Jeff Stallard
-
Posts
218 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Jeff Stallard
-
-
Yes Leo at 79 has "authentic" intonation, but what he does with it and urges me to do is fun. When he's playing I can see people dancing because he is. It's our imperfections that make is human.
Of course. No one will deny that. I'm not sure where you're going with that. If you're implying that classical music doesn't have those endearing imperfections, I again offer this quote as my rebuttal: "the left hand leaps sometimes completely miss their mark and hit totally wrong keys! But I hardly noticed the mistakes; the piece was so dynamic, so intense, so full of life!"
-
There was some sort of power failure. The comment from the Tulla musician quoted in the liner notes was to the effect that, "We were the only ones there who could play in the dark."
As I said previously, the benefits of ear playing are vast and deep, but you could turn it around and tell this type of story: "One of the musicians wanted me to play a song she had written, so she handed all of us the music, but I was the only one who could read it."
-
reading anything aloud (whether words or music) requires understanding and interpretation from the performer. Someone who has difficulty reading words will read aloud without reference to the meaning of the words because they are struggling with the mechanics of what the letters mean, giving a flat and uninteresting (or even completely incomprehensible) rendition of the text, and this is the spoken equivalent of those music readers whom everyone detests.
Very well stated! The problem is not reading at all, just BAD reading. I think folk musicians are exposed only to the worst readers. Given that folk music is, on paper, much simpler than other styles (few leaps, narrow range, rare accidentals, no time signature changes, etc.) beginning readers tend to gravitate toward it (I know I do). My old violin teacher, who is a professional classical musician, could SIGHT-READ any tune I gave her and she would sound like a seasoned session player. No wait, I take that back...she played in tune.
-
"Reading is the ultimate goal?" Not really.
Yes, I agree with you. Reading is only a means to an end, the same as ear training, but I was explaining the Suzuki quote about hearing being the foundation of reading.
-
Of course great performances can come from people who have learned he tune from printed music, but not by people who do not feel or understand the music.
Yes. It has nothing to do with how you learn the music, only with how well you understand it, and I believe that classical musicians have as much ability to understand music as folk musicians. As evidence, I offer this quote from the posted article:
"the left hand leaps sometimes completely miss their mark and hit totally wrong keys! But I hardly noticed the mistakes; the piece was so dynamic, so intense, so full of life!"
Wow, sounds like folk music, doesn't it? Furthermore, I offer a little bit of personal experience. Twice, I've had the displeasure of hearing exclusively ear-playing folk (Irish in fact) musicians who not only couldn't play the right notes or keep a steady tempo, but they were so horrible that I couldn't pick out ANY tempo. So yes, there are examples of ear players who don't get it. Your point is very important though, and can't be stressed enough. You have to UNDERSTAND the music. Who cares how you got there, as long as you understand it?
Speaking as someone who claims not to read music, it always seems to me that "the dots" don't tell you enough anyway.Well you're probably used to folk-style sheet music, which is like a Dick and Jane book. In real sheet music, the dots tell you MUCH more than just what note, when, and how long.
The giveaway is that if they did, any group of sufficiently competent musicians could perform without a rehearsal!That's like saying that, if a group of actors can't perform a scene from a play without a rehearsal, there's something wrong with the script. Oh, and yes, there are tons of musicians who can play a piece well the first time through.
-
"The illiterate self-taught village concertina player can provide just as much joy to his audience at village weddings and dances as can the world-renowned virtuoso at prestigious symphony concerts".
We may be misinterpreting his statement. Notice how he doesn't name a second instrument when he refers to the symphony at the end. The suggests to me that he wasn't comparing two instruments, but rather two ways of playing, and the concertina just happened to be the example he picked. I think what he meant was that a concertinist, whether an illiterate folk player or a symphony virtuoso, can provide equal joy to their audience. When you consider the history of the concertina, it certainly does stand out as an instrument that can span the musical spectrum, and so it makes sense to use it as the example.
-
Suzuki said that music is a language, and like all languages, we learn to speak it before we can read it. Therefore, his method was to have students learn by ear for, I think, the first three books, which were on tape.
The benefits of ear training are vast and deep, of course. However, to continue Suzuki's analogy, reading is the ultimate goal. The fact that we should speak it first only means that the foundation of the building is ear training. The building itself is made up of reading. Thus, ear training is only a tool that serves to strengthen reading.
-
Imagine how advanced the world would be if literacy were as shunned in other areas as it is in folk music. The reason the early musicians couldn't read notes wasn't because they studied it and analyzed it, and decided that an aural approach was more advantageous. They couldn't read notes because they were uneducated peasants. We adhere to their "rules" thinking it's divine wisdom, when it's really just the only way they knew how to do it. We get things backward, and think that their inability to read is what made them good. But the truth is that being good lets them get away with being unable to read.
