Chapter
3.3: The Kantele Traditions of
by
Carl Rahkonen © 1989 All Rights Reserved Back to Table
of Contents
Any
use of this material should contain a proper reference to this site.
MODERN KANTELES
The modern form of the kantele
incorporates the reverse-curve shape found in other large western string
instruments, such as the piano or harp.
Modern kanteles are in the same basic shape as concert grand pianos,
only much smaller. A second important
feature is that some modern kanteles have a quick tuning machine which makes it
possible to change to different keys quickly.
The Finns call modern kanteles by a number of different names. If it has no tuning machine, it may be called
a "home kantele" [kotikantele] or "school kantele"
[koulukantele]. With a tuning machine it
may be called a "machine kantele" [koneistokantele] or "concert
kantele" and some even call it a "chromatic kantele", though it
is still basically a diatonic instrument, but one which can be retuned
quickly. I use the term "modern
kantele" to describe any kantele with the reverse-curve shape, and
"machine kantele" for those with the additional quick tuning
machine. The reverse-curve shape of the
modern kantele was adopted gradually by builders beginning in the 1920s and
today it is the standard shape for large kanteles. It can be traced to the influence of a single
individual ‑‑ Paul Salminen.
Paul Benjam Salminen (1887‑1949)
was born in
Salminen wanted his kantele to be
the culmination of kantele form, designed specifically for playing art
music. That meant, first of all, that it
had to sound resonant and pure in its tone, but still have certain qualities
which are unique to the kantele, so that it would be sufficiently different
from piano, harp, or any other western art music instrument. It had to have an even timbre and volume
throughout its range. This could only be
achieved by controlling precisely the ratios between the length and the
thickness or weight of the strings, which is believed to have led to the use of
the reverse-curve shape.
A second aspect was that there had
to be a way to damp (silence) the strings, serving the same function in art
music performance as releasing the sustaining pedal on a piano. This was done by adding a hinged board over
the strings with a padded felt piece underneath which, when pressed down, would
damp all of the strings simultaneously. Most importantly of all, there had to be a
way to overcome the greatest limitation of the box kantele, namely, that it was
a strictly diatonic instrument. Box
kanteles were not capable of playing music which changed in key or had
accidentals.
Illus.
27. Modern kantele with a tuning
machine. (Sketch based on an instrument build by Oiva Heikkilä, housed at the
Illus.
28. Modern kantele without a tuning
machine as adapted for folk use. (Sketch
based on an instrument built by Jussi Ala-Kuha, housed at the Folk Music
Institute, Kaustinen).
Salminen believed that the solution
was to build a machine which would very quickly at the turn of a lever retune a
given pitch up or down a half step. The
machine would have eight levers; one for each of the diatonic scale degrees. By pushing a lever forward, all the strings
of that diatonic pitch would be raised by a half‑step. For example, if the first lever controlled
the C pitches, when moved forward, all five of the C strings on the instrument
would change to C#. The lever could be
returned to the vertical position at any time to lower the pitch of all five C
strings back to a C. Likewise the lever
could be pulled back one position further, which would lower all the C strings
to Cb (B ). The tuning levers for each
set of diatonic strings work the same way.
The retuning, which could be done even during the act of playing, would
account for most changes in key or accidentals, while generally leaving the
tuning of the strings diatonic.
Salminen patented his first kantele
with a tuning machine in August 1920, which has been called his "spindle
kantele." [1] It worked on a
system where three separate lengths of string were attached to spindles. One string was tuned to the natural, the
second a half step higher and the third a half step lower. When the spindles were in normal position,
the natural pitched strings were on top, forming a plane on which the
instrument was played. If the player
wished to raise a pitch, he pushed a lever forward, which rotated the spindles
in all octaves for that pitch a quarter turn.
This would bring the shorter length string, tuned a half step higher,
into playing position. If a lever was
pulled in the opposite direction, it would bring the lower pitched strings into
playing position (Illus. 29).
The sketch for the patent
application shows eighteen spindles, meaning that a total of 54 strings were
used. But according to Sulo Huotari, who
saw a prototype, the kantele was much larger, having 35 spindles, with
Illus.
29. Drawing from Paul Salminen's
"spindle kantele" patent on August 24, 1920 (No. 8748). From the Finnish National Patent Office,
Helsinki.
105
strings (35 sets of three string each). [2]
The sketch shows a box kantele with the tip cut off, but a photograph of
this kind of kantele shows that it had a reverse‑curve shaped body
(Illus. 30).
The spindle kantele was large and
heavy in order to withstand the great tension of the strings and the tuning
machine was awkward and difficult to use.
Salminen sold the rights to the spindle kantele patent in December 1921
to the Hellas Piano Corporation, which apparently intended to manufacture the
instrument. As part of the payment for
his patent, Salminen received instruction in how to tune pianos. This was significant, since he again
experimented with developing a tuning machine, but this time based on the
principle of string tension.
Illus.
30. Photograph of Paul Salminen with his
"spindle kantele" taken in the early 1920s, compliments of Jorma
Salminen.
