Black Note Etude

Posted by: holystorm

Black Note Etude - 05/03/06 03:09 PM

I think this is one of Chopins greatest songs, but I want to know is it harder to play a song where 90% of the notes are on the black keys, opposed to the white keys?

Thanks.
Posted by: pianojerome

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/03/06 03:19 PM

It shouldn't be any harder. In fact, it should probably be easier than pieces where 50% are on black keys and 50% are on white keys.

All you have to do is raise your arm a little and lean forward a little (since the black keys are higher and farther away than the white keys) and that's it - then your wrist/hand positions and finger positions and everything are the same.
Posted by: PoStTeNeBrAsLuX

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/03/06 04:02 PM

holystorm,

Not wishing to single you out, as many others are guilty of the same, but Chopin's Op10 no5 is not a 'song!'[/b]

It is a piano 'piece.'

More specifically an 'étude' or 'study.'

Whoever performs it, plays it on a piano.

There is no vocalist.

Ain't nobody singin'.

It is not a song.

Hope that helps ;\)


- Michael B.

PS. As for the difficulty of this piece, black keys are narrower than white keys, so the target area for your digits is smaller. Then again, there are fewer of them on a piano keyboard, so you have fewer wrong ones to hit \:\) . This piece would be difficult whichever key it was written in: FWIW I reckon it is a tad easier for being in Gb major; I think it would be harder in G major, for example.
Posted by: Derulux

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/03/06 04:15 PM

Never fear, holystorm, this is a commonly-argued subject that keeps coming up when certain people have nothing better to do. ;\) Here, allow me:

It is a song.

It is comprised of notes that make music.

It is a song for piano.

The piano sings it.

IT is the vocalist.

It is a song.
Posted by: Max W

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/03/06 04:28 PM

But a song is written specifically for a human voice, not a piano ;\)

And as for the 10/5, playing on the black keys only (although it does use white keys, heh) isn't in itself difficult, but some of the fingering problems that are created from this make it more difficult (but by using the same notes transposed a semitone down/up they would still be there)
Posted by: Phlebas

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/03/06 04:32 PM

 Quote:
Originally posted by holystorm:
I think this is one of Chopins greatest songs, but I want to know is it harder to play a song where 90% of the notes are on the black keys, opposed to the white keys?

Thanks. [/b]
I think the fact that it is exclusively on black keys make it somewhat easier because you have to think less about moving your hand in and out of the black key area.

Compare it to - say - the first movement of Kreisleriana. One of the difficulties of this piece is there's more of a mixture of black keys and white keys, the thumb occasionally has to play on black keys, and there is much more in and out of the black key area.

That being said, the Schumann may not be more difficult than the Chopin, I'm just making an observation on one of the challenges of the Schumann.
Posted by: PoStTeNeBrAsLuX

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/03/06 04:48 PM

Derulux:
 Quote:
this is a commonly-argued subject that keeps coming up when certain people have nothing better to do. ;\)
Argument/pedantry for the sake of it? Mr Pot, please meet Mr Kettle \:D
 Quote:
It is a song.
[sticks fingers in ears]

La-la-la-la-la-la-la....[1]

Michael B.
[1] Now that's a song ;\) .
Posted by: sheepdip

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/03/06 06:00 PM

I know this has come up many times before but I have never replied to one of them so I feel that I am entitled to at least one comment. It is NOT a song. ie. Webster...
1. The act or art of singing; as, he broke into song.

2. A piece of music sung or as if for singing.

I know there are greater problems in life than this but at the moment this is it.
Posted by: bach enthusiast

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/03/06 06:57 PM

Am I crazy, or did I read or hear that a well known pianist used to play, or sort of play this piece at recitals by rolling an orange across the black keys while playing the left hand part. If someone knows if this is true, can you confirm or disconfirm my recolection?
Posted by: holystorm

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/03/06 07:29 PM

What the hell? Is that even possible?
Posted by: pianojerome

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/03/06 07:33 PM

Yeah, that was Nicolas Slonimsky.
Posted by: valarking

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/03/06 07:45 PM

 Quote:
Originally posted by Derulux:
Never fear, holystorm, this is a commonly-argued subject that keeps coming up when certain people have nothing better to do. ;\) Here, allow me:

It is a song.

It is comprised of notes that make music.

It is a song for piano.

The piano sings it.

IT is the vocalist.

It is a song. [/b]


The piano does not sing. Singing implies use of vocal cords.
However contrary you want to be, you can't deny that.


