Hi Jon, yes - of course you are right. Playing strictly in time would make the music mechanical and emotionless. But I made the experience that we as soloists learn to think we would play fine and even in time although we are completely off. We imagine it would be right or caused by musical reasons which often are in fact technical. As Stewart suggested there is a time in the learning process when you need to omit the metronome to let the music breathe (again).
I am using a metronome in the process of learning a piece (as well as a tape recorder) to check my playing. Later I omit both (the metronome won't help anymore and recording the playing just produces new insecurities - I don't know how others might feel about it, but I'm far away from being satisfied with the sound of my home recorded lute). Best wishes Thomas Am Mit, 2003-11-05 um 10.34 schrieb Jon Murphy: > Herbert, > > I've had one of those for 68 years, it is commonly called a toe. Use the > metronome to set the pace, then turn it off. As you know I don't speak as a > lutenist, but all songs vary in the steadiness of the beat desired. Only in > ensemble is strict timing desirable. Even in orchestral music the conductor > will subtly vary the time that he beats, although he may not know it. > > The tapping toe is the best metronome, although the mechanical device is > useful to set the overall pace of the piece. I would be speaking in the > wrong place were I to compliment a pop singer, but Frank Sinatra didn't have > a very good voice at all - what he had was phrasing, the ability to lead or > lag the beat by just enough to make music. A strict progression of notes in > a strict time can be made by a computer, music is made by musicians. > > Best, Jon > > -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss --
