| Brought to you this hour by |  | Advertising and Web Hosting on Woodwind.Org! |
Doublereed Archive - Posting 000029.txt from 2008/01
From: "Harry Searing" <hsearing@-----.net>
Subj: [DR-L] re: note nomenclature
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:01:58 -0500
Hi, Pat!!
Gee, I think I've heard this played two different ways.
My understanding of tremolo marks is that you transfer the number of
slashes to the same number of beams and you have your note value, in
this case, 3 beams would become 32nd notes. Although at a dotted quarter
= 132, that's fairly impossible. That's the same as quarter notes at
198! Even 16th notes would be impressive at that speed! (Maybe that's
what I've heard.)
I've also heard people play it as fluttertongue!
The link that John provided says it's an "unmarked" tremolo. I don't
necessarily agree with this assessment based on what I wrote above, but
composers are notorious for making up their own notation, or
misinterpreting standard conventions. So how knows. Not sure what
"unmarked" means, maybe unmeasured? If that's the case, then I would say
fluttertonguing would be appropriate.
Neither the original Hudebni score or the Peters Liepzig (sort of an
urtext edition, it's based on various sources), are any help in
determining how to perform this passage.
What does your hornist want to do?
Regards,
Harry
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Woodwind.Org 2008 Donation Drive has started. Visit
https://secure.donax-us.com/donation/ for more information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
For personal help: email doublereed-owner@-----.org
Doublereed is a service of Woodwind.Org, Inc. http://www.woodwind.org
