Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
On Mar 29, 2006, at 5:27 PM, Noel Stoutenburg wrote: the general level of music literacy among those who were musically literate was higher in 1960 than it is today No, I think it was 100% both then and now ;- Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
On Mar 29, 2006, at 3:45 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: Irving Berlin's arrangements are pretty good because he had hired an arranger to help him compose his songs. According to the admittedly flawed recent biography As Thousands Cheer, by Laurence Bergreen, Berlin hired not an arranger but an amanuensis to write down what Berlin was playing at the piano. Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
Chuck Israels noted the poor quality of songbooks post 1960 (I mistakenly deleted his posting so I can't quote it). I realize that he was talking about recent publications of old standards, not of recent music, but I thought it would be worth mentioning that piano-vocal publications of rock music, of which I have many, vary tremendously in quality, and some of them are very good. The best, not surprisingly, tend to be those in which the original accompaniment is keyboard-based: The Doors, for example, and Joni Mitchell. Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
At 3/30/2006 11:38 AM, Andrew Stiller wrote: On Mar 29, 2006, at 5:27 PM, Noel Stoutenburg wrote: the general level of music literacy among those who were musically literate was higher in 1960 than it is today No, I think it was 100% both then and now ;- Define musically literate. I think you are saying that today, there are many less musically literate people. Just because some people think they are musically literate, does not mean they are. So, I absolutely disagree with the statement: the general level of music literacy among those who were musically literate was higher in 1960 than it is today The statement should have said: the general level of music literacy has declined End of statement. Phil Daley AutoDesk http://www.conknet.com/~p_daley ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
On Mar 30, 2006, at 11:44 AM, Andrew Stiller wrote: On Mar 29, 2006, at 3:45 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: Irving Berlin's arrangements are pretty good because he had hired an arranger to help him compose his songs. According to the admittedly flawed recent biography As Thousands Cheer, by Laurence Bergreen, Berlin hired not an arranger but an amanuensis to write down what Berlin was playing at the piano. >From almost every other account of Berlin's piano playing I have heard, Berlin had a notoriously poor harmonic sense, restricting most of his harmonies to primary triads in flat keys. He would often have the assistant (for lack of a better word) try out different things until he heard something he liked, then say, That's it! That's what I composed! Having worked this way with composers before, I can relate. Sometimes there actually ARE more sophisticated harmonies implied in the melody, but the composer is unable to realise them properly. Who is the composer really, in that case? I have stopped doing this kind of work now. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
On Mar 30, 2006, at 8:59 AM, Andrew Stiller wrote: Chuck Israels noted the poor quality of songbooks post 1960 (I mistakenly deleted his posting so I can't quote it). I realize that he was talking about recent publications of old standards, not of recent music, Yes, that's what I meant, but even some old ones vary in quality. I've heard pretty poor piano accompaniments to Cole Porter songs used by Ben Heppner's accompanist (for one example). I'm all for people with trained voices singing popular songs, as long as the rendition at least approaches the accepted standards set by the better performers of that material, just as I'm happy that Rufus Wainwright sings L'Invitation au Voyage. (Not the best I've heard, of course, but pretty decent, and it introduces his audience to that wonderful song at what I consider to be an acceptable, and certainly heartfelt, level.) I just don't enjoy ignorant performances - where classical singers go slumming. Ugh! I'm always surprised that people who are supposedly trained in the nuances of interpretation can be so far off that it's embarrassing when they sing popular material. The result sounds as if they've either never heard it, or that they mistakenly believe they are elevating the material by performing it in grossly pretentious and bizarre ways. When I hear that kind of thing, it casts doubt, in my mind, on the integrity of all of their other work. Makes me think they have no more understanding of the stuff they normally perform than they do of the pop stuff. End of OT rant. but I thought it would be worth mentioning that piano-vocal publications of rock music, of which I have many, vary tremendously in quality, and some of them are very good. The best, not surprisingly, tend to be those in which the original accompaniment is keyboard-based: The Doors, for example, and Joni Mitchell. Good to know this. Chuck Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
On Mar 30, 2006, at 9:27 AM, Phil Daley wrote: the general level of music literacy has declined In my experience, in my lifetime, this is an understatement. Chuck Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
On Mar 30, 2006, at 9:35 AM, Christopher Smith wrote:Having worked this way with composers before, I can relate. Sometimes there actually ARE more sophisticated harmonies implied in the melody, but the composer is unable to realise them properly. Who is the composer really, in that case? I have stopped doing this kind of work now.I stopped playing the bass for a living when I'd show up (with a Fender bass) for a recording date with illiterate musicians who were being paid more than I'd dreamed of to have me create a bass part to a piece they'd "written" that made no sense to me. I'd probably have done it and taken the money, but I could never figure out what they wanted to hear, partly because I couldn't stand listening to the kind of music they were "writing" and hearing. I was afraid that if I learned to do it, my music would begin to sound like that.Then there was a period of working with Paul Simon, mostly as his composition teacher. (There was not a lot I could teach him that applied to his work, and he is certainly more than minimally gifted at what he does.) I couldn't make that work either, when Paul wanted to help me by getting me involved in making his recordings. I couldn't figure out what was going on in that world. I liked the idea of the money and notoriety, but couldn't work the way the pop guys do.To each his zone.Chuck Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
