Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I’ll call Sam Milligan and see if he can put a post up about this. But I think if you are referring to the advent of lever harps in the 20th century(as I think you are) I think the earliest version was on Clark Irish harps, which were made in Syracuse New York in the 1920’s. Where Clark got the idea I don’t know.
The earliest modern lever harp was produced by Lyon & Healy starting in the 1950’s when Sam Pratt was head of the harp division. He was also responsible for the style 30, or Princess Louise, which originally had a square back on it. Anyway, Sam Pratt named the Lyon & Healy lever harp the Troubadour, and then, since there was absolutely no music available specifically for it, asked Sam Milligan to produce a book of tunes for it. That book was Fun From the First.
Saul- Thanks for the three articles. They are all over a year old. Someone told me recently they are both in Federal prison. I’d be curious to know how long a sentence they received.
The house is up for sale for 2 million dollars. Annual taxes are $34,000. The real danger is that the next owner could very likely buy the house just to have the property, tear the house down, and build some other monstrosity in its place. At least these turkeys restored the original house.
You should of course always play a harp that is in tune. I can’t stand hearing someone practice on an out of tune harp. If you use a machine that is easy to read, it shouldn’t take you more than 2 minutes maximum to tune the instrument. The fastest way, using a machine is to tune all the C’s, then all the B’s, then all the A’s, etc.
Hugh- Maybe you need to put at the top of each category page a paragraph as to what the page is there for and how to use it, as you did in your second paragraph above. For the pieces page for example, there should be an explanation at the top that says, in part, if you fill in the boxes under Browse pieces, X will happen. If you fill in the box that says Find and View a Single Piece, X will happen, etc. Because right now, I don’t know what is supposed to happen when I fill in those boxes. Am I filling them in to see something already up? Or filling them in to add something to the page?
Kim and Hugh- First off, my apology if I sounded offensive. That wasn’t the intention. It was late at night, I had spend about 20 minutes trying to figure out how the site works and was getting nowhere.
The problem I have with many sites on the web is that there is a confusion of information on each page. I have to search all over the page, scrolling up and down for 15 minutes to find out how to do something. I end up hitting endless buttons until, by accident, I hit the one that makes the computer do what I wanted it to do, and by that time, I have no idea what I did that made it happen. The new site, and it’s new home page is to me like a big wall with sticky notes pasted all over it at random. If I search long enough, I will probably find what I’m looking for and figure out the route to get there. But I shouldn’t have to do that, and I didn’t have to do that with the old site. It was perfectly clear from day one how it worked and how I had to navigate around it. I think the problem with the new site-and I run into this all the time with my computer guru who sets everything up for me-is that it may seem obvious to someone whose whole life is computers, but it is not obvious to someone like me. I hope as you work on this more that you bring in a couple of people who know almost nothing about computers, ask them to do this or that on the new site, and then stand back silently and watch what they do. Ask them to talk out loud as they try to do what you want them to do so you can hear what problems they are having.
The old site has very clearly defined sections on the home page. The new site in my opinion does not. On the new home page, the right hand column has “LATEST BLOGS AND POSTS.” Which is it? Blogs or posts? I like seeing the various categories in a list, going to one of those, and reading, in the order they were posted, the whole conversation. I don’t want to have to read the latest post for some thread on the home page, then click on that to find the thread it is commenting on, and then looking for the begining of the thread. I shouldn’t have to do a fishing expedition every time I want to read the latest commentary. Seeing the ‘LATEST POSTS” on the home page presents them out of context. These LATEST POSTS work for the moment because for the most part they are the first post for a possible thread. What happens when you’ve got 25 posts on a thread and what appears on the home page is post #26? Do I then have to click on that, have it take me to the thread, and then figure out if the thread started at the top of the page(like the old site) or at the bottom, with the latest post at the top of the thread?
I just clicked on the first post, something about Paraguyain harps. To get to that thread, I couldn’t click on the text of the post, but rather the title of the section it is listed under(Harps and Accessories). But that didn’t take me to the Harps and Accessories section, it took me to the Paraguyain harp thread. To get to the Harps and Accessories page and the various listings, I had to go first to the Paraguyain Harp thread and then click on Harps and accessories. This seems confusing. Also, the post on the home page shows you what the person wrote, but doesn’t show you the subject title. So I now have to sit there and read some of each post on the home page to figure out what the subject is. Once there are 15 or 20 posts on a thread, this is going to get very confusing without the thread title at the top of the post.
I hate to rain on anybody’s parade. But my first reaction, which I’m posting here for reasons that will be clear in a moment, is that I hate it. I am a computer caveman, and whenever anybody “upgrades” anything on my computer, it just means that everything has been moved around so I can’t find it and I have to learn all over again how to find my way around.
