and spiral bind the book

Soften the spine, by careful bending and folding.

Keep the pages open but using clothes pins/pegs or a piece of plastic

Break the spine and spiral bind the book


Check out Theta Music Trainer .

Lots of games for ear training and music theory.

Technically, I think the vocals portion of Rock Band counts for this, as would its precursor SingStar.

If you've got a Mac and a familiar iTunes library, my friend made this game, almost as a joke.

(It plays back x number of tracks from your iTunes library simultaneously until you identify them...

it's called " Counterpoint .")

That could feasibly train your ear in an abstract sense, since you're essentially trying to pick out familiar musical snippets from a very dense soundscape.

Ooh, Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time had a game mechanic centered around playing back melodies on your N64 controller-turned-ocarina.

Ah, also Ambrosia Software's game Aquaria (also available on Steam) has a similar game mechanic that provides you with a diatonic scale from which melodies can be sung.

You might be interested in GNU Solfege .

It's not a game per se, but it has A LOT of exercises with visual and aural feedback.

It also records statistics about each one of your performances, so you can know how well you're learning and "score" yourself.

I've been using it for some weeks now, doing a few exercises each day

and I can say it is lot's of fun and very didactic as well, but your mileage may vary.

Looks like you received a bunch of great answers already, but I thought I'd add something to the list anyway.

Have you tried: TENUTO (App) -

It has a great set of Games/Tools for Ear Training and/or Sight Singing (VERY helpful, even if you never make a sound) http://www.musictheory.net/products/tenuto 8 NOTES

(Online/Free) -

The WebSite includes 10 games, some are GREAT and they're ALL free!

I've never used it, but Sibelius has some ear-training software called Auralia which is supposed to build your ear up using training and games.

music.stackexchange.com/users/175/BlueRaja - Danny Pflughoeft

There are simple ear-training games in Band-in-the-Box .

Those are quite simple, but even fun :)

The first is called Music replay game.

It has three modes:

note, rhythm and melody replays.

The computer plays note or phrase and you have to replay it using a computer keyboard or midi instrument.

You can set up a tempo and range of notes.

There is notation displayed too, so this can be a sight-reading game too.

Second is the Pitch Invasion - this game has the same controls and set-up possibilities as previous one.

There are flying saucers falling down and each of them projects a audible pitch.

By guessing it, you shoot the saucers down.

This game is great for children.

There is the good old LOOM

This is an adventure game.

The game requires one to memorize spells in the form of short tunes of 4 notes.

To cast a spell one needs to play back the tune.

Depending on the difficulty level it is done solely by ear or with a written notation.

Some spells can be played backwards reversing the meaning.

Changing, for example, open to close .

Check EarMaster Pro 6 its not free

but we can have 7 days full trial version.

Question: There have been several popular music games in recent years, but they seem to be most useful for developing a sense of rhythm. Are there any games that are helpful as ear training exercises? What would you recommend?

Are there any games useful for ear training?

Games for training the ear include Theta Music Trainer, GNU Solfege, TENUTO, Auralia software, LOOM, Earmaster Pro 6

Here are some suggestions for ear training. Theta Musica Trainer, Rock Band, SingStar, GNU Solfege, TENTUTO, Sibelius, Auralia, Band-in-the-Box, Loom or EarMaster Pro 6


Logic Pro has built-in controls for using different temperaments.

Check out the link below: http://documentation.apple.com/en/logicpro/usermanual/index.html#chapter=43%26section=6%26tasks=true

It allows you to either select a pre-configured tuning system, or customize your own.

MAX/MSP is another solution, but if you don't have programming experience, using this as an option might be significantly more trouble than it's worth.

However, you could Here are some other links I found, but cannot personally vouch for: http://www.cycling74.com/forums/topic.php?id=7392

(If you have MAX, you could use this file to convert MIDI input to specific frequencies).

(article describing various software programs suited for alternate tunings) http://www.justonic.com/

The MIDI program Timidity can be adjusted to any tuning you want , though it requires a little bit of work.

Update:

Timidity supports playing just intonation very easily: -Z file, --freq-table=file

Cause the table of frequencies to be read from file.

This is useful to define a tuning different from 12-equal temperament.

If ``pure'' is specified, TiMid‐ ity++ plays in trial pure intonation.

-Zpure[n(m)], --pure-intonation=[n(m)]

Play in trial pure intonation by Key Signature meta-event in the MIDI file.

You can specify the initial keysig by hand, in case the MIDI file does not contains the meta-event.