Chuck Israels wrote: On Mar 30, 2006, at 9:27 AM, Phil Daley wrote: the general level of music literacy has declined In my experience, in my lifetime, this is an understatement. and since I grew up listening to Chuck (no offense meant!) the fact that it has got worse in my performing lifetime is doubly bad. An example, if I may: I was waiting for my 5 year old to finish her Violin lesson and I was listening to the teaching room next door (This is in a largish college here in Calgary). A youngish boy of about 15 had entered the room a half an hour before and had ripped through some pretty (technically) impressive stuff - Liszt in parallel min 6ths, some Rach Prelude etc etc. I realised that he was preparing for the local music competition and then heard a truly terrible performance of a Bach prelude and fugue with lots of pedal (which I think is unnecessary in Bach - shoot me!). The boy came out and I said: May I talk to you about your Bach. Who is Bach, he replied. The fugue that you just finished. Oh. What _is_ a fugue anyway? I have had to play that rubbish before, and I have no idea what it means. Is it a tempo sign (verbatim). I could not reply to that, and walked off shaking my head and knowing that I had to adjudicate a number of these children all who don't know how the composers are, nor what the musical forms are that they are playing. Sad, Sad. On another point, more in tune with the subject line, there are copies of the Real Book floating around in Australia with some quite different changes than the Boston book. These changes were used by a number of very good Australian jazz musicians in the 60s and then added to the Boston book when it became available. As we (Australians) often didn't have media copies of the original tunes due to the lack of recordings, these changes became the standard(s). I need to lug a Real Book with me when playing jazz gigs, just to remember what the standard changes are here, and not the ones that I was brought up on (and think are better anyway!) Bruce Petherick ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
Dear Chuck... THANK YOU for those comments on (mis)interpretation of popular song...I have pasted them in several locations (with your name redacted) for people to see. Jim From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Chuck Israels Sent: Thu 30-Mar-06 12:42 To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation On Mar 30, 2006, at 8:59 AM, Andrew Stiller wrote: Chuck Israels noted the poor quality of songbooks post 1960 (I mistakenly deleted his posting so I can't quote it). I realize that he was talking about recent publications of old standards, not of recent music, Yes, that's what I meant, but even some old ones vary in quality. I've heard pretty poor piano accompaniments to Cole Porter songs used by Ben Heppner's accompanist (for one example). I'm all for people with trained voices singing popular songs, as long as the rendition at least approaches the accepted standards set by the better performers of that material, just as I'm happy that Rufus Wainwright sings L'Invitation au Voyage. (Not the best I've heard, of course, but pretty decent, and it introduces his audience to that wonderful song at what I consider to be an acceptable, and certainly heartfelt, level.) I just don't enjoy ignorant performances - where classical singers go slumming. Ugh! I'm always surprised that people who are supposedly trained in the nuances of interpretation can be so far off that it's embarrassing when they sing popular material. The result sounds as if they've either never heard it, or that they mistakenly believe they are elevating the material by performing it in grossly pretentious and bizarre ways. When I hear that kind of thing, it casts doubt, in my mind, on the integrity of all of their other work. Makes me think they have no more understanding of the stuff they normally perform than they do of the pop stuff. End of OT rant. but I thought it would be worth mentioning that piano-vocal publications of rock music, of which I have many, vary tremendously in quality, and some of them are very good. The best, not surprisingly, tend to be those in which the original accompaniment is keyboard-based: The Doors, for example, and Joni Mitchell. Good to know this. Chuck Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Dear Chuck... THANK YOU for those comments on (mis)interpretation of popular song...I have pasted them in several locations (with your name redacted) for people to see. Jim From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Chuck Israels Sent: Thu 30-Mar-06 12:42 To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation On Mar 30, 2006, at 8:59 AM, Andrew Stiller wrote: Chuck Israels noted the poor quality of songbooks post 1960 (I mistakenly deleted his posting so I can't quote it). I realize that he was talking about recent publications of old standards, not of recent music, Yes, that's what I meant, but even some old ones vary in quality. I've heard pretty poor piano accompaniments to Cole Porter songs used by Ben Heppner's accompanist (for one example). I'm all for people with trained voices singing popular songs, as long as the rendition at least approaches the accepted standards set by the better performers of that material, just as I'm happy that Rufus Wainwright sings L'Invitation au Voyage. (Not the best I've heard, of course, but pretty decent, and it introduces his audience to that wonderful song at what I consider to be an acceptable, and certainly heartfelt, level.) I just don't enjoy ignorant performances - where classical singers go slumming. Ugh! I'm always surprised that people who are supposedly trained in the nuances of interpretation can be so far off that it's embarrassing when they sing popular material. The result sounds as if they've either never heard it, or that they mistakenly believe they are elevating the material by performing it in grossly pretentious and bizarre ways. When I hear that kind of thing, it casts doubt, in my mind, on the integrity of all of their other work. Makes me think they have no more understanding of the stuff they normally perform than they do of the pop stuff. End of OT rant. but I thought it would be worth mentioning that piano-vocal publications of rock music, of which I have many, vary tremendously in quality, and some of them are very good. The best, not surprisingly, tend to be those in which the original accompaniment is keyboard-based
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
At 9:44 AM -0800 3/30/06, Chuck Israels wrote: On Mar 30, 2006, at 9:27 AM, Phil Daley wrote: the general level of music literacy has declined In my experience, in my lifetime, this is an understatement. OK, folks. Before this descends any further into incoherence, it really is necessary to provide some working definitions. General level: a vague and unhelpful term. Do you mean by it the number of people (so make that a percentage of the entire general population) who meet your definition of music literacy (which I'll get to in a minute)? Or do you mean by it the degree of musical literacy (still to be defined) possessed by that fraction of the entire general population who are interested in such things? Or do you mean by it the depth of musical literacy (still, still to be defined) possessed by those who have formally studied music and think of themselves as musicians? Or something else entirely? Like the number of elementary school students who take formal classes in General Music, or who participate in school ensembles (which have always and everywhere discriminated against any form of popular music)? Music Literacy: I'm sure that each of you in this discussion has a solid picture of what this means to you, but I'm not at all sure than any of you share the same picture. The simplest definition would be the ability to read music, just as literacy in general is considered the ability to read language. But that's pretty unsatisfactory because the ability to read music off the page, valuable as it is, has never defined the one and only thing that makes a musician a musician, and in many traditions it is not a requirement at all. I rather suspect that what each of you means is more like the depth of knowledge ABOUT music possessed by an individual in the general population, which is something