Salminen's second patent for a
kantele tuning machine was filed in July 1925, which laid out the basic
principles by which machine kanteles are still built today. The machine had seven spindles attached
perpendicularly to the strings at the end of the instrument. To each spindle
were attached the diatonic strings of a given pitch in all octaves. As a lever was pushed forward the spindle
would rotate slightly, increasing the tension of all the strings attached to it
and raising their pitch by a half step.
Moving a lever in the opposite direction would reduce the tension and
lower the pitch of all the strings.
With the new tuning machine,
Salminen had to solve an extremely complex technical problem -- that of keeping
all the strings in tune with each other, while changing the tension on the
instrument by retuning some of them. The
solution required a great deal of study, experimentation and work. He had to take into account the changes in
stress on the body of the instrument which would affect the overall tuning as a
change in tension took place. An equal
tempered tuning did not work, because when any of the pitches were raised, the
tempered pitches would drop slightly and vice versa. He had to develop an entirely new system of
tempering the tuning, which would work with the tuning machine. In spite of the great difficulties, he was
able to make the system work.
Although the tuning machine was the
only improvement specifically mentioned in the patent applications, Salminen
added several other structural and functional features to the kantele. All of Salminen's kanteles used the reverse‑curve
shape and were thus known for having an even timbre and tone quality across the
entire range of the instrument. The
biggest improvement over box kanteles was in the sound of the bass strings. Next to each tuning pin he added a second
smaller pin around which the string ran, which helped make the sound
clearer. He added marks on the sound
board to show the position of the tonic and dominant strings, usually a red or
white mark for the tonic and a black mark for the dominant. Finally, Salminen's kanteles were equipped
with a damping board, which would silence all the strings simultaneously.
At the same time, Salminen retained
specific characteristics dating all the way back to carved kanteles. The basic tuning of the strings was diatonic,
though they could be retuned quickly enough to account for key changes and most
accidentals. The strings were all
arranged in a single plane. Most
significantly, the strings passed from the tuning pins, around the positioning
pins and to the hitch pins at the end of the instrument without passing over
a bridge. This retained an important
part of the kantele sound
--
a natural vibrato -- which is praised by folk and art musicians alike. The vibrato is believed to be caused by the
loop attaching a string to its hitch pin.
Salminen experimented with various sizes and shapes of loops, settling
on one which he felt provided a sufficient vibrato (Huotari 1984b).
It is not certain how Salminen came
up with the idea for the reverse‑curve shape. The drawings accompanying his patent
applications all show straight‑sided box kanteles, but even the oldest of
Salminen's
Illus.
31. Drawing from Paul Salminen's second
kantele patent on July 11, 1925 (No. 11483).
From the Finnish National Patent Office, Helsinki.
Illus.
32. A modern kantele with the damping
board lifted open showing the tuning machine. (Built by Oiva Heikkilä, housed
at the Sibelius Academy).
prototypes
used the reverse-curve shape. Some
believe that he borrowed this shape directly from the orchestral harp or grand
piano. Erkki Ala‑Könni has written
that he made precise calculations of the lengths and thicknesses of the strings
(1983:16). From these calculations he
may have drawn the reverse-curve shape. Paul
Salminen's son, Jorma, mentioned that Paul read in a Finnish newspaper about an
advanced kantele and eventually received drawings of the instrument (Salminen,
Jorma 1984:5), though it is not certain what shape this kantele had. A final possibility is that since Salminen
was from St. Petersburg, he may have seen a variety of Russian gusli which used
the reverse-curve shape. A drawing of
this kind of gusli may be found among the papers of A. O. Väisänen (Illus. 33).
Illus.
33. Sketch of a Russian Gusli by A. O.
Väisänen, from his papers at the Finnish Literature Society.
It is equally uncertain how Salminen
developed the damping board. Most box
kanteles have a board which covers the area where the strings are attached at
the end of the instrument. The board was
usually fastened down by two screws and it was removed in order to change a
broken string. On square‑ended box
kanteles this board made a smooth transition from ponsi to strings, providing a
place to rest one of the forearms.
Perhaps this covering board provided a starting point for the damping
board. It is a small step to extend this
board slightly, attach it with hinges rather than screws, then add padding
underneath and a spring to hold it at the proper height, thus forming a fully
functioning damping board. I was not
able to find any box kanteles which had a fully developed damping board, except
a few special ones made after the time of the modern kantele.
Some believe that Salminen borrowed
the idea for the tuning machine from the modern orchestral harp, since the
basic principle is the same, however the actual technical means to accomplish
the retuning is different. The machine
of a harp retunes the strings by changing their length, while the
kantele machine retunes by changing the tension of the strings. It is believed that Salminen repaired
orchestral harps, but only after he had developed the kantele tuning
machine. He was familiar with the harp
mechanism but chose to keep the system he had developed.
The metal parts of the tuning machines
were prepared by Salminen himself.[3] He
nickel plated each of the metal parts and assembled the machines which required
great precision in order to operate correctly.
He purchased raw steel string through the Fazer Music Store which he
used to make his own strings. Among the
specialized tools he acquired was a lathe and a machine for wrapping bass
strings. The bass strings were made with
a layer of silk between a central steel string and a fine silver wrapping. The weight and thickness of the bass strings
was determined by the thicknesses of the outer layers. After turning in the tuning pins and
attaching the strings, it took a great deal of time to make the fine
adjustments necessary to be sure that the tuning machine worked properly (Salminen, Jorma 1983?:[2]; Huotari 1984a:9). The total time invested was between 220 and
500 hours for each instrument!