Optionally, n is the number of key signature.

In case of sharp, n is positive.

In case of flat, n is negative.

Valid values of n are in the interval from -7 to 7.

In case of minor mode, you should put `m' character along with -Zpure option.

To make your own, arbitrary tunings, see this .

Midi actually has a 20-year old ratified specification extension just for this.

Any synth that supports that extensions should support those temperaments (although you might need an appropriate midi interface too).

The wikipedia page for the extension page lists a number of soft-synths that support the extension.

Denemo (music score editor.

free.) supports a few temperaments.

Some Synth plugins (vsti...) lets you choose the temperament.

Ideal, if you want to play live with a midi keyboard.

Edirol

Orchestral was one, but I think it's discontinued.

Mutabor allows you to use arbitrary tunings and works on a couple of platforms.

It accepts MIDI input from keyboards and files.

On Mac I've had some trouble getting it set up, and the translation to English is not done yet, but it has great potential...

Pianoteq .

You should really look at this physical-modeling piano virtual instrument plugin .

Not only does it support all the historical temperaments, it models many kinds of harpsichords, fortepianos, pianos, and other instruments.

It sounds excellent and is light on system requirements, and it's available for Mac, PC and Linux.

TallKite.com

/alt-

tuner.html Alt-tuner is a midi effect for your Digital Audio Workstation, very powerful.

You can sweep the whole spectrum of meantone (1/3 comma, 2/7 comma, 1/4 comma, 1/5 comma, 1/11 comma = 12-ET, 0 comma = pythagorean) and you can even do this with a foot pedal as you are playing, via midi learn.

It also does well-temperament, any kind.

It does just intonation with commatic shifts, called tapnotes.

It does ADAPTIVE just intonation, which adjusts all the pitches very slightly (2-3¢) as you play, for a better sound than quarter-comma meantone, which has fifths flat by 5.5¢, and min 7ths and maj 9ths flat by 11¢.

You can also switch back and forth between all these tunings with foot pedals as you play - as to Monica Cellio's comment above - no need for mp3s, just play and listen!

Korg and Yamaha synths each support a fairly large number of different temperaments.

Other makes may as well, these are just the ones I have owned.

I'm surprised the companies don't advertise this feature.

Every virtual organ software that I know of can handle multiple temperaments: Hauptwerk (proprietary) GrandOrgue (open source) jOrgan (open source)

Question: Do you know of any software out there that will allow me to play in different musical temperaments (e.g. Well temperament and Meantone temperament)?  I'm especially interested in software that accepts MIDI input.

Software that allows playing in different temperaments

Logic Pro has built-in controls for using different temperaments.  MAX/MSP is another solution, but if you don't have programming experience, using this as an option might be significantly more trouble than it's worth.  Midi actually has a  20-year old ratified specification extension  just for this. Denemo, Edirol, Mutabor are others. All virtual organ scores can do this. Korg and Yamaha synths each support a fairly large number of different temperaments.

Suggestions for software that allows playing in different temperaments, include, Logic Pro, MAX/MSP, Timidity, Denemi, Edirol, Mutabor, Pianoteq, Hauptwerk, GrandOrgue, jOrgan. Also Korg and Yamaha synths.


Most keyboard instruments of the baroque Era as well as early pianoforte had fewer keys than the current 88-standard (some modern piano like the Bosendorfer Imperial have 97 keys, 9 additional keys in the bass), and much of Bach keyboard works for instance can be played on such a restricted keyboard.

With restricted high notes you will have difficulties with many of Chopin's and Liszt's works where the composers take hold of the whole instrument and use replication of elements among successive octaves for effect.

Many pieces of composers such as Scriabin and Debussy also use the whole range of the piano.

Another thing you would miss is playing four-hands, but I guess this is not the kind of activity you are into.

If your new keyboard is able to transpose 1 octave up or down, you may be able to play more pieces by adjusting the range to the work you want to play, as if you were shifting your chair left or right in front of your piano.

I have a 61 key and don't find it a problem, but then other people used to larger keyboards do.

Just make sure it has handy octave-transpose buttons and you can do a bit of quick transposing mid-song if you need it.

If you really like to play flashy virtuosic pieces, then it might be a problem.

But the highest octave is hardly ever used, and if it extends to an A on the lower end, that should cover most pieces in the standard repertoire.

Looking at a Google image search of 61 note keyboards, it seems that many of them end on a low C (C2).

It would be a safer bet if it extended at least down to the A, but those lower notes are often used for octave doublings, in which case you'd probably be able to get away with it.

