ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/bagpipe/archive/v01.n040

Internet Message Format | 1999-08-30 | 40KB

From: [e-mail] (bagpipe-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: bagpipe-digest V1 #40
Reply-To: bagpipe-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


bagpipe-digest        Tuesday, August 31 1999        Volume 01 : Number 040




----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 05:44:28 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Royce Lerwick)
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: Top 5 Hints

On Tue, 10 Aug 1999 23:34:48 GMT, "Screecher" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Has anybody ever heard a top flight pipe corp or a top flight solo piper (or
>for that matter solo drummer) practise as fast as possible then slow down???
>I have heard many pipe corps and soloists playing slow and gradually work up
>to a tempo they are happy with. I have never heard of a corp/soloist playing
>as fast as they can then slow down.

And I've never seen the neighbor's dog crap in my yard, but I know he
does because it's his crap and there it is.

Royce

- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 14:24:12 -0500
From: Mike Talcott <[e-mail]>
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: Smallpipes with ceilidh band - make/volume/key?

Steve:

Here is the Article from Evertjan, as posted on the UP list, by his permission.

______________

Being on this list for some time now I've seen a lot of topics before...
This one is discussed two times allready.
So this is an old article I wrote in the fall 1997 issue of Iris na bPiobaire,
if put it
allready on the list a year ago but here is it again for those who missed it or
have recently
joined the list.
It's long be warned.

Plug in your Pipes
copyright 1999 Evertjan 't Hart

What if amplification is needed? Well, then you might really have a problem. The
problem is,
that the average soundman has no experience with the uilleann pipes at all, or
for that matter,
with acoustic instruments in general. Give them a rock band and they'll do a
great job, but
they have no clue at all how the pipes should sound. Most of them will see and
hear the
instrument for the first time, so they're not really to blame. Anyway, if you
would like the
audience to hear your instrument as it should sound, you'll have to take the
matter into your
own hands. It's not wise to argue with the soundman. You'll need him for the
duration of your
concert so you better keep it friendly. But don't let him tell you how your
instrument should
sound either!

One of the problems is, that what you hear on stage through the stage monitors,
is completely
different from what the audience will be hearing, so there's no reference here.
Often there are
two separate systems running. The PA for the audience, and the monitors for the
musicians on
the stage. If you're not performing solo, make sure a member of your band checks
the sound
off stage.

The P.A.

For those pipers among us with no knowledge about the subject I'll explain in
short the basics
and the jargon of a PA. PA stands for "public address" and is a sound system
very similar to
the hi-fi systems most people have at home. It's different because the
components are
separated; bigger and much more powerful. In the case of a basic set-up there's
a mixing
console,
effect units, power-amps, speaker cabinets, microphone's, stands and lots of
leads.

The mixing console is used to reduce all the different sourcesùchanter, reg's,
drones, fiddle,
guitar, etc., etc., to a stereo signal that is then sent to the amplifiers. It
is also used to
mix effects to the original signal. Effect units may vary, but there will be
equalizers,
crossover filters, compressor/limiters, delays, reverbs, etc.

Microphones Versus Transducers

To amplify the chanter there are two ways to go. The first, and best, is using a
good
microphone. The second is to use a transducer.

First the microphones. There are basically two type of mics, dynamic mics and
condenser mics.
If you have the choice take the condenser type. They are far better than the
dynamic ones. So
if you have to work with the available equipment on stage, you know what to
choose. Whatever
you do try to avoid using a Shure SM58 or similar mic because they are designed
for vocals
and to be used at very close range. They have a boost in the mid-range which is
great for
screaming hard rock singers, but a disaster for the rich harmonics of the
chanter. You will see
a lot of those mics because they're cheap and indestructibleùyou can drive a
nail into a piece
of African blackwood with it and it will still works! So, if you want "total"
control, the
best thing to do is to buy your own mic and always bring it with you.

