Re: [Harp-L] Diatonic/chromatic

["jross38@xxxxxxxxxxx" <jross38@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> 
> Well, let's say it is not possible to estimate the limits of the mechanics
> before trying to go over them.

Of course not.  But those limits have been tested ad nauseam for twenty odd years.  Hell, in terms of bends for more than a hundred years.  You may not have reached your personal limit of ability, but the mechanics are known and the limits therein quite well by this point.    

> I've been quite far I think compared to many, and still haven't found the
> limits. For the moment, I am the limitative factor, not the instrument.
> Ok, maybe my ears aren't that good.

I am certainly the limiting factor for my own playing.  But, that doesn't mean there aren't certain things which my instrument simply can and can't do.  You can't bend notes on a piano (ok, you can if you either modify the thing or have someone holding a tuning wrench and turning the tuners while you play, but the point is solid) and you can't play a chord on a trumpet (iirc you can kind of play two notes at once, but two notes does not a chord make).  And nothing wrong with either.  Both are known limitations of the instruments in question.  One of the known limitations, IMO, of the diatonic is that it has three different ways of creating notes, and those three don't sound the same, don't behave the same and are not simply interchangeable.

These limitations raise some interesting questions.  How does one go about playing highly chromatic music on the diatonic?  How can the instrument be rearranged to make things easier?  How can you use the differences inherent in the modes of sound production to your advantage?   

The problem I see is all too often the answer seems to be to ignore these questions and claim wholeheartedly that the problems don't even exist and are only in the minds of finicky listeners or the limits of the particular player.  And yes that's a bit of a straw man, but it seems to hang there in the air.

As for the long list of notables who seem to have no problems with the various issues above, well, I really think a lot of it is indeed the "isnt-that-cool" effect.  I doubt any of them would accept the levels of timbral differences note to note (not to mention the all too often sloppy intonation or variance in articulation) on their own instruments.  As for wanting a diatonic and not a chromatic, if you write for it well and take advantage of the strengths rather than highlight the weaknesses then it makes perfect sense.  Or, if you really want the odd factor musically, that makes sense as well. But, if your trying to play a slow standard, well, that's what this thread is really about, IMO.

Also, I want to mention Rosco's post just to say that I basically agree with most of what he writes.  These techniques are just techniques, and the question is not can they be used or should they be used, but how can they be used to best serve the music.  Bends, overblows and more are wonderful tools for expressing music on the diatonic.  But, like all tools they have their proper usage. I'm stealing this analogy from a few people, most recently Smo-Joe, but I've always felt it's a damn good one.  The right tool for the right job, both in terms of instrument choice and in terms of instrument usage.




JR Ross