Yes, it will restrict your repertoire.

I have a 61 key synth, and there are occasions when I have to adapt a piece 'to fit'.

Not very many songs, mind.

It doesn't make me regret buying it 20 years ago.

There is a dedicated transpose key that I can configure from -24 to +24, so the theoretical range is greater than 88 keys, however, despite it being very easy to use, it can still be impossible/impractical to execute whilst playing (you also have to shift your hands pretty quickly to compensate for the left or right hand that didn't need to transpose).

I only usually transpose keys between songs.

You can get an 88 key midi controller very reasonably: http://www.amazon.co.uk/M-Audio-9900-40832-00-Keystation-88es/dp/B0006676A0/ref=sr_1_3/280-5526809-4799532?s=musical-instruments&ie=UTF8&qid=1400103634&sr=1-3&keywords=88+key+keyboard+weighted

So you can enjoy the best of both worlds, space and pocket permitting.

Since the 61-key market does have some fine workhorses.

Many 88-key models are also available as 61-key models and can be half the price.

So you can save some money if you already own an 88-key controller, and a compatible cable, of course.

I went from a board with 61 keys to one with 73.

It was a vast improvement.

I still miss the very lowest keys, not so much the highest octave.

Happily I have my old upright at home for when nothing will do but that low A, or Bb.

When gigging, I need to stay away from too much bass anyway, so it is not so bad.

But if this is your only keyboard, I expect you will feel very cramped on a 61.

A 73 would be better.

But if you can find (and afford) an 88 - with an acceptable key feel and that is not too back breaking - pick it up.

You are a pianist as opposed to a keyboard player.

I think there is a distinction (both are wonderful assets to humanity, of course)

so weigh any advice you get based on the speaker's orientation to his or her instrument.

You might experience issues.

I'm learning Liszt's Hungarian rhapsody No. 9 right now and for some of the highest notes, an ossia for 66-key pianos is given.

Not sure if they'd fit in to your 61-key one, though.

Whatever you do, don't get rid of the 88 key digital piano and switch down to a 61 key digital keyboard!

The only reason for doing this is if you are into organ music, thus not needing that additional octave at the top and additional octave and one third at the bottom of the keyboard!

Like others say, hitting (or even finding) that octave transposition feature in mid selection is a drag and will distract you from the music enough to make a mistake (or variation as us musicians like to say to minimize errors in performances)!

Yes, it will limit you in your playing of classical pieces of music and you'll definitely want to hold on to this one!

If you do indeed want to go with 61 keys, try to get at least two, if not three or more so that you can have more musical range for organ pieces!

What I would do is go with a digital computer organ or even have a pipe organ built if it was in your budget as well as meeting your portability needs!

Please remember that when using a MIDI keybaord of 61 keys,, it is extremely easy to transpose the key, for instance -12 semitones or an octave.

giving your 12 more bass notes at the expense of the highest notes...

This will help a bit for certain pieces.

The transpose function also allows you to cheat, by playing a piece in any key that suits you and not learning new notes.

If you already play classical music surely you can answer this yourself to some extent.

How many times do you play keys in the top and bottom octave in the music you've played?

Classical music covers a massive range, I think if you were utilising those extremes of pitch you'd probably remember!

Question: I'm planning on trading my 88-key digital piano for a 61-key portable music workstation as I'm more inclined into rock keyboards as of late than classical music. However, I do enjoy playing classical parts, and I wonder if buying a keyboard with a restricted range will restrict my repertoire much. A 61-key keyboard essentially removes the first and last octaves from the 88-key traditional piano.  Are there many pieces that would be deemed unplayable without these octaves?

Will a 61-key keyboard severely restrict my piano repertoire?

S0: Most keyboard instruments of the baroque Era as well as early pianoforte had fewer keys than the current 88-standard (some modern piano like the Bosendorfer Imperial have 97 keys, 9 additional keys in the bass), and much of Bach keyboard works for instance can be played on such a restricted keyboard.  With restricted high notes you will have difficulties with many of Chopin's and Liszt's works where the composers take hold of the whole instrument and use replication of elements among successive octaves for effect. Many pieces of composers such as Scriabin and Debussy also use the whole range of the piano.  If you really like to play flashy virtuosic pieces, then it might be a problem.

Some classical pieces will be able to be played, eg Bach. However there are some classical pieces that you will not be able to play, Chopin, Liszt, Scriabin, Debussy and will restrict your repertoire.

