Re: [Harp-L] intonation and such



As I've said before, J.R. Ross is almost entirely correct here, in my
opinion. Very measured, rational analysis.
WVa Bob


> Winslow wrote:
>
> "The one part of this I disagree with is the part about not exposing
> the overblow."
>
> Funny, I thought that was the best part.  Part of playing any musical
> instrument is to emphasize strengths and minimize weaknesses.
> Choosing very carefully when you play something (bend, overblow,
> tongue-slap, etc...) is a key way of doing just this.
>
> "It's like admitting to weak overblow technique, and much of what is
> played and recorded using overblows betrays that weakness."
>
> No, it's admitting that an overblow isn't a natural note.  That it
> has a different tone and phrasing than the natural notes of a
> diatonic harmonica and thus you have to choose when and how to use it
> in a song.  This is the same for bends.  Both have a different
> tonality than natural notes and thus the need to figure out when and
> when not to use them.  It's really no different than knowing when to
> use a "T" or "K" articulation to start the note or knowing when and
> when not to use vibrato.
>
> "Fifth may be a better overall position than third for a particular
> tune, but if it's because third exposes the overblow, I say go for
> third and get your overblows to the point where you can sustain them
> with full tone, in tune, and bend them up and down at will."
>
> While the tone may be full, it will still sound different than a
> natural note.  Same with a bend.  It's a question of when to use it
> and when not--when will that tone fit and when won't it.
>
> "Only then will you have proper command of the technique. In fact,
> several of the players named below do have that command, which makes
> the advice a little puzzling."
>
> They can play with overblows quite well.  But they still can't make
> them seamless.  I've not yet heard anyone do that.  I've also not yet
> heard anyone do that with bends either.  The idea that somehow
> eventually someone will practice enough and get good enough technique
> to make the physical difference in the behavior of the reed between
> natural and bent and overblown notes simply nonexistent just doesn't
> make any sense to me.  Given that, learning when and when not to use
> these techniques is some of the best advice I've ever heard.
>
> Iceman:
>
> "I have all my students linger longer on their intonation problem
> notes. It starts with holding 4 hole inhale bend as a long tone. If
> it is used in a melodic line, I'll have them play that 'problem' note
> longer in the line until they stop shying away from it. It's just
> another note - just because you need a slightly different technique
> to play it is no reason to be afraid of it."
>
> No, but it's every reason to listen to it and figure out when it can
> and can't be used for best effect and musical results.  An overblow
> is not just a natural note made in a different manner.  The reed is
> doing something different, that's not just imagination and neither
> hard work nor concerted thought will make that little fact go away.
>
> "Same goes for OB in my more advanced students. Be proud of it. If it
> doesn't sound like you want it to, you have to expose it to the air
> more to take care of the irregularities inherent. Adjustments are
> made, subtleties are discovered and a more micro sense of pitch and
> tone develops."
>
> "Expose it to more air"?  It depends on what you want for the song in
> question.  Sometimes a created note (bends or overblows) in the right
> place is perfect.  But in the wrong place the inherently different
> nature of their timbre, phrasing and the pitch-variable part (which
> is always there--even with good intonation, the pitch is always a bit
> slippery just by definition) can and will make the note stick out
> like a sore thumb.  Think of the "Ode to Joy" challenge.  Playing
> that piece with the bend in second position (the oft used 3draw whole-
> step bend) sounds nasty.  Unlistenible really.  Knowing not to do
> that (by playing in first position or on a Melody Maker if you want
> 2nd) is key to getting a musical result which won't scare small
> children and make dogs howl in a bad way.
>
> Chris M writes:
> "Let me explain a little more.  I was speaking with Mr Anderson about
> playing How Insensitive. He plays it on a Bb harp and starts the song
> in the middle octave where he needs to use OBs and the 7OD to play
> the melody. I told him in a song like that it would be better to not
> use OBs unless you have to because they are weak notes compared to
> other available notes. Although most if not all Jobim tunes use all
> 12 tones in the course of a tune there are better positions that can
> be played to make the melody smoother especially if one does not have