quite different. And right there is where we run into a perception problem. It's hard to get away from the fact that each of us unconsciously measures someone's knowledge about the specific type of music that is important to US, and not necessarily the type of music that's important to THEM. To one person, the only knowledge worthwhile is knowledge about opera. To another, knowledge about country or traditional music. To yet another, knowledge about jazz. Etc., etc., and so forth. There is, of course, the indisputable fact that our entire culture has become one of music consumers rather than music makers. But has that ever NOT been the case? Sure, I grew up in a house with a couple of pianos in it on top of which could be found an eclectic collection of Stephen Foster, Barbershop, Beethoven, Chopin, and even Bach. But to hear the best in the best possible way, we went out to concerts to enjoy live music. My family were all musicians, but we were both consumers and makers. Yes, recordings were a new and wonderful way to experience more music than we would ever have the opportunity to experience first hand, but they didn't replace live performance in our lives. And I'm sorry, but I see exactly the same thing happening with the overwhelming majority of young people today who live for the music in their iPods. They STILL put great value on attending live performances, and spend lots of money doing so. What they mostly don't do is to make music in any especially meaningful way, but that's always been true of the majority, and as far as their depth of knowledge of music it may not include music theory but it can be encyclopedic when it comes to the music and the performers they enjoy and value. Oops. Didn't mean to haul out a soapbox, but I am interested in what various people mean by the words they're throwing around. John -- John Susie Howell Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
Friends, In the interest of accuracy and precision, let me clarify by restating what I meant when I wrote: and the general level of music literacy among those who were musically literate was higher in 1960 than it is today, when for too many, the pinnacle of music literacy is knowing how to download music into an iPod, and how to change the battery. In the entire population, the percentage of people able to read music, or to sing, or play any musical instrument with any signiricant degree of proficiency has been declining probably for about a third of a century. I think the decline took root between 1960 and 1970, and that the rate of decline has increased since. Paradoxically, I also suspect that if one compares those who are musically literate today, with those who were musically literate in 1960, that those who are in comparable locations on the literacy scale are at a higher point today than their counterparts on the scale were in 1960; that is, the best today are more proficient than the best in 1960; and the median musician today is more proficient than the median student in 1960 was, but the number of musicians in the population is relatively lower than it was in 1960. I should also add that these observations are based upon personal experience in the US., and may or may not be accurate in other places, and indeed, may not be universally accurate in the US. ns ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
My statements: This is not absolutely true here in Europe (Switzerland) More kids learn to play an instrument (than in the sixties) piano players play more boogie woogies and pop instead of classical music. Sight reading and musical understanding is detoriating. guitar players play more TABs and don't really learn to read music. They learn to play power chords and solos right enough, but (see piano players)... All instruments learn to improvise more (which is good) but sight reading won't be trained enough, as is technique (I still think you need to play classics to learn a good technique) wood, brass and string players (violin etc.) are better readers than the rest, they play often in bands and orchestras. percussion players may be great readers of rhythms, but not of musical scores. Singers have no great chance to sight-read if they aren't good piano players, as well, (playing the badly arranged modern fakebooks) all kids have a more limited musical experience, listening mainly pop, hip-hop etc. mostly produced by (almost) non-musicians. more kids are interested in Jazz (Piano players), this is good, when they also learn to develop their technique... less kids like classics, less kids understand about what music is or can be...:-( there are a few kids who are really good and have learned (too) much at an early age (because of their parents hoping they will be stars?) There are less ensembles There are more bands (punk, etc.) All in all, even if there are more kids learning instruments, the quality has become worse... all in all... Kurt At 21:37 30.03.2006, you wrote: Friends, In the interest of accuracy and precision, let me clarify by restating what I meant when I wrote: and the general level of music literacy among those who were musically literate was higher in 1960 than it is today, when for too many, the pinnacle of music literacy is knowing how to download music into an iPod, and how to change the battery. In the entire population, the percentage of people able to read music, or to sing, or play any musical instrument with any signiricant degree of proficiency has been declining probably for about a third of a century. I think the decline took root between 1960 and 1970, and that the rate of decline has increased since. Paradoxically, I also suspect that if one compares those who are musically literate today, with those who were musically literate in 1960, that those who are in comparable locations on the literacy scale are at a higher point today than their counterparts on the scale were in 1960; that is, the best today are more proficient than the best in 1960; and the median musician today is more proficient than the median student in 1960 was, but the number of musicians in the population is relatively lower than it was in 1960. I should also add that these observations are based upon personal experience in the US., and may or may not be accurate in other places, and indeed, may not be universally accurate in the US. ns ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
On Mar 30, 2006, at 9:35 AM, Christopher Smith wrote: Having worked this way with composers before, I can relate. Sometimes there actually ARE more sophisticated harmonies implied in the melody, but the composer is unable to realise them properly. Who is the composer really, in that case? I have stopped doing this kind of work now. I think one's attitude toward such a relationship depends on the individuals involved. I once collaborated with a songwriter who did as you describe: He wrote beautiful melodies which were very expressive of his texts, with sophisticated harmonies implied in the melody. His basic musical ideas were excellent, but the accompaniments he wrote were clumsy and awkward. He knew that they were, and that's why he hired me to root out and realize what was implied. It was a delightful working relationship. The composer was a joy to work with, always very gracious, aware of what I had to offer and eager to learn from me. And he paid me well, too. I have no bitter feelings about my subordinate role at all. The truth is, my compositional skills are more that of a craftsman. I'm pretty good at taking someone else's work and fixing it up, but I'm not so good at coming up with original material of my own. It's good to have a collaboration where the parties' talents are complementary. mdl ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
