[VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit
Dear Eugene, Sorry. I did not intend to suggest you intended to mislead this newsgroup by suggesting that Rasch's anthology was a collection of essays (plural) from the Guitar Summit. At least one other reader and I at first believed that from your message. The Boccherini article on the guitar quintets in Rasch's anthology was apparently presented at the 2013 (not 2014) Guitar Summit. Otherwise there were no other "Guitar Summit" papers in the anthology. I saw a list of papers for the 2014 conference, but it has since been removed from the web site. As I noted at that time, the "owners" Penn and Stevens act as referees in selecting papers for the "research conference." Since Penn and Stevens apparently are not interested in publishing the papers (or even abstracts) in some form (not even online), one cannot judge the "Guitar Summit" and the quality of their "research." I lived for six months in a town on the Bodensee, and often visited Konstanz. Like you, I doubt nostalgia would be enough to draw me back for the Guitar Summit. (Better tourist goals are Meersburg, or the Zeppelins at Ludwigshafen!! Or for a real "summit," Hohentwiel bei Singen-- three times I rode my bicycle 20 miles and climbed up there, I was so fascinated with the views. One could see for 50 miles--but no Boccherini guitar quintet was in view.) Heinrich Albert (1870-1950)? AJN On 06/27/14, Braig, Eugene wrote: Yes, I do not intend to mislead. I have been told the guitar article was presented by an attendee at the last Lake Konstanz meeting as posted to the Facebook group. As clearly stated, I have never attended in person and am not likely to do so any year soon. Best, Eugene -Original Message- From: [1]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [[2]mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of AJN Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 6:13 PM To: [3]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk; Braig, Eugene; [4]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit Eugene's information is misleading. _*Understanding Boccherini's Manuscripts*_ edited by prolific Dutch Musicologist (U of Utrecht, emeritus) Rudof Rasch contains only a single article on guitar, namely one about Boccherini's still problematic guitar quintets. The author writes "... some are not enthusiastic about [my] article whose punch line is that there is no documented evidence . . ." (Guitar Summit, 2013). This collection of essays probably drew inspiration from the Boccherini Conferences in Lucca, and the much ballyhooed forthcoming Boccherini critical collected edition. Editor Rasch, a recognized Boccherini authority, remarks that in his chapter overview "... the guitar quintets . . . will be mainly passed by." (page 2). Certainly the book is not from the "Guitar Summit" group from Konstanz. The owners of the conference are Gerhard Penn (Austrian) and Andreas Stevens (Swiss). Stevens has an on-line life and works study of Heinrich Albert (1870-1950) AJN --- n 06/27/14, Martyn Hodgson<[5]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: Thank you for this Eugene. I wonder if he did really present a paper of the entire book (258 pages) - who knows? regards, Martyn __ From: "Braig, Eugene" <[1][6]brai...@osu.edu> To: Vihuelalist <[2][7]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu> Sent: Thursday, 26 June 2014, 19:35 Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit There is at least this that was presented at the last Lake Konstanz meeting: [1][3][8]http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Boccherinis-Manuscripts-Ru dol f-R asch/dp/1443856630 Best, Eugene -Original Message- From: [2][4][9]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:[3][5][10]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Monica Hall Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 2:30 PM To: Martyn Hodgson Cc: Vihuelalist Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit I did actually ask if abstracts of the papers could be made available purely as a matter of ineterest - but got no response. Perhaps the organizers haven't got time - but really contributors should be asked to provide these preferably in advance as a matter of course There did seem to me to be an aura cronyism about the affair. . Monica - Original Message -[433][440][6][11]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index .htm l > 214. [434][441][7][12]http://www.avast.com/ > > -- > > References > > 1. mailto:[442][8][13]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu > 2. mailto:[443][9][14]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu > 3. mailto:[444][10][15]jel...@gmail.com > 4. mailto:[445][11][16]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk > 5. mailto:[446][12][17]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk > 6. mailto:[447][13][18]vihuela@cs.dartmouth
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit
Yes, I do not intend to mislead. I have been told the guitar article was presented by an attendee at the last Lake Konstanz meeting as posted to the Facebook group. As clearly stated, I have never attended in person and am not likely to do so any year soon. Best, Eugene -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of AJN Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 6:13 PM To: hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk; Braig, Eugene; vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit Eugene's information is misleading. _*Understanding Boccherini's Manuscripts*_ edited by prolific Dutch Musicologist (U of Utrecht, emeritus) Rudof Rasch contains only a single article on guitar, namely one about Boccherini's still problematic guitar quintets. The author writes "... some are not enthusiastic about [my] article whose punch line is that there is no documented evidence . . ." (Guitar Summit, 2013). This collection of essays probably drew inspiration from the Boccherini Conferences in Lucca, and the much ballyhooed forthcoming Boccherini critical collected edition. Editor Rasch, a recognized Boccherini authority, remarks that in his chapter overview "... the guitar quintets . . . will be mainly passed by." (page 2). Certainly the book is not from the "Guitar Summit" group from Konstanz. The owners of the conference are Gerhard Penn (Austrian) and Andreas Stevens (Swiss). Stevens has an on-line life and works study of Heinrich Albert (1870-1950) AJN --- n 06/27/14, Martyn Hodgson wrote: Thank you for this Eugene. I wonder if he did really present a paper of the entire book (258 pages) - who knows? regards, Martyn __ From: "Braig, Eugene" <[1]brai...@osu.edu> To: Vihuelalist <[2]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu> Sent: Thursday, 26 June 2014, 19:35 Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit There is at least this that was presented at the last Lake Konstanz meeting: [1][3]http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Boccherinis-Manuscripts-Rudol f-R asch/dp/1443856630 Best, Eugene -Original Message- From: [2][4]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:[3][5]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Monica Hall Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 2:30 PM To: Martyn Hodgson Cc: Vihuelalist Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit I did actually ask if abstracts of the papers could be made available purely as a matter of ineterest - but got no response. Perhaps the organizers haven't got time - but really contributors should be asked to provide these preferably in advance as a matter of course There did seem to me to be an aura cronyism about the affair. . Monica - Original Message -[433][440][6]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.htm l > 214. [434][441][7]http://www.avast.com/ > > -- > > References > > 1. mailto:[442][8]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu > 2. mailto:[443][9]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu > 3. mailto:[444][10]jel...