[Harp-L] re: Intonation and Such



Paul M writes:

"JR . . . I'm starting to get confused concerning the point you've been
trying to make . . . "

Sorry. I was trying to be clear but must not have been. I'll try to be clearer.

"Are you are saying that BOTH bends and overblows are problematic because
they don't have the tonal integrity of so-called 'regular' notes . . . ???"


Yes, though I wouldn't (and haven't) use the term "problematic". They are both different in terms of phrasing and timbre from natural notes (intonation can be dealt with, though they have more issues than natural notes by the nature of how they are created).

"If so, then what's left to play on a Richter-tuned diatonic??? "

Why is it that you assume simply because something is different and I say that needs to be recognized and appreciated you assume that this means they can't be used. The harmonica can be thought of as having two (it's really three, as bends and overblows are two distinct phenomena, but for this a dichotomy actually works) different types of notes: naturals and accidentals (not the same as in a piano, but the intent works). The naturals represent one physical phenomena, the accidentals another. Knowing how to use these together is the key. Specifically, since the natural notes are much easier to use and master, as well as much less prone to certain issues (see above, though here intonation is back in play--it's very easy to play an accidental with bad intonation, fairly hard to do so with a natural note), knowing when and how to use the accidentals is key to playing the harmonica to it's fullest potential. Ignoring the difference between the phenomena tends to lead, IMO, to fairly unmusical results.

I have never and will never say you can't or shouldn't use the accidentals (bends and overblows). What I have said is that it's important to know when and how to use them to best effect and to recognize that they are not just naturals with a slightly different technique for getting them. There are many times when you can use them without having them stick out much at all--it depends on the style of music, the particular song and what position (or tuning, for that matter) you're using. For instance, I find that something like "Sweet Georgie Brown" while using many accidentals does lay fairly well in 2nd position on a standard tuned diatonic (with good control of bends, of course). Here they are in places where you can get away with the timbre and phrasing issues (though not the intonation, for the most part--that needs to be pretty spot-on). But, in something like the melody from "The Ode to Joy", you can't, because of where and how the bent note in 2nd position comes in the song. It depends on the context of the song and the style of the music--and the Ode has much fewer bends.

"If you are advocating only the use of so-called 'regular' notes as tonally
pure, then one would suppose that the only music that can be played on a
Richter-tuned diatonic is 'some' folk, fiddle, or 'Oompah' tunes . . ."


See above. I am not advocating that, I never have and never will.

"Otherwise, one will have to play either chromatic or alternately tuned
harmonicas to achieve this 'tonal purity' to play other styles of music . ."


I do believe that any diatonic harmonica can never be played with "tonal purity" (not my term), though I would say it's the timbre and phrasing issues which hurt as much or more than intonation (which can be gotten quite good). In terms of timbre and phrasing, accidentals will never sound the same as naturals, and if one is playing a musical form where this is needed, then one will need to find another way than simply using naturals and accidentals on the diatonic (in any tuning--these issues don't go away by using an alternate tuning, though that might make certain things for certain songs easier). Now, that doesn't mean you can't play many highly complex styles on the diatonic. It means you have to choose very, very carefully how and on what diatonic you play those styles, IMO--and maybe consider multiple diatonics and other things as well.

". Of course, I'm not suggesting that there is anything wrong with playing
chromatic or alternate-tuned harmonicas (actually, one of the most moving
harmonica-listening experiences I've ever had was a Richard Hunter set of
original compositions at Buckeye several years ago playing alternate tuned
harps) . . . "


In the issues I'm raising, I both make and believe that there is no distinction between standard major tuned diatonics and any other tuning. In any Richter diatonic you still have the issue of natural notes and accidentals, regardless of tuning (excepting, perhaps, a tuning which had all the "natural notes" (ie C, D, E, etc...) as blows and all the sharps/flats as draws--though even here you'd have some serious legato issues.

"As 'brevity is the soul of wit,' I'd appreciate a quick and simple synopsis
. . . so my very simple mind can grasp these very deep concepts . . . "


You are not simple, you are quite intelligent. However, if you need simple, the first paragraph and second paragraphs are as brief as I can do (brevity may be the sole of wit, but it's not something I do well).




()() JR "Bulldogge" Ross () () & Snuffy, too:) `----'







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