Salminen's tuning machines underwent some
improvements over time. The earliest
ones had the tuning levers on the bass side of the instrument and levers were
harder to turn. In later models, he
moved the levers to the treble side and added "helper springs" which
made the operation of the tuning machine lighter and faster.
In addition to inventing and
building the machine kantele, Paul Salminen played a central role in developing
the techniques used in its playing and in promoting its use around
Finland. The machine kantele required
special training in moving the levers of the tuning machine while playing, use
of the damping board and a finger technique more compatible with art
music. Salminen and his wife Ida held
recitals where she would sing and he would accompany on the kantele. He wrote method books and arranged a great
deal of music for the machine kantele and taught dozens of private students,
many of whom went on to become outstanding players and teachers themselves.
That a design for a kantele was
patented signifies something important.
It is no longer a folk artifact, a one of a kind instrument used by the
builder himself, it has become a commercial product to be manufactured,
distributed and sold. But Salminen's
kanteles were never manufactured. They
were still made by hand and not in great quantities. Paul Salminen assembled and sold only one
hundred one machine kanteles from 1925 to 1949.
He kept a detailed notebook which recorded the history of each
instrument, when and to whom it was sold, the amount of time used in making it,
the price, and any other distinctions.
The notebook, together with detailed drawings, photographs and other
important documentation, is in the possession of Paul's son, Jorma Salminen.
It is important to note that
Salminen concentrated his work on the difficult tasks of assembling the tuning
machines, adding the strings and adjusting the instruments. He commissioned various carpenters to build
the bodies for the instruments from exact drawings he would provide. The first of these was Efraim Kilpinen in
Kalajoki. Somehow, the dimensions were
misunderstood and the kantele which resulted was many times larger than
expected (Ala‑Könni 1983:16; Salminen, Jorma 1984:5). The earlier Salminen kantele bodies (from
1925 to 1938) were built by a carpenter named Lepistö and another named
Karvinen, both from around Helsinki.
From 1938 until Salminen's death in 1949, most of the kantele bodies
were built by the master craftsman Armas J. Koivisto (Ala‑Könni 1983:16).
Armas Jaakko Koivisto (1885‑1967)
was born in Kuopio in the Savo area of Finland.
Like Salminen, Koivisto's father was Ingrian and his mother Finnish. Koivisto attended trade school and became a
master carpenter, building kanteles on the side. He made and sold some square-ended box
kanteles, with 22 to 30 strings, through the Binneman Music Store in
Helsinki. He experimented with various
types of wood, making the bodies from pine, birch or alder, and the sounding
boards from spruce or pine (Koivisto 1962:4/3‑4)
Salminen contacted Koivisto around
1936 to build a body for a machine kantele.
Salminen provided the drawings, but said he was not completely satisfied
with the previous bodies. So Koivisto
experimented, made some slight changes, and built one body out of pine. The kantele which resulted was particularly
good, so Koivisto continued to receive orders until Salminen's death in 1949
(ibid:4/8‑9). During those years
Koivisto worked for the Heinola Saw Mill (Huoari 1986), where he was able to
select the most ideal pieces of wood for kantele building. Koivisto was a particularly talented
carpenter who took pride in accomplishing difficult tasks, such as circular
inlays around the kantele sound hole. He
was also well known for his artistic wood carvings and some of his kanteles
feature carved pictures.
In addition to those kanteles made
on commission, many individual builders had agreements with Salminen to acquire
a machine kantele by building the body themselves according to specifications,
then having Salminen add the tuning machine.
Perhaps the most well‑known of these was Leander Laasanen, who
built the body for #83 in 1944. Another
who wished to get a machine kantele this way was Sulo Huotari.
Sulo Huotari (b. 1920) is a master
craftsman who became interested in the machine kantele, so in 1948 went to
visit Paul Salminen at his home in Helsinki.
Huotari asked about the possibility of building the body for the kantele
himself and having Salminen add a tuning machine, but the cost at the time was
prohibitive. Salminen did not want
anyone else to assemble or adjust the tuning machine, explaining that it was
complex process and certainly would not turn out right on the first try. When Huotari again tried to contact Salminen
in 1951, Ida Salminen informed him that Paul had passed away, but that there
were five wooden bodies which had been built by Armas Koivisto and parts for
one tuning machine left over. Huotari
purchased the machine parts and one of the bodies from Salminen's widow
(Huotari 1984a; 1986a).
The tuning machine had only the
axles and the bearings on which the axles turned. All the small parts were missing. Huotari did not attempt to assemble it since
he did not have the necessary measurements for the missing parts. Some time went by before one of Salminen's
former students contacted Huotari about making some minor repairs and adjustments
to her machine kantele. Ida Salminen had
referred the girl to Huotari. He
completed the necessary repairs and at the same time took the measurements for
the missing parts. In this way he began
a part‑time career as a machine kantele builder.
At the time, Huotari was working as
the foreman in a textile weaving factory.
He had access to a good metal shop where he could prepare the metal
parts and do experiments on machine kanteles.
Even though he had the measurements, it was necessary to build many
models before the machine worked properly.
