On 9 Aug 2011, at 21:21, Christopher Smith wrote:
> I'm not saying YOU don't hear it the way you do, I'm just saying there is
> flexibility when you get far away from the usual 12-tone system that can
> account for variances in identification
Also my own background is non-standard as I have a
dlawn Arts Academy
patricksheehanmu...@gmail.com
-Original Message-
From: John Howell [mailto:john.how...@vt.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 08, 2011 7:32 PM
To: finale@shsu.edu
Subject: Re: [Finale] non-standard key signatures
At 8:18 PM -0400 8/8/11, Christopher Smith wrote:
>On Mon Aug 8,
On Tue Aug 9, at TuesdayAug 9 6:37 AM, Steve Parker wrote:
>
> On 9 Aug 2011, at 01:18, Christopher Smith wrote:
>
>>
>> On Mon Aug 8, at MondayAug 8 7:51 PM, Steve Parker wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 8 Aug 2011, at 23:21, Klaus Smedegaard Bjerre wrote:
>>>
One scale inherent in the first 13 p
On 9 Aug 2011, at 16:57, John Howell wrote:
> No, it fits perfectly into the natural harmonic
> series as a small whole-number multiple of the
> fundamental frequency. It does NOT fit into the
> artificial equal-tempered scale, nor is there any
> reason to expect it to.
I write in Ben Johns
At 11:37 AM +0100 8/9/11, Steve Parker wrote:
> >
>> It's marginally closer to the #4 than to the
>>P4. It's not anywhere near what we call in tune
>>these days, but it's enough to be interpreted
>>by our ears as the #4.
>
>Very marginally (1 cent). I don't hear it as an augmented fourth.
On 9 Aug 2011, at 01:31, John Howell wrote:
> Or else they played it out of tune.
Or for big band screaming, play it exactly as an 11/8.. ;-)
Steve P.
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
On 9 Aug 2011, at 01:18, Christopher Smith wrote:
>
> On Mon Aug 8, at MondayAug 8 7:51 PM, Steve Parker wrote:
>
>>
>> On 8 Aug 2011, at 23:21, Klaus Smedegaard Bjerre wrote:
>>
>>> One scale inherent in the first 13 partials of brasses is the overtone
>>> scale, also known as the Lydian do
At 8:18 PM -0400 8/8/11, Christopher Smith wrote:
>On Mon Aug 8, at MondayAug 8 7:51 PM, Steve Parker wrote:
>
>>
>> On 8 Aug 2011, at 23:21, Klaus Smedegaard Bjerre wrote:
>>
>>> One scale inherent in the first 13 partials
>>>of brasses is the overtone scale, also known
>>>as the Lydian domina
On Mon Aug 8, at MondayAug 8 7:51 PM, Steve Parker wrote:
>
> On 8 Aug 2011, at 23:21, Klaus Smedegaard Bjerre wrote:
>
>> One scale inherent in the first 13 partials of brasses is the overtone
>> scale, also known as the Lydian dominant scale.
>
> The 11th harmonic is actually about midway b
I'll add my vote against mixed key signatures.
If I see music written this way it gives a sense of early 20C.
Accidentals on each note or per bar is much more contemporary.
I don't find them too bad to read though.
Steve P.
___
Finale mailing list
Final
On 8 Aug 2011, at 23:21, Klaus Smedegaard Bjerre wrote:
> One scale inherent in the first 13 partials of brasses is the overtone scale,
> also known as the Lydian dominant scale.
The 11th harmonic is actually about midway between the perfect fourth and the
augmented fourth.
George Russell's Ly
saidharmonic G minor with a raised 4th step.
Klaus
>
>From: John Howell
>To: finale@shsu.edu
>Sent: Monday, August 8, 2011 11:48 PM
>Subject: Re: [Finale] non-standard key signatures
>
>>On 2011-08-08 19:21, Adam Taylor wrote:
>>>
>On 2011-08-08 19:21, Adam Taylor wrote:
>> I'm wondering what a performer's opinion is on non-standard key
>> signatures, for example, one containing B-flat, E-flat, F-sharp and
>> C-sharp. The first movement of my second string quartet uses these four
>> accidentals and it could clean up the
On 2011-08-08 19:21, Adam Taylor wrote:
> I'm wondering what a performer's opinion is on non-standard key
> signatures, for example, one containing B-flat, E-flat, F-sharp and
> C-sharp. The first movement of my second string quartet uses these four
> accidentals and it could clean up the notation
I hate them, too, and I've never met a performer who likes them.
David H. Bailey
On 8/8/2011 3:31 PM, Raymond Horton wrote:
> This performer hates them
> On Aug 8, 2011 1:52 PM, "Adam Taylor" wrote:
>> I'm wondering what a performer's opinion is on non-standard key
>> signatures, for example,
This performer hates them
On Aug 8, 2011 1:52 PM, "Adam Taylor" wrote:
> I'm wondering what a performer's opinion is on non-standard key
> signatures, for example, one containing B-flat, E-flat, F-sharp and
> C-sharp. The first movement of my second string quartet uses these four
> accidentals an
Well, I HATE seeing them. I always forget the non-standard part, and end up
pencilling in courtesy accidentals, which makes it way more cluttered than if
they were ordinary accidentals in the key of Bb or Gm. It's just too hard to go
back on 40 years of tonal training. If there is a key signatur
Hi Adam,
It hardly sounds like a piece that uses just four accidentals will be anything
remotely like "a mess of sharps and flats" -- and regardless, writing the
accidentals out will be *much* more performer-friendly than insisting on a
nonstandard key signature.
Cheers,
- DJA
-
WEB: http
I'm wondering what a performer's opinion is on non-standard key
signatures, for example, one containing B-flat, E-flat, F-sharp and
C-sharp. The first movement of my second string quartet uses these four
accidentals and it could clean up the notation a bit to have them all in
the key signature
19 matches
Mail list logo