@gmail.com > 4. mailto:[445][11]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk > 5. mailto:[446][12]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk > 6. mailto:[447][13]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu > 7. mailto:[448][14]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk > 8. mailto:[449][15]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk > 9. mailto:[450][16]brai...@osu.edu > 10. mailto:[451][17]vihu...@cs.dart References 1. mailto:brai...@osu.edu 2. mailto:vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu 3. http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Boccherinis-Manuscripts-Rudolf-R 4. mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu 5. mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu 6. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/ 7. http://www.avast.com/ 8. mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu 9. mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu 10. mailto:jel...@gmail.com 11. mailto:hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk 12. mailto:mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk 13. mailto:vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu 14. mailto:hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk 15. mailto:mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk 16. mailto:brai...@osu.edu 17. mailto:[451]vihu...@cs.dart To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit
Eugene's information is misleading. _*Understanding Boccherini's Manuscripts*_ edited by prolific Dutch Musicologist (U of Utrecht, emeritus) Rudof Rasch contains only a single article on guitar, namely one about Boccherini's still problematic guitar quintets. The author writes "... some are not enthusiastic about [my] article whose punch line is that there is no documented evidence . . ." (Guitar Summit, 2013). This collection of essays probably drew inspiration from the Boccherini Conferences in Lucca, and the much ballyhooed forthcoming Boccherini critical collected edition. Editor Rasch, a recognized Boccherini authority, remarks that in his chapter overview "... the guitar quintets . . . will be mainly passed by." (page 2). Certainly the book is not from the "Guitar Summit" group from Konstanz. The owners of the conference are Gerhard Penn (Austrian) and Andreas Stevens (Swiss). Stevens has an on-line life and works study of Heinrich Albert (1870-1950) AJN --- n 06/27/14, Martyn Hodgson wrote: Thank you for this Eugene. I wonder if he did really present a paper of the entire book (258 pages) - who knows? regards, Martyn __ From: "Braig, Eugene" <[1]brai...@osu.edu> To: Vihuelalist <[2]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu> Sent: Thursday, 26 June 2014, 19:35 Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit There is at least this that was presented at the last Lake Konstanz meeting: [1][3]http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Boccherinis-Manuscripts-Rudol f-R asch/dp/1443856630 Best, Eugene -Original Message- From: [2][4]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:[3][5]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Monica Hall Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 2:30 PM To: Martyn Hodgson Cc: Vihuelalist Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit I did actually ask if abstracts of the papers could be made available purely as a matter of ineterest - but got no response. Perhaps the organizers haven't got time - but really contributors should be asked to provide these preferably in advance as a matter of course There did seem to me to be an aura cronyism about the affair. . Monica - Original Message -[433][440][6]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.htm l > 214. [434][441][7]http://www.avast.com/ > > -- > > References > > 1. mailto:[442][8]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu > 2. mailto:[443][9]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu > 3. mailto:[444][10]jel...@gmail.com > 4. mailto:[445][11]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk > 5. mailto:[446][12]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk > 6. mailto:[447][13]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu > 7. mailto:[448][14]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk > 8. mailto:[449][15]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk > 9. mailto:[450][16]brai...@osu.edu > 10. mailto:[451][17]vihu...@cs.dart References 1. mailto:brai...@osu.edu 2. mailto:vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu 3. http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Boccherinis-Manuscripts-Rudolf-R 4. mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu 5. mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu 6. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/ 7. http://www.avast.com/ 8. mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu 9. mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu 10. mailto:jel...@gmail.com 11. mailto:hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk 12. mailto:mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk 13. mailto:vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu 14. mailto:hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk 15. mailto:mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk 16. mailto:brai...@osu.edu 17. mailto:[451]vihu...@cs.dart To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit
- Original Message - From: "Martyn Hodgson" To: "Monica Hall" ; "Braig, Eugene" Cc: "Vihuelalist" Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 5:03 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit Well, as we've just discussed - up to a point. This is why it's important to try and have wider informed comment (if not good peer review) of papers presented at conferences which, maybe, assert some pet thoery only very lightly, if at all, supported by historical evidence. The point of all this is that such asserted views can sometimes become widely established by default - and then the very devil to shift. Martyn If we lived in an ideal world this might happen. But we don't and it doesn't. Monica __ From: Monica Hall To: "Braig, Eugene" Cc: Vihuelalist Sent: Friday, 27 June 2014, 15:38 Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit How right you are. The problem with historic performance practices is that most of what is written about them is nothing more than speculation and conjecture. Unfortunately people are not willing to admit this and will fight to the death over things which will be forever unknown. Monica - Original Message - From: "Braig, Eugene" <[1]brai...