He particularly studied how changes in stress affected the overall
tuning of the kantele. After a great
deal of experimentation, he solved the problems and completed his own machine
kantele.
After Paul Salminen's death there
was a great need for someone to continue making machine kanteles. Ida Salminen still received requests for
machine kanteles, which she now referred to Huotari. In return, Huotari paid a percentage of the
kantele price to Ida. Just as Salminen,
Huotari concentrated on making the tuning machines and commissioned other
carpenters to build the bodies. The
remaining bodies made by Armas Koivisto in Ida Salminen's possession were made
into machine kanteles. Among others who
built bodies for Huotari's machine kanteles was the master kantele builder from
Veteli in the Perho River Valley, Oiva Heikkilä. Huotari built a total of thirty‑one
machine kanteles from 1952 until 1963, when illness forced him to stop. After Huotari stopped building machine
kanteles, he sold the materials he had concerning the measurements, drawings,
directions for building and adjusting the machines, and the way in which the
kanteles should be tuned to Oiva Heikkilä, who began to make his own machine
kanteles in 1968 (Huotari 1985:6).
Huotari is still widely recognized in Finland as an expert, especially
on the mechanics of building the tuning machine.
Oiva Heikkilä (1913‑1979)
became one of the few professional kantele builders ever seen in Finland. His father, Viljami Oskari Heikkilä, built
both round‑ended and square‑ended box kanteles, some of which were
decorated with a lyre in the sound hole.
They ordered the strings and tuning pins from the Fazer Music Store
Catalog, where they saw a picture of the kantele developed by Paul Salminen. Based on the picture, they started to build
experimental kanteles with a reverse‑curve shape (Heikkilä 1975:10).
Heikkilä received formal training as
a carpenter, which included kantele building.
Before World War II, he built and sold kanteles to the Westerlund Music
Store and to individuals in the Perho River Valley. After the War, it was difficult to build
kanteles since the metal parts, tuning pins and strings, were hard to get. In spite of this, he started building three
varieties of kanteles. The first two varieties
were straight‑sided box kanteles, one with 28 strings and pointed tip,
and the other a 32 string model with a cut‑off tip. The third variety was a 36 string kantele
with a reverse‑curve tuning pin side and a round end, based on Paul
Salminen's machine kantele (Ibid:11).
In the mid‑1960s, Heikkilä
moved to Nurmijärvi and soon thereafter to Tikkurila near Helsinki. He worked for a short time making kanteles
for the Hellas Piano Corporation, but soon established his own shop and sold
kanteles to music stores as well as individuals. By the late 1960s, he began building machine
kanteles and was one of the first to build both the wooden bodies as well as
assemble and adjust the tuning machines.
For most of his machine and other large kanteles, Heikkilä adopted a
feature invented by Pasi Jääskeläinen: that of having a "middle
bottom" halfway between the top and bottom. This made his kanteles sound even and
refined, making them particularly good for art music performance.
Oiva Heikkilä was helped throughout
the years by his sons, especially Ossi, who today continues building kanteles
under the Heikkilä name. Ossi builds the
wooden bodies, and assembles and adjusts the machines. One of his brothers does the finishing work,
staining and coloring of the bodies, and another brother does the metal work
for the machines. Ossi estimates that
the Heikkiläs have built approximately one hundred fifty machine kanteles, over
three thousand other large kanteles (32 or 36 string models), seventy 25‑string
"school" kanteles, two‑hundred 9‑strings models and over
a thousand 5‑string models (Heikkilä 1986). Heikkilä kanteles are probably the most well‑known
and widely played kanteles in Finland today.
Another noted machine kantele
builder is Otto Koistinen (b. 1925) of Joensuu in Finnish Karelia. He has been making kanteles since the mid
1950s and began building his own model of machine kantele in the mid
1960s. The machine he developed has a
unique design in that the tuning levers are positioned at the end of the instrument,
halfway between the long and short side.
Koistinen has built some of the machines, but has generally contracted
this work out to metal workers. He
builds the bodies, and assembles and adjusts the machines. As of 1975, Koistinen estimated that he had
built between three and four hundred large kanteles, most of which without the
tuning machine (Koistinen 1975: 48‑49).
According to Sulo Huotari, Koistinen's machine kanteles are tuned closer
to equal temperament and this brings about a difference in intonation when
played with machine kanteles by other builders (Huotari 1985:5)
Koistinen's kanteles do not have a
"middle bottom" and thus are noted for having a bright tone, which is
favored by folk musicians and some art musicians, particularly those who come
from around Joensuu. His kanteles have
become well known throughout Finland, since they have been played by the Finn‑Kantele
group, which began in Joensuu and later moved to Lahti and by Koistinen's
daughter, Ritva, who is a noted master kantele player.
In the 1980s several other craftsmen
began building machine kanteles. Erkki
Leskelä from Ylikiiminkki in northern Ostrobothnia has become a successful
professional builder. His machines
feature a fourth position, which raises the pitch an additional half step
beyond standard tuning machines. Jussi
Ala‑Kuha, who is employed by the Instrument Workshop at Kaustinen has
developed his own model of machine kantele.
