> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Horton > Sent: 23 February 2008 17:22 > To: finale@shsu.edu > Subject: Re: [Finale] Firebirds > > > I was just guessing on artificial harmonics, and knew I was wrong as > soon as I wrote it. > > > Thanks greatly for that explanation. It does seem that it would be > fairly simple to play a nearly identical effect on the D string, > starting at the 15 pitch, as you say. A knowledgeable conductor or > concertmaster should insist on the correct octave. >
Right, I just decided to get off my arse and try this out. And while I was wrong earlier about suggesting it would be too hard to reach, the effect is completely different. Quite apart from not being able to have the specific pitches indicated ring out thanks to the intervening harmonics at this higher position, the actual slide becomes a far more dominant sound than the harmonics, and the overall timbre is significantly different. And far far too many supposedly-knowledgeable people don't have a full understanding of harmonics... > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Horton > Sent: 23 February 2008 17:26 > To: finale@shsu.edu > Subject: Re: [Finale] Firebirds > > > Neal - are the second vlns notated the same way as the last > example (but > at a different time? (I have a score or two, but have mislaid them.) > > > One other thought from looking at those examples is that > Stravinsky just > gave up on his original high D harmonics. Although the 1918 suite is > certainly in error. > I thought the seconds were notated an octave below the firsts, but I'm saying that from memory. The possibility that Stravinsky ended up compromising with the D string gliss certainly seems to be a likely explanation. _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