@osu.edu> To: "Vihuelalist" <[2]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu> Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 3:31 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > An academic on the day job, I recognize flaws inherent in the peer-review > process, that randomly sampling the wrong set from a population of > potential reviewers can have substantial subjective impacts on whether or > not a thing comes to be published. However, I do operate on both sides of > the process (more often as reviewer) and also recognize that it tends to > make contributions to any academic field generally stronger and more > defensible. I suspect dealing with fish, ecology, and statistical > procedures better lends itself to a purer objectivity than dealing with > historic performance practices that have to depend upon a certain amount > of speculation and conjecture. > > Eugene > > > > -Original Message- > From: [3]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:[4]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On > Behalf Of Monica Hall > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 3:42 AM > To: Lex Eisenhardt > Cc: Vihuelalist > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > > To be honest - even if these articles are read by outside readers there is > no guarantee that they are gold standard. > > I do get asked to peer review things. What happens is that you write your > comments and recommendations but the editor decides whether the article is > acceptable as it is or whether the writer should be asked to make any > changes. > > I have also had things I have written myself peer reviewed and rejected > by people who didn't know what they were talking about! (and subsequently > published by someone else)! > > At the end of the day - anyone can get a group of likeminded peole > together > for a conferance and call it what they like. And with the internet > anyone > can publish whatever they like however bizarre it may be. > > It is really a matter of "caveat emptor". You need to evaluate > everything > that you read and check all the information for yourself. It goes > without > saying that you should never copy anyone elses work without checking > sources and ensuring that it is accurate. > > The problem today is that most people don't - a lot of what passes for > original research today is just a rehash of other peoples work - often > written so long ago as to be completely obsolete. > > As Pontius Pilate said "What is truth?". > > Monica > > > - Original Message - > From: "Lex Eisenhardt" <[5]eisenha...@planet.nl> > To: "Vihuelalist" <[6]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu> > Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 2:01 PM > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > > >> >> As I understand it, the (9!) guitar related articles in Early Music 41/4 >> and >> 42/1 were all reviewed by outside readers. >> >> -Oorspronkelijk bericht- >> Van: [7]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:[8]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] Namens >> Martyn Hodgson >> Verzonden: woensdag 25 juni 2014 10:59 >> Aan: Monica Hall; Braig, Eugene >> CC: Vihuelalist >> Onderwerp: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit >> >> >> Well yes... though if papers are presented, but not disseminated by >> the 'Summit' and/or are not peer reviewed is there not the problem >> (alas too common) of mere speculation being transformed into generally >> accepted fact? >> Martyn >> __ >> >> From: Monica Hall <[9]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk> >> To: "Braig, Eugene" <[10]brai...@osu.edu> >> Cc: Vihuelalist <[11]vihuel
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit
- Original Message - From: "WALSH STUART" To: "Monica Hall" ; "Braig, Eugene" Cc: "Vihuelalist" Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 4:11 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit On 27/06/2014 15:38, Monica Hall wrote: How right you are. The problem with historic performance practices is that most of what is written about them is nothing more than speculation and conjecture. Unfortunately people are not willing to admit this and will fight to the death over things which will be forever unknown. I suspect you would fight to the death, Monica, to defend the utter and complete unknowability of certain Baroque guitar practices! Stuart Which ones? Monica - Original Message - From: "Braig, Eugene" To: "Vihuelalist" Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 3:31 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit An academic on the day job, I recognize flaws inherent in the peer-review process, that randomly sampling the wrong set from a population of potential reviewers can have substantial subjective impacts on whether or not a thing comes to be published. However, I do operate on both sides of the process (more often as reviewer) and also recognize that it tends to make contributions to any academic field generally stronger and more defensible. I suspect dealing with fish, ecology, and statistical procedures better lends itself to a purer objectivity than dealing with historic performance practices that have to depend upon a certain amount of speculation and conjecture. Eugene -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Monica Hall Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 3:42 AM To: Lex Eisenhardt Cc: Vihuelalist Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit To be honest - even if these articles are read by outside readers there is no guarantee that they are gold standard. I do get asked to peer review things. What happens is that you write your comments and recommendations but the editor decides whether the article is acceptable as it is or whether the writer should be asked to make any changes. I have also had things I have written myself peer reviewed and rejected by people who didn't know what they were talking about! (and subsequently published by someone else)! At the end of the day - anyone can get a group of likeminded peole together for a conferance and call it what they like. And with the internet anyone can publish whatever they like however bizarre it may be. It is really a matter of "caveat emptor". You need to evaluate everything that you read and check all the information for yourself. It goes without saying that you should never copy anyone elses work without checking sources and ensuring that it is accurate. The problem today is that most people don't - a lot of what passes for original research today is just a rehash of other peoples work - often written so long ago as to be completely obsolete. As Pontius Pilate said "What is truth?". Monica - Original Message - From: "Lex Eisenhardt" To: "Vihuelalist" Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 2:01 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit As I understand it, the (9!) guitar related articles in Early Music 41/4 and 42/1 were all reviewed by outside readers. -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] Namens Martyn Hodgson Verzonden: woensdag 25 juni 2014 10:59 Aan: Monica Hall; Braig, Eugene CC: Vihuelalist Onderwerp: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit Well yes... though if papers are presented, but not disseminated by the 'Summit' and/or are not peer reviewed is there not the problem (alas too common) of mere speculation being transformed into generally accepted fact? Martyn __ From: Monica Hall To: "Braig, Eugene" Cc: Vihuelalist Sent: Wednesday, 25 June 2014, 7:08 Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit That sums it up very nicely. Both the list and the Lake Konstanz meeting were opportunities for guitar enthusiasts to get together to discuss their interests. No need for any peer reviewing or the like. Monica - Original Message - From: "Braig, Eugene" <[1]brai...@osu.edu> To: "Vihuela Dmth" <[2]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 10:01 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > The word " s u b s c r i b e r " ended up robot flagging my last note for > redirection. Here it is again with the offending word deleted. > > E > > > -Original Message- > From: Braig, Eugene > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 4:59 PM > To: Vihuela Dmth > Subject: RE: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > > I think more people are reading more into this thing than they should. > While many contributors coincide, the Lake Konstanz Guitar Research > Meeting operated independently of the Topica Guitar Summit. You can see a > concise summary o
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit
