Thread: [kln2-devel] solfege recap
Brought to you by:
wiecko
From: Mo <Mo...@no...> - 2004-03-09 09:02:21
|
Hello Klearnnotes team :) Sorry for the delayed response but I wanted to make some comments on this e-mail. Personally, in my opinion, learning the names of notes is the start of musical anaylsis and theory. From there, the student can move on to scales, minor and major keys, key signatures, chords and their inversions, and so on. It has become apparent to me, however, there are differences in some locations in the world on how this is dones. In some places, letter names are dominant while in others, solfege is the norm. Solfege however, does come with its set of problems mostly due to the fact that (1) there are two different variations of it and (2) there are some issues in determining how to label a raised or lowered note in the Fixed Do method. However, looking ahead: Say in the future we decide to add some non-traditional scales into our program For example... whole tone scale: C D E F# G# A# Diminished Scale C D Eb F F# G# A B Blues Scale C Eb F (F#) G Bb Can either Solfege methods work in these cases without confusing the user? For example, in Fixed Do, do we sing Fa for F and F# but label the notes as Fa and Fa#? I'm not even sure if Movable Do would even work in these odd scales. Mainly due to the reason in that there is no tonal center in some of these scales and Movable is based on assigning Do to the root/tonic note. > Just to restate the problem: > 1. we need Solfeggio, because apparently this main method of naming notes > in some parts of the world (not because it is easier to be sung) Okay, I didn't realize this. This is new to me :) > 2. movable Do doesn't solve (1.) because it is not used there (and would > teach people things their folks would not understand) Yes, I do realize not everybody uses Movable Do. Just as I find Fixed Do confusing at times, I can see how the reverse can be true. > 3. fixed Do is ambiguous (see bellow). The great advantage that Fixed Do has over Moveable Do is that one does not need to know what key the music is in. Somebody posted this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solfege And I will quote from it: "the disadvantage [of Movable Do] is that the singer must do a harmonic analysis of the piece in order to sing the correct syllables. In fixed Do, the pitches are set: the tonic, Do, is C, Re is D, and so on; Fa is easy to remember, since it is F." > 2. Similar problem: we have to test if an user remembers the key signature > in the following part of the score. OK, we have G Major key signature. Now > there is a F note in the score. "Dear user, what is the name of this > note?". Well, if we don't distinguish Fa and Fa# we cannot test if the > user remembers that key signature applies to this note. I see the problem. If we ask the user to write a G Major scale, should we expect a "Fa#" or "Fa"? If we are testing for correct musical anaylsis, I would think Fa# would be correct. But if the user is singing the note, then Fa would be correct. > > If so, why are we even bothering using solfege at all? > > Because the guys repored, that in their environment naming notes by single > letters is virtually not used. They use Do/Re/Mi for everything: naming > notes, scales, pieces of music. Ok, I didn't know about this either :) The guys are going to have the best input on this on how this system works for them in their environments. Marek has come up with some good ideas on how to resolve issues pertaining to some of the issues of Fixed Do. I feel fine with his resolutions. We should take into consideration however, with some issues that could come up such as unusual scales, decorated chords, etc. -Mo |
From: Marek W. <Mar...@fu...> - 2004-03-12 02:18:29
|
Hi, On Tue, 9 Mar 2004, Mo wrote: > Personally, in my opinion, learning the names of notes is the start of > musical anaylsis and theory. From there, the student can move on to > scales, minor and major keys, key signatures, chords and their > inversions, and so on. I hope the kln2 program development can follow similar path. :) > I'm not even sure if Movable Do would even work in these odd scales. > Mainly due to the reason in that there is no tonal center in some of > these scales and Movable is based on assigning Do to the root/tonic > note. OK. Plus there is no name for e.g. Fb or B# in Movable Do, right? One cannot call them E/C (it doesn't make sense from the scale's point of view). What? Faa and Tii ;))) "Modified movable do". No way. > "the disadvantage [of Movable Do] is that the singer must do a harmonic > analysis of the piece in order to sing the correct syllables. OK. But she has to do harmonic analysis in order to sing the correct pitch/tune anyway. > I see the problem. If we ask the user to write a G Major scale, should > we expect a "Fa#" or "Fa"? If we are testing for correct musical > anaylsis, I would think Fa# would be correct. But if the user is singing > the note, then Fa would be correct. Exactly. > > Because the guys repored, that in their environment naming notes by single > > letters is virtually not used. They use Do/Re/Mi for everything: naming > > notes, scales, pieces of music. > > Ok, I didn't know about this either :) > The guys are going to have the best input on this on how this system > works for them in their environments. Mo, I did not understand your last sentence. Could you rephrase for me, please? > Marek has come up with some good ideas on how to resolve issues > pertaining to some of the issues of Fixed Do. I feel fine with his > resolutions. :) > We should take into consideration however, with some issues > that could come up such as unusual scales, decorated chords, etc. Yes. Therefore, if anybody else has some comments about how Solfeggio is used in his country - please post some short description. Maybe we should give up Solfeggio in some more complicated exercises in future? If so, we should make users used to using letters too. Maybe always show a one-letter name by a solfeggio name (like "Do (C)", "Re (D)") ? Just a loose idea, please don't take it too seriously for now. Mo, thanks for your comments. :) ~Marek -- \/ /|\ Marek Wieckowski ##### | | | = . . = \|/ Institute of Theoretical Physics U | Warsaw University / ~ \___ | <| | | > . < | http://www.fuw.edu.pl/~wiecko <<___>> | http://klearnnotes2.sourceforge.net |
