RE: XB-40 Retunings?

["Chris Michalek" <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Sorry George.  I didn't intend to imply that you think most of the
players in the world can't play in tune. Very bad wording on my part.
I don't know if George agress with my statement or not and he has
never mentioned anything pro or con in sny og our private
conversations.  This topis is something that comes from me.

Apologies to George and anyone else that mis-understood my thoughts.

chris michalek


>
>
>
>---- Original Message ----
>From: gbrooks1@xxxxxxxxx
>To: peloquinharp@xxxxxxxxxxx, mudharp@xxxxxxx, harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: RE: XB-40 Retunings?
>Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 21:37:19 -0500
>
>>
>>Tom Albanese and Michael Peloquin, both of whom I greatly admire,
>have
>>recently posted concerning this thread, in each case opening with
>the same
>>quotation from a recent and provocative post by Chris Michalek, who
>I also
>>greatly admire.  This is the quote:
>>
>>>I agree with Mr. Brooks on his thoughts
>>>regarding the xb40.  With the standard
>>>diatonic more than half of the users can't
>>>play in tune.
>>
>>This gives the impression that I expressed the opinion that half of
>all
>>players cannot play the diatonic harmonica in tune.  But I never
>said, or
>>even implied this in the post with which Chris was agreeing.  I was
>>responding to the assertion of Tim Moyer, who I also greatly admire,
>that
>>"it requires some additional discipline to fully exploit the
>possibilities
>>[of the XB-40]."  I argued "that the XB-40, while opening up great
>new
>>avenues of expression, requires additional discipline not only to
>fully
>>exploit the possibilities, but merely to play in tune."
>>
>>Chris's post and those that followed are extremely interesting, but
>the
>>thought that 50% or 90% of people cannot play the diatonic harmonica
>in tune
>>comes from him, not me.  My entire post is reproduced below.
>>
>>George
>>
>>
>>Post of 2/2404 reproduced:
>>
>>Tim Moyer wrote:
>>
>>>The XB-40 was designed to provide
>>>more flexibility in the bends, and not
>>>as a sort of augmented standard diatonic,
>>>but it requires some additional discipline to
>>>fully exploit the possibilities.
>>
>>I would argue that the XB-40, while opening up great new avenues of
>>expression, requires additional discipline not only to fully exploit
>the
>>possibilities, but merely to play in tune.
>>
>>Chromaticity on the thing?  I look forward to seeing what, and who,
>emerges.
>>I agree with Pat Missin that it's probably as difficult to play in
>F# on a
>>XB-40 in C as it is on a standard C diatonic set up for overblows
>and
>>overdraws.  But I don't know; my opinion, unlike Pat's, is based on
>only
>>short amounts of playing time on the XB-40 on a couple of occasions,
>and I
>>would love for someone to contradict me with a post along the lines
>of "It's
>>actually quite easy once you realize that...."
>>
>>I don't have an XB-40 yet.  I'm too busy learning to play a Marine
>Band
>>(chromatically).
>>
>>George
>>
>>--
>>Harp-l is sponsored by SPAH, http://www.spah.org
>>Hosted by ValuePricehosting.com, http://www.valuepricehosting.com
>>