Jump to content

English V Anglo


chrisbird

Recommended Posts

Surely 'lift' is just another term for 'life'. Dance music without lift is flat, even and boring. Add lift or life or emphasis to get the real deal..?

 

"Lift," I think, perhaps refers to motion -- and the kinetic musical aspect; if it's dance music, then it's an apt word to connote the elements of time that suspend the listener in kinetic relationship to the sound. The notes must be played and placed in an arrangement that propels the motion of the piece. This is especially salient in bass playing, where one is often not playng many notes, so the notes that are played must be placed perfectly to elicit optimal effect of time feel.

Edited by catty
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 222
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Surely 'lift' is just another term for 'life'. Dance music without lift is flat, even and boring. Add lift or life or emphasis to get the real deal..?

 

"Lift," I think, perhaps refers to motion -- and the kinetic musical aspect; if it's dance music, then it's an apt word to connote the elements of time that suspend the listener in kinetic relationship to the sound. The notes must be played and placed in an arrangement that propels the motion of the piece. This is especially salient in bass playing, where one is often not playng many notes, so the notes that are played must be placed perfectly to elicit optimal effect of time feel.

 

 

I agree. Lift is is the quality of music that promotes movement and dance. It is a subjective term and consequently not easy to define and a good topic for a discussion like this. The most important elements to me are tempo, well defined note durations (clear separation between the notes), and dynamics (volume changes) all combined to provide a clear underlying rythmic pulse and forward motion. It gets in your bones and lifts your feet off the floor!!

 

Or, I guess we could just say it's the magic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. Lift is is the quality of music that promotes movement and dance. It is a subjective term and consequently not easy to define and a good topic for a discussion like this. The most important elements to me are tempo, well defined note durations (clear separation between the notes), and dynamics (volume changes) all combined to provide a clear underlying rythmic pulse and forward motion. It gets in your bones and lifts your feet off the floor!!

 

Or, I guess we could just say it's the magic.

 

I suppose "lift" is like "quality": I can't define it, but I know it when I see or hear it. Musicians may try to analyse it when they hear it, but non-musicians, I'm sure, recognise it too, and just accept it.

 

No doubt separation, dynamics and tempo have something to do with it, but these are only the tools of the trade. Lift and other desirable qualities in music come when these tools are properly employed. In classical music education, the tools of the trade are taught much more systematically than is the rule in folk music, but it is immediately apparent that some amateur pianists play pieces that you enjoy listening to, while others just play pieces without mistakes. The difference is usually put down to "musicality" or lack of it.

I believe that musicality is a personal, mental thing that surfaces with whatever instrument you choose to play, and in whatever genre of music you play.

 

I don't think you can teach musicality, but I do think you can coach it (if it's there ;) ). Tips like "Don't play note by note - play phrase by phrase," or "Get the grace notes finished with before the beat, so that the main note falls on the beat," for instance, are perhaps more helpful than "Change bellows direction here," or "Take that D on the press rather than the draw." Bellows changes and choice of alternate fingerings are the tools of a concertinist's trade, but it's our musicality that tells us which to use, and when. Musicality is when you concentrate on the music rather than on the playing of it (the music being that sequence of sounds that emanate from your instrument.)

 

Of course, the more tools you have in your toolkit, the more freedom your musicality will have! :rolleyes:

 

Cheers,

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or, I guess we could just say it's the magic.

 

Indeed. As I stopped by for the late session at Stone's last night after running an event at the jobsite, this term lift was on my mind. It is magic, with others. Banjo player Brian Hebert, guitar Greg Bacon, flautist Jim Gleason and insane bousouki player George Arata were still at it. Listening to one another, connection, interplay, inspiration. After a bit the damned instruments seem to be playing themselves (perhaps the Hobgoblin I was enjoying had a wee bit to to with that). I could spend the rest of my days on this earth playing tunes with these lads and not find the end of our invention and magic. As usual, we were shooed out the door at closing time.

 

Brian just realeased a CD on CDBaby of Beatle tunes arranged as jigs, reels, slip jigs...you name it. Whacky cat he. Colleagues like that give you a push on the backside...it seems, lift or get left behind is the general motto. Brian O'Donovan was given a copy of that Beatle thing and played a lot of the cuts on A Celtic Sojourn this past Saturday. Brian was grinning very broadly last night.

 

Brian's site: http://www.bhtunes.com/

Edited by Mark Evans
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to work the bellows! Bellows changes is just one way to do it. Build pressure at certain moments, and small, short pushes on the draw or on the pull will all add to give life or lift to the music you make. It's all about dynamics as well. I've seen/heard too many EC players pulling their bellows in and out without working their bellows.

