spaced wide enough to played without strings slapping together.
RT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Wheeler" <[email protected]>
To: "'David Tayler'" <[email protected]>; "'lute-cs.dartmouth.edu'"
<[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:09 AM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: constructive critical commentary
What exactly do you mean by "optimized for
tone and playability"?
Mark
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag
von David Tayler
Gesendet: Dienstag, 12. Januar 2010 01:20
An: lute-cs.dartmouth.edu
Betreff: [LUTE] Re: constructive critical commentary
I think one could offer constructive commentary that is a bit more
pointed that was of a statistical nature that might be helpful.
For example, one can say that out of say 500 videos
50 percent of the lutes do not have the string spacing optimized for
tone and playability
But even this is sort of bordering on direct criticsim.
dt
At 04:08 PM 1/11/2010, you wrote:
I appreciate it when people point out mistakes, but it has to be handled
well.
For example, there are some videos where people are playing something
twice as fast or twice as slow, double or half timing.
Now it is obvious in this case that the player is not aware of it,
and one *might* send a personal email alerting someone, or then again, not!
If I had a glaring error I would probably take the video down and be
grateful, or in some cases if it is just a wrong note I would leave
it up and say, hey, I played a wrong note.
On the other hand, most professional recordings of Dowland's
Lachrimae and Johnson's Almaine have a mistake in the second
bar--parallel fifths--and there really is no point in commenting or
correcting this even in an email, although could post for example a
corrected edition or start a discussion topic on the issue--without
mentioning any names.
No one is aware of all they mistakes they might make, at least as far
as I can tell.
For some younger or preprofessional players I occasionally consider
mentioning some things that might prevent employment, but I have to
say the reception for such information, however well--intentioned, is
invariably tundra-esque.
When I was starting out, I definitely appreciated people mentioning
things like that, but I was trying to make a living and that puts you
in a different frame of mind.
The point is, there is first of all a privacy issue and second of all
a colleague issue.
When in doubt, say nothing at all.
d
At 01:31 AM 1/11/2010, you wrote:
>There seem to be several subject headers around dealing with what
>this, I'll stick to this one.
>
>I've had my fair share of lessons and I teach. Lessons or commentary
>from fellow students at a conservatory are not for people with a
>fragile ego, but all comments are fair. People know what they talk
>about, can clearly hear and see what's wrong with your playing and
>will say so. And it's good they do, for that's the only way to become
>better. The point is the comments are fair and made by people with
>knowledge. Not everybody posting comments on YouTube is fair or knows
>what he/she is writing about. Or, if I play a concert, people come to
>me and say they liked. it. Of course I'm flattered, but what did they
>like? Probably something completely different from what I tried to put
>into the music. That's no problem, but the same is true with
>criticism: what it is they didn't like, is not always a valid point
>for me. I might lose some of my audience, but I cannot please
>everybody. It is important to know who is saying something, to be able
>to judge it well. I had a little girl of six in my audience last
>Wednesday who thought it was utterly boring what I was doing, but her
>sister of eight just loved it. Not because of the music, but because I
>am her guitar teacher, I waved to her during the concert and was
>playing _such_ a funny guitar! She had a great time despite the boring
>music.
>
>Now for us commenting on each other's YouTube videos. Valery made the
>point he knows what's there to improve in his playing and he doesn't
>need to be reminded (sorry if I oversimplify his statement or have it
>wrong. It is a point I want to make that actually does not need
>Valery's playing, it is not about his playing at all, but the example
>was conveniently at hand). Sorry, Valery, perhaps you don't, because I
>think if you really did know what is there to improve and how to
>improve it, you'd change it within weeks or months. One of my first
>videos had too many funny faces, grimaces. I withdrew it. My debut
>Baroque lute videos of last weekend received kind comments, I thank
>you all, but I know my tone has to improve, not all is quite steady
>and some ornaments were downright sloppy. Many of the lute players on
>YouTube play not legato enough. Or should we blame their microphones?
>Many don't hold notes to give them their 'proper' length, or is that
>debatable? Anyway, do I tell them directly? No, because I don't know
>them. I teach real people. People facing me, personalities I know. I
>know their ambitions and their sensitivities. Both are needed to find
>the right touch in making comments on their playing. What use is there
>if someone hears from me his playing is not legato enough and he
>should hold the bass, when all he wants is a pat on the back and
>praise for his brave efforts?
>
>Sorry, got carried away. Real theorbo pupil coming in half an hour.
>
>David
>
>
>--
>*******************************
>David van Ooijen
>[email protected]
>www.davidvanooijen.nl
>*******************************
>
>
>
>To get on or off this list see list information at
>http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
