Re: ASCII Tab Idea (insanely long reply) HarpL Archives

Other web Sites
Harmonica Blues Harmonica Amps
Harmonica Links Harmonica Pages

• Archives Home

• Years
· 1992 · 1993 · 1994 · 1995 · 1996 · 1997	· 1998 · 1999 · 2000 · 2001 · 2002 · 2003

Ebay Searches:

Amps:
Microphones:
Effects:
Harmonicas and Gear:
Harmonica Music and Instruction:

Harp-L Archives

[Previous Message] [Next Message]
[Previous in Thread]
[Start of Thread] [End of Thread]

Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 08:17:49 -0800 (PST)
From: Mike Will
Subject: Re: ASCII Tab Idea (insanely long reply)

- --- In harp-l-archiv~..., "Jimbeau Harp"
wrote:

> >One weakness is that standard notation's
time/rhythm
> >notation is relative. You don't know _when_ a
> >particular note is supposed to be played unless you
> >"add up" all preceeding durations of notes and
> >rests.
>
> If you're referring to off-beat notes or syncopated
notes, this was
> precisely one of the points I faulted your approach
for.

No, that's not it. Standard notation tells you how
long to hold the current note/rest. It does not tell
you absolutely when in the measure the note/rest
starts. The note/rest starts after all the other
notes/rests have been held their full duration. You
can't in general see at a glance that, for example, a
particular note starts at the beginning of beat 3.
This means that if you hold exactly one note/rest an
incorrect duration, every other note that follows will
start at the wrong time.

In a way, it's interesting. Notes are specified
absolutely, with no possibility of key or pitch
independence where relative note relationships are
specified; while rhythm is specified relative to other
notes only, with no possibility of specifying absolute
start times.

> >Another difficulty is lack of visual consistency of
> >intervals. <
>
> SNIP
> >It's
> >not necessarily immediately apparent that you're
> >looking at the same 3 half steps in both cases.
This
> >is complicated even further when there are
> >sharps/flats in the key signature.
>
> How does tab deal with this problem of "visual
inconsistency"?

Never said it did. You asked what "problems" standard
notation has. This is one.

However, the interval relationships using
hole/technique notation is consistent for all standard
major diatonics. IOW, 2 draw to 3 draw bend is always
relatively the same, as we all know.

> >I personally think it is a weakness not to have
unique
> >names for each of the 12 pitches of the western
> >chromatic scale. One easy way to do it would be:
> >
> >A beta B C delta D epsilon E F gamma G alpha. (I'm
> >sure there is a font where the alpha, beta, etc
show
> >as a single character.)
>
> What, MORE symbols? Your approach is like the
Chinese approach to written
> language, i.e., a different character for almost
every word. I prefer
> alphabets myself -- easier to learn.

No, fewer symbols. BTW, greek letters _are_ part of
an alphabet.. nothing like Chinese characters. Why
fewer? One character, e.g. alpha, instead of Ab/G#,
each of which uses 2 characters, both of which
indicate the same pitch (class), neither of which has
its own unique name, but only a relation to a nearby
note.

> >Finally, standard notation doesn't provide for
> >non-key-specific notation. There's no way to show
> >generic note relationships without choosing a
specific
> >key.
>
> Not sure what you mean here.

Using standard notation, you can't write down a music
phrase/lick without picking a specific key and
specific pitches. If I write in "scale degree"
notation I can specify something like 1, 3b, 5, which
is a root position minor triad in any major scale. I
don't have to write C, Eb, G, or F, Ab, C. That's
more specific information than I want to show.

>
> >The
> >limiting factor is complete familiarization with
the
> >note layout of each different key harp.
>
> Again, this is why I emphasize understanding music
theory.

You'll get no argument from me.

> >I think you're mixing two distinct issues. I know a
> >fair amount of music theory, but that doesn't mean
I
> >know what the notes are in the different holes of
> >differently tuned harmonicas.
>
> It's precisely because I know theory that I know
what notes are in what
> hole.

Nope. I think knowing music theory only lets you
figure out what is where. It's not a knowing like
knowing the way around your home. You can figure out
that 12*12=144, or you can "know" it so you don't have
to figure it out.

> >Wait.. now you're using hole numbers. Why? It's
> >useful and compact.
>
> I never said I never refer to hole numbers.

You did say that most people who read standard
notation don't need hole numbers. I say, yes they do.

> >It's stilted to have to say "play
> >the note corresponding to the 2nd octave 2nd
position
> >root" or something relative to
> >another key harp, as "play the flat 3rd as if
> >playing in C on an F harp." The hole numbers have
> >value because harps are _relatively_ the same, and
the
> >relations are consistent based on hole given a
playing
> >technique.
>
> Quick: what IS the flat 3 of a C on an F harp?

The flat 3 of C is Eb, no matter what harp. If you
mean WHERE is the flat 3, then I'll tell you in hole
numbers because.. how else? Right below the natural
3? Which octave? There are more than 1.

>
> If you had to think about it, you really don't know
theory.

No, you really don't know your harp layout. Knowing
the theory means you instantly know the flat 3 of C is
Eb. Knowing where the Eb is on any key harp is a
function of knowing 1) a generic harp layout based on
scale degree, 2) knowing the specific harp layout for
the key of the harp, e.g. F, or 3) knowing how to
transpose from the harp layout you know to the one you
need.

But if you do
> AND you can combine that with your spatial
relationship method, then reading
> it using standard notation is a breeze.
>
> Oh yeah -- Eb, half step bend in hole 3.

Nah, it the 6 contrabend... %^)

> But just as often, I'll also jot out phrases for
myself or students using
> relationships in the key, e.g., 3rd, 5th, 7th, 4th,
etc., or the actual note
> names, or as notes on a staff.

But, they're aren't "actual note names", they're
relationships. Being forced to PICK actual note names
takes away from the generic nature of the
relationships you're teaching.

> Despite my comments, I encourage you to continue to
develop your tab system.
> I certainly appreciate your commitment to the
harmonica.

Thanks. Let me just reiterate... I was sitting around
having my morning coffee, and this one idea came to me
of separating the blows and draws with a rhythm line
to eliminate the need to show blow/draw symbols with
the hole numbers and to have an easy-to-scan way to
show rhythm with tab. I'm not a tab advocate, or a
tab-over-notation advocate. Just sharing what might
have been useful.

Mike Will

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games
http://sports.yahoo.com