RE: [Harp-L] Re: positions you can use on diatonic

[JersiMuse <jersimuse@xxxxxxxxx>]

Well, it is not because I have a different opinion that "I'm not getting
it".
I've carefully read all messages, I understand each one's opinion, I've even
thought the same way as you during a long time, and I know why I've changed
my mind.

BTW, I'm pretty sure Brendan thinks in terms of position but knows the notes
on a C harp, as well as the scales he needs. I'm also pretty sure he can
read music and knows the music theory.

"if both musicians do not know the same elements in music theory, they don't
communicate"
Exactly.

-----Message d'origine-----
De : harp-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:harp-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] De la part
de Cara Cooke
Envoyé : lundi 2 avril 2012 22:21
À : harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx
Objet : Re: [Harp-L] Re: positions you can use on diatonic

Brendan Power said it very well.  To me, though, it seems like JersiMuse is
not getting it.  It may just be our varied musical experiences.

*"To my opinion, if positions only refer to root notes, they are useless,
and the note name is a much better and precise information. Especially when
you communicate with other people from the band, who are usually not
harmonica players. I'm surprised that harmonica players so much feel the
need to use a separate vocabulary, enabling them to better communicate with
other harmonica players, and complicates their communication with other
musicians. Whereas, to my opinion, playing music should mainly be the
encounter of different instruments."*

So far, I haven't learned or been around an instrument whose players do not
have their own vocabulary with regards to communication with other players
of the same instrument.  They may not talk that way to you when you are on a
different instrument, but they will to each other.  I also seldom hear
anyone talk "positions" on harmonica to another player who is not also a
harmonica player, unless first asked specifically to do so.  When playing
with other musicians, you may have your own shorthand communication that
works with them or you may speak plainly in music theory, but not all
communication techniques will be useful -- so it is best to learn how to
speak and understand many of the different systems.  To me, this is part of
the seasoning of a musician.  As a harmonica player, knowing about positions
is very useful.  As a beginning lesson regarding positions, it can be very
helpful to know that certain positions natively lend themselves to certain
emotionally charged scales, or modes, without the need to bend notes.  They
make very good starting points.  If you don't wish to talk about positions
to another harmonica player, fine, but they haven't out-lived their
usefulness or gone away.  The concepts are still important, even if you use
a different reference system to discuss them.

*"BTW, I'll let you just think about one point.  For most musicians, a note
is at the same time a name AND a position (position of fingers, toungue,
lips, etc). Still most musicians name their position by the name of the note
it gives.  Of course, most of musicians can not change their instrument's
key at a glimpse.  It is still interesting to know that some harp players do
think all 4 draw as being a D, on all harps, instead of "a third position".
Like most musicians not playing a C instrument do (sax, trumpet, etc)."
*
With all due respect, if you ask a sax player to tell you what note he just
played and he says it was an Eb, you need next to know if he gave it to you
in "concert".  Brass players can get the same note using different positions
or fingerings, so they never would refer to the note they played by the
position or fingering, or vice versa, unless they were talking to someone
playing the same instrument, or to a leader who might be trying to
coordinate everyone's intonation.  However, two french horn players might
debate whether the open E or the 1&2E was the better choice.  When they do,
they are not talking "concert".  They are talking "french horn".  If a banjo
player calls for everyone to move to "2" (or holds two fingers up), he is
typically trying to get everyone into the key of A.  (His capo is on the 2nd
fret.)  If the group is music theory oriented and sufficiently varied in
types of instruments, then holding two finders up may mean the key of D
(concert).  If a guitar player holds up four fingers, he most likely means
the key of B.  His instrument is "concert", but he is telling the group that
he has moved his capo to the 4th fret.  (Unless the guitar player is a
flat-picker, B is the most common key played from the 4th fret.  It really
helps to know about the people with whom you are playing music and the
instruments they are playing.)  Across our southern border, keys are called
by their vocal names (with a slight adjustment for dialect).  If "sol" is
called, you will be playing in the key of G.  If you hold two fingers up for
the key of "re", it may be taken as an insult.  In one band, we all knew
some basic American sign language, so we called the keys by their roots (by
hand) with a flair that indicated sharp or flat.
It worked well, but it only worked for that group.  Other people weren't
willing to take the time to remember the seven sign language signs when they
already had a method of communication that worked for them.

