Jump to content

RAc

Members
  • Posts

    759
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Contact Methods

  • Skype
    RAc_27

Recent Profile Visitors

5,057 profile views

RAc's Achievements

Heavyweight Boxer

Heavyweight Boxer (5/6)

  1. FWIW, there has been a recent discussion on this on reddit: Steve Martin's Concertina model? : concertina (reddit.com)
  2. I have transcribed a few of Al's tunes before and would volunteer to do this one as well unless someone else has already done it (Kautilya's link appears not to work anymore). Can be a couple of weeks though before I get around to doing it.
  3. How about Jody Kruskal (an active forum member here)? He's a very experienced teacher as well as an excellent player! For face-to-face lessons he probably qualifies too (depending where in NYC you are located).
  4. I believe what Don refers to is the fact that any mechanical switch is subject to wear and chemical processes that will eventually cause unreliable up to failing electrical contacts. This is particularly important for switches used in musical instruments as these are very heavily used (he mentioned in other places that professional instruments use gold plated contacts to counter the effect of rusting). Thus, after some time xxx the buttons will fail and need to be replaced, very likely the only parts in the entire setup that require maintenace at all. Iow, the better (and more expensive) the mechanical switches, the longer the maintenace-free lifetime of the entire instrument.
  5. Roger, your argument misses the point that a tab system is nothing "objectively" "good" or "bad," but provides a window into the musical mind of the one who came up with the tab. Again, if the reader's individual approach to music matches the one of the tutor's author, the system will resonate, otherwise it won't. It's as simple as that. A "good review" as suggested by Alex as well as "trashing" should take this into consideration. If a tutor, say, has real mistakes in the written music such as wrong fingerings, it's fair to "trash" the tutor on those grounds regardless of whether I can make sense of the notation or not. If the fingerings and everything else is correct but the system simply doesn't resonate with me, it wouldn't be fair. If the notation does resonate, that alone shouldn't be the sole reason for a raving review (there may still be deficiencies in the tutor such as notation errors, layout problems, didactic shortcomings and so on). My impression of the OP's attitude was that he expects some kind of universal notation standard for tabs that matches his expectations and considers a deviation from those standards as ground to totally dismiss that tutor. There are several fundamental problems with that attitude that have all been pointed out here.
  6. I would believe it's all done employing the built-in gyroscope...
  7. Interesting that you should mention the guitar... Remember Kicking Mule Records, Stefan Grossman's acoustic guitar only label? He had every artist he produced tab out their music to include as tab booklets. Had there been an internet back then, the disussion would have been EXACTLY the same. No two artists had even remotely compatible tab systems. Some used six lines and wrote the fret numbers on the lines, some seven to write the fret numbers in between two lines, some would use vertical bar lines, some phrase lines, some would add traditional time indicators such as flags, some would use downward stemlines for the thumb and upwards for the fingers etc. In compilations of multiple artists, the tab books would look fairly, uhm, challenging just for the cifferent appearances of every piece (unless Stefan would bother to rewrite every arrangement to his notation, which would suit some pieces, but not all of them). Aside from that, every book out there on the market would also include two or three pages in the introduction explaining the notation used in that book. The only common idea behind all of them would be that they rejected traditional music notation, also ignoring the fact that even in the "classical" music world, there are very emotional debates about reforming "the" standard notation system and many people again devising their own systems. What does that tell us? 1. Always remember: Music is for the ear, not the eyes. ANY attempt to render music visually is a crutch. Some of the best artists on any instrument never learned to "read" music in any form but attacked the challenge with their ears right from the start. 2. The fact that there are so many different crutches simply reflects the fact that we are all individuals and take our individuality to the music learning path. What works well for one person may not work at all for the other. As far as guitar tabs are concerned, I remember a few colleagues who spent a siginificant amount of time rewriting every tab they could find to "their" sytem. Every minute of that time spent practicing their instrument instead would have brought them much much further. Thus, I don't see where these discussions are suppoased to lead us. Individual differences are facts of life, and all we can and should do is acknowledge this. @tunelover: If the issue bothers you, the only advice I can give you is to go through all of the notation systems, find one that suits your individual way of thinking best, and then start walking on these crutches. After a while, you'll discard them anyways. Just don't focus on them too much, because after all, walking (= playing music) is your goal.
  8. At the end of the day, it's fairly straightforward: The goal is to become a better musician, and all that counts is whether that goal is being accomplished. In other words, if all the reflections and/or novel approaches to notation, layout or whatever help you become a better musician, by all means, make 'em and take 'em. Yet, as far as I can tell, noone has ever improved as a musician without practicing. Sometimes I have a feeling that the time spent in musing about other notation systems might be better spent giving your fingers and ears the drill. I'd be very interested in a status report of yours (the thread opener) in, say, a two year time frame, evaluating how you improved as a musician and how your different approach to notation has steered that progress. I myself (like, I believe, many others) have sort of developed my idiosyncratic notation, but I look at it as a crutch to aid the way my brain works and to make it easier to memorize and practice my tunes. That's all there is to it, really. Small percentage. Everything else I must do like everybody else: Drill, listening and patience.
  9. Bah, humbug. As long as you're not playing melodeons... <duck and cover>
  10. well Łukasz, you certainly have my highest respect for your work. I also have cut down on my few spare cycles for practicing in favor of working on my own custom concertina, which threw me back significantly... One remark about your design: If I remember a conversation with Alex H. correctly (please jump in, Alex, if I'm wrong), the areas marked red, though aesthetically plaesing, are statically problematic as those sharp edges may easily break under little tension?... All the best nevertheless!
  11. Oh my... now a whole buch of things fall into place. Speech recognition, auto correction, auto translation... all major contributors to the deterioration of language and its beauty. Humans enslaving themselves and one of the biggest assets that makes humanity (language) to computers. I should really get out of that field (IT) asap...
  12. Poor professional fishermen, they are stuck in an oxymoron, aren't they? 😙 Should I feel bad now because I love my job (not a fisherman)? Nope...
  13. In case you have access to a Windows device, this here may be of interest to you:
  14. I'm glad I could be of help! All the best with your choice and let us know how you get on!
  15. ok, if I understand you correctly, you confirm my statement here that there are almost no moveable chord patterns on the Jeffries but each chord pattern is a different triad inversion? By moveable I mean that (first approximation) the same order of fingers can be shifted by rows and/or columns yielding an identical chord. This is taken to extremes by the Hayden layout where there is exactly one triangular (three finger) pattern for minor and major triads, respectively, that never changes, but which chord actually sounds depends on where the root note sits. On the Crane, this is similar, but moving the chord a row up typically involves changing one finger.
×
×
  • Create New...