At 8:26 PM -0800 3/30/06, Mark D Lew wrote: I think one's attitude toward such a relationship depends on the individuals involved. I once collaborated with a songwriter who did as you describe: He wrote beautiful melodies which were very expressive of his texts, with sophisticated harmonies implied in the melody. His basic musical ideas were excellent, but the accompaniments he wrote were clumsy and awkward. He knew that they were, and that's why he hired me to root out and realize what was implied. There's a story about Berlin that I think is true. A young man applied for the position as his musical secretary. Berlin turned him down, saying, You're too good. You should be writing your own songs. The young man's name was George Gershwin. John -- John Susie Howell Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
A few years ago, there was a discussion on this List about fake books, and I was surprised to find that the group here was near universal in recommending one particular title. Now I have two questions: First, for my own curiosity, I want to know which fake book it was that everyone agreed was the best. Second, I wonder if anyone could recommend a fake book well suited for my specific situation. My use of the book would be for a solo piano-bar situation where I both sing and play. My problem is that I never learned to play well from chord charts. I sight-read very well, and I'm reasonably comfortable adapting or embellishing any simple piano accompaniment. But I do need to see notes on the page, or else I'm too busy thinking about chords and I lose the song. I continue to debate with myself whether I should take the trouble to learn to play from chord charts, or whether it's too late to teach that trick to this old dog. Right now, I just want to know if there's some big book that serves the same purpose as a fake book -- ie, a ton of songs in one fat book -- but actually has simple accompaniments written out instead of just charts. Also, my repertoire preference tilts toward the older stuff. I'd love a book that's got a deep collection of standards from the 20s, 30s, and 40s, and I'd like a fairly good sampling from before that, too. I like the old musicals (eg, Rodgers Hammerstin, Lerner Loewe) more than the new musicals (eg, Andrew Lloyd Webber, Tim Rice). Anything after the Beatles I don't really need, though I wouldn't object to a basic sample of the most popular ballad type songs from that era. You get the idea. It doesn't necessarily have to be one book, but if it's a series, I'd like some dense volumes that are designed not to overlap too much. Basically I want to be able carry in one armful pretty much every song I might want to play. I understand that probably means tiny print, but I'm OK with that. I actually know the words and melodies to most of the songs; I just need something written out to follow along, because my deep-down habits are as a sight-reader. Any ideas welcome. thanks mdl ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
Mark, If you can train yourself to read chord symbols, the Standards Real Book (from Chuck Sher publishing) probably has the best selection of tunes for what you're looking for: http://www.shermusic.com/standard_real.htm Keep in mind that fake books by definition have chord symbols only, not fully written-out accompaniments. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://secretsociety.typepad.com Brooklyn, NY On 29 Mar 2006, at 4:32 AM, Mark D Lew wrote: A few years ago, there was a discussion on this List about fake books, and I was surprised to find that the group here was near universal in recommending one particular title. Now I have two questions: First, for my own curiosity, I want to know which fake book it was that everyone agreed was the best. Second, I wonder if anyone could recommend a fake book well suited for my specific situation. My use of the book would be for a solo piano-bar situation where I both sing and play. My problem is that I never learned to play well from chord charts. I sight-read very well, and I'm reasonably comfortable adapting or embellishing any simple piano accompaniment. But I do need to see notes on the page, or else I'm too busy thinking about chords and I lose the song. I continue to debate with myself whether I should take the trouble to learn to play from chord charts, or whether it's too late to teach that trick to this old dog. Right now, I just want to know if there's some big book that serves the same purpose as a fake book -- ie, a ton of songs in one fat book -- but actually has simple accompaniments written out instead of just charts. Also, my repertoire preference tilts toward the older stuff. I'd love a book that's got a deep collection of standards from the 20s, 30s, and 40s, and I'd like a fairly good sampling from before that, too. I like the old musicals (eg, Rodgers Hammerstin, Lerner Loewe) more than the new musicals (eg, Andrew Lloyd Webber, Tim Rice). Anything after the Beatles I don't really need, though I wouldn't object to a basic sample of the most popular ballad type songs from that era. You get the idea. It doesn't necessarily have to be one book, but if it's a series, I'd like some dense volumes that are designed not to overlap too much. Basically I want to be able carry in one armful pretty much every song I might want to play. I understand that probably means tiny print, but I'm OK with that. I actually know the words and melodies to most of the songs; I just need something written out to follow along, because my deep-down habits are as a sight-reader. Any ideas welcome. thanks mdl ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
Mark D Lew wrote: A few years ago, there was a discussion on this List about fake books, and I was surprised to find that the group here was near universal in recommending one particular title. Now I have two questions: First, for my own curiosity, I want to know which fake book it was that everyone agreed was the best. Second, I wonder if anyone could recommend a fake book well suited for my specific situation. My use of the book would be for a solo piano-bar situation where I both sing and play. My problem is that I never learned to play well from chord charts. I sight-read very well, and I'm reasonably comfortable adapting or embellishing any simple piano accompaniment. But I do need to see notes on the page, or else I'm too busy thinking about chords and I lose the song. I continue to debate with myself whether I should take the trouble to learn to play from chord charts, or whether it's too late to teach that trick to this old dog. Right now, I just want to know if there's some big book that serves the same purpose as a fake book -- ie, a ton of songs in one fat book -- but actually has simple accompaniments written out instead of just charts. Also, my repertoire preference tilts toward the older stuff. I'd love a book that's got a deep collection of standards from the 20s, 30s, and 40s, and I'd like a fairly good sampling from before that, too. I like the old musicals (eg, Rodgers Hammerstin, Lerner Loewe) more than the new musicals (eg, Andrew Lloyd Webber, Tim Rice). Anything after the Beatles I don't really need, though I wouldn't object to a basic sample of the most popular ballad type songs from that era. You get the idea. It doesn't necessarily have to be one book, but if it's a series, I'd like some dense volumes that are designed not to overlap too much. Basically I want to be able carry in one armful pretty much every song I might want to play. I understand that probably means tiny print, but I'm OK with that. I actually know the words and melodies to most of the songs; I just need something written out to follow along, because my deep-down habits are as a sight-reader. Any ideas welcome. And probably you want legal fake books, since you'll be using them in public, right? Sher Publications has some very good books which claim to have the authentic chord changes in them. Visit http://www.shermusic.com -- their Standards Real Book or any of the New Real Book series may be just what you want. Hal Leonard has been bringing out their versions of the original Real Books, but there are huge differences in content. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
