|
Post by Dave Dexter on Jun 19, 2018 13:05:49 GMT
I think of trill as multiple twiddlies and mordent as just the one. Sorry about my highest order technical terminology :-) Got you. Tends to be idiomatic of high woodwind lines? Say from 0.22 of this? Lovely effect but, much like my usage of tam tam and tuned percussion, probably easy to overdo...
|
|
|
Post by driscollmusick on Jun 19, 2018 15:29:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Jun 19, 2018 15:39:50 GMT
Since we're all about learning here, a helpful guide to trills and mordents from the Alfred edition of the Bach Inventions John, I think your image link broke, the text is visible when I quote but not the image)
|
|
|
Post by driscollmusick on Jun 19, 2018 16:41:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Jun 19, 2018 17:19:20 GMT
Let me try in this meta example in which I screenshot the forum: You add as an attachment and then insert the image where you want it embedded in your post: If you don't insert, then it is added to the end of the post. Downside is that you have to click images to view them full size, but I suppose it prevents people making massive page-breaking posts of 14,000 pixels. Free forum, for now it'll do.
|
|
|
Post by driscollmusick on Jun 19, 2018 17:54:13 GMT
Ah, OK. Got it!
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Jun 19, 2018 18:39:06 GMT
I think criticism of notes, just like everything else, should be taken in the way of "that's helpful feedback, but whether or not I act on it, is a different matter". I agree with the general sentiment here that when one posts something in a forum like this one, with the implicit request for criticism, one ought to be prepared to receive feedback of all sorts, both pleasant and otherwise. If not, what's the point of posting in the first place? And if one can criticise, say, the orchestration of a passage, why not also the notes chosen for the melody too?
Of course, on the other hand, how one takes a particular criticism (whether it's notes or something one is less often personally-attached to) is up to that person. If I post something and somebody says "the melody would sound better if you replaced C with D", it's up to me to evaluate whether or not that change is in line with my vision for the piece. If it is, I'll gladly thank the critic for pointing it out. If not, I'll just have to say, "Thank you for the feedback, but that C was deliberate, and I won't be changing it."
As a counterbalance to this, though, I remember Mike once saying that notes are "as subjective as hell", which makes it harder to give constructive criticism on, as compared to, say, how a particular orchestration clearly won't work because of instrument imbalance. It's easier, for example, to criticize Beethoven's orchestration than to question why he chose those particular pitches for his opening theme, even though philosophically speaking, his chosen pitches shouldn't be above criticism. (Though I'd be hard-pressed to come up with a convincing example of how a particular Beethoven theme would sound better if you changed some of the pitches.) So perhaps it's not really a matter of criticism of notes being taboo, but just the fact that they're often very subjectively-chosen means that it's very difficult to criticize them in a constructive way, and consequently it's easier to pick something else to criticize that's more clearly "wrong" or can be improved.
|
|