Overall, it has to be agreed upon by those in the group in what "language"
communication is to take place or confusion will ensue.  Communication is
dependent upon the audience.  You all have to speak the same language.
This is a harmonica list, so "positions" is in the lexicon.  It is most
useful, if you wish to understand or be understood, that you learn as many
varieties of these different communication styles as possible so that you
will be ready to enable communication on your part when necessary.

*"Positions are not mandatory and are limited, classical music theory is not
mandatory neither, but it is not much more difficult to be learnt and it has
proven for centuries to be unlimited."
*
For the purpose of the discussion regarding positions (which have
corresponding roots), positions are as limited as music theory (12 notes,
12 positions).  It is simply a reference to enable communication that is
based upon the instrument.  Music Theory serves a broader, more separate
purpose and has evolved to suit it.  The root for the position is the
"Rosetta Stone" reference to music theory.  The fact is harmonica is just
short of 200 years old and we are only now really learning what it can do
and how to improve it.  Our references may change over time, but they will
remain instrument specific until we have to talk to musicians who don't play
harmonica.

Music Theory references may not always suffice for some of these instrument
references, either, by the way -- in terminology or in notation.  For
example, in fiddle, a shuffle is a specific technique with specific bowing
patterns to achieve specific purposes.  Violinists do not typically learn
the basic fiddle shuffle.  When they are asked to play a piece in which the
composer has inserted these fiddle techniques, they tend to work themselves
to death trying to get them to sound right, and they always sound stiff.
The composer only has the limitations of music notation to work with when
writing a shuffle and a violinist will tend to read it a certain way.
However, a fiddler will see the same notation, recognize the pattern, and
make the intuitive leap that the composer means for the violin to play a
shuffle.  The violin family is a very old instrument family, yet music
theory can only compensate for so much in its notation to communicate what
the composer desires should be played.  The rest is left up to
interpretation by the musician.

If you were to look at music theory and music notation, you would find that
it has been evolving for centuries.  It creates a sort of language to help
musicians talk to one another, but it isn't perfect yet.  It is still
evolving.  It is still "theory".  Ultimately, a language has to be shared
before it can serve as effective communication.  So, if both musicians do
not know the same elements in music theory, they don't communicate.
Especially in the root/folk music forms, it is common for the musician to
not be up on his music theory past the bits he needs to know to do his job
well.  So, now you are back to communicating in some specialized form that
suits the situation, like positions and numbers and signals.

