dots vs ears

peeplj · Post by **peeplj** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 7:28 pm

All Western music has been influenced by the evolution of musical notation, and much earlier in its development than you might think.

Long before there was any such thing as a separately-recognized traditional or folk music.

If you feel the need to argue this, please go to a library and read up on it first.

--James

Denny · Post by **Denny** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 7:29 pm

johnkerr wrote:I pointed out, and continue to maintain, that written melody has had no influence at all on ITM. Indeed, Irish music has never been written down and published as part of its composition process.

John, this is in no way ITM specific.

Putting any music, from any genre, to paper is never the creative process.

fearfaoin · Post by **fearfaoin** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 7:33 pm

peeplj wrote:All Western music has been influenced by the evolution of musical notation, and much earlier in its development than you might think.

Oh, I see. You're saying influence of written melody predates or at least
coexists with ITM's development. Yes, ITM was certainly not formed in a
vacuum.

John-N · Post by **John-N** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 7:36 pm

Tjones wrote:I see the dots vs the learning by ear debate much in the same light, as learning a language. ITM being a type language. As with any language you have native speakers, and the written language to guide you. The written language (dots) won't give one the flavor of the dialect(sp) being spoken or played. By listening closely one picks up the accent or dialect(sp).

That's right.

As it has been said already, music styles are like languages. It is effective when learning a new language to be emersed in an environment where everyone speaks that language. Young children can learn difficult languages when they are surrounded by it. And for music that means plenty of listening and interacting (CDs if necessary). It takes years to master the subtle nuances for a given style of music.

-John

fearfaoin · Post by **fearfaoin** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 7:36 pm

fearfaoin wrote:
johnkerr wrote:To place your argument into an analogous yet unrelated domain, it's as if you were arguing that "You can 'swear off the knife and fork' all you like, but you cannot remove the influence of the history of gastronomy from Chinese traditional food. That history has been heavily influenced by the evolution of modern eating utensils."
Odd. What I got from peeplj's comments were "Somewhere between
the beginning of ITM and now, the tradition was influenced by written
melody, thus changing it irrepairably from what it originally was..."

It's odd, because your analogy separates two independant devolopment
timelines (Chinese cuisine and Western tool use), whereas peeplj's contention
was that written music and ITM are inextricably linked...

peeplj · Post by **peeplj** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 7:38 pm

fearfaoin wrote:
peeplj wrote:All Western music has been influenced by the evolution of musical notation, and much earlier in its development than you might think.
Oh, I see. You're saying influence of written melody predates or at least
coexists with ITM's development. Yes, ITM was certainly not formed in a
vacuum.

I would say predates. We're talking very early history, here.

But yeah, that's the gist of what I'm saying.

Now what I'm not saying--and haven't said--is that having the dots is in any way essential to learning to play Irish trad. There are many fine players who can't read at all who play the music very well indeed.

I do think it's good that tune collections exist--otherwise many fine tunes would have been lost through the years.

I don't see anything wrong with using the dots to help you learn the tune, as long as you don't depend just on the dots to learn how the tune should sound. As I've said before, it's just one tool of many.

If you don't like the dots, don't use them.

--James

Doc Jones · Post by **Doc Jones** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:37 pm

I don't like dots.

Oops....should I have said something deeper than that.

I'm afflicted with the terrible combination of being extremely lazy, having a short attention span, and a terrific ear . Makes learning the little rascals nearly impossible when you can play along with a tune the second time you hear it.

I think it would be terrifically useful to be able to use them though. Maybe for a New Year's resolution (again!).

Doc

Wormdiet · Post by **Wormdiet** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:51 pm

Doc Jones wrote: and a terrific ear

Can I buy it from you? How did you acquire it?

Doc Jones · Post by **Doc Jones** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 10:25 pm

Wormdiet wrote:
Doc Jones wrote: and a terrific ear
Can I buy it from you? How did you acquire it?

Hmmm, that sounds like another thread to me.

Doc

dow · Post by **dow** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 10:46 pm

Friends... Romans... Doc Jones...

Lend me your ear.

rama · Post by **rama** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 11:56 pm

....you're all a bunch of psydotic songbirds

dow · Post by **dow** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 9:07 am

rama wrote:....you're all a bunch of psydotic songbirds

Check your spelling.. that's "Psydotic Psongbirds"

We now return you to your regularly scheduled argument abuut Irishmen with dots in their ears.

Cathy Wilde · Post by **Cathy Wilde** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 9:55 am

Haven't read the entire thread over, but ....

Has anyone yet discussed historical context; i.e., the exigencies of the larger repertoires afforded by the advent of recordings and broadcasts over the past century?
And of course, the particular case of geography as it relates to the far-flung and session-sparse realities of ITM in places like the United States?

dow · Post by **dow** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 10:02 am

Cathy Wilde wrote:Haven't read the entire thread over, but ....

... And of course, the particular case of geography as it relates to the far-flung and session-sparse realities of ITM in places like the United States?

A-HA! Now THIS is an interesting thought and may have an effect on how the viewpoints read. Or not. But it certainly pertains to my own particular situation.

Gordon · Post by **Gordon** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 10:42 am

peeplj wrote:All Western music has been influenced by the evolution of musical notation, and much earlier in its development than you might think.

Long before there was any such thing as a separately-recognized traditional or folk music.

If you feel the need to argue this, please go to a library and read up on it first.

--James

Folk music - worldwide - does not need to be "separately-recognized." Recognized as folk by whom? Music professors? That's akin to saying Latin terms for discovered dinosaurs influenced their evolution. Folk music, as its name implies, existed in widely varied forms worldwide long before notation - or written speech, for that matter - existed. Pre-homosapiens used crane bone to play flute music in what seems to be asian modalities. Its sound can still be found in modern Chinese folk music; not much chance the little prehumans wrote down their tunes, though...
As for going to the library.. hmm.. While many authoritative studies have been written on our topic here, many are ultimately theories of Western music written by -- surprise! - musical authorities on Western (read classical) music. No chance, of course, that ITM was developed by talented but uneducated folk; perhaps they picked up their tunes by eavesdropping at the court? And by that logic, blues, here in the States, was no doubt the result of slaves reading notation over the shoulders of their harpsichord-playing owners?
ITM has evolved in recent years -- influenced by radio, Coleman recordings, O'Neills and other similar catalogs, as well as classes taught at Berkeley. But at its root, it is an ancient music, passed aurally from generation to generation. I can only learn it now by reading notation and listening to players and their modern recordings. But to think that the art of notation in some way contributed to the creation of ITM, or any other folk music, is to greatly insult the talent of the common man (or woman).
But you can look all this up, if you really want to. Google it, if you must.

Gordon