On Mar 29, 2006, at 1:47 AM, Darcy James Argue wrote: If you can train yourself to read chord symbols, the Standards Real Book (from Chuck Sher publishing) probably has the best selection of tunes for what you're looking for: Ah yes, that was the title that you guys all mentioned before. Now I remember. Keep in mind that fake books by definition have chord symbols only, not fully written-out accompaniments. OK, in that case what I'm looking for is something sort of like a fake book but different in that respect. (A fake fake book?) I guess I could say that I'm looking for a really fat anthology that packs in a whole lot of songs by using small print and no-frills layout. mdl ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
On Mar 29, 2006, at 1:47 AM, Darcy James Argue wrote: If you can train yourself to read chord symbols, the Standards Real Book (from Chuck Sher publishing) probably has the best selection of tunes for what you're looking for: http://www.shermusic.com/standard_real.htm Can you or anyone else give helpful advice with respect to the Bb, C, and Eb editions? Surely they don't actually put every song in the same key. Is it perhaps that everything in the Eb edition is a minor third higher and everything in the Bb edition is a major second lower, with the C version being somewhere in the middle? mdl ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
Mark, The Bb and Eb editions are for players of transposing instruments (like Bb trumpet and Eb alto saxophone). Is it perhaps that everything in the Eb edition is a minor third higher and everything in the Bb edition is a major second lower Other way around -- Bb edition is up a step, Eb edition is down a minor third (or up a major sixth, depending). - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://secretsociety.typepad.com Brooklyn, NY On 29 Mar 2006, at 5:37 AM, Mark D Lew wrote: On Mar 29, 2006, at 1:47 AM, Darcy James Argue wrote: If you can train yourself to read chord symbols, the Standards Real Book (from Chuck Sher publishing) probably has the best selection of tunes for what you're looking for: http://www.shermusic.com/standard_real.htm Can you or anyone else give helpful advice with respect to the Bb, C, and Eb editions? Surely they don't actually put every song in the same key. Is it perhaps that everything in the Eb edition is a minor third higher and everything in the Bb edition is a major second lower, with the C version being somewhere in the middle? mdl ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
Darcy James Argue wrote: Mark, The Bb and Eb editions are for players of transposing instruments (like Bb trumpet and Eb alto saxophone). Is it perhaps that everything in the Eb edition is a minor third higher and everything in the Bb edition is a major second lower Other way around -- Bb edition is up a step, Eb edition is down a minor third (or up a major sixth, depending). The various keyed books are meant to be used by the different instruments so they can work together -- trumpet/tenorsax/clarinet play from the Bb book, alto sax from the Eb book, etc. For playing piano you'd most likely want to use the C edition, unless you plan on singing along, in which case perhaps your vocal range lies higher or lower than the C book. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
On Mar 29, 2006, at 5:28 AM, Mark D Lew wrote: On Mar 29, 2006, at 1:47 AM, Darcy James Argue wrote: If you can train yourself to read chord symbols, the Standards Real Book (from Chuck Sher publishing) probably has the best selection of tunes for what you're looking for: Ah yes, that was the title that you guys all mentioned before. Now I remember. We were probably talking about a jazz fake book, which would have been the New Real Book, Vol 1, also by Sher Music. It has three volumes, and a Latin Real Book, a Vocal Real Book, and a Jazz Real Book as well. The Standards Real Book as recommended by Darcy is the one you would probably like the best given your repertoire, but it doesn't have complete accompaniments. Keep in mind that fake books by definition have chord symbols only, not fully written-out accompaniments. OK, in that case what I'm looking for is something sort of like a fake book but different in that respect. (A fake fake book?) I guess I could say that I'm looking for a really fat anthology that packs in a whole lot of songs by using small print and no-frills layout. I have a book called Broadway Deluxe by Hal Leonard, ISBN 0-88188-306-9 that seems to do what you ask, though the print is not so small and sometimes the songs run 3 pages or more. It is bound in standard paperback binding (what is the name of that?) so it doesn't sit as flat as I would like it to on the piano. The repertoire runs to traditional Bdway fare, up to about the 70's or so. One of the books I really enjoyed reading through to improve my piano chops was the Readers Digest Treasury of Best Loved Songs. The arrangements (by Dan Fox) are much better than the average published arrangements and are quite playable by one of limited technique (me) while still sounding hip and full. Most of the tunes fit onto two pages as well, and it is a metal comb binding inside a hard cover - ideal for sitting on a piano. There isn't a LOT of broadway repertoire in it - more popular and Tin Pan Alley - but it might be worth a look. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
At 1:32 AM -0800 3/29/06, Mark D Lew wrote: Also, my repertoire preference tilts toward the older stuff. I'd love a book that's got a deep collection of standards from the 20s, 30s, and 40s, and I'd like a fairly good sampling from before that, too. I like the old musicals (eg, Rodgers Hammerstin, Lerner Loewe) more than the new musicals (eg, Andrew Lloyd Webber, Tim Rice). Anything after the Beatles I don't really need, though I wouldn't object to a basic sample of the most popular ballad type songs from that era. You get the idea. At one point in time one of the big publishers--it may have been Readers Digest--had a series out that would be exactly what you want. You definitely don't want a fake book, since that assumes an ability to, well, fake! I'd suggest contacting Readers Digest and asking, then working through your local music retailer and their catalogs if nobody here comes up with a good answer. John -- John Susie Howell Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