The mic I use is an AKG C3000, a large membrane condenser mic. A large membrane
mic gives a
much "warmer" sound then a mike with a smaller membrane. I use an AKG because
it's the cheapest
large membrane I know of, but any brand will do. You can generate even more
control if you add
a preamp and a reverb-unit to your setup. In a mic situation I use the AKG C3000
as a mike
for the chanter, a Behringer "Super gain" (a two channel high-quality preamp)
and a Alesis
reverb. The use of your own reverb unit gives you the opportunity to make two
reverb presets.
One for the "slow stuff" and one for the "fast stuff. "

Using this type of setup you can feed the mixing console with a high quality,
balanced signal
already colored with reverb so you can bypass the EQ of the mixing console. It's
best that you
do this, for you don't need the EQ due to the high quality of your setup. Make
sure that the
soundman presses the defeat button for your channel on the console. If you
don't, he will
probably boost the treble because he is more or less deaf in those frequencies
thanks to years
of working with high sound levels.

Placement

Place the mic in a position so it can pickup the back D. About 20 cm from the
chanter.
Experiment until you get all the notes more or less equal in volume. The mics
for regulators
and drones are off less importance; any good mic will do. It's a good idea to
cut the treble
for the drones so that you'd get a nice bass sound.

And now for the transducers. This can be very scary for the "purists" among us,
so be warned!
If the sound levels on stage are getting too high the use of a mic will result
in feedback. You
know that high pitched screaming howl! It's caused by a sound loop. The sound
from the monitors
is picked up by the mic, amplified and fed back to the monitors, picked up by
the mic,
fed back...etc., etc., resulting in the feedback. (Whatever you do, don't try to
cover the mic
with you're hand. It only makes it worse.) The sound level wig only get that
high if you're
playing with very loud instruments like drums or electric guitars. If you're in
a situation
like that and you would like to hear what you're doing, then the use of a
transducer might be
the thing for you. Transducers are commonly used among stringed instruments.
They are little
piezio (crystal) pickups and are glued on the instrument in order to amplify it.
Piezio
transducers have a very low output signal so they must be placed where the sound
is produced.
In our case that's on the chanter reed. You can glue it on the staple or on the
reed head
depending
on the type of reed and the type of transducer you use.
 Many types are suitable, but I use a Barcus Berry so I wig refer to this brand.
If you would
like to glue the transducer to the staple use the Barcus Berry clarinet/sax
model 1375. Before
you rush to your dealer be aware of the fact that you'd have to do some
modification to your
chanter. You'll have to route or file a groove for the lead in the piece of the
chanter (the
reed Seat) that fits into the chanter headstock. (This is done at your own
risk!!) Fortunately
the lead is only 2 mm thick so it's not that bad. Remove the hemp and make a
groove deep enough
to fit the lead. (fig. 1) Replace the reed and measure how long the lead must
extend below the
reed seat to reach the place where you want to attach it. Remove the reed and
add new
hemp enclosing the lead. You can attach the transducer to the staple with the
adhesive that
comes with the transducer or you can use waxed hemp or waxed dental floss. (fig.
2) After you
replace the reed and the headstock make sure the lead with the connector at its
end is not too
long. It must be long enough to bend back in a loose loop to be attached with
electricians
tape to the headstock.

Remember, when you are using a transducer it is not quality you're going for,
but loudness.
There is no way you can use a transducer without some device to correct the
outcoming signal.
Piezio-transducers have the tendency to emphasize the high frequencies, so you
need an
equalizer to correct this. Because of the low signal output you need a preamp as
web. I use the
same
Berhinger "Supergain" I mentioned before, to boost the signal.

So the basic setup for transducer use can be as follows: a Barcus Berry model
1375, or
something like it, a preamp, as good as you can afford, and an equalizer reverb
unit, or some
other multi-effect unit. If you encounter hum or strange noises when you touch
the lead then a
metal connector against the metal chanter headstock will cure this. This makes
the headstock a
component of the "shield."

