Fwd: [Harp-L] intonation and such

["Winslow Yerxa" <winslowyerxa@xxxxxxxxx>]

Jonathan appears to be arguing with what he imagines (incorrectly)
that I mean.

I do not argue that overblows or bends can or should be made to sound
the same as what Jonathan calls "natural" notes (all notes are natural
notes if you can produce them by applying your body to a physical
instrument). If you have followed my recent posts, I have pointed out
the opposite and cited the Ode to Joy Challenge I staged a few years
back as showing how difficult it is to disguise even the simplest bends.

However, "different" does not mean "bad or "poor" or "weak". It just
means different, and different does not need to be concealed or
protected. It needs to be brought to its full potential, and then used
in an appropriate way.

My point was that these notes can be made to sound much stronger and
fuller than many players either care to try or are willing to believe
is possible. They seem to assume that the notes will sound weak and
therefore try to hide them.

Instead, I argue that any player who uses these notes should get as
strong as they can in playing them. Anything worth doing is worth
doing as well as possible. Half-assed technique leads to half-assed
artistic decisions.

Proper command of overbends includes: sustaining them for several
seconds, enhancing their tonal strength and richness, and playing them
both at standard pitch and in bending them up and down in pitch.
Players should learn to articulate the beginnings and ends of the
notes and to color them with vibrato and tremolo, and to be able to
vary the dynamic level of these notes while sustaining them. Only then
should a player decide the degree to which he or she wishes to expose
or conceal the notes. Decisions at that point will be based not on a
position of weakness but on a position of artistic qualities.

Most players have not developed their overbend technique to the point
where they should be making hard-and-fast decisions about where these
note "should" be placed. It's a moving target that will get closer,
wider, and easier to hit as the player's technique improves.

Winslow

--- In harp-l-archives@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Jonathan Ross <jross38@...> wrote:


Winslow wrote:

"The one part of this I disagree with is the part about not exposing
the overblow."

Funny, I thought that was the best part.  Part of playing any musical  
instrument is to emphasize strengths and minimize weaknesses.   
Choosing very carefully when you play something (bend, overblow,  
tongue-slap, etc...) is a key way of doing just this.

"It's like admitting to weak overblow technique, and much of what is
played and recorded using overblows betrays that weakness."

No, it's admitting that an overblow isn't a natural note.  That it  
has a different tone and phrasing than the natural notes of a  
diatonic harmonica and thus you have to choose when and how to use it  
in a song.  This is the same for bends.  Both have a different  
tonality than natural notes and thus the need to figure out when and  
when not to use them.  It's really no different than knowing when to  
use a "T" or "K" articulation to start the note or knowing when and  
when not to use vibrato.

"Fifth may be a better overall position than third for a particular
tune, but if it's because third exposes the overblow, I say go for
third and get your overblows to the point where you can sustain them
with full tone, in tune, and bend them up and down at will."

While the tone may be full, it will still sound different than a  
natural note.  Same with a bend.  It's a question of when to use it  
and when not--when will that tone fit and when won't it.

"Only then will you have proper command of the technique. In fact,
several of the players named below do have that command, which makes
the advice a little puzzling."

They can play with overblows quite well.  But they still can't make  
them seamless.  I've not yet heard anyone do that.  I've also not yet  
heard anyone do that with bends either.  The idea that somehow  
eventually someone will practice enough and get good enough technique  
to make the physical difference in the behavior of the reed between  
natural and bent and overblown notes simply nonexistent just doesn't  
make any sense to me.  Given that, learning when and when not to use  
these techniques is some of the best advice I've ever heard.

Iceman:

"I have all my students linger longer on their intonation problem  
notes. It starts with holding 4 hole inhale bend as a long tone. If  
it is used in a melodic line, I'll have them play that 'problem' note  
longer in the line until they stop shying away from it. It's just  
another note - just because you need a slightly different technique  
to play it is no reason to be afraid of it."

No, but it's every reason to listen to it and figure out when it can  
and can't be used for best effect and musical results.  An overblow  
is not just a natural note made in a different manner.  The reed is  
doing something different, that's not just imagination and neither  
hard work nor concerted thought will make that little fact go away.

"Same goes for OB in my more advanced students. Be proud of it. If it  
doesn't sound like you want it to, you have to expose it to the air  
more to take care of the irregularities inherent. Adjustments are  
made, subtleties are discovered and a more micro sense of pitch and  
tone develops."

