On 6 Nov 2010, Julia Say wrote:
> I think I'm heading in some of the same directions
Here's the draft. I've taken a different approach to John, combining the "theme
strains" in a different way, according to my current prejudice that some
variation
sets were written down without the "ground" o
On 5 Nov 2010, Gibbons, John wrote:
> Here's a working draft of a set based on Crawhall.
I think I'm heading in some of the same directions, since I can't sleep.
Nothing
publishable yet.
> It needs some editing and probably some bits throwing away.
> But it's too late to find out what it pla
Here's a working draft of a set based on Crawhall.
It needs some editing and probably some bits throwing away.
But it's too late to find out what it plays like.
Some of his inconsistencies are intentional and he's probably put melodically
different tags in for variety.
But the harmonically diffe
Sound isn't a problem for me as (somehow) I have ABCNavigator set to play
using something like a reedy violin ( I think it's set for harmonica) but
I'm a little stuck on the tempo for this one (not that good reading the
dots) and, when played, it raced away at a speed which I had no hope of
mat
To John Julia & Matt and all
This has been a wonderful interchange and highly enjoyable save in one
respect. The horrible midi noise made as my computer plays the
examples. I can't be the only one who would love to hear the points
made on the instrument(s) the tune(s) was/were devel
On 5 Nov 2010, Gibbons, John wrote:
>Crawhall's tags... are harmonically as well as melodically
> different from Reavely,
Exactly - which is why I think there's two possible sets there.
> the illegibilities in Crawhall seem
> to be mostly his fault...
Was he noting this down in haste, I wond
Julia and All,
I also tried using Crawhall's tags, but they are harmonically as well as
melodically different from Reavely, so I stuck with the latter to make a
unified piece. I prefer it that way, but others might prefer the Crawhall.
I agree the FARNE images can be a bit fuzzy, but the ille
On 4 Nov 2010, Gibbons, John wrote:
>Reavely's set is fine but a bit short for addicts of long
> variation sets.
Well, folk seem to be interested in our "workings out", so here goes.
I think the three of us would agree that tunes we have from Reavely are
generally a
very useful source. (for
Den 05-11-2010 00:43, [1]cal...@aol.com skrev:
And there are a lot of lurkers out here who are silent but
interested, and are grateful for being allowed to eavesdrop on informed
discussions.
Thx,
Alec
Hear ! Hear !
As very much a newbee to piping, and living in De