With the right equipment it will sound very good. At the last Dranouter Folk
Festival in
Belgium, Davy Spillane and his band played on Saturday evening. His pipes
sounded great
considering the circumstances. His band played very loudùdrums, bass, elec.
guitar, synth. Davy
had built a fortress of equipment around himselfùeffects, pre-amp, monitors,
etc. A pity
because you
could only see him from the waist up. He did not use a mic for his pipes so I
was wondering how
he was able to get this sound with just a transducer. I met Davy the next day,
coincidentally,
and asked him about his setup. He told me that he used an ordinary Barcus Berry
(the
Clarinet/Sax model 1375) and that the secret lies in a very good pre-amp. The
pre-amp he is
using,
from TC Electronics, is one of studio-quality and very expensive. (The price of
a nickel
silver/blackwood full set.) He said that the placement of the transducer is a
matter of
experimentation,ùsometimes on the staple, sometimes on the head of the reed.
This type of
amplification is for him just a way to handle the volumes involved in playing
with a rock band
backup. "If
the volume lets you, use a good mic. "

I agree. Use a mic if the music is too loud for acoustic playing. Use a
transducer if there is
no other way around it. If a transducer can't give you the volume you need to
hear yourself
play, then don't play at all!

Have fun, and if you have any additional questions don't hesitate to contact me.



All the best,

Evertjan 't Hart

__________________________________________________________
Uilleann Pipes Reed Making Guide
http://home.wxs.nl/~HartDD/Reed/reed.html
__________________________________________________________
Fling Homepage
http://home.wxs.nl/~HartDD/fling.html
__________________________________________________________






- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 11:59:13 -0500
From: Richard Mao <[e-mail]>
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: memorizing tunes

- --------------8992658E5A97320D141A1536
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Ccc31807 wrote:

> This is a critique of Richard Mao's post on memorization.

<snipped>

> >Your subconscious mind plays the tune.... drives the car, manipulates your
> >fingers.... Your conscious mind is like the navigator... reminding the
> >subconscious mind what comes next, when a turn is coming up... whether you
>
> I have to disagree with him, not so much on the practical tips, which are good,
> but on his theory.  There is no "right" way, and each person must find out
> which works for him.  This may not be true for anyone else but me, but this is
> the way I see it.
>
> Learning a tune and playing a tune both must be done by the conscious mind.
> The subconscious mind should have no involvement at all.  If it does, you
> haven't learned the tune.
>
> When you learn the tune, you should do it as an act of your conscious will.
> When the composer wrote the tune, he wrote it as an act of conscious will, and
> the tune has an inner framework or structure, which is unique to that
> particular tune, and makes sense in that particular tune.  If you learn (not
> memorize) the structure, the tune will be truly yours.  Analyze the tune, note
> by note, phrase by phrase, rhythmic pattern by rhythmic pattern, harmonic
> pattern by harmonic pattern, part by part, until you know the tune, and you
> know what it says.  You must work from your mind, rather than your fingers.  In
> the examples given by RM, most (if not all) are examples of the failure of
> muscle memory, and are the result of not knowing the tune.
> ===========================

Hi...  Different strokes for different folks..... Indeed there are different ways
of visualization and implementation of the learning/playing process.... whatever
works for you...
The way I think about conscious playing... is that there will be a certain
limitation to the speed of your playing if you are constantly consciously thinking
about the next note your finger needs to play...before you play it... In this
mode... one slip of the memory and your fingers hesitate a bit before you get back
on track...

Not in contradiction, but in contrast .... the following is a little more
elaboration on how I guide my own learning playing process...an analytical
framework, so to speak...

=============================

Memorization..Draft 2.

⌐1997, 1999 by Richard Mao.
Feel free to copy this work for your individual use in the study of piping. If you
use or republish portions of it in any form for teaching others or distributing to
others, or for commercial efforts, you must secure my permission (generally, all I
want is to know you are using this work and for you to give credit to the source).
This copyright notice must stay with and be reproduced with any copy of this work.

Introduction / Framework


Where in your mind and body does your bagpipe playing come from?

I base my advice on the premise that you play your bagpipes most successfully when
you play from the same ôplaceö as you drive your car.