At 2:37 AM -0800 3/29/06, Mark D Lew wrote: On Mar 29, 2006, at 1:47 AM, Darcy James Argue wrote: If you can train yourself to read chord symbols, the Standards Real Book (from Chuck Sher publishing) probably has the best selection of tunes for what you're looking for: http://www.shermusic.com/standard_real.htm Can you or anyone else give helpful advice with respect to the Bb, C, and Eb editions? Surely they don't actually put every song in the same key. Is it perhaps that everything in the Eb edition is a minor third higher and everything in the Bb edition is a major second lower, with the C version being somewhere in the middle? You want the C edition. The Bb edition is for instruments in Bb to play along, and the same for the Eb book. That covers all the saxes, clarinets, trumpet, etc. John -- John Susie Howell Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
Alright, I give up - what's a fake book? Cheers, Lawrence "þaes ofereode - þisses swa maeg"http://lawrenceyates.co.ukDulcian Wind Quintet: http://dulcianwind.co.uk ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
Hi Lawrence, Fake is another term for improvise. A standard (old) Fake Book, legal or otherwise, has melody, chord symbols and lyrics, thats all. I had to go to my 1950s Fake Book, just the other day, to get the lyrics to an old tune. I have also used it to figure out the form of a song, so I could see how the arranger screwed it up. I never knew that Cherokee was a double song form! JS -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 8:24 AM To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation Alright, I give up - what's a fake book? Cheers, Lawrence þaes ofereode - þisses swa maeg http://lawrenceyates.co.uk Dulcian Wind Quintet: http://dulcianwind.co.uk ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Alright, I give up - what's a fake book? A publication containing the melody lines of a selection of songs, with the harmonies indicated by chord symbols or names, and one or more verses of lyrics, enabling one to fake playing the song. Every Music retailer, and most of the big bookstores (Barnes Noble, Borders) that I've been in have one or more examples in stock for sale. ns ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
Also, my repertoire preference tilts toward the older stuff. I'd love a book that's got a deep collection of standards from the 20s, 30s, and 40s, and I'd like a fairly good sampling from before that, too. I like the old musicals (eg, Rodgers Hammerstin, Lerner (I'm not sure who the quote is from) I work at a music store in the sheet music department (Lipham Music in Gainesville, FL). There are literally hundreds of such collections available. We must have 20 or so in stock that cover the 1920's-1950's, not to mention musicals. Hal Leonard and Alfred (which bought Warner Brothers music last year) publish a number of piano/vocal/guitar books like that. Those collections are in the format of traditional sheet music - a vocal line at the top and a piano part below. Chord symbols for guitar are placed above the vocal line. Usually, but not always, the piano part contains the melody. On a side note, I've heard complaints from customers about the Hal Leonard 'legal' edition of The Real Book fakebook. They say it does not contain the same titles as the originals and do not have the correct chord symbols on some songs. I also heard a customer tell me that PDF versions on CD-ROMs of the original Real Book and others can be found for sale on ebay. Obviously not legal, but nonetheless available. James Gilbert http://www.jamesgilbertmusic.com/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
On Mar 29, 2006, at 7:42 AM, James Gilbert wrote: Also, my repertoire preference tilts toward the older stuff. I'd love a book that's got a deep collection of standards from the 20s, 30s, and 40s, and I'd like a fairly good sampling from before that, too. I like the old musicals (eg, Rodgers Hammerstin, Lerner (I'm not sure who the quote is from) I work at a music store in the sheet music department (Lipham Music in Gainesville, FL). There are literally hundreds of such collections available. We must have 20 or so in stock that cover the 1920's-1950's, not to mention musicals. Hal Leonard and Alfred (which bought Warner Brothers music last year) publish a number of piano/vocal/guitar books like that. Those collections are in the format of traditional sheet music - a vocal line at the top and a piano part below. Chord symbols for guitar are placed above the vocal line. Usually, but not always, the piano part contains the melody. On a side note, I've heard complaints from customers about the Hal Leonard 'legal' edition of The Real Book fakebook. They say it does not contain the same titles as the originals and do not have the correct chord symbols on some songs. I also heard a customer tell me that PDF versions on CD-ROMs of the original Real Book and others can be found for sale on ebay. Obviously not legal, but nonetheless available. This is true, and there are thousands of songs included. My students have these and have given me a copy - a useful, though illegal, resource for those who understand chord symbol shorthand. Chuck Sher's books are the most consistently correct (almost always), and they represent a high level of integrity in editing and presenting this kind of material. None of this solves Mark's problem of needing fully realized piano arrangements, and most published ones are abominable when compared with the most rudimentary realization by a competent jazz musician. I agree that the Reader's Digest Songbook - Remembering Yesterday's Hits (ISBN 0-89577-249-3) is a fine example of this kind of thing done well. The arrangements by Dan Fox are exemplary, and they can be played with the lead line sung instead of played on the piano. They are simple and harmonically satisfying. A lot of care and sophisticated thought went into this publication, and it includes many great songs. I recommend it to Mark, and anyone else who needs this kind of publication. Chuck James Gilbert http://www.jamesgilbertmusic.com/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
On Mar 29, 2006, at 7:42 AM, James Gilbert wrote: I work at a music store in the sheet music department (Lipham Music in Gainesville, FL). There are literally hundreds of such collections available. We must have 20 or so in stock that cover the 1920's-1950's, not to mention musicals. Hal Leonard and Alfred (which bought Warner Brothers music last year) publish a number of piano/vocal/guitar books like that. Those collections are in the format of traditional sheet music - a vocal line at the top and a piano part below. Chord symbols for guitar are placed above the vocal line. Usually, but not always, the piano part contains the melody. Yes, I've seen dozens of such anthologies in the library and such. I was hoping that someone could recommend to me the most efficient of them. My experience is that even the larger anthologies have only about 40 songs, and if you start collecting several of them, you have a lot of overlap, so that you're adding a whole book just for three or four songs that you don't already have in one of your other books. I was hoping to find an anthology-type book that shares the feature I've seen in fake books, ie, a couple hundred songs, with just the information I need and not a bunch of space spreading it out to look like real sheet music. I know the Readers Digest books that John H mentioned. I've got most of them here at home. They're nice to have, but they're the opposite of what I'm looking for now. They're big oversized books with extra large print, and lots of space for titling. Maybe I'll have to learn to fake from chord charts after all. Either that, or I need to make my own notebook, scanning the music I do have and reducing, trimming, cutting and pasting it in software somehow. mdl ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