From: <oxy...@ya...> - 2004-03-12 06:51:03
|
Hi I have a commercial sofware that do all that we want. I have commented with Marek before, and the possibly linux version is sooooo big that could be named Klearnmusic instead. Is a program running in a macintosh classic, in black and white. It teach to read music, to reconize instantly by ear (perfect pitch) and to read rhytm. It have midi input. You can check in google practica musica from ars nova, I have version 3. The system we are using in Klearnnotes2 is the pentagram and buttons with the names of the notes like here http://www.musictheory.net/load.php?id=82 But in practica musica all input can be choose with 7 diferent systems: 1-"Plain" Piano keyboard 2-Guitar fretboard 3-Staff Keyboard 4-English Enharmonic Keyboard 5-French Enharmonic Keyboard 6-German Enharmonic Keyboard The options 1, 3, 4 & 5 are identical, just option 1 have the keys white, option 3 have a little grand staff (treble and bass clef) with the notes and the letters that says A B C over the notes, option 4 have letters that says C/B#/Dbb over the white keys C and the black keys only says #/b, option 5 have letters that says do/sib/rebb over the white keys C and the black keys only says #/b, option 6 have letters that says C/H#/Dbbb over the white keys C and the black keys only says #/b, AND IS NOT MOVABLE DO ANYWHERE. This input system permit to learn the notes, scales, rhytms, memorize songs, key signatures, read in diferent clefs, chords, arpeggios, inversions, ear training, etc inclusive melody writing. Also you can use at the same time: 1-the computer keyboard (A B C) 2-mouse clicking in the key/string 3-midi input. I insist that the movable do is only for learn to sing. If everthing is confusing, I can try to hack the program to send pictures (is protected to print screen command). This perfect is perfect to learn music at any level, I just wish that it could: 1-run in Linux 2-be user definable the number of frets (0 to 24), number of strings (4 to 7) and tunning of each string (C to B), so can be configure like any instrument with strings, from a violin (4 strings, 0 frets) to a 7 string guitar (7 string, 24 frets) and everything in between. 3-Have voice input (so I can answer with my violin or use the movable do) 4-Have a fun video game mode OT for a funky string instrument program check xstick in google. Cheers, javier _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? La mejor conexión a internet y 25MB extra a tu correo por $100 al mes. http://net.yahoo.com.mx |
From: Marek W. <Mar...@fu...> - 2004-03-24 02:00:02
|
Javier, Thanks for summarizing to kln2-devel the ideas you have wrote to me privately before. Yeah, it's good to share them with others. On Friday 12 March 2004 07:40, javier wrote: > possibly linux version is sooooo big that could be > named Klearnmusic instead. We will discuss this once enough new features are added. But there is a number of good reasons why _not_ to rush into project name changing. Anyway, there is such a possiblility, but right now it is definitely too soon to open such a discussion. > input can be choose with 7 diferent systems: Yes. This is the aim for kln2 too: to have all input ways done in a similar way, so that any input (or even a few at the same time) could be used for any exercise. > 1-"Plain" Piano keyboard > 4-English Enharmonic Keyboard > 5-French Enharmonic Keyboard > 6-German Enharmonic Keyboard [...] > 1 have the keys white > 4 have letters ... C/B#/Dbb over the white keys C > 5 have letters ... do/sib/rebb over the white keys C > 6 have letters that says C/H#/Dbbb over the white keys C But why not use B/H/ti choice for the (3): > 3-Staff Keyboard [...] > option 3 have a little grand staff (treble and bass > clef) with the notes and the letters that says A B C > over the notes, From my point of view there are following input ways needed: [done or almost done:] 1. clickable piano keyboard 2. computer keyboard 3. buttons with note's names 4. clickable staff 5. voice input [say note's name to your mic] [planned:] 6. clickable guitar fretboard [with extra options (for mandolin/ bass guitar)] 7. midi keyboard input [should be easy with tse3] 8. microphone pitch input [play or sing the shown note to your mic] Now, all the graphical [on-screen] inputs [1,3,4,6] should show note's name when highlighted. This depends on whether user wants to use English, German or French(=Solfeggio) notes' naming. Also computer keyboard input depends on this (it should react to key B/H/T depending on which naming system a user has chosen). Therefore, I think of naming convention choice as a choice independent of which of the 1-8 above a user wants to use as input. Plus, all the graphical [on-screen] inputs should be used as a means for asking questions (which depends just on which of the signals are really used by an Exercise). > 5 have letters ... do/sib/rebb over the white keys C [...] > AND IS NOT MOVABLE DO ANYWHERE. True. It looks like what we called "modified fixed Do". > I insist that the movable do is only for learn to > sing. I agree. And because there is no clear name for double sharp/flat notes nor for E#,Fb,B#,Cb it is virtually impossible to use movable Do for music learning even if someone wanted to. > so can be configure like any instrument with > strings, from a violin (4 strings, 0 frets) to a 7 > string guitar (7 string, 24 frets) and everything in > between. I really don't know if there is a point in implementing a not-fretted "fretboard". (BTW: how do you call the "fretboard" part of the violin in English?) In principle it can be done (you click on a picture with no frets and depending on the point you click on the answer is considered right or wrong), but is there really a point? Would it really teach anything? I can imagine, for these instruments learning to play is more about feeling the real instrument. I think we should not consider this even as a far-future goal. But yes, changing number and tunes of strings and number of frets should be done. In future. First aim is hard-coded 6-string guitar with standard (EBGDAE) tuning. ~Marek -- \/ /|\ Marek Wieckowski ##### | | | = . . = \|/ Institute of Theoretical Physics U | Warsaw University / ~ \___ | <| | | > . < | http://www.fuw.edu.pl/~wiecko <<___>> | http://klearnnotes2.sourceforge.net |