"Expose it to more air"?  It depends on what you want for the song in  
question.  Sometimes a created note (bends or overblows) in the right  
place is perfect.  But in the wrong place the inherently different  
nature of their timbre, phrasing and the pitch-variable part (which  
is always there--even with good intonation, the pitch is always a bit  
slippery just by definition) can and will make the note stick out  
like a sore thumb.  Think of the "Ode to Joy" challenge.  Playing  
that piece with the bend in second position (the oft used 3draw whole- 
step bend) sounds nasty.  Unlistenible really.  Knowing not to do  
that (by playing in first position or on a Melody Maker if you want  
2nd) is key to getting a musical result which won't scare small  
children and make dogs howl in a bad way.

Chris M writes:
"Let me explain a little more.  I was speaking with Mr Anderson about  
playing How Insensitive. He plays it on a Bb harp and starts the song  
in the middle octave where he needs to use OBs and the 7OD to play  
the melody. I told him in a song like that it would be better to not  
use OBs unless you have to because they are weak notes compared to  
other available notes. Although most if not all Jobim tunes use all  
12 tones in the course of a tune there are better positions that can  
be played to make the melody smoother especially if one does not have  
full facility over the OBs.  I use a C harp in 3rd for this tune."

I think this may be the best thing I've ever read from Chris.  I  
don't agree with his characterization of overblows as "weak" in tone  
and the "least expressive notes" but if I'm reading his general point  
it's that you have to use overblows quite judiciously if you don't  
want them to stand out and if you want to have a smoother sound.  I'd  
say the same for bends.  And, I'd note the "ifs" in the previous  
sentence: smooth, even and such is not always what is needed for a  
given song.  But, that's the point: it's to match the instrument to  
the song and vice-versa.  If you're playing "The Girl from Ipanema"  
and the timbre and phrasing is all over the map, it probably will  
sound horrible.  If you're playing thrash-metal it might be perfect  
to have the timbre popping in unusual places and the phrasing  
uneven.  As always, it's about context.

This is Winslow again and then George's response:

"">I say go for third and get your overblows to
 >the point where you can sustain them with full
 >tone, in tune, and bend them up and down at will."

"Great advice, but a lot of work. If you succeed, you will be only  
the third person to do so (Howard and Chris are the other two). But  
the goal is the correct one if you're going to play overblows."


I'm not sure what the goal is: to be able to play them well?  That's  
not just Howard and Chris.  I guess it depends on what "full tone"  
means.  If it means that they are unnoticeable from natural or bent  
notes in tone, then neither Chris nor Howard has gotten close.   
That's not a diss against either, but rather just noting that it's  
not like there is an even-ness and same-ness of tone between bends  
and natural notes either.  All three sound different.  Many people  
can use all three quite well.  If the goal is to use them  
interchangeably, then it's inherently false: they aren't the same and  
can't be used the same.  This is no different than in fretted  
instruments: fretted notes will sound different than unfretted ones.   
The difference there is usually smaller than with bends and  
overbends, and they have the benefit of not needing to worry about  
pitch and intonation as do harmonica players and their created notes,  
but there is a difference and most guitarists learn fairly early when  
to fret and when to use the open string--and just as importantly when  
not to.  That being said, the analogy is just that, and not exact-- 
bends and overblows are a physically different phenomena than natural  
notes whereas fretted strings are doing the same thing as unfretted,  
thus their tonal and phrasing differences are much, much smaller.


Paul M wrote:

"That being said, as harmonicas and technique improved through the  
years, the
notion of 'not exposing the overblows' changed along with it, and  
Howard, as
well as most guys I know that play with that approach, are no longer
concerned about 'exposing the overblow' . . . as most now get good  
control
and tone out of them . . ."

Probably my biggest complaint about Howard's playing is that he does  
expose them too much.  Indeed, if there's any one thing it's that he  
tries too hard too often.  When he relaxes and doesn't try to show  
off, he's great.  When he forces things in terms of technique, he  
loses me entirely.  That's in part because of the techniques he  
chooses to use when he's forcing things: tricky things to do, but  
which end up not sounding all that interesting.  The same with many  
others.  It's those who use created notes but place them in easy to  
hit and right for effect places who tend to have less problems (and  
note that these two are not always the same, but usually go hand in  
hand, and knowing which is which and when is when is the main issue).

Finally, just because I have to say it every time in pre-emption  
because someone will claim otherwise: I am not saying overblows are  
not valid.  I am not saying that they are not an important  
technique.  They are.  The issues I bring up go for bends every bit  
as much as overblows.  Both are wonderful things which help make the  
diatonic such an interesting instrument.  Neither are the same as the  
natural notes.





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












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



_______________________________________________
Harp-L is sponsored by SPAH, http://www.spah.org
Harp-L@...
http://harp-l.org/mailman/listinfo/harp-l

--- End forwarded message ---