|
Post by Tim Marko on Aug 28, 2018 16:22:04 GMT
I've been working to learn harp and all it's foibles. I consider myself a fairly intelligent individual, but I seem to be missing something very basic that will hopefully make everything else I've been reading make sense.
As I understand, the harp with all pedals neutral is a c major scale (assuming no altered tunings). If I want to have a G maj, I raise the F pedal to sharpen all the fs on the instrument. I can now play all the diatonic notes in g major or e nat min, etc. (I know it's simple, but I can't seem to wrap my brain around this one.) If I now want to go to Bb, I need to lower the f back to neutral and lower the E and B strings.
Is that the gist of it?
Also, like bowings, many say let the harpist deal with pedal markings, but I know I need to understand the limitations so that it's even possible.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Hewer on Aug 28, 2018 17:19:46 GMT
Yes Tim, that is the basic concept. The trick to a more chromatic use of the harp is to also consider enharmonic spelling. Harpists are used to seeing weirdly spelt chords in order to make the pedals even more versatile. For example, if you wanted to have fast repeating notes on say b flat, then you could also tune a to a sharp so the player can alternate between the two notes and play faster trems. Remember the layout of the pedals too as this affects how fast changes can be made. Both feet can change notes at the same time and the change is often made close to when the note is to be sounded. Chromatic glissandos need to be spelt out either in small cue notes or with pedal directions. I suggest Ravel's Introduction and Allegro as a fine example to study. You might find this useful too..... link
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Aug 28, 2018 17:33:53 GMT
From what I understand, the way the harp is built is such that all C strings, for example, are connected to the C pedal, and all D strings to the D pedal, etc.. So depressing a single pedal changes the pitch of all strings in the corresponding pitch class. And yes, if you want to change from G major to Bb, you'll need to change the F pedal back to natural, and B and E pedals to flat. This means playing chromatic passages on the harp is a royal pain, and you should probably avoid it. Of course, you could still pull off chromatic shenanigans if you exploit enharmonic spellings, e.g., you can tune the harp to have B#, C#, D, Eb, Fb, and you'll be able to play 5 semitones in sequence. (But you also lose the ability to play B and F natural without giving time for the harpist to reconfigure the pedals. So it depends on what you want to achieve.) Certain diminished 7th chords can be spelt enharmonically such that all harp strings fall on a chord tone, so you could do a glissando/arpeggio across the entire harp range, which can be a neat effect in certain contexts. Furthermore, flat keys are preferred over sharp keys (so you'll often see harp parts written in, e.g., Cb major (7 flats) instead of B major (4 sharps)). I don't remember why this is so, it may have something to do with the timbre or accuracy of tuning. I don't remember how fast pedal changes can be effected -- in slow-enough passages you might be able to pull off chromaticity by scheduling a pitch class to be retuned while other pitch classes are being played (which could involve exploiting enharmonic spellings so that you can still sound a pitch while the strings usually used for that pitch are being retuned). But it depends on the ability of the harpist. If you're planning to do this sort of thing, I'd say you should write pedal markings yourself, so that you can make it playable. But if you're writing mostly diatonic parts, it's probably OK to let the harpist figure it out herself.
|
|
|
Post by driscollmusick on Aug 28, 2018 17:47:29 GMT
Tim, what might help "wrap your brain" is that the changing of pedals has nothing to do with changing key, it's just changing the individual pitches of the 7 lettered notes (A-B-C-D-E-F-G). Flat notes are preferred over sharp because the strings are at their longest with flat notes and are therefore most resonant. The HLP resource Mike linked is a great one. She lists some common harp errors here: www.theharplegacyproject.com/typical.html
|
|
|
Post by driscollmusick on Aug 28, 2018 18:36:44 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Aug 28, 2018 21:26:29 GMT
A lot of essentials covered already, but here's my bit: Pedalling. You can use a specific pedal diagram which shows the position of the pedals physically: I don't have it in my NS, but in any case I prefer the perfectly acceptable alternative of spelling it out. The pedals for each string are arranged DCB on the left, and EFGA on the right. I notate vertically, so and subsequent changes are notated in the same manner: Harpists can change notes pretty fast, two concurrently from either side (so D to D# and F to F# for ex.) and are quick with accidentals if you want them to follow a passage "outside" their tuning. You can, and I have, cue up pedal changes some bars in advance to save time if you have a large tuning change coming up and if those strings are free. In passages without the time to change in advance, they'll just change on the note. Notice in this, the very first time anyone played my music! the pedal change comes with the note as it must ring out from the previous. http://instagram.com/p/BD3TR0ZrCNA You're right, harps are often tuned to scales and it's one of their great strengths as an orchestral colour. Their sound is most resonant and full when tuned to flats, and progressively less so through naturals and then sharps. However, you'd be hard pressed to notice in the midst of an orchestra. It's possible that every one of my harp markings has been changed by the player, but certainly there was no problem, and I can't see how anything I've done so far was incorrect or had a simpler solution. Understanding the limitations is vital to accurate writing so I agree, work out your own pedalling. Even if it must be changed, like string bows sometimes are, it will both communicate your intent and your commitment. I feel that players see a lot of mistakes and laziness in parts, if you're the exception then everyone wins. One thing I can't comment on is key signatures, as I write everything in C with accidentals - I perhaps recall Mike saying that harp parts would conventionally have the same key changes as the other instruments, though?