Others who have built successful models are Arto Matto in Läppenranta,
Keijo Planman in Vantaa and Pekka Lovikka in Ylitornio. The young master instrument builder Jyrkki
Pölkki from Kintaus, an expert on the physics of vibrating strings (see Pölkki
1983), has experimented with a tuning machine which shortens the length of the
string, like a concert harp, rather than changing the tension.
Although machine kanteles represent
an important development, they make up only a small percentage of the modern
kanteles built in Finland. Machine
kanteles are relatively difficult to build and are expensive. In order to have the tuning machine operate
as it should, it requires extremely exact work followed by many hours of fine
adjustments. A player typically will
have to wait a year or more for it to be built and it will cost in the
neighborhood of 10,000 FM (about $2500).
In many applications, such as for the beginner or in playing folk music,
the machine is unnecessary. Most kantele
players, both art and folk musicians, prefer the advantages of the reverse‑curve
shaped instrument, because its sound is even across the entire range. So there is a great demand for the modern
kantele without the tuning machine, or with other less expensive and less
complex kinds of tuners. A majority of
modern kanteles fit into this category.
Paul Salminen is also credited with
inventing a simple tuning mechanism, attached to individual strings between the
tuning pin and positioning pin (Salminen, Jorma [1983]:[3]). This kind of tuner has a small lever which
rotates on a shaft. The shaft has a cam
which presses against the string itself.
As the lever is moved in one direction, the cam increases the tension of
the string enough to raise it approximately a half step. As the lever is moved back, it allows the
string to return to its original tuning.
While the lever of a machine kantele can change a given pitch in all
octaves by as much as a full step, both up and down a half step, the individual
string tuner can only change the pitch of one string by a half step, either up
or down, but not both.
These kinds of individual string
tuners are not found on each string since the space required for clearance will
not allow it. They are typically found
only on the strings which require the most retuning. For example, on a diatonic kantele tuned in C
major, the most frequently found tuners will be on the G strings. This facilitates the tuning of G#, which provides the leading tone for the
relative minor key of A minor. The next
most frequent individual tuners will be on the F strings, to provide the F#
necessary when playing in the dominant of the C major tuning, G major. The third most frequent tuners are on the C
strings, providing the leading tone for D major or D minor, or on the D
strings, providing the leading tone for E minor. I have not seen any kanteles with more than
three sets of individual string tuners, though it is possible that some exist.
There are certain disadvantages
which come with individual string tuners.
First, they do not always work well.
Often their use does not quite tune the string as accurately as would be
needed for first rate concert performance.
A second drawback is that they cause a great deal of wear on the
strings, which causes more frequent string or tuning pin failure.
The advantages are that they can be
easily installed (or removed) and they are relatively inexpensive. Such a kantele will cost in the neighborhood
of 3000 FM (about $750) or about one third the price of a machine kantele. The tone quality is virtually the same, only
the convenience and the repertoire playable on such an instrument is
limited. It therefore provides an
alternative for the beginner or intermediate art musician.
Some kantele builders and players
feel that the modern kantele has not completed its development, specifically
for art music performance, since there are several problems to be
overcome. The machine kantele is
difficult to build and therefore relatively expensive. Even with the advantages of a tuning machine,
the modern kantele is still basically a diatonic instrument, which limits the
repertoire some-what. In addition, many
players have mentioned interference from noise, which comes when moving the
levers to change keys or while using the damping board. This noise can have a devastating effect in
the recording studio. In order to change
keys or play an accidental, the player has to lift a hand from the strings to
move a lever. Some players have
suggested that the modern kantele be improved by substituting foot pedals for
the levers, so that both hands can remain on the strings when a change takes
place. Finally, the modern kantele still
has a relatively weak carrying power and its sound frequently gets covered when
played with other western instruments.
Many players have begun using contact microphones and amplifiers, but
then the original timbre of the kantele is changed.
The
Modern Karelian Kantele
As a possible solution to some of
the problems with the machine kantele, there has been a recent and significant movement
in Finland to use chromatically tuned kanteles similar to those played in
Soviet Karelia. This movement has been
brought about largely through the efforts of a single individual, Kari Dahlblom
(b. 1955), who lives in Tikkakoski in Central Finland. Kari is a master kantele player, who won the
Finnish art style playing competition in 1982.
By profession he works for the Finnish Army as, among other things, a
translator of Russian. Kari has been
interested for many years in Russian music and is also an outstanding dombra
and gusli player, as well as a collector and player of various types of Finnish
and Russian folk instruments. Dahlblom
became interested in Soviet Karelian kanteles after hearing the professional
kantele ensemble from Petrozavodsk perform in Finland.
The kanteles they play are based on
models first developed in the 1930s by Viktor Gudkov, with the playing of art
music specifically in mind. They are fully chromatic instruments with the
strings arranged in two separate planes, the upper plane having diatonic
pitches and the lower plane, chromatic pitches.
Gudkov established the first Karelian kantele ensembles and made the
earliest arrangements of written music.
Illus.
34. Modern Karelian style chromatic
kantele built by Heikki Linjama, Tikkakoski.
Dahlblom wanted to learn to play the
instrument, but was unable to acquire one.