That is, your conscious mind acts as a navigator, setting your destination,
deciding where to turn, deciding on how fast to get there...but it is the
subconscious mind that is actually driving the car, using hands to steer the car,
using feet to step on the gas and the brakes, using your bodyÆs eyes to look out
for stop signs, traffic lights turning red, pedestrians, and other hazards. Your
conscious mind has complete confidence in your subconscious mindÆs ability to drive
the car...to the point of actually carrying on a conversation with the passenger in
the next seat while the subconscious mind ôdrivesö the car. When your brain has
complete confidence in your fingers, you will be playing ôout of your mind,ö you
will be playing ôin the zone.ö

Another way to think about it, your brain sets the goals but your fingers do the
playing. (You may recognize concepts similar to ôleft brain-right brainö of Betty
Edwards,  ôself one and self twoö of Tim Gallwey. I am drawing from all of these
and choosing the terms ôconscious mindö or ôbrainö and ôsubconscious mindö or
ôfingers.ö)

What, then, is the process of learning. How do you, learn/memorize under this
viewpoint? The conscious mindÆs role is to show the subconscious mind how to play a
tune and then the conscious mind gets out of the way.

First, we must recognize that either the conscious mind or the subconscious mind
can control and manipulate your fingers. I visualize the memorization process this
way:

At first, the conscious mind uses your eyes to read the music and move the fingers
according to the pattern of notes. The conscious mind is ôshowingö the subconscious
mind how this tune goes.

Then comes repetition of the musical phrase (in this context,  a phrase is a chunk
of music that the piper is comfortable with memorizing, e.g. a four-note musical
word, a two-bar phrase, an eight-bar partûall based on the piperÆs current musical
memorization capability). The conscious mind makes the fingers play the phrase over
and over...eventually the conscious mind gets familiar with the tune and its
attention wanders. The subconscious mind reaches out under the conscious mindÆs
finger control and starts manipulating the fingers.

The conscious mind at first resists this takeover and the fingers fumble, the
fingers can lock up....the conscious mind has not developed confidence that the
subconscious mind can do the job. (Imagine a father hanging on to the seat of a
bicycle, running along side while his child pedals the wheels. The kid shouts, ôlet
go, let goö and sooner or later the parent has to let go...the kid might wobble,
but will straighten out and peddle on its own....thatÆs successful learning and
letting go.)



======================================
Ccc31807 wrote:

>
> RM's memory tips were good, and I recommend them.  But I have two additional
> tips:
>
> 1.  The FIRST thing you do, even before you can play the tune, is memorize it.
> You should be able to do this from the music alone, without ever playing it
> once on the pc.  Memorize the tune like you would a poem.  Get it into your
> head before you try to get it into your fingers.
> 2.  Sing the tune.  Put words to it.  Find suitable lyrics from a metrical
> index of poetry.  If you can sing the tune, with words, you can "sing" along as
> you play it, and I guarantee that you will never miss an ending or confuse the
> tune with another tune.
>
> Memory work is to your mind like working out is to your body.  The more you do,
> the more you are able to do.  ......

==========================

Thanks ccc for these additions... For when you have decided to add a tune you have
previewed/played/heard on a CD... to your permanent repertiore.....I agree with
both hints (to my way of thinking you are creating/memorizing the map that the
conscious mind uses to guide the subconscious mind) ..

and I agree especially with the concluding statement... The more you do, the more
you are able to do... Memorization (for almost everybody) is a learnable skill that
improves with practice and increasing exercise of the skill.

Yours in service to better piping.........


