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.