Well, as we've just discussed - up to a point. This is why it's important to try and have wider informed comment (if not good peer review) of papers presented at conferences which, maybe, assert some pet thoery only very lightly, if at all, supported by historical evidence. The point of all this is that such asserted views can sometimes become widely established by default - and then the very devil to shift. Martyn __ From: Monica Hall To: "Braig, Eugene" Cc: Vihuelalist Sent: Friday, 27 June 2014, 15:38 Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit How right you are. The problem with historic performance practices is that most of what is written about them is nothing more than speculation and conjecture. Unfortunately people are not willing to admit this and will fight to the death over things which will be forever unknown. Monica - Original Message - From: "Braig, Eugene" <[1]brai...@osu.edu> To: "Vihuelalist" <[2]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu> Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 3:31 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > An academic on the day job, I recognize flaws inherent in the peer-review > process, that randomly sampling the wrong set from a population of > potential reviewers can have substantial subjective impacts on whether or > not a thing comes to be published. However, I do operate on both sides of > the process (more often as reviewer) and also recognize that it tends to > make contributions to any academic field generally stronger and more > defensible. I suspect dealing with fish, ecology, and statistical > procedures better lends itself to a purer objectivity than dealing with > historic performance practices that have to depend upon a certain amount > of speculation and conjecture. > > Eugene > > > > -Original Message- > From: [3]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:[4]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On > Behalf Of Monica Hall > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 3:42 AM > To: Lex Eisenhardt > Cc: Vihuelalist > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > > To be honest - even if these articles are read by outside readers there is > no guarantee that they are gold standard. > > I do get asked to peer review things. What happens is that you write your > comments and recommendations but the editor decides whether the article is > acceptable as it is or whether the writer should be asked to make any > changes. > > I have also had things I have written myself peer reviewed and rejected > by people who didn't know what they were talking about! (and subsequently > published by someone else)! > > At the end of the day - anyone can get a group of likeminded peole > together > for a conferance and call it what they like. And with the internet > anyone > can publish whatever they like however bizarre it may be. > > It is really a matter of "caveat emptor". You need to evaluate > everything > that you read and check all the information for yourself. It goes > without > saying that you should never copy anyone elses work without checking > sources and ensuring that it is accurate. > > The problem today is that most people don't - a lot of what passes for > original research today is just a rehash of other peoples work - often > written so long ago as to be completely obsolete. > > As Pontius Pilate said "What is truth?". > > Monica > > > - Original Message - > From: "Lex Eisenhardt" <[5]eisenha...@planet.nl> > To: "Vihuelalist" <[6]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu> > Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 2:01 PM > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > > >> >> As I understand it, the (9!) guitar related articles in Early Music 41/4 >> and >> 42/1 were all reviewed by outside readers. >> >> -Oorspronkelijk bericht- >> Van: [7]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:[8]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] Namens >> Martyn Hodgson >> Verzonden: woensdag 25 juni 2014 10:59 >> Aan: Monica Hall; Braig, Eugene >> CC: Vihuelalist >> Onderwerp: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit >> >> >> Well yes... though if papers are presented, but not disseminated by >> the 'Summit' and/or are not peer reviewed is there not the problem >> (alas too common) of mere speculation being transformed into generally >> accepted fact? >> Martyn >> __ >> >> From: Monica Hall <[9]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk> >> To: "Braig, Eugene" <[10]brai...@osu.edu> >> Cc: Vihuelalist <[11]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu> >> Sent: Wednesday, 25 June 2014, 7:08 >> Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit >> That sums it up very nicely.
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit
On 27/06/2014 15:38, Monica Hall wrote: How right you are. The problem with historic performance practices is that most of what is written about them is nothing more than speculation and conjecture. Unfortunately people are not willing to admit this and will fight to the death over things which will be forever unknown. I suspect you would fight to the death, Monica, to defend the utter and complete unknowability of certain Baroque guitar practices! Stuart Monica - Original Message - From: "Braig, Eugene" To: "Vihuelalist" Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 3:31 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit An academic on the day job, I recognize flaws inherent in the peer-review process, that randomly sampling the wrong set from a population of potential reviewers can have substantial subjective impacts on whether or not a thing comes to be published. However, I do operate on both sides of the process (more often as reviewer) and also recognize that it tends to make contributions to any academic field generally stronger and more defensible. I suspect dealing with fish, ecology, and statistical procedures better lends itself to a purer objectivity than dealing with historic performance practices that have to depend upon a certain amount of speculation and conjecture. Eugene -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Monica Hall Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 3:42 AM To: Lex Eisenhardt Cc: Vihuelalist Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit To be honest - even if these articles are read by outside readers there is no guarantee that they are gold standard. I do get asked to peer review things. What happens is that you write your comments and recommendations but the editor decides whether the article is acceptable as it is or whether the writer should be asked to make any changes. I have also had things I have written myself peer reviewed and rejected by people who didn't know what they were talking about! (and subsequently published by someone else)! At the end of the day - anyone can get a group of likeminded peole together for a conferance and call it what they like. And with the internet anyone can publish whatever they like however bizarre it may be. It is really a matter of "caveat emptor". You need to evaluate everything that you read and check all the information for yourself. It goes without saying that you should never copy anyone elses work without checking sources and ensuring that it is accurate. The problem today is that most people don't - a lot of what passes for original research today is just a rehash of other peoples work - often written so long ago as to be completely obsolete. As Pontius Pilate said "What is truth?". Monica - Original Message - From: "Lex Eisenhardt" To: "Vihuelalist" Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 2:01 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit As I understand it, the (9!) guitar related articles in Early Music 41/4 and 42/1 were all reviewed by outside readers. -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] Namens Martyn Hodgson Verzonden: woensdag 25 juni 2014 10:59 Aan: Monica Hall; Braig, Eugene CC: Vihuelalist Onderwerp: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit Well yes... though if papers are presented, but not disseminated by the 'Summit' and/or are not peer reviewed is there not the problem (alas too common) of mere speculation being transformed into generally accepted fact? Martyn __ From: Monica Hall To: "Braig, Eugene" Cc: Vihuelalist Sent: Wednesday, 25 June 2014, 7:08 Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit That sums it up very nicely. Both the list and the Lake Konstanz meeting were opportunities for guitar enthusiasts to get together to discuss their interests. No need for any peer reviewing or the like. Monica - Original Message - From: "Braig, Eugene" <[1]brai...