I can’t figure out how things are organized on the new site. Messages are placed on the home page and I can’t figure out what I’m supposed to click to see the rest of the message. Same for the various categories in the forums. I liked the fact that I can see the headings for all the threads under the forum title. I can’t do that on the new site, or at least I can’t figure out where everything is. The original site needed no explanation and is very user friendly. I have no idea how to find anything on the new site. I also am not in the slightest interested in hearing anybody’s uploaded tapes or videos. If you want that, go to youtube. I’m guessing this new site is modeled after Facebook, which I have never used and which doesn’t interest me in the slightest. I like the discussions on the current site, and I like being able to access them quickly and easily, and to see what has been posted on a thread. So I’m guessing that I will be disappearing from the harp column site.
Jerusha-I first learned this technique from Jane Weidensaul’s little book called Scientific Practice. I’d never heard of it before. It works really well once you learn to use it. I always start by playing very slowly until it starts to feel comfortable. But then, instead of speeding up by tiny increments, I cut to a much faster tempo, but only in small units, no more than a measure in one unit. It works really well for me.
Kay- I agree completely with your teacher. At the beginning you have to play thing slowly. But there is another technique that can be used very effectively. This is not in stead of playing slowly, but rather in addition to playing slowly, or maybe once the piece can be played slowly, then this technique can be used. And that is to play very small segments of a piece, typically 2 or 3 beats at a time, at a much faster tempo, either at tempo or close to it. What you do is play the first couple of beats at the faster tempo. When that is going well, do the next several beats, or a measure, as a separate unit and play that up to tempo until it is going well. Then connect the first unit you learned to the second unit and play them together until they are going well. Practice new short units up to tempo and then keep adding them to what you have already practiced.
I find this technique more effective at learning a fast piece than playing a piece slowly and very slowly speeding it up. The reason is that if you learned to play a piece which will ultimately be fast, and you’ve only played it very slowly(over and over and over again), as you speed it up(one notch on the metronome at a time) you will have to relearn some or all of the movements so that what you do works at a fast tempo. Stated another way, you can get away with murder at a slow tempo(inefficient movement, fingerings that won’t work at a fast tempo, etc.). If you practice short units of the piece close to final tempo, you learn right away the movements that are needed to play this piece fast. You will also learn right away if a fingering is not going to work at full tempo.
There’s an even more ominous trend about to start. I heard a report on NPR last week that both the Minneapolis Symphony and the St. Paul Chamber Orchestra are in deep financial trouble and that the management wants to eliminate 6 permanent (salaried) positions from the orchestra in order to fix the financial situation. The report didn’t say which positions they wanted to eliminate. But I’ll bet that one of them is the harp position. I wonder how many orchestras in the next 5 to 10 years will make the harp job a fee-for-service position.
I just thought of a funny little encounter I had last summer(a year ago). I got a call from Joanna Newsome’s manager who said that she was going to be in Boston for 5 days on vacation and needed a harp in her hotel room for that time. He told me when she was arriving at the hotel and what time I should be there to deliver the harp. I didn’t think to ask for her phone number and he didn’t offer it to me. So I got to the hotel at the appointed time, when to the front desk, and asked which room Newsome was in. The desk clerk looked and looked but couldn’t find a Newsome. UGH! I thought. She’s not listed here under her own name. I went home and called her manager, leaving a message on his machine. I also called my good friend Bill Grant, who is the resident harp technician in New York and who I knew had done work for her there. He didn’t have her number, but assured me the manager would call back soon, which he did. I explained the problem. He said she’s listed under Samberg. Not knowing that her significant other is Andy Samberg of Saturday Night Live, I went back to the hotel and asked for Sam Berg. No Sam Berg there. This time I remembered to bring the manager’s number with me and I called him. Look, I said, I really need to have her cell number. I promise I won’t misuse it. But I have to be able to communicate directly with her. He gave me the number and I called. She came down immediately and got the instrument. When I told her what had happened, she said “I thought you had this number.” She was very apologetic and gracious. On my way out of the hotel I passed Steven King hailing a cab.
Tony- I agree with everything you said. I’ve had this discussion with musician friends, and we all agree that the standard repertoire of all music-opera, symphonic, chamber music etc.- is probably less than 1% of what has been written. I do believe that there are probably hidden gems waiting to be rediscovered, but all in all, it’s about 1%.
Sometimes music is rejected within the life of the composer because it is archaic to the times. This happened to Bach and to Richard Strauss in particular. Strauss was often called by the critics a second rate composer, probably because he was not writing 12 tone or “20th century” music. He himself said(I think with a big smile on his face) “I may be a second rate composer. But I’m a first rate, second rate composer!” Poulenc was savaged by critics for Dialogue of the Carmelites because it sounded so much like music of the early 20th century even though it was written in 1956. Those same critics had to go back 20 years later to explain why they were so wrong. So you’re right. It takes a laps of time for music to be judged purely on its own terms without the judgements of the era in which it was written.
Kreig- I just read your post and thought of about 5 responses, all of which are unprintable! So I’ll just let this one go by.
When I play solo recitals-all classical repertoire- I always play from memory mainly because I find looking at the music distracting. I look only at the strings and my hands the whole time, and I somehow kind of ‘see’ the music I’m playing as I do. Also, focusing on the hands and strings helps me to tune out completely anything going on in the hall. Many times I’ve had someone come up to me after a program and apologize for some distraction in the hall. I was never once aware of it.