|
|
|
Post by Tim Marko on Aug 29, 2018 15:00:48 GMT
Thanks all. The light bulb has lit up.
Now all the talk of enharmonic, etc. makes sense.
So a progression of F major to D major, a possible solution would be to lower G to Gb. Play F A C then D Gb A (Gb=F#) and it should be notated this way, correct? And I'm sure depending on what else is happening there could be other "better" answers.
And the learning continues!
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Aug 29, 2018 16:14:08 GMT
Thanks all. The light bulb has lit up. Now all the talk of enharmonic, etc. makes sense. So a progression of F major to D major, a possible solution would be to lower G to Gb. Play F A C then D Gb A (Gb=F#) and it should be notated this way, correct? And I'm sure depending on what else is happening there could be other "better" answers. And the learning continues! I would sharpen the F, even if it means a pedal change every time you switch between Fmaj to Dmaj. Using spare strings to spell chords alternately with fewer pedal changes is a sound stratagem, when needed, but I think using correct spelling as far as possible makes more sense - the part is then consistent where possible with the rest of the piece, and I feel the harpist would probably naturally approach it this way. It also saves explanations for copyists and orchestration assistants. I have a tendency to write music that jumps around chords a bit and gives me headaches in harp pedalling, but I don't think I've ever had to do anything more than give a few bars' notice and very occasionally adapt passages (minimally). But that's just me!
|
|
|
Post by Tim Marko on Aug 29, 2018 16:24:40 GMT
That makes sense. I guess I was thinking the change came without time for a pedal change.
Speaking of, how much time has to be allowed for a change?
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Aug 29, 2018 17:40:57 GMT
That makes sense. I guess I was thinking the change came without time for a pedal change. Speaking of, how much time has to be allowed for a change? They can change pretty much on the note (see my instagram video in previous post) and can change two pedals at once, if they're from opposite sides (DCB) + (EFGA) with subsequent changes being fast too. D-F-D presents no challenge except at ridiculous tempos! The pedals are integral to the instrument, so it makes sense a good harpist will be able to change them without having to think about it. It's not like timpani, which takes - in theory, though in practice seems to be faster - a few seconds per tuning change. It took me a while to get it, the basics at least, and it is a unique set of constrictions to get your head around. But not much to worry about beyond that.
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Aug 29, 2018 18:12:22 GMT
Now I'm wondering if it's possible to change a pedal while the corresponding string(s) is sounding. If it's possible, it could be used for an interesting effect of a chord, say, shifting to a different one while sounding, without needing to be strummed again.
Crudely analogous to strumming a bar chord on the guitar then shifting your hand down the fretboard to make a glissando-chord effect.
|
|
|
Post by driscollmusick on Aug 29, 2018 19:13:25 GMT
Now I'm wondering if it's possible to change a pedal while the corresponding string(s) is sounding. If it's possible, it could be used for an interesting effect of a chord, say, shifting to a different one while sounding, without needing to be strummed again. Crudely analogous to strumming a bar chord on the guitar then shifting your hand down the fretboard to make a glissando-chord effect. sites.siba.fi/sv/web/harpnotation/manual/pedal-effects
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Aug 29, 2018 19:45:59 GMT
Now I'm wondering if it's possible to change a pedal while the corresponding string(s) is sounding. If it's possible, it could be used for an interesting effect of a chord, say, shifting to a different one while sounding, without needing to be strummed again. Crudely analogous to strumming a bar chord on the guitar then shifting your hand down the fretboard to make a glissando-chord effect. You couldn't do it as well as on a guitar, but sure. For the best effect, it'd have to be two chords formed of most/all the same fundamental notes (Cmaj/Ebmin say, which would limit you) otherwise the glissando effect wouldn't be very obvious, or the strings would have to be plucked just before the pedal changes. Unless the harpist does a gliss down all strings and then switches between chords.
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Aug 29, 2018 19:56:10 GMT
Ah, I appear to have missed the subpages of that page when browsing through it last time. Very interesting indeed! Lots of interesting effects I've never thought of.
|
|