You want more life - tap your buttons instead of pushing them (but of course not all the time). Put some vibrato on a certain note (quite nice in dance music too - but use with moderation). Still not happy with the result: put your concertina on your knee and tap your feet at appropriate rythm. Then there is ornamentation. I cut my notes quite often (to start with). Remainder you have to work out for yourself......

Sage advice.

Only one thing I find in your statement troubling....Vibrato. :( I've listened and tried to embrace it, but as yet not even Noel Hill has produced a vibrato that does anything but make me cringe (that's saying a lot as I adore his playing). The pipe and whistle produced vibrato is outlandish and there in it's salvation. One doesn't even consider it something naturally produced. It's funky and cool. But a concertina with such clarion notes sounds somehow sad and lost when it is attempted, particularly in a lament. I'm aware this is a minority view. :ph34r:

 

I have at present about 5 methods of making vibrato effects on a EC concertina (which will work for other systems too). I wanted to put these on Youtube, but presently there are other priorities in life.

Vibrato is to be used with some moderation (some pipers overdo it too in my opinion) and can sound great on concertina too. That said I agree with you that on the last Noel Hill CD his use of vibrato is not to my liking. I think Niamh Ni Charra does a far better job on her CD ''From Both sides'' See track 2 (Caoineadh Eoghain Rua).

Edited by chiton1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

John (AI) said:

I don't think you can teach musicality, but I do think you can coach it ...

 

You certainly can teach musicality. And you can learn to be more "musical."

Those that have it have generally have practiced more than those that lack it,

or have paid more attention to phrasing, or have been developing it longer. It isn't magic or something mysterious.

To think so is self-defeating. It can lead you to that think if you don't have it there's no use pursuing it, or "either you have it or you don't."

Pablo Casals held master classes for musicians who had all the technique anybody could ask for.

Master classes talk and teach about things that come after technique.

Casals was teaching phrasing and when he said something, or played a sequence of notes on the piano,

musicians paid attention to him.

Technique isn't the only thing that can be taught and learned in a structured fashion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You certainly can teach musicality. And you can learn to be more "musical."

Those that have it have generally have practiced more than those that lack it,

or have paid more attention to phrasing, or have been developing it longer.

 

David,

Look at the world around you! People are not musical because they practise more than others. They practise more than others because, being musical, they find it more important and enjoy it more than others do!

Conversely, people without musicality would be wasting their time practising music - fortunately for them, they have no urge to do so, and can be just as happy as a musical person practising ... ;)

 

Pablo Casals held master classes for musicians who had all the technique anybody could ask for.

Master classes talk and teach about things that come after technique.

 

Hm! You can get to do a masterclass with Casals without being musical? If you believe that, you'll believe anything a psychologist says! :lol:

 

And aren't masterclasses more coaching than teaching anyway?

 

Cheers,

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hm! You can get to do a masterclass with Casals without being musical? If you believe that, you'll believe anything a psychologist says! :lol:

 

And aren't masterclasses more coaching than teaching anyway?

 

Cheers,

John

 

David needs no defense, I respond because your remarks hit me a bit sideways.

Ever heard the phrase "His/her playing is so...mechanical."? As someone who was a fellow at Tanglewood and the Marlboro Festival in 90's, I can tell you that indeed there were and always are some very mechanical brilliant players and singers there. In some sad cases musicallity is only something they can immitate. From my listening over and over again to Casals playing (Bach cello suites) I don't hear technique whipping past, but musicality, profound thought and soul pouring forth. David's reflections come from a very special time at that place. Would that I could have been there while the master was still alive. Casals had the authority of truth, his truth.

 

Coaching/teaching...mighty blurred line that. Coaching from Casals...not bloody likely. You get the whole package wether or not you touch bow to gut at all.

 

I once had the opportunity to have "coachings" with Carlo Bergonzi culminating in a performance before an audience with some more "coaching". While he was "coaching" me he taught me about breath support like nothing I had ever encountered before. Sneaky chap, all I could do was stare into those intense, grey eyes.

Edited by Mark Evans
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You certainly can teach musicality.

 

Very nice claim. Can you tell what musicality is? At university we once did a review of the different concepts of musicality in different times and places, e. g. Gestalttheorie in Germany in 1920s and atomistic approach in the USA in 1950s.

 

Some parts of the varying concpets of musicality are certainly more prone to teaching, more 'teachable' than other parts. :)

 

Sebastian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You certainly can teach musicality.