A smile on your face is the light in the window
           that lets people know you're at home.(author unknown)

Richard Mao, The Peking Piper ( [e-mail] )



- --------------8992658E5A97320D141A1536
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
Ccc31807 wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>This is a critique of Richard Mao's post on memorization.</blockquote>
<snipped>
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>>Your subconscious mind plays the tune.... drives
the car, manipulates your
<br>>fingers.... Your conscious mind is like the navigator... reminding
the
<br>>subconscious mind what comes next, when a turn is coming up... whether
you
<p>I have to disagree with him, not so much on the practical tips, which
are good,
<br>but on his theory.  There is no "right" way, and each person must
find out
<br>which works for him.  This may not be true for anyone else but
me, but this is
<br>the way I see it.
<p>Learning a tune and playing a tune both must be done by the conscious
mind.
<br>The subconscious mind should have no involvement at all.  If it
does, you
<br>haven't learned the tune.
<p>When you learn the tune, you should do it as an act of your conscious
will.
<br>When the composer wrote the tune, he wrote it as an act of conscious
will, and
<br>the tune has an inner framework or structure, which is unique to that
<br>particular tune, and makes sense in that particular tune.  If
you learn (not
<br>memorize) the structure, the tune will be truly yours.  Analyze
the tune, note
<br>by note, phrase by phrase, rhythmic pattern by rhythmic pattern, harmonic
<br>pattern by harmonic pattern, part by part, until you know the tune,
and you
<br>know what it says.  You must work from your mind, rather than
your fingers.  In
<br>the examples given by RM, most (if not all) are examples of the failure
of
<br>muscle memory, and are the result of not knowing the tune.
<br>===========================</blockquote>
Hi...  Different strokes for different folks..... Indeed there are
different ways of visualization and implementation of the learning/playing
process.... whatever works for you...
<br>The way I think about conscious playing... is that there will be a
certain limitation to the speed of your playing if you are constantly consciously
thinking about the next note your finger needs to play...before you play
it... In this mode... one slip of the memory and your fingers hesitate
a bit before you get back on track...
<p>Not in contradiction, but in contrast .... the following is a little
more elaboration on how I guide my own learning playing process...an analytical
framework, so to speak...
<p>=============================
<p>Memorization..Draft 2.
<p>©1997, 1999 by Richard Mao.
<br>Feel free to copy this work for your individual use in the study of
piping. If you use or republish portions of it in any form for teaching
others or distributing to others, or for commercial efforts, you must secure
my permission (generally, all I want is to know you are using this work
and for you to give credit to the source). This copyright notice must stay
with and be reproduced with any copy of this work.
<p>Introduction / Framework
<br>
<p>Where in your mind and body does your bagpipe playing come from?
<p>I base my advice on the premise that you play your bagpipes most successfully
when you play from the same ôplaceö as you drive your car.
<p>That is, your conscious mind acts as a navigator, setting your destination,
deciding where to turn, deciding on how fast to get there...but it is the
subconscious mind that is actually driving the car, using hands to steer
the car, using feet to step on the gas and the brakes, using your bodyÆs
eyes to look out for stop signs, traffic lights turning red, pedestrians,
and other hazards. Your conscious mind has complete confidence in your
subconscious mindÆs ability to drive the car...to the point of actually
carrying on a conversation with the passenger in the next seat while the
subconscious mind ôdrivesö the car. When your brain has complete confidence
in your fingers, you will be playing ôout of your mind,ö you will be playing
ôin the zone.ö
<p>Another way to think about it, your brain sets the goals but your fingers
do the playing. (You may recognize concepts similar to ôleft brain-right
brainö of Betty Edwards,  ôself one and self twoö of Tim Gallwey.
I am drawing from all of these and choosing the terms ôconscious mindö
or ôbrainö and ôsubconscious mindö or ôfingers.ö)
<p>What, then, is the process of learning. How do you, learn/memorize under
this viewpoint? The conscious mindÆs role is to show the subconscious mind
how to play a tune and then the conscious mind gets out of the way.
<p>First, we must recognize that either the conscious mind or the subconscious
mind can control and manipulate your fingers. I visualize the memorization
process this way:
<p>At first, the conscious mind uses your eyes to read the music and move
the fingers according to the pattern of notes. The conscious mind is ôshowingö
the subconscious mind how this tune goes.
<p>Then comes repetition of the musical phrase (in this context,
a phrase is a chunk of music that the piper is comfortable with memorizing,
<i>e.g.</i> a four-note musical word, a two-bar phrase, an eight-bar partûall
based on the piperÆs current musical memorization capability). The conscious
mind makes the fingers play the phrase over and over...eventually the conscious
mind gets familiar with the tune and its attention wanders. The subconscious
mind reaches out under the conscious mindÆs finger control and starts manipulating
the fingers.
<p>The conscious mind at first resists this takeover and the fingers fumble,
the fingers can lock up....the conscious mind has not developed confidence
that the subconscious mind can do the job. (Imagine a father hanging on
to the seat of a bicycle, running along side while his child pedals the
wheels. The kid shouts, ôlet go, let goö and sooner or later the parent
has to let go...the kid might wobble, but will straighten out and peddle
on its own....thatÆs successful learning and letting go.)
<br>
<br>
<p>======================================
<br>Ccc31807 wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>
<br>RM's memory tips were good, and I recommend them.  But I have
two additional
<br>tips:
<p>1.  The FIRST thing you do, even before you can play the tune,
is memorize it.
<br>You should be able to do this from the music alone, without ever playing
it
<br>once on the pc.  Memorize the tune like you would a poem.
Get it into your
<br>head before you try to get it into your fingers.
<br>2.  Sing the tune.  Put words to it.  Find suitable
lyrics from a metrical
<br>index of poetry.  If you can sing the tune, with words, you can
"sing" along as
<br>you play it, and I guarantee that you will never miss an ending or
confuse the
<br>tune with another tune.
<p>Memory work is to your mind like working out is to your body.
The more you do,
<br>the more you are able to do.  ......</blockquote>