cara

On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 9:01 AM, JersiMuse <jersimuse@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> It was not a total coincidence from me.
>
> It may surprise you Brendan, but I totally agree on most of your points.
>
> I would just like to precise few things to conclude my own remarks.
>
> To my opinion, if positions only refer to root notes, they are 
> useless, and the note name is a much better and precise information.
> Especially when you communicate with other people from the band, who 
> are usually not harmonica players.
> I'm surprised that harmonica players so much feel the need to use a 
> separate vocabulary, enabling them to better communicate with other 
> harmonica players, and complicates their communication with other 
> musicians. Whereas, to my opinion, playing music should mainly be the 
> encounter of different instruments.
>
> Anyway.
> I agree on the fact that all this is new, and becomes complicated to 
> manipulate when arriving to chromatism.
> And this is exactly the point.
> Positions are great when they are used the way they were expressed to 
> explain harmonica playing until the 80's / 90's. I mean playing common 
> licks, without chromatism, worked out before hand, and exploited on 
> tunes which have a single key, and most of the time a single mode.
> It works but it is totally empiric and disconnected from the music theory.
> Or you can see it the other way around : it is totally empiric and 
> disconnected from any music theory but it works, which is the most 
> important.
> Why not. It can be very useful that way.
>
> But in that case, and I would say "by definition", it won't work when 
> you derivate from the inner configuration.
> So it is limited to a specific use.
> First, one should not try to connect positions to any kind of logical 
> theory. It can not work because it has been developed to avoid it (and 
> if it was possible, then why not use the inner theory).
> Second, if you incorporate chromatism, and different specific needs of 
> sound colors, ambiances, you'll have to go forward on scales anyway.
> Not speaking about playing a parallel harmony suite than the one 
> played by the band ...
>
>
> At the end, I have begun the harmonica with positions and switched to 
> keys and scales because I needed them to play the music I wanted to play.
> And my personal conclusion is that it is much easier to learn the 
> basis of music theory from the beginning, than trying to understand a 
> concept which is only empiric.
>
>
> BTW, I'll let you just think about one point.
> For most musicians, a note is at the same time a name AND a position 
> (position of fingers, toungue, lips, etc). Still most musicians name 
> their position by the name of the note it gives.
> Of course, most of musicians can not change their instrument's key at 
> a glimpse.
> It is still interesting to know that some harp players do think all 4 
> draw as being a D, on all harps, instead of "a third position". Like 
> most musicians not playing a C instrument do (sax, trumpet, etc).
>
> Last but not least.
> All my remarks are totally absurd as, as explained in my first email, 
> I only play on a C harp, which means I don't need all this philosophy 
> :-) And this is where I wanted to end : all depends on your needs !
> One have to think what he needs to be able to play the music he loves, 
> knowing the strengths and weaknesses of each tool, and decide which 
> one is better for him.
> Positions are not mandatory and are limited, classical music theory is 
> not mandatory neither, but it is not much more difficult to be learnt 
> and it has proven for centuries to be unlimited.
>
> Thanks all who had the patience to read my emails whereas I guess most 
> of you disagree with my "position" :-) I hope it was interesting 
> anyway.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jerome
> www.youtube.com/JersiMuse
>
>
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : harp-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:harp-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] De 
> la part de Brendan Power Envoyé : lundi 2 avril 2012 12:14 À : 
> harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx Objet : [Harp-L] Re: positions you can use on 
> diatonic
>
> JersiMuse inadvertently highlighted the essence of positions when he
wrote:
>
>
>
> ".if positions are related to modes, then the whole system doesn't work.
> But
> if positions are not related to modes, and only give the root compared 
> to the harp used, then, what is their utility?"
>
>
>
> That's got it right there: that IS their utility! What does "Position"
> mean?
> It means a place, a place related to other places. In harmonica terms, 
> it's a hole/breath/bend place on the harp. Jersi highlighted its 
> function: the word "Position" should only refer to the root note's 
> place, or position, on the harp - not the name of the note, or the 
> mode or scale that starts there.
>
>
>
> Take Third Position, as this seems the most contentious. The root 
> notes of Third Position are found on holes 1, 4 and 8 draw, no matter 
> what harmonica you use. We all agree on that! If that happens to be 
> the key note of the song you're playing, you can say you're playing the
song in Third Position.
>
>
>
> HOWEVER, what scale or mode of Third Position you use depends on 
> what's appropriate for the music you're playing. Commonly Third is 
> played as a minor scale, because that's what lays easiest. But you can 
> play Third as a major, and there are well over a hundred other scales 
> you could use in that position if you have the interest and technique 
> to do so. Some will lay easier than others.
>
>
>
> So it's up to the player to say what Third Position mode they're using.
> "I'm
> in Third Position Major/Minor/Wholetone/Raag Bhairav.." Or whatever.
>
>
>
> The confusion has arisen because the names Second, Third, Fourth etc 
> relate to the home key of the harp, called First Position by harp 
> players. Other scales starting on different root notes (if played with 
> unaltered notes on the harp) can be given modal names (Mixolydian, 
> Dorian, Aeolian etc). But that only gives you seven modes (or 
> 'natural' positions). As soon as you introduce chromaticism through 
> bending/overblowing the whole system needs to be refined.
>
>
>
> But this is relatively new. For a long time positions like Third, 
> Fourth, Fifth were ONLY played as minor keys, and others (eg. First) 
> only as major keys. That meant the scale used got identified with the 
> position of its root note - hence the confusion!
>
>
>
> With advances in technique that's changing, and many players are now 
> able to play other scales within the same position. So now (in 
> addition to the key of the harp) both the position and scale used need 
> to be stated if someone asks what you are doing.
>
>
>
> However the concept of position as a PLACE on the harp named after the 
> circle of fifths derived from First Position is still useful. For 
> example,
> 3
> draw semitone-bend is the starting note for Eleventh Position. That's 
> a useful notion for the player and anyone he's talking to, because it 
> describes its root position on the harp. But it has nothing to do with 
> the name of the note found there is or the scale used: those depend on 
> the harp used and the discretion of the player in relation to the 
> music being played.
>
>
>
> Brendan Power
>
> WEBSITE: www.brendan-power.com <http://www.brendan-power.com/>
>
> YOUTUBE: www.youtube.com/BrendanPowerMusic
>
>
>
>
>