In 1983, Hanna Pirhonen, a former member of the Petrozavodsk kantele
ensemble, immigrated to Finland from Soviet Karelia. She provided her alto kantele as a model and,
at Kari Dahlblom's request, an instrument builder in Tikkakoski, Heikki
Linjama, began building the first Finnish versions of the instrument. As of mid 1986, Linjama had built just over
thirty Karelian kanteles. Dahlblom also
commissioned the master instrument builder Jyrkki Pölkki to build this kind of
kantele.
The Karelian kantele has certain
advantages as well as disadvantages compared to the Finnish machine
kantele. It is a comparatively simple
instrument to build and is therefore relatively inexpensive. There are no problems with moving tuning
levers or with their noise. Almost all
western art music can be played on the Karelian kantele, since even highly
chromatic passages, while difficult, are still possible. As part of its structure, the Karelian
kantele has a bridge near the end of the instrument and thus has a louder sound
than Finnish kanteles. It blends well
with other instruments and can still be heard over instrumental accompaniment.
Because of the bridge, the Karelian
kantele has a different timbre than Finnish kanteles. It lacks the brightness and the natural
vibrato praised by Finnish players. The
timbre is more "civilized"; closer to that of the concert harp.
Being fully chromatic instruments,
Karelian kanteles have a more limited range than modern Finnish kanteles. To overcome this lack in range, they are
normally played in ensembles with matched sets of different sizes. In the Petrozavodsk ensemble they play three
different sizes: prima, alto and bass.
So far, Heikki Linjama has developed his own soprano and alto
models. Because the range of these
instruments is only around three octaves, they do not need the reverse‑curve
shape and have straight sides.
Modern Finnish kanteles and Karelian
kanteles are suited to different purposes.
An analogy may be made in comparing the violin and piano. The violin is more of an ensemble instrument,
even though it can be used in playing unaccompanied solos. The piano has the ability to play both the
melody and accompaniment and is therefore more of a solo instrument. An ensemble made up of several pianos would
sound muddled. The Karelian kanteles are
more like the violin; the modern Finnish kanteles more like the piano in this
regard. For this reason, the Karelian
kantele would be a nice supplement, played together with and in addition to the
modern Finnish kanteles.
The
Modern Kantele and the Folk Builder
Even though the modern kantele was
invented as an art music instrument, it never ceased being a folk instrument as
well. Folk builders began adopting the
reverse‑curve shape of Salminen's machine kantele soon after its
invention. They learned of Salminen's
innovations in various ways. Some were
directly involved in building kantele bodies for Salminen, such as Armas
Koivisto. Others, like Oiva Heikkilä,
saw Salminen's kantele pictured in the Fazer Music Store Catalog and began
experimenting with the new shape.
Whether or not the reverse‑curve shape was absolutely necessary
for the performance of folk music, it was perceived as being superior, since it
was associated with a "developed" kantele. By the 1950s, the box kantele passed into
oblivion, as virtually all kantele builders used the reverse‑curve shape.
Many folk builders began
experimenting with the modern kantele due to the strong influence of
fashion. The reverse‑curve shape
brought some acoustical advantages, in that the range of the instrument could
be extended and still sound good, but many of the other conventions of the
modern kantele were either unnecessary, or in some cases hindered folk music
performance. Box kanteles differed from
modern kanteles in several ways. Some of
the differences were explained to me by the master instrument builder, Rauno
Nieminen.
According to Nieminen, the history of
all western string instruments has been characterized by an overall rise in
pitch with a corresponding rise in string tension. New instruments had to be designed to
withstand higher string tensions than the older instruments. The development of new instruments which
could cope with greater string tension can be seen in the history of violin and
piano, and a similar development affected the kantele.
Newer kanteles are tuned to a higher
overall pitch level than older kanteles and are built to withstand far greater
string tensions than the older ones.
This was discovered when the instrument builders at Kaustinen wanted to
build box kanteles according to shapes and patterns which had not been used for
some sixty years. When they originally
built some of these present day box kanteles, they were amazed to find that
their tone and playing response was very similar to the modern kantele. They had built them with strong internal
bracing, similar to that found in the modern kantele. It was not until they began taking old
instruments apart, to repair and restore them, that they discovered the
internal bracing of old box kantele was really quite minimal. If such instruments were tuned up to today's
standard pitches, they would sound strained and might not be able to withstand
the tension. When these instruments are
tuned at a lower level, a truer picture begins to emerge as to how these
instruments sounded and responded. The
box kanteles had a bright, sharp attack followed by a rapid decay in
volume. More modern kanteles, some of
which have middle bottom and all of which have a great deal more bracing to
drive the sound, have a smoother attack and the sound is sustained for a
greater period of time.
These differences in the acoustical
properties of the instruments actually favor one style of playing, art or folk,
over the other. For example, in folk
playing, overall damping is not used.
With an old kantele damping was largely unnecessary because all strings
would have a quick decay. Also, a
bright, clear, sharp attack is favored by folk musicians because much of the
music played is dance music and strong attack is necessary for the rhythmic
accompaniment of the instrument to be heard.
Folk playing is usually done on the hardest portion of the fingertip, just
before the fingernail, which increases the attack even further.
Art music, on the other hand, favors
a smooth, rounded tone. The instrument
is played with the softest, fleshiest part of the fingers. Blending of the tones in chords is important
with art music, therefore art musicians favor an instrument with a smooth
attack and a long decay. At the same
time, an instrument with a long decay requires some form of damping, otherwise
an unacceptably muddy sound will result.