Fail.
Posted by: xyz2004slc

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/03/06 07:50 PM

It is a song without words. I would rather it be a "song" because that implies a nice cantabile.
Posted by: AndrewG

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/03/06 07:52 PM

Me too. I always try to correct friends or students when they refer to a piano piece as a 'song'. Does it matter? Probably not much but ...
Posted by: valarking

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/03/06 08:01 PM

 Quote:
Originally posted by xyz2004slc:
It is a song without words. I would rather it be a "song" because that implies a nice cantabile. [/b]
Black Keys etude is not a singing melody or cantabile of any sort.
Posted by: Derulux

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/03/06 10:08 PM

The piano does not sing. Singing implies use of vocal cords.
However contrary you want to be, you can't deny that.[/b]
Then explain why so many people refer to making a line "sing".... ;\)
Posted by: valarking

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/03/06 10:18 PM

 Quote:
Originally posted by Derulux:
The piano does not sing. Singing implies use of vocal cords.
However contrary you want to be, you can't deny that.[/b]
Then explain why so many people refer to making a line "sing".... ;\) [/b]
They are trying to communicate a method of melodic phrasing and touch.
Posted by: Derulux

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/03/06 11:16 PM

 Quote:
Originally posted by valarking:
 Quote:
Originally posted by Derulux:
The piano does not sing. Singing implies use of vocal cords.
However contrary you want to be, you can't deny that.[/b]
Then explain why so many people refer to making a line "sing".... ;\) [/b]
They are trying to communicate a method of melodic phrasing and touch. [/b]
Then it would certainly be a poor communicative effort, considering your first statement. ;\)
Posted by: valarking

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/03/06 11:33 PM

 Quote:
Originally posted by Derulux:
 Quote:
Originally posted by valarking:
 Quote:
Originally posted by Derulux:
The piano does not sing. Singing implies use of vocal cords.
However contrary you want to be, you can't deny that.[/b]
Then explain why so many people refer to making a line "sing".... ;\) [/b]
They are trying to communicate a method of melodic phrasing and touch. [/b]
Then it would certainly be a poor communicative effort, considering your first statement. ;\) [/b]
It is, unless one knows how to interpret it for piano performance.
Posted by: PoStTeNeBrAsLuX

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/04/06 01:40 AM

It is a usage that I never heard in ~30 years of involvement in music (both instrumental and indeed, as an accompanist, choral) whilst in my native England. In fact I have never encountered it since starting to read this forum some 6 months ago. I presumed therefore that it is either (i) a new coinage amongst the younger generation[1] or (ii) an Americanism. Or perhaps both. Seeing it used about the most 'unsonglike' Black Key étude from someone located in London was the last straw I suppose...

Personally I believe that it implies ignorance of musical forms, and is somehow dismissive, seemingly reducing any piece of music to being a mere 'song'[2]. Could one talk of Beethoven's 9th being one of his best 'songs'. It has a bit of singing it after all ;\) .

- Michael B.

[1] Waves walking stick, adjusts ear trumpet and pulls blanket more closely over knees.
[2] I am aware that various composers (real) 'songs' can be great pieces of music, but the usage of the word for non-vocal music, gives me this impression somehow.
Posted by: Derulux

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/04/06 02:34 AM

 Quote:
Originally posted by valarking:
 Quote:
Originally posted by Derulux:
 Quote:
Originally posted by valarking:
quote:
Originally posted by Derulux:
The piano does not sing. Singing implies use of vocal cords.
However contrary you want to be, you can't deny that.[/b]
Then explain why so many people refer to making a line "sing".... ;\) [/b]
They are trying to communicate a method of melodic phrasing and touch. [/b]
Then it would certainly be a poor communicative effort, considering your first statement. ;\) [/b]
It is, unless one knows how to interpret it for piano performance.
Ever try to translate something into a different language? (Ever read the label on a particular brand of Chinese condoms--Sixsex--that was translated into English? "Each condom is made of the highest quality natural latex of import, and subject to electronic inspection...and meets ISO4074 standards, it can provide you with pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases such as AIDS.")

I suppose one's interpretation of another's language is rather important. This I cannot refute, but I think I can show by example that my statement still stands. A comment on making a piano "sing" when a piano cannot sing is absolutely useless. If you have to "interpret" what someone's actually trying to say, why not have them come right out and say it? (Or is it, perhaps, because this individual doesn't know how to say it, and "sing" is the only thing they can come up with?) Either way, it is still a poor communicative effort.