@osu.edu> To: "Vihuela Dmth" <[2]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 10:01 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > The word " s u b s c r i b e r " ended up robot flagging my last note for > redirection. Here it is again with the offending word deleted. > > E > > > -Original Message- > From: Braig, Eugene > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 4:59 PM > To: Vihuela Dmth > Subject: RE: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > > I think more people are reading more into this thing than they should. > While many contributors coincide, the Lake Konstanz Guitar Research > Meeting operated independently of the Topica Guitar Summit. You can see a > concise summary of what the Lake Konstanz/Constance meeting is at the > bottom this GFA page: [3]http://www.guitarfoundation.org/?ArchForums . . . as > well as the organizers' own Facebook group: > [4]https
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit
Indeed. Eugene -Original Message- From: Monica Hall [mailto:mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk] Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 10:38 AM To: Braig, Eugene Cc: Vihuelalist Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit How right you are. The problem with historic performance practices is that most of what is written about them is nothing more than speculation and conjecture. Unfortunately people are not willing to admit this and will fight to the death over things which will be forever unknown. Monica - Original Message - From: "Braig, Eugene" To: "Vihuelalist" Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 3:31 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > An academic on the day job, I recognize flaws inherent in the peer-review > process, that randomly sampling the wrong set from a population of > potential reviewers can have substantial subjective impacts on whether or > not a thing comes to be published. However, I do operate on both sides of > the process (more often as reviewer) and also recognize that it tends to > make contributions to any academic field generally stronger and more > defensible. I suspect dealing with fish, ecology, and statistical > procedures better lends itself to a purer objectivity than dealing with > historic performance practices that have to depend upon a certain amount > of speculation and conjecture. > > Eugene > > > > -Original Message- > From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On > Behalf Of Monica Hall > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 3:42 AM > To: Lex Eisenhardt > Cc: Vihuelalist > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > > To be honest - even if these articles are read by outside readers there is > no guarantee that they are gold standard. > > I do get asked to peer review things. What happens is that you write your > comments and recommendations but the editor decides whether the article is > acceptable as it is or whether the writer should be asked to make any > changes. > > I have also had things I have written myself peer reviewed and rejected > by people who didn't know what they were talking about! (and subsequently > published by someone else)! > > At the end of the day - anyone can get a group of likeminded peole > together > for a conferance and call it what they like. And with the internet > anyone > can publish whatever they like however bizarre it may be. > > It is really a matter of "caveat emptor". You need to evaluate > everything > that you read and check all the information for yourself. It goes > without > saying that you should never copy anyone elses work without checking > sources and ensuring that it is accurate. > > The problem today is that most people don't - a lot of what passes for > original research today is just a rehash of other peoples work - often > written so long ago as to be completely obsolete. > > As Pontius Pilate said "What is truth?". > > Monica > > > - Original Message - > From: "Lex Eisenhardt" > To: "Vihuelalist" > Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 2:01 PM > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > > >> >> As I understand it, the (9!) guitar related articles in Early Music 41/4 >> and >> 42/1 were all reviewed by outside readers. >> >> -Oorspronkelijk bericht- >> Van: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] Namens >> Martyn Hodgson >> Verzonden: woensdag 25 juni 2014 10:59 >> Aan: Monica Hall; Braig, Eugene >> CC: Vihuelalist >> Onderwerp: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit >> >> >> Well yes... though if papers are presented, but not disseminated by >> the 'Summit' and/or are not peer reviewed is there not the problem >> (alas too common) of mere speculation being transformed into generally >> accepted fact? >> Martyn >> __ >> >> From: Monica Hall >> To: "Braig, Eugene" >> Cc: Vihuelalist >> Sent: Wednesday, 25 June 2014, 7:08 >> Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit >> That sums it up very nicely. Both the list and the Lake Konstanz >> meeting >> were opportunities for guitar enthusiasts to get together to discuss >> their >> interests. No need for any peer reviewing or the like. >> Monica >> - Original Message - >> From: "Braig, Eugene" <[1]brai...@osu.edu> >> To: "Vihuela Dmth" <[2]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu> >> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 10:01 PM >> Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit >> > The word " s u b s c r i b e r " ended up robot flagging my last note >> for >> > redirection. Here it is again with the offending word deleted. >> > >> > E >> > >> > >> > -Original Message- >> > From: Braig, Eugene >> > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 4:59 PM >> > To: Vihuela Dmth >> > Subject: RE: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit >> > >> > I think more people are reading more into this thing than they >> should. >> > While many contributors coincide, the Lake Konstanz Guitar Research >> > Meeting operated independently
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit
How right you are. The problem with historic performance practices is that most of what is written about them is nothing more than speculation and conjecture. Unfortunately people are not willing to admit this and will fight to the death over things which will be forever unknown. Monica - Original Message - From: "Braig, Eugene" To: "Vihuelalist" Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 3:31 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit An academic on the day job, I recognize flaws inherent in the peer-review process, that randomly sampling the wrong set from a population of potential reviewers can have substantial subjective impacts on whether or not a thing comes to be published. However, I do operate on both sides of the process (more often as reviewer) and also recognize that it tends to make contributions to any academic field generally stronger and more defensible. I suspect dealing with fish, ecology, and statistical procedures better lends itself to a purer objectivity than dealing with historic performance practices that have to depend upon a certain amount of speculation and conjecture. Eugene -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Monica Hall Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 3:42 AM To: Lex Eisenhardt Cc: Vihuelalist Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit To be honest - even if these articles are read by outside readers there is no guarantee that they are gold standard. I do get asked to peer review things. What happens is that you write your comments and recommendations but the editor decides whether the article is acceptable as it is or whether the writer should be asked to make any changes. I have also had things I have written myself peer reviewed and rejected by people who didn't know what they were talking about! (and subsequently published by someone else)! At the end of the day - anyone can get a group of likeminded peole together for a conferance and call it what they like. And with the internet anyone can publish whatever they like however bizarre it may be. It is really a matter of "caveat emptor". You need to evaluate everything that you read and check all the information for yourself. It goes without saying that you should never copy anyone elses work without checking sources and ensuring that it is accurate. The problem today is that most people don't - a lot of what passes for original research today is just a rehash of other peoples work - often written so long ago as to be completely obsolete. As Pontius Pilate said "What is truth?". Monica - Original Message - From: "Lex Eisenhardt" To: "Vihuelalist" Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 2:01 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit As I understand it, the (9!) guitar related articles in Early Music 41/4 and 42/1 were all reviewed by outside readers. -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] Namens Martyn Hodgson Verzonden: woensdag 25 juni 2014 10:59 Aan: Monica Hall; Braig, Eugene CC: Vihuelalist Onderwerp: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit Well yes... though if papers are presented, but not disseminated by the 'Summit' and/or are not peer reviewed is there not the problem (alas too common) of mere speculation being transformed into generally accepted fact? Martyn __ From: Monica Hall To: "Braig, Eugene" Cc: Vihuelalist Sent: Wednesday, 25 June 2014, 7:08 Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit That sums it up very nicely. Both the list and the Lake Konstanz meeting were opportunities for guitar enthusiasts to get together to discuss their interests. No need for any peer reviewing or the like. Monica - Original Message - From: "Braig, Eugene" <[1]brai...@osu.edu> To: "Vihuela Dmth" <[2]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 10:01 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > The word " s u b s c r i b e r " ended up robot flagging my last note for > redirection. Here it is again with the offending word deleted. > > E > > > -Original Message- > From: Braig, Eugene > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 4:59 PM > To: Vihuela Dmth > Subject: RE: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > > I think more people are reading more into this thing than they should. > While many contributors coincide, the Lake Konstanz Guitar Research > Meeting operated independently of the Topica Guitar Summit. You can see a > concise summary of what the Lake Konstanz/Constance meeting is at the > bottom this GFA page: [3]http://www.guitarfoundation.org/?ArchForums . . . as > well as the organizers' own Facebook group: > [4]https://www.facebook.com/groups/131072740286508/. I've never managed to > attend the Lake Konstanz meeting in person. > > The "Guitar Summit" was a discussion forum (not unlike the present suite > of
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit
An academic on the day job, I recognize flaws inherent in the peer-review process, that randomly sampling the wrong set from a population of potential reviewers can have substantial subjective impacts on whether or not a thing comes to be published. However, I do operate on both sides of the process (more often as reviewer) and also recognize that it tends to make contributions to any academic field generally stronger and more defensible. I suspect dealing with fish, ecology, and statistical procedures better lends itself to a purer objectivity than dealing with historic performance practices that have to depend upon a certain amount of speculation and conjecture. Eugene -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Monica Hall Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 3:42 AM To: Lex Eisenhardt Cc: Vihuelalist Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit To be honest - even if these articles are read by outside readers there is no guarantee that they are gold standard. I do get asked to peer review things. What happens is that you write your comments and recommendations but the editor decides whether the article is acceptable as it is or whether the writer should be asked to make any changes. I have also had things I have written myself peer reviewed and rejected by people who didn't know what they were talking about! (and subsequently published by someone else)! At the end of the day - anyone can get a group of likeminded peole together for a conferance and call it what they like. And with the internet anyone can publish whatever they like however bizarre it may be. It is really a matter of "caveat emptor". You need to evaluate everything that you read and check all the information for yourself. It goes without saying that you should never copy anyone elses work without checking sources and ensuring that it is accurate. The problem today is that most people don't - a lot of what passes for original research today is just a rehash of other peoples work - often written so long ago as to be completely obsolete. As Pontius Pilate said "What is truth?". Monica - Original Message - From: "Lex Eisenhardt" To: "Vihuelalist" Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 2:01 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > > As I understand it, the (9!) guitar related articles in Early Music 41/4 > and > 42/1 were all reviewed by outside readers. > > -Oorspronkelijk bericht- > Van: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] Namens > Martyn Hodgson > Verzonden: woensdag 25 juni 2014 10:59 > Aan: Monica Hall; Braig, Eugene > CC: Vihuelalist > Onderwerp: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > > > Well yes... though if papers are presented, but not disseminated by > the 'Summit' and/or are not peer reviewed is there not the problem > (alas too common) of mere speculation being transformed into generally > accepted fact? > Martyn > __ > > From: Monica Hall > To: "Braig, Eugene" > Cc: Vihuelalist > Sent: Wednesday, 25 June 2014, 7:08 > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > That sums it up very nicely. Both the list and the Lake Konstanz > meeting > were opportunities for guitar enthusiasts to get together to discuss > their > interests. No need for any peer reviewing or the like. > Monica > - Original Message - > From: "Braig, Eugene" <[1]brai...@osu.edu> > To: "Vihuela Dmth" <[2]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu> > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 10:01 PM > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > > The word " s u b s c r i b e r " ended up robot flagging my last note > for > > redirection. Here it is again with the offending word deleted. > > > > E > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Braig, Eugene > > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 4:59 PM > > To: Vihuela Dmth > > Subject: RE: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > > > > I think more people are reading more into this thing than they > should. > > While many contributors coincide, the Lake Konstanz Guitar Research > > Meeting operated independently of the Topica Guitar Summit. You can > see a > > concise summary of what the Lake Konstanz/Constance meeting is at the > > bottom this GFA page: [3]http://www.guitarfoundation.org/?ArchForums > . . . as > > well as the organizers' own Facebook group: > > [4]https://www.facebook.com/groups/131072740286508/. I've never > managed to > > attend the Lake Konstanz meeting in person. > > > > The "Guitar Summit" was a discussion forum (not unlike the present > suite > > of Dartmouth lute lists) that was hosted by Topica beginning in 2007. > > However, it went through earlier incarnations hosted by a couple > different > > online services (most notably as the "Classical Guitar History List") > that > > slightly predate the first Lake Konstanz meeting. I ha