> full facility over the OBs.  I use a C harp in 3rd for this tune."
>
> I think this may be the best thing I've ever read from Chris.  I
> don't agree with his characterization of overblows as "weak" in tone
> and the "least expressive notes" but if I'm reading his general point
> it's that you have to use overblows quite judiciously if you don't
> want them to stand out and if you want to have a smoother sound.  I'd
> say the same for bends.  And, I'd note the "ifs" in the previous
> sentence: smooth, even and such is not always what is needed for a
> given song.  But, that's the point: it's to match the instrument to
> the song and vice-versa.  If you're playing "The Girl from Ipanema"
> and the timbre and phrasing is all over the map, it probably will
> sound horrible.  If you're playing thrash-metal it might be perfect
> to have the timbre popping in unusual places and the phrasing
> uneven.  As always, it's about context.
>
> This is Winslow again and then George's response:
>
> "">I say go for third and get your overblows to
>  >the point where you can sustain them with full
>  >tone, in tune, and bend them up and down at will."
>
> "Great advice, but a lot of work. If you succeed, you will be only
> the third person to do so (Howard and Chris are the other two). But
> the goal is the correct one if you're going to play overblows."
>
>
> I'm not sure what the goal is: to be able to play them well?  That's
> not just Howard and Chris.  I guess it depends on what "full tone"
> means.  If it means that they are unnoticeable from natural or bent
> notes in tone, then neither Chris nor Howard has gotten close.
> That's not a diss against either, but rather just noting that it's
> not like there is an even-ness and same-ness of tone between bends
> and natural notes either.  All three sound different.  Many people
> can use all three quite well.  If the goal is to use them
> interchangeably, then it's inherently false: they aren't the same and
> can't be used the same.  This is no different than in fretted
> instruments: fretted notes will sound different than unfretted ones.
> The difference there is usually smaller than with bends and
> overbends, and they have the benefit of not needing to worry about
> pitch and intonation as do harmonica players and their created notes,
> but there is a difference and most guitarists learn fairly early when
> to fret and when to use the open string--and just as importantly when
> not to.  That being said, the analogy is just that, and not exact--
> bends and overblows are a physically different phenomena than natural
> notes whereas fretted strings are doing the same thing as unfretted,
> thus their tonal and phrasing differences are much, much smaller.
>
>
> Paul M wrote:
>
> "That being said, as harmonicas and technique improved through the
> years, the
> notion of 'not exposing the overblows' changed along with it, and
> Howard, as
> well as most guys I know that play with that approach, are no longer
> concerned about 'exposing the overblow' . . . as most now get good
> control
> and tone out of them . . ."
>
> Probably my biggest complaint about Howard's playing is that he does
> expose them too much.  Indeed, if there's any one thing it's that he
> tries too hard too often.  When he relaxes and doesn't try to show
> off, he's great.  When he forces things in terms of technique, he
> loses me entirely.  That's in part because of the techniques he
> chooses to use when he's forcing things: tricky things to do, but
> which end up not sounding all that interesting.  The same with many
> others.  It's those who use created notes but place them in easy to
> hit and right for effect places who tend to have less problems (and
> note that these two are not always the same, but usually go hand in
> hand, and knowing which is which and when is when is the main issue).
>
> Finally, just because I have to say it every time in pre-emption
> because someone will claim otherwise: I am not saying overblows are
> not valid.  I am not saying that they are not an important
> technique.  They are.  The issues I bring up go for bends every bit
> as much as overblows.  Both are wonderful things which help make the
> diatonic such an interesting instrument.  Neither are the same as the
> natural notes.
>
>
>
>
>
>   ()()    JR "Bulldogge" Ross
> ()  ()   & Snuffy, too:)
> `----'
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   ()()    JR "Bulldogge" Ross
> ()  ()   & Snuffy, too:)
> `----'
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Harp-L is sponsored by SPAH, http://www.spah.org
> Harp-L@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://harp-l.org/mailman/listinfo/harp-l
>






This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and MHonArc 2.6.8.