There will be some classical pieces that you will not be able to play, Chopin, Liszt, Scriabin, Debussy and will restrict your repertoire.


Well, the piano started out with only about 60 keys, same as the harpsichord –

in fact it WAS a harpsichord, except that the harpsichord maker Bartolomeo Cristofori (try saying that 10 times fast!)

got the bright idea of putting hammers on one (to HIT the strings) instead of plectra (to PLUCK the strings).

So the piano was invented – this was around 1700, or maybe a little before that.

Anyway, as composers began to use the new instrument they started writing more and more complicated and brilliant music for it.

Pretty soon, the keyboard had to expand in both directions.

By the middle of the 19th century, it had 85 notes – up to A – then finally they added the last three at the top.

There's even a piano made today – the Bösendorfer Imperial Concert Grand – which has 97 keys; the bass notes go all the way down to C.

It's nine-and-a-half feet long and weighs almost a ton. — Piano Education - FAQ

I'm no expert but the obvious answer is so to have the full seven octaves for both A minor and C major.

The first key of a piano is an A and the last is a C.

The importance of A minor and C major is they are the only two keys made up entirely of white keys.

And to be precise, one extra pitch is added to the top of the final octave to complete it.

So a full chromatic scale is 13 pitches, 12+1.

Two chromatic scales are 25 pitches, (12x2)+1, etc.

So in total there are (12x7)+1+3 = 88 keys on a piano.

An observation about 88 notes on the piano...

You can play through the entire major key circle of fifths on the piano starting on the lowest C to the highest C; AND You can play through the entire minor key circle of fifths on the piano starting on the lowest A to the highest A. Interesting how this worked out perfectly!

There are a lot of explanations for this, such as "The extra 4 keys allow the piano to cover the entire range of a 'standard' orchestra."

However, it's probably just tradition.

The human ear can't really distinguish notes higher or lower very well, but it provides more functionality than 4- or 5-octave pianos.

The keyboard grew beyond five octaves as piano makers essentially said "Ours is better because it has more notes."

There is no particular reason why it didn't stop at 85 or keep going to 90.

It could have done either.

Eventually the market required that all pianos have the same number, and it just happened to stabilize at 88.

Question: I know that the piano contains 7 octaves plus a 4th. I also know that it accommodates the full circle of fifths (from C and back to C). But since a fifth contains 7 semitones, it only "needs"  7X12 = 84 keys for the circle. So why the "extra" 4 keys?

Why do standard modern pianos have 88 keys?

There are a lot of explanations for this, such as "The extra 4 keys allow the piano to cover the entire range of a 'standard' orchestra.", that is the full seven octaves for both A minor and C major.  The keyboard grew beyond five octaves as piano makers essentially said "Ours is better because it has more notes."  Eventually the market required that all pianos have the same number, and it just happened to stabilize at 88.

The piano keyboard has 88 keys to have the full seven octaves for both A minor and C major. It covers the full range of a standar orchestra. Piano makers increased the number of keys, but the market required all pianos to have the same number of keys and it sabilized at 88.


One cause of yawning can certainly be that your body needs more oxygen, so key to solving the problem is getting enough breaths in.

Some scores have breaths marked, but for others you'll need to work out for yourself where you can fit your breaths in.

You can train for bigger breaths but some people find it difficult to breathe properly.

I know a couple of people who were asthmatic and had this problem, and they found swimming helped them learn to breathe more deeply and take deeper, more controlled breaths.

One of the first thing you could do is to train yourself to yawn : yawn and alternatively inhale and intonate at a standard voice level at the same time, opening the mouth as wide as possible.

Do that slowly, several times before starting to sing.

It will flex your face muscles in a good way and place your lower jaw.

A little side benefit is that you will be less likely to yawn after this exercice.

Our singing teacher used to make us do this and a little series of other warmups before every session.

You could also have an iron deficiency, which affects the amount of oxygen your system can use.

I'd say go and talk to a GP and see if it's possibly medically related as well as a technique thing.

More generally about breathing properly while singing: Stand up straight.

Don't raise your chest when breathing.

Instead, breathe down into your stomach.

Your lungs will expand downwards and you'll have more control over the release of air as you sing.

If you put one hand on your chest and the other on your stomach, the chest hand should remain still and the stomach hand should move out when you breathe in and in when you breathe out.

This should allow you to get more oxygen out of your breaths, regardless of how many you take.

I experienced the same thing when I was first learning to sing.