We make fun of "backwater hicks" who can't read the simplest sentence, and yet we admire and imitate musicians who can't read the simplest note. Very strange.
Yes, I realize I'm spitting on a sacred cow. Fire away.
Edit: I don't mean to imply that folk musicians are stupid and uneducated, just that people way back when were uneducated and ignorant of anything BUT playing by ear.
-
My right (dominant) hand had no problem using three fingers, but my left hand protested, and I gave in. Now it's a struggle to get that left-hand third finger into the action.
-
Try to build a habit of using the ring finger for the fourth row. For instance, when playing an F# or Bb, avoid the urge to just shift your middle finger over one row. I did that for months, and discovered that it really gets me in a pickle -- a sticky wicket if you will -- often. At first I figured it was just because I was inexperienced, but now that I'm using my ring finger on the 4th row, a lot of problems I had previously have gone away. However, I am having a tough time training my ring finger, so right now it's just one problem replacing another, but in a few weeks, I should be fine.
Learn from my mistake and get that ring finger involved.
-
Only poor playing apparantly.
-
Pauline de Snoo and Wim Wakker come to mind for starters. .
Naaaaaaaah, they just don't have enough experience to be able to play without aids.
-
Wow, that's too bad. I have trouble hearing my girlfriend, but I think it's mental in my case. Kind of makes me glad I'm not a fan of concerts.
-
I don't have that model, but I do have a similar digital recorder. It doesn't have that much memory, but enough to suit me. Yeah, they're pretty handy.
-
Well, I've never seen a really great concertina player with a strap. Maybe my experience is limited or perhaps they just practice more and overcome the need for aids.
I had a nice scathing rebuttal all typed out, but honestly, what's the point? I play my way, and you play yours.
-
In the famous "Lady and the Tramp" scene where they're eating spaghetti, the waiter is in the background playing "La Bella Notte" on the concertina.
In "Mary Poppins" doesn't Bert play the concertina when we first meet him (the one-man-band scene)?
-
Of course, if the player changing the lightbulb is a Hayden system player, then they'll change the lightbulb the same way each time.
Umm.....what?
-
I was asking anybody really, but I'm particularly interested in the way Alan did it, as that's the only vibrato I've ever heard on the concertina.
-
So this shake you mention...its movement is perpendicular to the line on which the bellows expand and contract, correct?
Excellent discussion! Thank you all for helping me out.
-
FYI, I did find this note while searching: "The terms vibrato and tremolo are sometimes used interchangeably." They don't seem that similar to me, but that might explain why we're having a hard time defining the two.
-
Here are a few common definitions of tremolo I found on the Web:
1. Very rapid repitition of one or two notes
2. A tremulous effect produced by rapid repetition of a single tone or rapid alternation of two tones
Likewise for vibrato:
1. A smooth and repeated changing of the pitch up and down from the regular musical pitch, often done by singers.
2. A cyclic change in pitch, usually in the range of 7 to 14 Hz.
What I'm talking about it is definitely vibrato. But maybe, since it was Alan Day's performance where I noticed it, he can explain what he did... Maybe it is, in fact, tremolo, but it sure sounds like vibrato to me. I even looped that last note over and over again, and I can't see how it's anything but vibrato.
This is confusing because...how the heck would you make cyclic pitch changes with a concertina?!?!
-
Vibrato is "periodic changes in the pitch of the tone" so how would bellows manipulation affect the pitch?
-
I never thought you could get vibrato on a concertina, but listening to Alan's "Connet Waltz," at the end sticks in some vibrato, so now I'm curious how one goes about generating vibrato on a concertina.
-
It's going to be tough deciding which one to tackle first.
Interesting Results From Sleepy Practice
in Teaching and Learning
Posted · Edited by Jeff Stallard
The last few months, I've been playing mostly classical, so a few nights ago I thought I'd start focusing more on playing by ear (it's cyclic with me). It was late, but I felt like playing. I decided on Off She Goes, and well...off I went. It was slow at first, just trying to make my fingers remember where to go. Well after 5 or 10 minutes, I found myself nodding off, but I pushed on for maybe another 10 minutes. During that time, I don't remember any coherent melody.
The next morning, I tried playing it, and I had improved greatly! I still had some trouble remembering the B part, but I was much better than I had been the previous night. So maybe I've found the secret: practice when you're half asleep. I'm half-way kidding of course, but I'm wondering if we use a different part of my brain when we're really tired than when our brains are awake and alert.
Anyone else ever notice this?