Guest Posted January 10, 2004 Share Posted January 10, 2004 Hi everyone Last weekend I also bought a program called IntelliScore which takes takes an MP3 and converts it into a Midi file. I can then open that midi in my music notation software as sheet/printed music. While it doesn't produce instant, polished music, the result is enough for me to tweek around enough to get a something I can then play along with the CD. I also use Transcribe, a program that will open wav, MP3 or CD track files, and either alter the speed of the tune without changing the pitch, change the pitch without altering the speed, or both. The wonders of technology! Have a great day Morgana Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megmcd Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 Does anyone besides me (old-timer that I am, I guess!) think that this techno-charting takes away some of the feeling of triumph that comes from figuring out a tune by ear? Besides the lack of gloating opportunities, though, I wonder whether something more important might be lost: the musical growth that occurs when one must learn tunes by ear, especially complicated tunes. I realize that many people have already debated on this forum the virtues of learning tunes from sheet music versus by ear. What I'm wondering about here is whether the opportunity to learn by ear should have its challenges and growth removed. For those rare super-tough tunes I can see the benefits, and I'm sure if I had notation software I'd probably use it occasionally. But I'm glad I can pick up tunes by ear, and I'd hate to see that skill not learned by others. That is, of course, how traditional music has traditionally been passed along. Other opinions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimLucas Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 I wonder whether something more important might be lost: the musical growth that occurs when one must learn tunes by ear, especially complicated tunes. I realize that many people have already debated on this forum the virtues of learning tunes from sheet music versus by ear. What I'm wondering about here is whether the opportunity to learn by ear should have its challenges and growth removed. I'm glad I can pick up tunes by ear, and I'd hate to see that skill not learned by others. That is, of course, how traditional music has traditionally been passed along. It's one way that traditional music has been passed along. I've been known to introduce a bit of Bach, Purcell, or whatever as being from an ancient tradition, "the written tradition". A great deal of music has survived -- not just through rediscovery, but kept continuously alive -- for centuries through the medium of written music. There are relatively few tunes which have survived unaltered for more than 100 years in aural tradition. And we know this because of the numerous published collections and private manuscripts of "traditional" music that record in written form the way tunes were played "back then". And at least some of the private manuscripts were specifically intended either to augment the memories of their compilers or to help pass the tunes on to other musicians, even family members. The by-ear vs. by-book divide is just one of many that have occurred and will occur throughout human history. The technology of applying inks to parchment or papyrus allowed written records to supplant and far surpass oral historians and to greatly enhance the effectiveness of teachers. The printing press not only made possible distribution of information to a general populace, it made literacy for that populace both both desirable and attainable. But the skill of rote memorization has significantly declined, and I wonder how many of our current generation could quote any significant text, other than song lyrics. For some people printed music and the ability to read music are a tool they use to access knowledge beyond what they might be able to through personal contact. For some, it's even a complete substitute for the actual learning process, and they cannot play without "the dots"... or ABC. They haven't learned the skill that connects their movements (of fingers, lips, etc.) and the sounds of a melody. I suspect there are many more musicians playing more tunes today than there would be without written music. Whether this is an improvement is a matter of personal opinion. Since the advent of microphones and electronic amplification our culture has largely lost the ability to perform music or even speak in public without it. It's even become difficult to busk in the streets without miniature amplifiers and speakers. But their use is so pervasive, it can be argued that learning to project one's voice or instrument is no longer necessary. The person who can't be heard 3 meters away without amplification can either avoid unamplified situations or learn not to care that noone can hear them. There will still be those like myself who feel that a strong voice is a desirable asset, but I'm sure we're in the minority. Electronic tuners are a more recent "intrusion". It used to be that the other instruments -- fiddle, guitar, flute, etc. -- generally expected to tune to the accordion or concertina, and there would be a conflict only if there were two or more "untunable" instruments that weren't in tune with each other. Now it seems that a person who can tune his instrument without an electronic gadget is rare, and that many consider it blasphemy to suggest tuning to a particular instrument rather than to an electronic gadget. Strangely (or maybe not), some of those who are most rigid about tuning to the gadget can be grossly out of tune without realizing it. They've become so dependent on the gadget that they haven't learned to hear. And