 

Very nice claim. Can you tell what musicality is? At university we once did a review of the different concepts of musicality in different times and places, e. g. Gestalttheorie in Germany in 1920s and atomistic approach in the USA in 1950s.

 

Some parts of the varying concpets of musicality are certainly more prone to teaching, more 'teachable' than other parts. :)

 

Sebastian

 

Another definition coming up! We'd done rather well with the last one, and I expect this one will yield a similar result!

 

By the way, I love your tag at the end. When learning a new tune, I memorize the beast in my head and if I can sing it....indeed, I can play it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you tell what musicality is?

Sebastian

 

Well, OK, if I must. But I got these off the net so there’s nothing special here. Choose the one you like the best and take her to the floor, as the man said. Courses for horses. One man’s trash is another man’s treasure. As another man said, if you don’t know by now, I can’t tell you.

 

Musicality is the attention and sensitivity to the musical elements of dance while creating or performing.

 

…is phrasing, style, dynamics, expression, overall sensitivity…

 

…is the ability to hear and interpret music in a way that is both mechanically correct and artistically expressive.

 

…is a term used to describe whether a dancer hears, feels, and expresses the music in his body while dancing and whether he stays on the correct beat of the music.

 

… is the condition of being musical.

 

All and none of the above?

 

Sorry. I know it when I hear it and I bet you do, too. It’s like true love or indigestion. You can’t always define it precisely but know when it’s there and when it’s not. You got something better? And does it need articulating? I mean, talking about music is like dancing about architecture. Do we do this net stuff to avoid playing? Aren't we supposed to look forward to, and enjoy, playing - or at least more than talking about playing? isn't that why they call it "playing?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...what musicality is?

 

Another definition coming up!

 

(Anecdotal): the inclination to while away one's hours and days in poetic reverie, rather than apply one's faculties toward such worthwhile pursuits as making money, seeking status, or otherwise succeeding in any practical terms. :unsure:

 

But, generally, I prefer this one: "... the condition of being musical."

Edited by catty
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, OK, if I must.

 

Sorry for asking, but you said:

 

You certainly can teach musicality.

 

'Musicality' is a very problematic term, because different people tie it to very different concepts. To be able to form my opinion about your statement, that "you certainly can teach musicality" I need to know what you mean by 'musicality'.

 

One example: People can be trained for absolute pitch -- to some degree (But there are people who don't need training.) Interestingly, perfect pitch is included by some into the concept of 'musicality', but not by all.

 

If you can teach something, is it possible to measure it? Is it possible to measure musicality? Is it possible to objectivate 'musicality'? How?

 

A discussion on the 'teachability' of musicality would be made easier, if the participants would know more clearly what they are talking about.

 

From my experience: Yes, it is possible to teach some aspects of music and some skills and to infuse a greater understanding of musical processes into pupils, thus increasing their actual musical abilities (active and passive abilities). Nevertheless, different people do have different potentials. A person with a smaller musical potential can maybe by means of training and learning acquire more actual musical abilities and become 'more musical' than someone with a greater musical potential who remains without teaching. But still, with the same amount of effort a person with greater musical potential will achieve a higher level of musicality than a person with a smaller musical potential. That's evident if you try it in the real world.

 

Would you say that: actual musical abilities = musicality?

Or would you say that: musical potential = musicality?

Or would you say that: x * (actual muscial abilities) + y * (musical potential) = musicality?

 

And then: x = y; x > y or x < y?

 

Sebastian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Musicality is the attention and sensitivity to the musical elements of dance while creating or performing.

 

…is phrasing, style, dynamics, expression, overall sensitivity…

 

…is the ability to hear and interpret music in a way that is both mechanically correct and artistically expressive.

 

…is a term used to describe whether a dancer hears, feels, and expresses the music in his body while dancing and whether he stays on the correct beat of the music.

 

Interesting discussion--aesthetics, pedagogy...

 

While I think you can "teach" the technical aspects (skills) of execution (phrasing, dynamics, style, etc.), the skill set itself is rather dependent on other phenomena (sensitivity, ability to hear, etc.) with whcih to render the form--music. I'm not sure one can "teach" sensitivity, for example--this is one of those innate qualities that renders a creative disposition and proclivity upon which everything else may depend more, rather than, less.

 

For example, in order to "teach/learn" the blues, one learns a blues scale...then spends years in revolving states of debauchery and repentance.. ;)

 

Or in other words, upon seeing the above post...I agree with you, Sebastian. <_<

Edited by catty
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...