Re: [Harp-L] Define terms fluid = legato

[michael rubin <michaelrubinharmonica@xxxxxxxxx>]

I do not see the sounds in between notes as noise.  They are often
called quartertones and different cultures embrace them, name them,
notate them, etc.  Part of what makes the harmonica so beautiful is
its ability to play these sounds.  I love them and often choose them
intentionally for inflection.  Now, I could not play bends as
consistently perfectly on pitch as Charlie McCoy without lots of
practice but I am not an amateur either.  When I want the sound of
"very on pitch" for folk or country music, I can do it.  But for blues
and rock and certain styles of jazz  I am very likely to play "out of
tune" intentionally.  You may not like it, but it sounds good to me.
Michael Rubin
Michaelrubinharmonica.com

On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:29 AM,  <Philharpn@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> All this discussion about whether the diatonic is more "fluid" than the
> chromatic? True, the diatonic offers the chance to hit more pitchy notes (or
> non-notes) just like the slide trombone than the chromatic.
>
> ((Both harps are equally fluid -- it all depends on the player. The
> unspoken issue here is "bendability." The diatonic has more bends, therefore it
> musts be more "fluid." (Playing the diatonic without bends is not fluid?) The
> extreme example of this bendability are the large number of diatonic players
> who play notes flat or sharp or even between notes. Talk about fluid
> playing. And just to prove they are skilled, they mix them up. Half flat, half
> flat, half between notes, fast, slow and half fast.))   There is a term for
> these "between notes" it's called noise.
>
> The unspoken issue here is that the diatonic is "more fluid" because it has
> more than a half-step bend on a few holes.
>
> Just because you can get three bends on hole 3 draw and two bends on draw
> two does not make the playing any more "fluid."
>
> To further complicate matters, Moses diatonic players don't even know how a
> chromatic works -- but they are damn sure they hate it and that it is
> impossible to play.
>
> Back in the day, most chromatic players graduated from diatonic to
> chromatic "so they didn't have to worry about all those missing notes." They can't
> bend notes on a diatonic and are damn sure they don't want to waste their
> time figuring it out -- it would only be a waste of time.
>
> Then there is a third group that plays both chromatic and diatonic and
> can't understand why these two groups can't understand how the other harp works.
>
> The term wanted here is legato: (smooth, flowing manner, without breaks
> between the notes).
>
> It is possible to play legato on any instrument. Piano legato anyone?
>
> Didn't Tommy Reilly perfect legato while playing blow-draw patterns?
>
> Also, there are no absolutes. There will always be someone who is the
> exception to the rule (conventional wisdom) and pretty soon a whole bunch of
> people are following in his footsteps.
>
> Phil
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> In a message dated 7/6/10 10:01:08 AM, bon@xxxxxxxxxx writes:
> (snip)
>>
>> BTW, someone mentioned they like the fluidity of the diatonic over the
>> chromatic and the opposite is why I don't like the diatonic in
>> classical music, because it lacks the articulation, clearness and even
>> tonal quality of notes through the registers.  Kind of like speaking
>> with only vowel sounds and no consonants.  So I strive for clarity in
>> my playing always.
>>
>> I do feel Toots plays with fluidity on chromatic on the ballads!!!
>>
>>
>> Harmonically yours,
>>
>> Robert
>> http://www.robertbonfiglio.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>