The Clarinet BBoard

Re: Fixing the cork/pads on a Clarinet?

Author: Mark Charette  Date:   2008-09-10 10:53 jeffy wrote: > The closest I come to music notation these days is a piano roll > view in midi based recording software. > ... That's too bad. The whole purpose of reading and writing music (given that the notation can express it) is communication. A common language. You say you play guitar, right? I did a long time back, played in studios. One form of communication was lead sheets, one form was written out music, and one was tablature. Each communicated something about the music. To suggest that reading music should be left to the young because it's hard is a form of arrogance best left to the young

Reply To Message

Re: Fixing the cork/pads on a Clarinet?

Author: clarnibass  Date:   2008-09-10 21:25 >> Yes it is, over time. I don't agree with this either, but too hard for me to explain in English, sorry. Edit: But I decided to try anyway I guess there are two connected but different ideas of music communication. It seems you claim music that was written being more communicative in the sense that music that wasn't written (i.e. before it was possible) simply can't be communicated as clearly after generations. But some music that wasn't written still exists. As you said, you can't know if it was exactly like this, but I don't consider this less communicative. Also, I don't think you can know how EXACTLY music that was written really was. For example, I know a lot of written music that couldn't possibly be performed the way it was (first) intended by just reading it, while I know music that isn't written that is very possible to perform the way it should. The communication of music that is played (with or without being written) could be judged by how it was supposed to be, but it doesn't have to. The communication of the music can be the way it is in the moment that it is played, and it is irelevant how it was created. Also, communication methods change. A long time ago there was no written music. Now we have recordings, and it changed everything. That is a much better way to communicate music to a lot more people. Papers with notes mean nothing to most people who would still be interested in the music. So the main thing that to me is communication in music is the communication that happens when the music happens. For an example I can give a duo I have. All the music is completely improvised. It is on the internet and many people can listen to it. Comapre that with music that is written but never heard. The former example is more communicative in the exactly the way you claimed written music is. As far as the communication of the music itself, when someone is listening to it, that has nothing to do with it being written or not anyway. Post Edited (2008-09-11 12:34)

Reply To Message

Re: Fixing the cork/pads on a Clarinet?

Author: mikeW  Date:   2008-09-10 23:42 If you're really pushing 30, then in the spirit of Mark Twain, let's hope you're having a rather extended adolescence. >> Also, if anyone plays an instrument for someone else's approval has already lost because almost everyone you meet will not care what you can do as they are too preoccupied with their own life. Don't even kid yourself. Music has traditionally been a rather communal effort. Don't mistake masturbation for sex just because no one wants to have sex with you. >> One thing about anyone claiming to have a craft is that they intend to preserve the secret. It is a will to power. They make their efforts behind the curtain a big mystery on purpose. That being said, I would not attempt to work on anything that I am not willing to sacrifice. Anything that is cheap will be fair game to my tinkering. That would be the opposite of what is going on with most musicians I know. They seem perfectly willing to share their art through the example of performance and their craft through teaching, talking about the dirty, technical business of playing, and even spending a lot of time writing about it on bulletin boards. >> Some of the supposed Sumerian music that we have supposedly found are not wriiten in standard notation. It is in all honesty anyone's guess as to what the notation it is written in really means. We can only assume that they used the same intervals also. Japanese musical notation differs from the notation that has evolved in the European tradition. I suspect Indian and Chinese notations are different, as well (I an not familiar with either.) Musical notation from the middle ages is also different than our contemporary notation. But you're right that people can only make educated guesses as to how it was to be interpreted. The same is true of any language the we know only through notation, such as ancient Greek and Latin. The fact that there are limitations in the notation is not a reason for not learning to read music. On the other hand, I'm amazed at the information density in modern music notation. There is much nuance that can't be written down, but in terms of meter, tempi, articulation, volume, pitch, note duration and rhythm, it's incredibly compact. >> Much after that time, it is true that otherwise music b4 recording would be lost. There has been much discussion on this bboard (and elsewhere) as to how much we can know that we are playing, for example, Mozart's music the way Mozart intended, and how much the use of modern instruments colors the music. That's one reason why there are groups devoted to performing and recording music on instruments appriate to the time that it was written. And much detailed scholarship trying to understand how it was performed. >> In this day it is easier to hit record instead of writing ideas. To each his own. It is possible that I could pick up and start (relearn) reading at what you would consider a pretty high level but my ear is faster. None of my heros went to music school. Most were black and uneducated so there... While there are some great musicians who don't read music, their ranks are small and diminishing. And realize that these folks have an amazing knowledge of music and can play hundreds (maybe thousands) of tunes at the drop of a hat. So while they might not read music, they have still managed to learn and internalize the music theory and traditions of the music. Most accomplished this by spending years in the trenches, learning from more experienced players. This, but the way, is the craft that you appeared to disparage above. And I hope you realize that those particular trenches are pretty much a thing of the past. So if your point is that you don't think learning to read music is worthwhile (for a musician) because it doesn't completely convey how the music is performed, that's just silly. And if you don't think that the jazz musicians you admire were deeply educated in the music because they didn't read, that's also silly. And if you think you can get to some place like where they were without spending years hanging with the cats, that's really optimistic.

Reply To Message

Avail. Forums  |  Need a Login? Register Here

User Login  User Name:  Password:  Remember my login:

Forgot Your Password? Enter your email address or user name below and a new password will be sent to the email address associated with your profile.