<p><br>==========================
<p>Thanks ccc for these additions... For when you have decided to add a
tune you have previewed/played/heard on a CD... to your permanent repertiore.....I
agree with both hints (to my way of thinking you are creating/memorizing
the map that the conscious mind uses to guide the subconscious mind) ..
<p>and I agree especially with the concluding statement... The more you
do, the more you are able to do... Memorization (for almost everybody)
is a learnable skill that improves with practice and increasing exercise
of the skill.
<p>Yours in service to better piping.........
<br>
<p>A smile on your face is the light in the window
<br>           that lets
people know you're at home.(author unknown)
<p>Richard Mao, The Peking Piper ( [e-mail] )
<br>
<br> </html>

- --------------8992658E5A97320D141A1536--


- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 15 Aug 1999 07:39:15 -0700
From: "Iain Sherwood" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: Drone cords: Silk or polyester?

as a bagpipe dealer, I KNOW that the cords are ALL made in Pakistan; some
are silk, and some are rayon...as far as quality is concerned, remember that
ALL pipe banners and regimental colours for the British Army are made in
Pakistan, where they do the finest gold and silver bullion embroidery in the
world - using child labour, of course ...

IS
Royce Lerwick <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:[e-mail]...
> On 14 Aug 1999 23:14:32 GMT, [e-mail] (Zudupiper) wrote:
>
> >>The difference between these and you last
> >>cords is probobly just a different maker
> >
> >Now THAT makes sense.
> >
> >Should have thought of that myself.
> >
> >Zu
>
> Just to fire off another war, I've seen a lot of Pakistani work with
> fabric and fiber, and they don't do a lot better with cords or kilts
> than they do with pipes, and that's even lower-tech than turning
> pipes, so it isn't a technology problem.
>
> Royce



- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 01:40:16 -0600
From: [e-mail]
Subject: [none]



------------------------------

Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 02:17:16 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Royce Lerwick)
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: Top 5 Hints

On Sat, 07 Aug 1999 16:58:54 GMT, "Screecher" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I my opinion.......
>concerning your tip No.5 practise.
>About the worst thing you can do during practise is play fast. Play
>everything as slow as possible so as all the
>technique/fingerwork/expression/execution/MUSIC comes through clearly. If
>you can play slow you can play fast.

No, and that's why there's so many people who hit the wall in grade 3
and only get there by lobotomizing the score.

In order to play fast you have to play faster than you are capable of
playing accurately. If you never play faster than you can play
accurately, you will never play fast. Speed, and accuracy. The two are
constant regulators and when you concentrate on one the other suffers,
but ultimately they both come up separately but arrive together with
accurate speed.

