Peer review #2

It is a nice article! Though, it might benefit from some additions and clarifications:

Overall:

• 1) It would be nice if you used consistent terms. For example, use only "panpipes" or "panflutes" throughout the article. As well, maybe you want to call the main parts either "pipes" or "tubes". It creates confusion when you use these words interchangeably.
• 2) Maybe combine "sound radiation" and "acoustics". It is confusing when the physics about the instrument is interrupted by the method of playing.

Intro:

• 3) Some image (illustration or a photo) is necessary because, the reader might not be familiar with how antara panpipes look like (had to google, you sometimes call the "panflutes" which is very confusing since they don't have holes).
• 4) You might want to add physical description of the instrument in the introduction (especially since you don't provide a picture). Only in the last section "sound radiation" is where the reader gets the image that pipes are attached in parallel and not some other way. I had to google what panpipes look like before reading the history section.
• 5) Instead of calling it "tube-based instrument of Peruvian origin", you might want to specify that this instrument belongs to wind instrument family and that sound is produced by blowing at one end of the pipe in the introduction. This would give a reader a rough idea of what it might be. Also, you might want to give an example of a similar instrument. Is flute similar or different? Is there any instrument that is roughly like panpipes or is this instrument very unique?

Structure:

• 6) "If the pipes are open, they produce a sound that is a higher octave than the closed pipes". Does it mean that panpipes can come in an open ended form? If you contrast it with other types of pipes, make it clear to the reader.
• 7) In the "acoustics" subsection of "structure" you refer to an article ("as this article reports"). Which article? Who wrote it? You might want to restructure this subsection so that the reader clearly knows what article you are referring to and what the reader needs to know from it. Maybe introduce an article at the beginning and summarize what the reader needs to know from it. Alternatively, you might just citation to this article without mentioning it like most of the Wiki articles do.
• 8) Can panpipes be made out of non-cylindrical pipes? Are there different variations of the panpipes?
• 9) What is a "decreasive tape"? Elaborate a bit more on the inverse relation of pipe length and frequency. Maybe give an example of how this relationship works.

Sound Radiation:

• 10) You might want to add explanation to the meaning "rarefaction" to make this article more clear to the reader. (Didn't know what it meant, had to google).