so we get back to the computer programs that can assist us in both by-book and by-ear learning... by converting recorded music into some form of printed notation, or by changing its speed and pitch for ear-learning. They will help many people to learn more tunes than they ever could have otherwise... or at least more readily than they would have otherwise. At least some of those will never learn to pick up tunes by ear and at speed, even though they could, simply because they won't need to. I'm sure we'll each have our own opinions of what is good, bad, or indifferent about each of these technical innovations and the various skills that either use them or don't. But that's just fine; there's not just one "right" way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Madge Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 This brings to mind the argument for the "Folk Process". The argument goes that each accidental change to a tune as it is passed on from player to player will be subject to a Darwinian "survival of the fittest" test and that the tune will slowly improve. Also players will only play their best tunes and the worst will be dropped from their repertoir and will become forgotten. The Kipper family had an alternative theory that singers are much more selfish and would keep their best songs to themselves and only pass on their worst ones! Robin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Besser Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 I find this whole by-ear-or-by-the-dots debate silly. You do what works for you. You mix and match, as the need arises. I learned everything by ear for 30 years. Then, when I began playing concertina more seriously, I learned to read, because I had a lot of catching up to do. And just couldn't retain all that music in my head; I needed cheat sheets. Now I do a mix. I learn a lot by ear, but when I want to learn something exactly the way others play it, I use notation. I have elaborate cheat sheets for gigs, because at my advanced age I just can't remember everything; having the notation available to me has prevented many a mishap. The purity of the folk process is a luxury for younger folks; at my age, I need crutches! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimLucas Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 The argument goes that each accidental change to a tune as it is passed on from player to player will be subject to a Darwinian "survival of the fittest" test and that the tune will slowly improve. Also players will only play their best tunes and the worst will be dropped from their repertoir and will become forgotten. I'm constantly annoyed by that simplistic view of Darwin's theory. What's been left out is the role of the environment -- including other "organisims", -- which varies from place to place. A coelocanth may be considered "the fittest" for the sea bottom around the Comoro islands, but hardly for the Sahara desert. For a camel the reverse is true. And whether an "improvement" is really an improvement is also context dependent. I've heard some lovely tune variants on 2-row melodeons, where the "original" fiddle versions would be quite difficult to play. And tunes in C are rare in Irish sessions these days, seeminly being exterminated by folks who are only comfortable playing in keys with one or two sharps, even though C would be a "best" key for most concertinas. A single species (or tune) may radiate into myriad variations -- like the Galapagos finches, or the Australian marsupials -- if there are "empty" ecological niches waiting to be filled. The last sentence in the quote does seem to describe extinction through competition. but with tunes there's also the possibility of hybridization between very dissimilar "species", something that doesn't seem to work with plants and animals. The Kipper family had an alternative theory that singers are much more selfish and would keep their best songs to themselves and only pass on their worst ones! In one of his books, Francis O'Neill described a piper who did just that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 You do what works for you. You mix and match, as the need arises. Amen to that Jim! In my original posting I was NOT proposing that the use of computers as the only way to learn. I was merely sharing my excitement at some new software. I certainly didn't expect the response I got, and will be more careful in future. I am a big fan of learning by ear, of using the dots, of computer programs - basically anything that helps. Regards Morgana Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helen Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 Morgana, I think it is lovely that you shared your excitement with us. I would hope that you and others (including myself) would not start editing what you might post because of the possible reception. Some of us like learning by ear, some by notes, and some vary with the circumstance. I always feel gratified when people recognize that how we learn is a skill to be applauded. So, thanks for sharing your new toy. Helen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megmcd Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 Morgana, I didn't mean to criticize either you or the software. I just don't want to see people forgetting or never learning how to pick up tunes by ear because it's an exciting process, and it can teach many musical skills such as interval recognition and integration of finger action with ears. On the other hand, as Jim and Jim point out, compilation of written tunes is important both to preserve the rich traditional legacy and to assist our memories in the short term. I agree with Helen: I hope you won't feel that you have to edit your postings for fear of disagreement. I'm sorry if I was less tactful than I should have been. Meg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henk van Aalten Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 Last weekend I also bought a program called IntelliScore which takes takes an MP3 and converts it into a Midi file. I can then open that midi in my music notation software as sheet/printed music. Morgana, This sounds very interesting! Can you also tell us the name of your music notation software? Thanks Henk (P.S. hoping to hear a tune from you soon!