On Mar 29, 2006, at 9:55 AM, Mark D Lew wrote: On Mar 29, 2006, at 7:42 AM, James Gilbert wrote: I work at a music store in the sheet music department (Lipham Music in Gainesville, FL). There are literally hundreds of such collections available. We must have 20 or so in stock that cover the 1920's-1950's, not to mention musicals. Hal Leonard and Alfred (which bought Warner Brothers music last year) publish a number of piano/vocal/guitar books like that. Those collections are in the format of traditional sheet music - a vocal line at the top and a piano part below. Chord symbols for guitar are placed above the vocal line. Usually, but not always, the piano part contains the melody. Yes, I've seen dozens of such anthologies in the library and such. I was hoping that someone could recommend to me the most efficient of them. My experience is that even the larger anthologies have only about 40 songs, and if you start collecting several of them, you have a lot of overlap, so that you're adding a whole book just for three or four songs that you don't already have in one of your other books. I was hoping to find an anthology-type book that shares the feature I've seen in fake books, ie, a couple hundred songs, with just the information I need and not a bunch of space spreading it out to look like real sheet music. I know the Readers Digest books that John H mentioned. I've got most of them here at home. They're nice to have, but they're the opposite of what I'm looking for now. They're big oversized books with extra large print, and lots of space for titling. Maybe I'll have to learn to fake from chord charts after all. Go ahead and give that a try Mark. It's not rocket science, and it can be great fun. It will give you a greater sense of mastery and familiarity with the patterns of what I call harmonic grammar. Ask questions here, OT though they may be. There are many informed and generous people who will be likely to help. The most intellectually organized jazz theory book I know is written by Andrew Jaffe, and I think there is a new edition of it by Advance Music. Mark Levine's book, published by Sher, is also good. Chuck Either that, or I need to make my own notebook, scanning the music I do have and reducing, trimming, cutting and pasting it in software somehow. mdl ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
I heard RealBook is now legal. In Boston, there used to be only one music store who kept them under the counter, and you have to ask for it, while there was another guy, who sits by Berklee building, who looks like a bum or a street drunk, who sells you RealBook only if you approach. Now all the music stores in Boston put it on their show window including Berklee bookstore. Around here, that RealBook is the only practical fake book. We had a gig with a new pianist, who brought 8 fake books which didn't include that RealBook. You can guess the rest of the story. -- - Hiro Hiroaki Honshuku, A-NO-NE Music, Boston, MA http://a-no-ne.com http://anonemusic.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
James Gilbert / 2006/03/29 / 10:42 AM wrote: On a side note, I've heard complaints from customers about the Hal Leonard 'legal' edition of The Real Book fakebook. They say it does not contain the same titles as the originals and do not have the correct chord symbols on some songs. Both books has many, many wrong chords and wrong chord spellings, such as b5 that should had been #11, but I use it to test my students :-) Speaking of which, does anyone know the _correct_ (or should I say originally intended) changes of Nefertiti? Both RealBooks are obviously incorrect. I tried to transcribe both Herbie and Ron but of course they are not consistent for me to determine the original changes. I believe Phill Woods had the same problem when he was arranging for his band, and he just did his own chord progression to it. -- - Hiro Hiroaki Honshuku, A-NO-NE Music, Boston, MA http://a-no-ne.com http://anonemusic.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
A-NO-NE Music wrote: I heard RealBook is now legal. In Boston, there used to be only one music store who kept them under the counter, and you have to ask for it, while there was another guy, who sits by Berklee building, who looks like a bum or a street drunk, who sells you RealBook only if you approach. Now all the music stores in Boston put it on their show window including Berklee bookstore. Around here, that RealBook is the only practical fake book. We had a gig with a new pianist, who brought 8 fake books which didn't include that RealBook. You can guess the rest of the story. The original Real Book is still illegal since no royalties are paid. There are several different Real books which various publishers have out (Sher and Hal Leonard are most notable, although Warner Brothers has some fake books which use Real in the title) but none reproduces the original contents exactly -- Hal Leonard's Real Book is missing something like 150 tunes from the original Real Book, for which they substituted other jazz and standards tunes. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
On Mar 29, 2006, at 12:52 PM, Chuck Israels wrote: most published ones are abominable when compared with the most rudimentary realization by a competent jazz musician. You are certainly right about this, but three exceptions come to mind: Gershwin's original piano arrangements for his songs, most of which are more-or-less intact in the modern published versions, those of Jerome Kern, who had an exceptional harmonic sense, and those of Irving Berlin (this last one's arrangements are pretty good because he had hired an arranger to help him compose his songs.) Actually, now that I think about it, I have a few old (pre-60's) song books, and most of the arrangements are far superior to what we get nowadays. There doesn't seem to be much thought or effort put into piano-vocal arrangements since about 1960 or so. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
On Mar 29, 2006, at 10:42 AM, James Gilbert wrote: On a side note, I've heard complaints from customers about the Hal Leonard 'legal' edition of The Real Book fakebook. They say it does not contain the same titles as the originals and do not have the correct chord symbols on some songs. The original Real Book was notorious for having flatly wrong chord symbols, in addition to errors in melodies and misinterpretations of chord symbols (like Cm instead of Am7(b5)). The legal Real Book (6th edition, I think?) was supposed to have corrected some of the more egregious errors, but it is still far from the thoroughly researched quality of Sher's New Real Book. Publishing being what it is, it was probably impossible to clear some of the titles from the original illegal Real Book when they tried to go straight, thus the differences in repertoire. One feature that the Sher books have is original chords marked (as the composer wrote them) and commonly-used substitutes either above or in parentheses. In a few cases they actually have a new page with a popular version by someone other than the composer (Bill Evans and Miles Davis are the most popular re-interpreters of standards cited). This way you can compare Brubeck's original version of In Your Own Sweet Way with Miles Davis' version, and use the one you prefer (in my case, Miles' version.) If your clients want tasty chord changes, rather than the original harmonisation, you should direct them to the late and lamented Frank Mantooth's book The Best Chord Changes For The Best Standards Ever, which has some interesting and playable chords that are not always like the originals. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
