Re: [Harp-L] Harp L: Chromatic versus Diatonic

[joe leone <3n037@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Something to consider in the debate of diatonic vs chromatic  
(diatonic is the senior instrument. so I place it first.)

The term is 'difficulty factor'. You may try a tune and for the sake  
of argument, let's say it has 3 major parts. A head and 2 bridges.  
So, the head is a difficulty factor of 3, the first bridge a 5, and  
the second bridge a 7. The total factor is 15 BUT the tune IS do- 
able. Unfortunately due to the section that's a 7, it requires weeks  
(and sometimes more weeks) to get that one section.

Now lets say you found another key where the factors are 4,6,5. Here  
you are biting off a 6 factor in order to LOOSE that nasty 7 factor.  
The total is still 15, but the tune takes less time to get. Another  
key gives you a 5,5,5 factor. Still a 15 BUT it seems that ALL the  
notes are fighting you and you can't get a legato or smooth delivery  
out of the notes. The set-up is unfriendly

Eventually you find a key where the factors are 4,5,5. A-Haaaa it's a  
14 which is alMOST a 15, but it lays on the harmonica quite well. Ok,  
so maybe that was while using a chromatic. If you are attempting the  
same tune on a diatonic, you can almost guarantee that ANYTHING you  
do is going to INCREASE the difficulty factor by a few points. Why?  
BeCAUSE you are inventing notes on the fly.

On top of that, while you are inventing notes you are also  
concentrating too hard on tone. And instead of having a slide to help  
you reach out and touch those elusive notes, your mouth becomes the  
slide. Yes, it would be quite nice to be able to do a tune and hit  
all the notes correctly, but sometimes this is impractical.  
UnFORtunately there are those who, if they pick up the 'fudging'  
factor that you are trying to sneak by with, may just call you on it.

There are some tunes that just shouldn't be done on chromo. I could  
list them but it may cause another stir and I would be taken the  
wrong way again. Suffices to say that there are also tunes that  
shouldn't be attempted on diatonic. Ok, there's no law that says you  
can't play anything ON anything. I (myself) have an entire book of  
tunes that I play on diatonic...for practice. But I would never do  
them on stage as they aren't complete. Or a better term would be: "I  
can't trust the timbres".

Every tune has a few CRITICAL notes that set the mood of the tune. If  
you can't get these notes, you shouldn't do the tune. At least not in  
performance. Now if a person was in the business and it was their  
living, I can see where spending 5 months on a tune is justifiable. I  
mean they could learn 2.4 tunes per year, and in 10 years they would  
have 24 tunes for a repetoire that they could play over and over and  
over as a result of traveling all over the place, with the resultant  
factor that they were NOT getting stale nor overexposed.

But I think anyone below that narrow range of masters is wasting  
their time on God awful tough-a55 stuff when the time could be better  
spent on something else. In other words, use the right tool for the  
job. Don't cut down a tree with a chisel, don't try and plane a piece  
of wood with a brick.

just an opinion folks.   smo-joe