Thus the structure of the modern kantele included a damping board as an
integral part.
When folk builders began making
modern kanteles, they also included the damping board, even though it served no
function in folk music performance. In
some cases the it was rendered non‑functional by placing a screw beneath
it, so that it could be lifted easily to change the strings if they broke, but
it could not be pressed to damp the strings.
In other cases the folk musicians would simply lift open the damping
board and leave it open while playing.
Many folk builders also included the marks under the strings showing the
position of the tonic and dominant strings, even though folk playing is usually
accomplished more by feel and by listening than looking for the marks.
While folk builders adopted the
conventions of the reverse‑curve shape, damping board, and marks under
the strings, they shunned the use of mechanical tuners. Since most traditional kantele music can be
played in a single diatonic tuning, folk musicians prefer to build and play
modern kanteles with no mechanical tuners at all. It is generally believed that the skill of
the folk musician lies in gaining the maximum potential from a strictly
diatonic instrument.
The best folk builders, especially
from the Perho River Valley, have been able to use the advantages of the
reverse-curve shape to the fullest and still produce instruments specially
suited for folk music performance. Such
kanteles appear on the outside very much like typical modern art music
kanteles, but there are differences.
They have a brighter timbre, sharper attack and softer decay than art
music kanteles. An additional feature on
many of these kanteles is the so‑called "lowered basses." The three lowest strings are tuned to
contrabass dominant, subdominant and tonic pitches, and the three next lowest
strings one octave higher. For example,
if the kantele were tuned in C major, the six lowest strings would be tuned (in
descending order) c, G, F, C, G1, F1. The six lowest strings provide a bass octave
in three strings, and a contrabass octave in three strings, which are used to
produce a bass rhythm in dance accompaniments.
The overall range of these kanteles can be up to almost six octaves,
depending on the number of diatonic strings, which is variable.
The most favored kanteles among folk
musicians, especially those from the Perho River Valley, are those built by
Leander Laasanen (1892‑1985). Like
the famous kantele builder from Kalajoki, Efraim Kilpinen, Laasanen began his
professional career as a ski maker.
Although he built more than four hundred kanteles, he considered it
primarily a hobby. He had contact with
many of the best players in the Perho River Valley and became a fine player
himself. The Laasanen family playing
tradition lives on with his children and grandchildren, all of whom play
kanteles he built.
Laasanen began by building
straight-sided box kanteles, but over the years he experimented greatly with
the structure of the kantele and the types of woods used.
[In
the beginning, I built those straight sided instruments. All the time I tried to build kanteles which
satisfied their users. Improvements always came through experimentation and
development, for example I eventually came upon the right kinds of wood]
(Laasanen 1975:47).
In
the late 1940s, he began building reverse‑curve shaped kanteles based on
Paul Salminen's machine kantele. He
experimented with the shape, as evidenced by some existing models which look
like round‑ended box kanteles, but with a reverse-curve tuning pin side
(Illus. 35).
Laasanen perfected and adapted the
modern kantele shape specifically for folk music performance. From 1947 on he numbered these kanteles
Illus.
35. A round-ended box kantele with a
reverse-curved tuning pin side built by Leander Laasanen. (Sketch by Rauno
Nieminen, 1983).
which
have the same basic size, shape and range as machine kanteles, but no tuning
mechanisms. They are thought of as being
among the very best kanteles ever built for playing folk music and are in great
demand among folk performers. For
example, the master folk kantele player Viljo Karvonen from Halsua has built at
least thirty kanteles himself, which were all fine instruments, but the kantele
he prizes the most was built by Laasanen.
Laasanen's kanteles are designed
with the folk musician in mind. The
workmanship is particularly good. When I
asked various folk players and other kantele builders why Laasanen's kanteles
are so good, several told me it was because the workmanship was "millin
tarkka" [exact to within a millimeter]. His kanteles have a very bright tone, which
is perfectly suited for the traditional dance music played in the Perho River
Valley. Laasanen's kanteles also feature
the "lowered bass" strings, with a particularly fine bass sound. As with all modern kanteles, he used strings
of graduated thickness, with extra thick strings for the three contra bass
strings.
In recent years, the Kaustinen
Instrument Workshop has been able to provide particularly good kanteles for
playing folk music. Their commercially
built large kanteles can also be used for playing art music, though the tonal
characteristics are more appropriate to folk music. The kanteles are built without the lowered
bass strings, though they can be specially ordered with that feature. Recently they have produced their own model
of machine kantele. Kaustinen also
offers a fully equipped workshop, training and materials for individuals to go
and build their own kanteles and quite a few folk performers have done just
that. The professional builders make a
variety of instruments ‑‑ jouhikkos (bowed lyres), mandolins, even
electric guitars ‑‑ in addition to various types of kanteles. The greatest number of instruments sold are
carved kanteles, particularly five‑string kanteles, which has been the
result of a significant revival in carved kantele playing.
