At 10:13 PM 2/8/06 -0500, David W. Fenton wrote: >Note names are too, but they are just abstract, and don't carry with >them the same tonal structural implications.
Again, all background and learning. I came to music late (early 1960s) and right into composing, and was not interested in tonality way back then. I never learned solfege and always found it opaque, and didn't care much about note names either, except as one more nuisance. Note names, finger positions, chord names, note names, ack! They were somewhat useful in reverse -- for naming what was actually going on to my eyes and ears if it was needed for explaining to someone else -- but not for composing. In other words, I'm very visual, and naming stuff becomes a hard-to-follow abstraction ... whereas the note positions and modifications are totally transparent to me. And hey -- I sure wish I wasn't away visiting relatives for that "Happy Birthday Mozart" thread! :) Dennis -- My latest project: http://maltedmedia.com/people/bathory/365-2007.html _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
