Re: [Harp-L] Spiral tuning for a beginner: which key?
 
- To: rex <rexg4@xxxxxxxx>
 
- Subject: Re: [Harp-L] Spiral tuning for a beginner: which key?
 
- From: christoph@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 
- Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 00:39:52 +0200
 
- Cc: harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx
 
- In-reply-to: <aa966f09-1f13-4110-9541-9072c29c1b4f@googlegroups.com> (rex's	message of "Wed, 22 Apr 2015 07:57:38 -0700 (PDT)")
 
- References: <871tjekoxt.fsf@grothesque.org>	<aa966f09-1f13-4110-9541-9072c29c1b4f@googlegroups.com>
 
- User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4 (gnu/linux)
 
Rex, thank you for your detailed and helpful reply!
I didnât realize that Melody Maker and Spiral are so closely 
related.  Actually, now that I had a close look at both, I wonder 
(just out of curiosity) why Melody Maker has the last 4 holes 
inverted.  Is it to keep it more similar to Richter (and make 
retuning simpler)?  Or does this inversion offer some 
possibilities that Spiral does not provide? (C-E-G chords?)
I know that some would say that I should practice playing instead 
of studying tunings, but I actually like to do both.  I find harp 
tunings by themselves a very interesting optimization problem (and 
a vehicle to learn some music theory.)  There are so many 
contradicting aspects!  Now that I learned a bit more about 
tunings, Iâm not so sure anymore whether I should go for spiral. 
Perhaps in the end I will choose Power Bender.
So for now I will stick with my C-major-Richter and practice my 
bends, until I know whether Iâd like to optimize my harp more for 
bends, or more for melody playing / chords.
Disregarding popularity, are there actually any aspects in which 
Richter is superior to Power Bender?  It looses the ungapped 
sequence of C-E-G chords in blow which I suppose is useful when 
playing in first position with tongue blocking.  Is this actually 
the original reason for that C-E-G sequence?
Thanks
Christoph
     
     This archive was generated by a fusion of 
     Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and 
     MHonArc 2.6.8.