Revival
of Carved Kantele Building
The revival in carved kantele
building began in the early 1950s, around the time when Finland hosted the
Olympics. During the same era when he was
building bodies for the machine kanteles of Paul Salminen, the master craftsman
Armas J. Koivisto was asked by the Fazer Music Store in Helsinki to build some
small and inexpensive five‑string kanteles so they could be sold to
Olympic visitors as souvenirs. Koivisto
began experimenting in making kanteles according to old models which were at
that time only found in museums. He did
not want his instruments to be mere souvenirs and tried to make them as fine as
possible, thus building the first real carved kanteles in Finland since perhaps
the turn of the century.
Martti Pokela, a popular folk
musician, became acquainted with Koivisto's five‑string kanteles through
his dealings with the Fazer Music Store and wanted to add the instrument to his
repertoire. He went to see Koivisto to
ask him to build custom five‑string kanteles with improvements. He had the tuning pins, strings and the size
changed to improve its sound and ease of playing. Koivisto also built Pokela some prototypes of
seven and nine‑string kanteles.
They met many times trying to develop the carved kantele up to the time
of Koivisto's death, when the development work continued with another master
kantele builder, Oiva Heikkilä.
A significant contributor to the
revival movement was Finland's Professor of Folk Music, Erkki Ala‑Könni,
who wanted to promote the carved kantele in public schools for teaching the
fundamentals of music. Pokela and Ala‑Könni
teamed up to develop what they felt would be standard models of the
contemporary carved kantele and commissioned Oiva Heikkilä to build them. Martti Pokela's model of the five‑string
kantele marked the culmination of the developmental work begun with Armas
Koivisto. Ala‑Könni wanted to
increase the capabilities somewhat, so he had Heikkilä build a nine‑string
"school kantele," with a steel bridge along the tuning pin side of
the instrument. The bridge increased the
amplifying power of the instrument, but at the same time left intact the
characteristic vibrato of the Finnish kantele.
The increased range made it possible to broaden the repertoire.
These instruments were developed
over a period of time. In Pokela's and
Ala‑Könni's own personal kantele collections they have prototypes of
various lengths. The correct length,
width, sound quality and playing charac-teristics were worked out by trial and
error until a "standard" emerged for both the five‑string and
nine‑string models. Pokela also
commissioned many other master craftsmen to build him carved kanteles. Some were custom-built models, with extensive
decoration or Pokela's name carved into the sides. Other carved kanteles which he commissioned
served as prototypes for a particular builder's own line of carved kanteles. Kantele builders were more than happy to make
instruments for Martti Pokela, since he had gained national fame through
extensive performances in concerts, on television, radio and records. The revival movement brought with it a great
deal of experi-mentation and in some cases even competition among kantele
builders for the best type of carved kanteles.
Pokela amassed one of the largest carved kantele collections in
Finland. Most of the collection is
housed at the Sibelius Academy division of Folk Music, where it is used by the
various folk music groups which Pokela directs.
During the past twenty years, the
growth in the number of carved kantele players has been great, both among
children and adults. As a result, there
has been a great increase in the building of carved kanteles. Literally hundreds of Finns make five‑string
kanteles, in wood shop classes, privately for their own use, or on a larger
scale to sell to others. The Kaustinen
Instrument Workshop alone prepares around one‑hundred carved kanteles per
month. In 1985, the Folk Music Institute
sponsored a five‑string kantele building contest, which had nearly one
hundred entries. All ages of builders
were represented, male as well as female, from all parts of the country. No two of the kanteles were alike!
Summary
The art of kantele building has changed
drastically over its history. Originally
kanteles were built by individuals for their own use. This tradition of folk builders has not
ended, since many Finns still build their own kanteles. In addition to folk builders, there came a
tradition of master builders, who made instruments of such high quality that
others wanted to buy them. The kantele
became a commercial item, but something which was still built by hand, one at a
time. There are very few professional
kantele builders in Finland, in the sense that the builder earns his entire
livelihood from building kanteles. The
kantele has never become a factory built instrument. There are instrument factories, such as those
connected with large music stores that build kanteles on a mass‑production
basis. These instruments are widely
thought of among kantele players and builders as being inferior and have not
really been accepted as a part of the kantele culture. As one builder put it, "Those people
stack one instrument on top of another to the ceilings." Another said,
"In the factory, a man stands with a calculator figuring out how
long it takes for each worker to do a task.
The factory is not geared towards craftsmanship, only towards
profit." The professional kantele
builder Erkki Leskelä put it best when he said, "I don't get to punch the
clock when the day is done like in a factory.
I have to work on each kantele until it is just right and it pleases the
customer and pleases me" (Leskelä 1983).
Notes:
[1] Salminen was not the first to patent
a kantele. In 1904, Pasi Jääskeläinen
patented one of the earliest kantele models designed for use with written music
(Pat. No. 2144). Ferdinand Kangasniemi
from
[2] In a more recent article Huotari described
another spindle kantele, which had just two strings per spindle and was thus
only half chromatic. It too had a
reverse-curve shaped body (Huotari 1988).
[3] According to Armas Koivisto
(1962:4/10), Salminen had the metal parts made by someone in Riihimäki, then
finished and assembled the machines at home.
Please read the official
disclaimer.
URL=http://www.people.iup.edu/rahkonen/kantele/diss/Mod.htm
Page
created and maintained by Carl Rahkonen. ©
1989 Last modified 10/24/05
Comments
and/or suggestions may be e-mailed to: rahkonen@iup.edu