You do not ever get them to come up both together at the same time.

Royce

(Well, I suppose you can, but that'll add another 10 years of mindless
tedium for no good reason to the process.)

- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: 17 Aug 1999 18:55:08 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Ccc31807)
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: memorizing tunes

>Hi Charles, Richard.
>
>Sorry Charles, I have to go with Richard on this one.

This is a real good post.  Obviously, there are different roads to the same
place.  I hope you will let me respond to some of your points, both to clear up
some poor choice of words on my part, and to differ on some matters of
substance.

>Concerning the "inefficiency" I don't think richard was advocating mindlessly
>playing thorugh the tune over and over until one had it from sheer
>repetition.

Point well taken.  I really didn't think we was advocating this, but I still
think his method is inefficient.

>I think he is incorporating all the analysis and dissection of a tune that we
>have
>seen talked about here: breaking it into phrases, finding the similar
>phrases,
>breaking it down even further into rhythmic patterns and difficult spots.

I am sure that he was, but he should have made sure that a dummy like me would
not miss it.

>highly academic trick of memorizing a sequence of scribbles on paper. It's
>_music_,
>not ink on parchment. Musicians do not think in terms of the lines and spaces
>on
>manuscript paper, but in terms of sound.

Right.  Music is NOT black ink on white paper, it is a living, breathing art.
Just like drama - same difference between reading a play and experiencing it in
the theater.

>Under your statement bagpipe playing
>wasn't really music and the players hadn't really learned to play until they
>could
>write it out. Therefore, given the music writing ability of most bagpipe
>players,
>very few can play or know the music. I doubt you really want to say that.

I really didn't mean to say that.  But I stick by my point.  Assuming basic
music literacy, if you can sit down and write out the music, you show that you
know it - not by "memory" - but real knowledge.  The old balladeers couldn't
write out their ballads (assuming illiteracy on their part) but they surely
knew their material, hours and hours worth.  I don't say that literacy and
knowledge are the same thing, but writing it down on paper is a sure test of
knowledge.

>A classical pianist absolutely relies on kinesthetic memory
>when playing anything

Absolutely.  But not solely.  We have to rely on ALL parts of our memory.  My
difference with RM was that he seemed close to saying (although he did not say
it) that reliance on kinesthetic memory was enough.  Mike, I have been there,
and I can tell you for a fact, if you do this, you will fail.  Kinesthetic
memory is not enough to carry you through a serious performance.

As pipers, we use our subconscious for breathing and squeezing the bag.  This
has to be more or less automatic.  If we march, we have to rely on the
subconscious to do this.  There are some tunes that we can play on autopilot,
"Scotland the Brave," for example.  But I can't conceive of performing a piece
from memory without having it in the forefront of my mind and concentrating on
every note.  If the mind wanders, the fingers will follow suite.

> The
>conscious mind cannot control the fingers one note at a time telling them
>when and
>where to be. It simply cannot be done.

I agree with this also.  It is like reading.  When you read, your eye doesn't
decypher "t-h-e" to sound out the word.  Instead, it takes the letters in at a
glance to read "the."  In the same way, when reading music, the eye might see a
C major scale, or a C major arpeggio, or some other structure, and read the
whole structure at a glance rather that seeing the individual notes.  Question:
 When you play "Scotland the Brave," do you play the first four measures as
part of an A major arpeggio?  Two low As, broken triad, two high As, and
another broken triad down to low A?  This is what I mean - we don't play the
notes, we play the structure, and if we had to write it, we would write the
structure.

>What one does is ingrain the note position
>and timing into kinesthetic memory, and then rely on the body to get the job
>done.
>Then the mind can create the _music_. One doesn't mentally think, "OK, the
>next
>note is an F# and I need to play that with my right index finger." There is
>where
>disaster lies.