I think that yawning is your body's natural reflex to open up wide, flex and then relax all the muscles in your larynx, throat and mouth (all of which you need to remain flexible and in control to sing properly).

Yawning is good for warming up before singing, but not good if it interrupts your singing.

Back then I found that I would yawn a bit at the beginning of rehearsal, but I never yawned during performance because I focused mentally on giving the best performance that I could, and got so busy focusing on forming each note that yawning was no longer a possibility.

Yawning while singing is not necessarily a sign of improper breathing.

Rather, it could be a sign of good throat position.

Proper vocal technique across a wide variety of styles (including classical, folk, and pop, all of which I'm trained in) has a singer open their throat and raise their palate in the rear, similar to the motion you make while yawning.

This helps keep the sound from being overly nasal.

Of course, yawning while singing is not really a great thing if it affects your singing.

There are several things you can do to help.

Firstly, learn to sing through a yawn.

You'd be surprised how, with a little training, you can sing straight through without losing tone while you're yawning.

Another thing you can do is learn what exactly triggers you to yawn while you sing and modify your tongue and throat position slightly -- you want your mouth and throat to be shaped similarly to a yawn, but it's possible you're going a bit too far and actually triggering a yawn unintentionally.

Proper breath support can also help decrease our propensity to yawn while singing, though, as I mentioned, I'm very reluctant to say that yawning is

caused by poor breathing.

Question: Singing almost always make me yawn.  I've heard this is due to not breathing correctly, but I'm not sure what that means.  What's the correct way to breathe while singing so I don't yawn?

Why do I yawn while singing?

One cause of yawning can certainly be that your body needs more oxygen, so key to solving the problem is getting enough breaths in. You can train for bigger breaths but some people find it difficult to breathe properly. One of the first thing you could do is to train yourself to yawn : yawn and alternatively inhale and intonate at a standard voice level at the same time, opening the mouth as wide as possible.  Another thing you can do is learn what exactly triggers you to yawn while you sing and modify your tongue and throat position slightly -- you want your mouth and throat to be shaped similarly to a yawn, but it's possible you're going a bit too far and actually triggering a yawn unintentionally.

One way to stop yawning whilst singing would be to get more oxygen. This can be achieved by training for bigger and more breaths. To help with this, training to yawn and learning what triggers you to yawn may help with this.


Ligeti's thirteenth piano étude "L'escalier du diable" or devil's staircase, uses the full range of the keyboard.

You can see it clearly in this video .

The pianist is Francesco Libetta .

Shostakovich 1st

Piano Concerto?

Ok, ok, not technically a 'song', but still...

Very few before 1890.

Some pianos like the Steinway A still had only 85 notes at that time, and most composers stayed within that range.

After that time, many composers pushed the limits.

Olivier Messiaen's piano compositions use the full range.

For instance the two-piano piece "Visions de l'Amen" opens with a triad on the lowest A of the piano.

Another piece has the left hand playing in the lowest octave and the right in the highest octave.

Ravel, in "Une Barque sur l'Ocean", writes for G below the lowest A on the keyboard.

He had a 90-key Erard piano that had that low note.

There is a similar 90-key Erard at the Frederick Collection in Ashburnham, Massachusetts.

I have heard that there is a piece by Scriabin that calls for the D above the highest C on the piano, but I don't think any piano was ever made that had that note.

Not on top of my head.

Some songs will require loads of octaves.

The Piano theme by Michael Nyman takes 3 octaves around C3, then jumps down 2 octaves.

But imo the main reason of having so many key (specially since you tagged this question under midi and midi controller) would be for performance reasons.

Most samplers allow you to choose ranges for different presets.

So you can actually have 2 blown octaves from a nice sawtooth wave with a huge portamento for your theremin like solo, then 5 octaves of your main rhodes sound :)

(I'm speculating, not saying you use those

or you want to do this, just putting it into a RL perspective!).

Logic in itself allows you to do this somewhat in environment, etc.

Some compositions will have some information on really really low end (ie.

think big, big pipe organs) but again - C1 has it's fundamental at around 32Hz, E1 at 41Hz.

it's around 15Hz (see an issue here?)

Uh, I stomped on this the other day

- it does play C0

but it's not a keyboard! :P

Late last year I was playing the piano reduction for Bruch's violin concerto and I'm not sure it uses the first and last C's of the piano, but it sure does use those octaves.

I know a piano reduction is not a proper piece, but hey, two cents is two cents.

There's another consideration to take into account with this question: while a piece may be strictly possible to play without the full 88 keys by moving it up or down an octave, it may not actually sound any good at that point.