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit
Dear Lex and List Well - O.U.P. - one of the most distinguished of academic publishers of books about music - published Jim Tyler's book on the early guitar in 2002, I suspect without its being read, edited or proof read by anyone else. With all due respect to Jim - may he rest in peace and rise in glory - it is riddled with errors. Nevertheless it is the standard work of reference on the subject and will be for our lifetimes. And then there is Groves... still flaunting Craig Russell's fictional biography of Santiago de Murcia...probably to the end of time... Better not go on. Plumber is currently ripping my house apart to replace toilet and I am dying to go... Monica - Original Message - From: "Lex Eisenhardt" To: "Vihuelalist" Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 10:23 AM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit Good point for mr. Pilatus! Nevertheless, the recent articles in EM generally seem well researched and they are worthwhile reading. I haven't read the book on Boccherini's manuscripts yet, but Cambridge Scholars Publishing and the book editor (Rudof Rasch) have a very good scholarly reputation. Lex -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] Namens Monica Hall Verzonden: vrijdag 27 juni 2014 9:42 Aan: Lex Eisenhardt CC: Vihuelalist Onderwerp: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit To be honest - even if these articles are read by outside readers there is no guarantee that they are gold standard. I do get asked to peer review things. What happens is that you write your comments and recommendations but the editor decides whether the article is acceptable as it is or whether the writer should be asked to make any changes. I have also had things I have written myself peer reviewed and rejected by people who didn't know what they were talking about! (and subsequently published by someone else)! At the end of the day - anyone can get a group of likeminded peole together for a conferance and call it what they like. And with the internet anyone can publish whatever they like however bizarre it may be. It is really a matter of "caveat emptor". You need to evaluate everything that you read and check all the information for yourself. It goes without saying that you should never copy anyone elses work without checking sources and ensuring that it is accurate. The problem today is that most people don't - a lot of what passes for original research today is just a rehash of other peoples work - often written so long ago as to be completely obsolete. As Pontius Pilate said "What is truth?". Monica - Original Message - From: "Lex Eisenhardt" To: "Vihuelalist" Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 2:01 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit As I understand it, the (9!) guitar related articles in Early Music 41/4 and 42/1 were all reviewed by outside readers. -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] Namens Martyn Hodgson Verzonden: woensdag 25 juni 2014 10:59 Aan: Monica Hall; Braig, Eugene CC: Vihuelalist Onderwerp: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit Well yes... though if papers are presented, but not disseminated by the 'Summit' and/or are not peer reviewed is there not the problem (alas too common) of mere speculation being transformed into generally accepted fact? Martyn __ From: Monica Hall To: "Braig, Eugene" Cc: Vihuelalist Sent: Wednesday, 25 June 2014, 7:08 Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit That sums it up very nicely. Both the list and the Lake Konstanz meeting were opportunities for guitar enthusiasts to get together to discuss their interests. No need for any peer reviewing or the like. Monica - Original Message - From: "Braig, Eugene" <[1]brai...@osu.edu> To: "Vihuela Dmth" <[2]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 10:01 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > The word " s u b s c r i b e r " ended up robot flagging my last note for > redirection. Here it is again with the offending word deleted. > > E > > > -Original Message- > From: Braig, Eugene > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 4:59 PM > To: Vihuela Dmth > Subject: RE: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > > I think more people are reading more into this thing than they should. > While many contributors coincide, the Lake Konstanz Guitar Research > Meeting operated independently of the Topica Guitar Summit. You can see a > concise summary of what the Lake Konstanz/Constance meeting is at the > bottom this GFA page: [3]http://www.guitarfoundation.org/?ArchForums . . . as > well as the organizers' own Facebook group: > [4]https://www.facebook.com/groups/131072740286508/. I've never managed to > attend the Lake Konstanz meeting in person. > > The "Guitar Summit" was a discussion forum (not
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit
Good point for mr. Pilatus! Nevertheless, the recent articles in EM generally seem well researched and they are worthwhile reading. I haven't read the book on Boccherini's manuscripts yet, but Cambridge Scholars Publishing and the book editor (Rudof Rasch) have a very good scholarly reputation. Lex -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] Namens Monica Hall Verzonden: vrijdag 27 juni 2014 9:42 Aan: Lex Eisenhardt CC: Vihuelalist Onderwerp: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit To be honest - even if these articles are read by outside readers there is no guarantee that they are gold standard. I do get asked to peer review things. What happens is that you write your comments and recommendations but the editor decides whether the article is acceptable as it is or whether the writer should be asked to make any changes. I have also had things I have written myself peer reviewed and rejected by people who didn't know what they were talking about! (and subsequently published by someone else)! At the end of the day - anyone can get a group of likeminded peole together for a conferance and call it what they like. And with the internet anyone can publish whatever they like however bizarre it may be. It is really a matter of "caveat emptor". You need to evaluate everything that you read and check all the information for yourself. It goes without saying that you should never copy anyone elses work without checking sources and ensuring that it is accurate. The problem today is that most people don't - a lot of what passes for original research today is just a rehash of other peoples work - often written so long ago as to be completely obsolete. As Pontius Pilate said "What is truth?". Monica - Original Message - From: "Lex Eisenhardt" To: "Vihuelalist" Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 2:01 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > > As I understand it, the (9!) guitar related articles in Early Music 41/4 > and > 42/1 were all reviewed by outside readers. > > -Oorspronkelijk bericht- > Van: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] Namens > Martyn Hodgson > Verzonden: woensdag 25 juni 2014 10:59 > Aan: Monica Hall; Braig, Eugene > CC: Vihuelalist > Onderwerp: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > > > Well yes... though if papers are presented, but not disseminated by > the 'Summit' and/or are not peer reviewed is there not the problem > (alas too common) of mere speculation being transformed into generally > accepted fact? > Martyn > __ > > From: Monica Hall > To: "Braig, Eugene" > Cc: Vihuelalist > Sent: Wednesday, 25 June 2014, 7:08 > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > That sums it up very nicely. Both the list and the Lake Konstanz > meeting > were opportunities for guitar enthusiasts to get together to discuss > their > interests. No need for any peer reviewing or the like. > Monica > - Original Message - > From: "Braig, Eugene" <[1]brai...