Making music is like making love.  You can't plot out every move, but you have
to experience it physically every time.  Memory is a tool for making music, and
we mustn't elevate the tool over the end product.  But we must know how to use
the tool.  This is where we part ways.  When you learn (i.e., memorize) music,
you must learn it with the conscious mind, and when you play it, you must play
it with the conscious mind.  The subconscious has nothing to do with it.  You
must be totally focused, totally concentrated, and your knowledge of the music
must be letter perfect.  Even then, this is no assurance that you will actually
make music, but not doing it is an assurance that you will not make music.

>First, a "real" musician can perform being completely unfit.
>
>Nope. Physical conditioning is an aspect of almost any musical instrument you
>can
>name.

This is true.  I play the piano, and have played the guitar, and could do both
of these fairly well, even as old, fat, and out of shape as I am.  When I took
up piping, I had to get pack into shape.  The point I wanted to make is that
the GHB calls for a higher level of physical fitness than does the piano or
guitar, or other "real" instruments.  I have had fun having my instrumentialist
friends try to blow my pipes, and marvel that anyone could actually play them.
:-)

>most of whom will tell you that they would like
>to be able to play _without_ the crutch of having the music in front of them.
>In
>addition, no "real" classical soloist I know of uses music.

This is true, too.  In a real sense, the written page gets in the way of making
music.  But still, most classical performances you go to, you will see the
musicians using music.

- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 15 Aug 1999 13:33:26 -0700
From: Andrew & Kristen Lenz <[e-mail]>
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: And yet another . . . pin3

Hmmm. It's improving, I like the chanter addition Can we get a blow pipe
so it anatomically correct? Maybe enlarge the drones and the "@" with
relation to the outer circle? I like the flames below, the flames above
aren't bad either though.

Andrew
- --
Andrew T. Lenz, Jr.
[e-mail]
Santa Cruz, California U.S.A.

- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 09:54:56 +1200
From: Casey S Wilkes <[e-mail]>
Subject: (bagpipe) Re: non-band pipe tunes

Karen Danko wrote:

> Hi,
>   I was wondering if there is any music for bagpipes that is not for pipe
> bands. Non war, military marching tunes, like the stuff I hear by Anne Gray,
> Kathryn Tickell... Also is there bagpipe music from other countries written
> down - like from Poland, Slovakia...? Thanks, Karen

Hi Karen,

There are heaps of "non-military" tunes that  can be played on the pipes.  For
a start there are many traditional Scottish and Irish dance tunes (Jigs, Reels,
Hornpipes, Strathspeys) as well as the slower music like Slow-Airs.  I would
also suggest that not all marches are military.

In fact it was only quite recently (compared to the age of the instrument) that
the Highland Bagpipe was played in bands.  Does that convince you that more
than just "military" marches can be played on the the Highland Bagpipe???

The other major non-military type of music that is played on the Highland
Bagpipe is "Ceol Mor".  This is known as the classical music of the pipes.
Tunes of this kind are based around a main theme (Ular or Ground) which is
embellished more and more as the tune progresses, until finally the Ular (or
part of it) is played again to "complete the circle".  At first, many people
find Ceol Mor hard to come to grips with, but usually when they have heard it
enough, they fall in love with it.  I believe that Ceol Mor (when played well)
is amongst the most powerful music I have heard, and listening to it being
played is like a form of meditation.

If you're interested in how the pipes blend in with other instruments, there
are many CD's you could listen to.  One track that I think is worth while is
the last track on an old "Vale of Atholl" CD called "No Reservations".  Bands
like "The Battlefield Band" might also be of interest, along with many others.

If you're interest in other kinds of pipes, "The Afro-Celt Sound System" Has
put out a couple of cool CD's.  These are more modern, incorporating many
aspects of Celtic and African music.  Some of the tracks even turn into a
techno type mix.

Anyway, I hope you keep listening to the pipes, and enjoy the variety of music
written for, and performed on them.

Cheers
    Casey


- -
 To unsubscribe to bagpipe, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe bagpipe" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

End of bagpipe-digest V1 #40
****************************

-
 To unsubscribe to $LIST, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe $LIST" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.