Christopher Smith wrote: Actually, now that I think about it, I have a few old (pre-60's) song books, and most of the arrangements are far superior to what we get nowadays. There doesn't seem to be much thought or effort put into piano-vocal arrangements since about 1960 or so. These can still be found, often at quite advantageous prices, at some used booksellers, and thrift stores. Further, while there may not be a songbook, these types of stores will often have a stack of individual folios, and will sometimes sell a whole stack for a very modest price; I bought a stack of organ music in such situations once by offering the proprietor a couple bucks for that box of music on the piano, and that box of music turned out to be a couple of thousand dollars worth of imported editions of organ music. I think there are a couple considerations which explain the apparent difference in quality: it appears to me that in songbooks issued up to the 1950's were assembled from prints of the originally published sheet music, and the general level of music literacy among those who were musically literate was higher in 1960 than it is today, when for too many, the pinnacle of music literacy is knowing how to download music into an iPod, and how to change the battery. ns ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
Hiro, Ethan Iverson once Herbie about the changes, and here's what Herbie said: http://thebadplus.typepad.com/dothemath/2006/02/nefertiti_chord.html - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://secretsociety.typepad.com Brooklyn, NY On 29 Mar 2006, at 1:58 PM, A-NO-NE Music wrote: James Gilbert / 2006/03/29 / 10:42 AM wrote: On a side note, I've heard complaints from customers about the Hal Leonard 'legal' edition of The Real Book fakebook. They say it does not contain the same titles as the originals and do not have the correct chord symbols on some songs. Both books has many, many wrong chords and wrong chord spellings, such as b5 that should had been #11, but I use it to test my students :-) Speaking of which, does anyone know the _correct_ (or should I say originally intended) changes of Nefertiti? Both RealBooks are obviously incorrect. I tried to transcribe both Herbie and Ron but of course they are not consistent for me to determine the original changes. I believe Phill Woods had the same problem when he was arranging for his band, and he just did his own chord progression to it. -- - Hiro Hiroaki Honshuku, A-NO-NE Music, Boston, MA http://a-no-ne.com http://anonemusic.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
Hey, this is great. Are you just a very gifted googler, or how did you came by that? Kurt At 01:44 30.03.2006, you wrote: Hiro, Ethan Iverson once Herbie about the changes, and here's what Herbie said: http://thebadplus.typepad.com/dothemath/2006/02/nefertiti_chord.html - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://secretsociety.typepad.com Brooklyn, NY On 29 Mar 2006, at 1:58 PM, A-NO-NE Music wrote: James Gilbert / 2006/03/29 / 10:42 AM wrote: On a side note, I've heard complaints from customers about the Hal Leonard 'legal' edition of The Real Book fakebook. They say it does not contain the same titles as the originals and do not have the correct chord symbols on some songs. Both books has many, many wrong chords and wrong chord spellings, such as b5 that should had been #11, but I use it to test my students :-) Speaking of which, does anyone know the _correct_ (or should I say originally intended) changes of Nefertiti? Both RealBooks are obviously incorrect. I tried to transcribe both Herbie and Ron but of course they are not consistent for me to determine the original changes. I believe Phill Woods had the same problem when he was arranging for his band, and he just did his own chord progression to it. -- - Hiro Hiroaki Honshuku, A-NO-NE Music, Boston, MA http://a-no-ne.com http://anonemusic.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
Darcy James Argue / 2006/03/29 / 06:44 PM wrote: Hiro, Ethan Iverson once Herbie about the changes, and here's what Herbie said: http://thebadplus.typepad.com/dothemath/2006/02/nefertiti_chord.html Amazing! I googled over and over and never got hit on this one. I just realized I had to google by nefertiti chord but not nefertiti changes. I thank you for this a lot! My group often plays Nefertiti over baiao groove. Now I have to rewrite the chart. -- - Hiro Hiroaki Honshuku, A-NO-NE Music, Boston, MA http://a-no-ne.com http://anonemusic.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
On Mar 29, 2006, at 9:52 AM, Chuck Israels wrote: I agree that the Reader's Digest Songbook - Remembering Yesterday's Hits (ISBN 0-89577-249-3) is a fine example of this kind of thing done well. The arrangements by Dan Fox are exemplary, and they can be played with the lead line sung instead of played on the piano. They are simple and harmonically satisfying. A lot of care and sophisticated thought went into this publication, and it includes many great songs. I recommend it to Mark, and anyone else who needs this kind of publication. I've got four of the Readers Digest books, and I agree that he did a fine job of making accompaniments that are rich and interesting while still being easy enough for beginning pianists (even if he does betray his own personality from time to time with certain favorite tricks). But as I noted elsewhere, the Readers Digest books don't suit my current want. Go ahead and give that a try Mark. It's not rocket science, and it can be great fun. It will give you a greater sense of mastery and familiarity with the patterns of what I call harmonic grammar. Ask questions here, OT though they may be. There are many informed and generous people who will be likely to help. Thanks. I don't think there's much in the way of questions I need to ask, though. I know exactly what I would need to do to get better: practice. I understand the concept well enough, I just have to get used to doing it so that it becomes second nature. I'm a singer first and pianist second with no intention to change that. Any work I'd do on my piano playing would be strictly to be able to improvise enough accompaniment to showcase the voice. I have no interest in learning the jazzy style of piano solo, nor do I have any use for the sort of piano skills one needs to play with a combo that has other instruments doing the bass and solos. mdl ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: req fake book recommendation
On Mar 29, 2006, at 7:53 PM, Mark D Lew wrote: I'm a singer first and pianist second with no intention to change that. Any work I'd do on my piano playing would be strictly to be able to improvise enough accompaniment to showcase the voice. I have no interest in learning the jazzy style of piano solo, nor do I have any use for the sort of piano skills one needs to play with a combo that has other instruments doing the bass and solos. Hi Mark, I didn't mean to suggest that there was any reason to go further than you needed or wanted. You can get a good idea of simple spacings from your experience with Fox - apply chord symbol names to those arrangements, and then reverse the process as you read fake book changes. At least that's how it would occur to me to learn the technique. Anyway, I just wish you fun and want to encourage you. Chuck Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