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 I use "Encore" music notation software, which is very user friendly, although unfortunately I'm not sure if it is available anymore (When I emailed the company to enquire about an upgrade I never recieved a response). To slow down cd tracks or MP3s I use Transcribe, which is brillant (especially as you can save the slowed down track as a wav file for the next time you want to practice), and the mp3 to midi software is called Intelliscore. Thank you to everyone who joined in this discussion, and my apologies to Meg for taking offense when none was intended. Henk: I do have some very very rough recordings of a harp/concertina duo I am in (called the Roaring Hamsters). I'll check with my harp playing friend to see if she minds me posting a tune to my web site Have a great day everyone Morgana Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Harrison Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 The HOURS I spent tryingt learn a tough part of a tune!!! The written note accelerates me through that laborious process and allows me more time to play and not labour.It's taken me 5yrs or so to be able to read music well enough to get the sense of a tune by playing it through a couple or three times.Its a profound joy to me now to be able to play through a tune book and pick stuff I like. regards Robin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helen Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 Oh lordy, Robin, I love you. I love using written music to get the correct notes and then listening to the tune to get the nuances. This is the quickest most enjoyable way for me to learn a tune. I'll get to the learning by ear, but not just yet. Right now, I want to play. Helen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimLucas Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 I love using written music to get the correct notes and then listening to the tune to get the nuances. This is the quickest most enjoyable way for me to learn a tune. I'll get to the learning by ear, but not just yet. Right now, I want to play. I've just started a new Topic on "Learning by ear" in the Teaching and Learning Forum. I hope others will contribute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexCJones Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 There has to be some limit to IntelliScore's abilities. If I have an MP3 of an ensemble with a bass playing a separate line from any other instruments and at least 1 instrument playing chords, can it really make a MIDI file from that? Does it present each instrument on its own staff? - Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Rhoads Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 I use "Encore" music notation software, which is very user friendly, although unfortunately I'm not sure if it is available anymore (When I emailed the company to enquire about an upgrade I never recieved a response). The original publisher (Passport, I think) is out of business. GVox (www.gvox.com) owns Encore now and they do seem to be doing at least a little support and development. The current version is 4.5.5, which was released about a month ago. Morgana, when did you try to contact them? I had an older version of Encore, not sure which one at this moment - I haven't used it in a couple of years. I thought it was kind of clunky to use (you could do a lot, but the software could have been smarter about helping you do things), but I was satisfied with the results. Possibly the new versions(s) are slicker. I have to wonder, though, if the state of the art in music notation programs hasn't passed Encore by at this point. It looks to me like GVox is a pretty small outfit now and I wonder if they have the resources to keep up. regards, Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 Alex wrote: There has to be some limit to IntelliScore's abilities. Certainly, there are huge limitations to Intelliscore; as I said earlier it the result definitely needs tweeking, but it is certainly a good starting point Tom wrote: The original publisher (Passport, I think) is out of business. GVox (www.gvox.com) owns Encore now and they do seem to be doing at least a little support and development. The current version is 4.5.5, which was released about a month ago. Morgana, when did you try to contact them? I wrote to them via email several times in October/November after I ordered an update which never arrived. Eventually we managed to cancel the transaction through our credit card company, but never received any response from GVox. (I did manage to track down a second hand copy of the current version, so I am using that.) Tom wrote: I have to wonder, though, if the state of the art in music notation programs hasn't passed Encore by at this point. More than likely; however I'm happy to stay with it, for now. I've been using various version of upgrade for over ten years, so I know my way around the program pretty well My husband has other, more updated and sophicitated music notation software (the names of which elludes me right now) which I will learn my way around eventually Cheers Morgana Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now