Posted by Rick Denney on February 27, 2001 at 11:59:22:
In Reply to: Didjeridus posted by Lew on February 26, 2001 at 18:16:53:
When I was in Queensland last October, I play-tested about a dozen of them, and listened to several players of different stylistic persuasions demonstrate them. In the end, I didn't buy one, and I'm glad I didn't.
First, to correct some notions of how they are made. They are the root of a eucalyptus tree which has been hollowed out by termites. That leaves a longitudinal "rifling" in the bore and creates a conical profile. The bell is formed by the ball of the root. These roots are above ground, being parts of a tree that is native to a tropical rain forest, and they flair into a ball at ground level. The ball is cut in half, leaving only the flare, to create a sort of a bell. The mouthpiece is a wax ring formed around the edge of narrow end, and it plays hell with my beard. The length varies, but they all ranged from 4 feet to about 6 feet long, and from less than three inches to more than six inches in diameter upstream fron the bell.
The players I heard did not play any harmonic other than the fundamental using a buzz. But standard technique requires multiphonic vocalization, with the objective of creating high-frequency difference tones that are then controlled. It's damn hard to do at all, let alone to do well. And, yes, circular breathing was a standard technique. All the aboriginal players I heard played softly to minimize air movement, and only the white players got real energetic with the instrument. Finesse seems to be an important part of the instrument.
If anyone wants a real didgeridoo, let me know. I think I still have the business card of the fellow in Kuranda who had the best selection, and I'll try to find it if there's interest.
Rick "who might have bought one but didn't really like the music" Denney