The lowest and highest octaves have very distinctive sounds about them, and notes written in those ranges are generally written there specifically for this reason.

I would suggest that going beyond just one of these boundaries makes playing the piece 'properly' on a piano impossible, even if not technically so.

John Corigliano , Etude-Fantasy and Concerto for Piano and Orchestra both use a huge range of the instrument.

Also Fredric Rzewski piano piece

#4 (from Four Piano Pieces) starts on the B one note from the top of a full-scale piano and uses the lowest A on the piano.

(I have had to "recompose" the piece on the fly when presented at the last moment with a Bechstein whose highest note is the A below the intended starting B)

Question: I’m wondering if there is a piano composition that uses notes from subcontra octave (C 0 ) and five-lined octave (C 8 ) at the same time?  In other words, is there any song there is no way to play without a keyboard that has 88 keys?

Are there any compositions for piano that are impossible to play without a full-range keyboard?

Shostakovich 1st, Olivier Messiaen's piano compositions and Ligeti's thirteenth piano étude "L'escalier du diable"  or devil's staircase, use the full range of the keyboard.

There are some piano compositions that use the full range of the keyboard. Some of these include Ligeti's thirteenth piano étude "L'escalier du diable", Shostakovich 1st and Olivier Messiaen's compositions.


It's a trick that's been around for ages, with many variations - I've even heard that the use of certain bodily fluids gives good results, but it isn't something I'm about to try.

The main reason to do this is to save money, but you should ask yourself whether the savings are worth it.

It's generally a better idea to keep your strings in good shape - wiping them clean of grime and sweat after playing and giving them a rubdown with string-cleaner every now and again.

Boiling is a short-term remedy and if you've been taking care of your strings on a regular basis, by the time it becomes an option, you really should think about changing them.

The key drawback of boiling is that you must take the strings off and put them on again - which, unfortunately, exposes them to certain risks.

For a start, once they've been wound onto the tuning pegs, the wire is permanently disfigured.

This isn't a problem as long as they remain wound on, but removing them and putting them back on may make it a factor in tuning, consistent string vibration and overall strength - bend and straighten a wire too many times and it breaks.

You can take care in putting the strings back on again in order to achieve an near-identical string position as originally, however, it's likely that you will end up with some inconsistency.

String tension will take care of it to an extent, but the string won't perform as well as when it was originally put on.

With wound strings, an additional problem might be distortion of the windings for the exact same reason.

My suggestion would be to resort to boiling only when left with no other option.

It really shouldn't be seen as a standard method of extending string life.

I used to do this with bass strings, and it does make a difference.

They'll brighten up and sound like new, but not for as long as they did right out of the package.

It's a bit of a pain, though, because of course to remove the strings, you have to fully unwind them rather than simply cut them, so it takes longer.

I wouldn't try this with guitar strings, mostly because the marginal cost savings doesn't seem worth it.

Also, I'm not sure if it would make much difference with plain strings---the idea behind boiling is that it clears out dead skin stuck between the windings, which of course plain strings don't have.

I wouldn't worry about boiling, etc unless absolutely necessary due to very limited finances.

Because out of all honesty, nothing sounds like a new fresh set of strings!

For some reason, when I put a new set of guitar or bass strings (roundwound) on, I only get about 2 sets worth (1.5 hours) of playing and they are dead!

I tried all brands and none lasted any longer than the D"Adarrio's.

I definately have a body chemical issue!

I played Bass in a hard rock band for 20 years, and I did boil each set of strings between each gig

and it did work.

Ocassinally, they would last longer after boiling and then rubbing alcohol wiping then

when new?

Nobody ever let me touch their bass because they knew what I would do to their strings....

Don't boil old strings; once they're gone they're gone.

I boil my new set right out of the package, it makes them softer and more pliable.

That's an old John Entwisle trick, it works.

Question: I've read that some people boil their strings from time to time to make them sound again like they were new (and save some money).  Is this really worthwhile, or are there any disadvantages to this?

Boiling/washing used guitar/bass strings - is it worthwhile?

S3: Boiling is a short-term remedy and if you've been taking care of your strings on a regular basis, by the time it becomes an option, you really should think about changing them.  Boiling is recommended only as a last resort. The general consensus is do not boil strings, buy new ones.

Some people claim that boiling old strings is worthwhile and gives good results, although only in the short term. Other say it is Not worthwhile unless you have limited finances - Once they're gone, they're gone!

Not worthwhile unless you have limited finances.