@osu.edu> > To: "Vihuela Dmth" <[2]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu> > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 10:01 PM > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > > The word " s u b s c r i b e r " ended up robot flagging my last note > for > > redirection. Here it is again with the offending word deleted. > > > > E > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Braig, Eugene > > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 4:59 PM > > To: Vihuela Dmth > > Subject: RE: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > > > > I think more people are reading more into this thing than they > should. > > While many contributors coincide, the Lake Konstanz Guitar Research > > Meeting operated independently of the Topica Guitar Summit. You can > see a > > concise summary of what the Lake Konstanz/Constance meeting is at the > > bottom this GFA page: [3]http://www.guitarfoundation.org/?ArchForums > . . . as > > well as the organizers' own Facebook group: > > [4]https://www.facebook.com/groups/131072740286508/. I've never > managed to > > attend the Lake Konstanz meeting in person. > > > > The "Guitar Summit" was a discussion forum (not unlike the present > suite > > of Dartmouth lute lists) that was hosted by Topica beginning in 2007. > > However, it went through earlier incarnations hosted by a couple > different > > online services (most notably as the "Classical Guitar History List") > that > > slightly predate the first Lake Konstanz meeting. I have been a > spotty > > contributor to each iteration of the discussion fora/listservs since > 2005. > > When I was active there, there was a great deal of discussion > centered on > > transitional periods at either end of the 19th c. Yes, Matanya Ophee > > served as an organizing hub for these listservs; his contributions to > and > > prominent voice in this particular a
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit
To be honest - even if these articles are read by outside readers there is no guarantee that they are gold standard. I do get asked to peer review things. What happens is that you write your comments and recommendations but the editor decides whether the article is acceptable as it is or whether the writer should be asked to make any changes. I have also had things I have written myself peer reviewed and rejected by people who didn't know what they were talking about! (and subsequently published by someone else)! At the end of the day - anyone can get a group of likeminded peole together for a conferance and call it what they like. And with the internet anyone can publish whatever they like however bizarre it may be. It is really a matter of "caveat emptor". You need to evaluate everything that you read and check all the information for yourself. It goes without saying that you should never copy anyone elses work without checking sources and ensuring that it is accurate. The problem today is that most people don't - a lot of what passes for original research today is just a rehash of other peoples work - often written so long ago as to be completely obsolete. As Pontius Pilate said "What is truth?". Monica - Original Message - From: "Lex Eisenhardt" To: "Vihuelalist" Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 2:01 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit As I understand it, the (9!) guitar related articles in Early Music 41/4 and 42/1 were all reviewed by outside readers. -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] Namens Martyn Hodgson Verzonden: woensdag 25 juni 2014 10:59 Aan: Monica Hall; Braig, Eugene CC: Vihuelalist Onderwerp: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit Well yes... though if papers are presented, but not disseminated by the 'Summit' and/or are not peer reviewed is there not the problem (alas too common) of mere speculation being transformed into generally accepted fact? Martyn __ From: Monica Hall To: "Braig, Eugene" Cc: Vihuelalist Sent: Wednesday, 25 June 2014, 7:08 Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit That sums it up very nicely. Both the list and the Lake Konstanz meeting were opportunities for guitar enthusiasts to get together to discuss their interests. No need for any peer reviewing or the like. Monica - Original Message - From: "Braig, Eugene" <[1]brai...@osu.edu> To: "Vihuela Dmth" <[2]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 10:01 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > The word " s u b s c r i b e r " ended up robot flagging my last note for > redirection. Here it is again with the offending word deleted. > > E > > > -Original Message- > From: Braig, Eugene > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 4:59 PM > To: Vihuela Dmth > Subject: RE: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > > I think more people are reading more into this thing than they should. > While many contributors coincide, the Lake Konstanz Guitar Research > Meeting operated independently of the Topica Guitar Summit. You can see a > concise summary of what the Lake Konstanz/Constance meeting is at the > bottom this GFA page: [3]http://www.guitarfoundation.org/?ArchForums . . . as > well as the organizers' own Facebook group: > [4]https://www.facebook.com/groups/131072740286508/. I've never managed to > attend the Lake Konstanz meeting in person. > > The "Guitar Summit" was a discussion forum (not unlike the present suite > of Dartmouth lute lists) that was hosted by Topica beginning in 2007. > However, it went through earlier incarnations hosted by a couple different > online services (most notably as the "Classical Guitar History List") that > slightly predate the first Lake Konstanz meeting. I have been a spotty > contributor to each iteration of the discussion fora/listservs since 2005. > When I was active there, there was a great deal of discussion centered on > transitional periods at either end of the 19th c. Yes, Matanya Ophee > served as an organizing hub for these listservs; his contributions to and > prominent voice in this particular arena are hard to deny, whatever your > opinion of them are. Still, at its core, the "summit" was really only a > listserv of guitar geeks (like me), scholars, and professional performers > who liked to ask interesting questions of a collective body of knowledge > (I tended to do more asking than ans! > wering). > > Best, > Eugene > > > -Original Message- > From: [5]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:[6]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On > Behalf Of jelmaa > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 12:43 PM > To: Martyn Hodgson > Cc: Vihuela Dmth > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar Summit > > Hi Martin and others, > > No, the pap
