Klarinet Archive - Posting 000402.txt from 1996/08

From: Neil Leupold <nleupold@-----.EDU>
Subj: Re: Clef change instead of note change
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 12:51:53 -0400

On Mon, 12 Aug 1996, Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.edu wrote:

> Neil Leopold asks about clef changes as a substitute for note-by-note
> transposition. He wants more details as to how the process works.

Actually, Dan, Neil Leupold, L-e-U-p-o-l-d, asked about your clef change
suggestion.

> Neil, if you can read both treble and bass clefs, you are well on your
> way to solving the transposition problem.

I can read both treble and bass clefs as a matter of necessity, i.e.; when
playing Mahler symphonies or, say, Dukas. Moveable C-clefs present no
problem either, for one should be fluent in both alto and tenor clefs in
order to analyze a complete score, as you suggest.

> There are a lot of clefs
> including the tenor clef, the soprano clef, the alto clef, etc.

The "soprano" clef? Is that another name for treble? Or is it perhaps
an octave up?

There is the old saying, "You can either work hard, or you can work
smart." Utilizing the short-cut of clef transposition seems to be a
case of working smart, much like picking out scalar patterns on sight
amidst a rapid run, rather than cognitively perceiving each note
individually. Even though I now automatically drop the notes down a
half-step in my head when transposing an A part on Bb, using the
different clefs is clearly much more efficient. If only so that I may
have multiple means at my disposal for transposition, I think I'll
practice your suggested technique. Very interesting.

Neil

   
     Copyright © Woodwind.Org, Inc. All Rights Reserved    Privacy Policy    Contact charette@woodwind.org