[Harp-L] What does "wrong" mean tonally? And what about texture?

[drfertig@xxxxxxxxx]

I am intrigued by musicians' quite varied reaction to various tonalities that emanate from harmonicas, both diatonic and chromatic, etc.   And by tonalities, I mean both the actual notes and their pitch, and then the textures for which harps are almost uniquely capable.

As for notes and pitch: Anthony's apt personal observations (re: Butter, see below - & I LOVE PB's playing) are like those of many others re: other players (setting aside busy-ness/genre choices), and suggest to me, arguably, that some listeners' evaluation of a piece of music may be strongly influenced by one's "perfect pitch" or intense ability to perceive and identify specific notes/pitches, especially when one's ear is trained to empiric scales, such as the western  "do re mi" scales.  

(Rent the movie 100% Arabica, great example of middle eastern music scales and a really good Parisian flick, too!) 

Perhaps
 it's why some cringe at some bent notes or note selections (Of course plenty of mistaken notes are simply that, and not desirable,
I'm talking about the CHOSEN notes that make others cringe) yet  that others find emotionally true and evocative.   

Might one's lack of ear may make it easier to hear and appreciate  less harmonically "true" sounds/pitches/combinations?  And vice versa?

Anyway, perhaps intense training and acute sensitivity affect this?  Thoughts?  or am I such a uneducated tone-deaf rube that I just don't get how simple it is?  But I am musically uneducated and untrained, as those of you who've heard me know.

On the other hand, the tonal textures that are uniquely characteristic of harmonicas seem more personal than empiric.  Listen to the reedy, note-y lyrical texture of accordions and chromatic harmonicas (e.g., in older French cinema) they have a feel entirely distinct from the gutsy slurring, bending, grumbling, and moaning diatonic sounds diatonic harps often have in blues.

For my own
 perverse taste texture and tone is foremost, (oh yes notes are important too!)  

I see being able to play particular notes on an instrument as a technical accomplishment.  However selecting and managing a given instrument so as to bring texture and meaning that animates those notes in the ears and hearts of a listener, is another.    

A Sax and a Ukelele can play the same notes, that's a technical fact, the texture is an aesthetic choice.   And of course it's a subjective, taste-driven, and culturally/experientially influenced thing.   

I don't argue the point, so much as I am exploring it.  

Yes, I need an editor!  Sorry for the prolixity . . .

Dave "He's not micro-tonal, he's tone-deaf" Fertig



--- On Mon, 7/6/09, harp-l-request@xxxxxxxxxx
 <harp-l-request@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
 RE: [Harp-L] RE: Paul Butterfield(answering to Micholas....)
        	 Monday, July 6, 2009 8:52 AM 
        	
            
            
            From: 
            "Anthony Smith" <anthony@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
            	
            	
            	
        	To: 
        	"'marcos coll'" <marcos_coll@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "'harp forum'" <harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx>
                I am not a big fan of Butterfield's stuff.  To me, he seemed like a really
busy player and much didn't sound correct. It seemed like he would use blow
notes in place of bent draws to allow for fast play and to simplfy breathing
patterns even if it wasn't right. In fact, when I started playing the
instrument, I would turn the station when he came on to hopefully avoid
getting sucked in to playing what to my ear, was wrong.  I surely don't want
to offened anyone who felt his playing and again this is just my take on it.

Regards,