Proper and effective communication should clarify and simplify, not require translation, back-translation, or interpretive effort. I stand by my statement.
Posted by: Mr. E

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/04/06 03:28 AM

Another definition of sing:
a. To make melodious sounds
b. To give or have the effect of melody; lilt.

And thus, when we speak of a piano singing, this is more the definition we are referring to.

But alas, you've known what we meant all along, and only wish to argue for the sake of arguing. So have at it.
Posted by: PoStTeNeBrAsLuX

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/04/06 03:56 AM

Mr. E,

I think we all know what the verb 'to sing' means, either in its primary literal meaning, or indeed its derived metaphorical ones, and how it applies to producing a 'singing' tone on a piano, etc. There is however quite a leap between that and calling the music thus produced a 'song.'

To my (English) mind, one cannot apply the term 'song' to a piece of instrumental music that features no vocals, without seeming ignorant of common usage of the English language. Hence why I would hesitate to point it out the error[1] if the poster were obviously not an English mother-tongue speaker.

Derulux:
 Quote:
Ever try to translate something into a different language?
[dons grandmother clothing and starts sucking eggs] Nah, in a country with four national languages, we don't seem to get much call for that around here :rolleyes:

- Michael B.

[1] And it is just that... yes, yes, we all know that languages develop and change over time, but in common English usage as it stands today, it's just wrong[/b]. The word has of course been used figuratively for piano music in special instances (such as by Herr Mendelssohn), but that still doesn't make any[/b] piano piece a 'song.'
Posted by: Mr. E

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/04/06 09:43 AM

 Quote:
Originally posted by PoStTeNeBrAsLuX:
Mr. E,

I think we all know what the verb 'to sing' means, either in its primary literal meaning, or indeed its derived metaphorical ones, and how it applies to producing a 'singing' tone on a piano, etc. There is however quite a leap between that and calling the music thus produced a 'song.'

To my (English) mind, one cannot apply the term 'song' to a piece of instrumental music that features no vocals, without seeming ignorant of common usage of the English language. Hence why I would hesitate to point it out the error[1] if the poster were obviously not an English mother-tongue speaker.

[/b]
I absolutely agree with you. I'm sorry I was a bit unclear. I was referring to Derulux.
Posted by: pianojerome

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/04/06 09:59 AM

Derulux does have a point. We say to 'sing' on the piano, which is of course impossible - but we are using it as a metaphor for something else. Nonetheless, what is this something else that we are referring to when we say 'sing'?

Perhaps what we mean is to make a lilting melodious line, as Mr. E wrote. Well, why not say that? It's much clearer than saying 'sing', unless 'sing' means more than just make a melodious line. This is Derulux's point.

It really does no good to tell someone to 'sing' at the piano, because what does that mean?

It would be more useful, I think, to tell the person to play a smooth legato, connecting each note to the next, connecting the dynamics so that there are no sudden leaps, apply a slight rubato, and be careful not to bang out any notes or make any notes too sharp, and THEN say, and think of how it sounds when you sing - you are aiming for this type of sound when you play. All of this is meant by 'sing', but how does the person know that if you don't explain it to them?

The explanation is necessary first, and then 'sing' can be used as a metaphor to tie everything together. Derulux's point is well-taken by me at least: 'sing' by itself is meaningless, and what gives it meaning is only when you actually explain in detail what you really mean.
Posted by: Max W

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/04/06 11:06 AM

 Quote:
Originally posted by pianojerome:
It would be more useful, I think, to tell the person to play a smooth legato, connecting each note to the next, connecting the dynamics so that there are no sudden leaps, apply a slight rubato, and be careful not to bang out any notes or make any notes too sharp, and THEN say, and think of how it sounds when you sing - you are aiming for this type of sound when you play. All of this is meant by 'sing', but how does the person know that if you don't explain it to them?[/b]
I prefer to use the term 'sing' at the piano not in any specific usage, but simply that you are expressing music so it sounds like it's coming from you, not from you to the piano - as afterall, singing doesn't always have to be how you described. (not that I don't equally agree with what you said ;\) )
Posted by: pianojerome

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/04/06 11:13 AM

See, so how would the person know that if you didn't tell him?

'Sing' is so ambiguous by itself – even more so because it is an impossible task with the piano – that if you don't explain, the person has absolutely no way of interpreting exactly what you mean.

Therefore, it is necessary first to explain what you mean - whatever you mean - and then use the word 'sing' as a metaphor.
Posted by: Shosti

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/04/06 11:40 AM

I think you're being too literal. The use of the word "singing" isn't going to confuse people just because pianos don't have vocal cords. I think to most people the metaphor is obvious-- we want to make the piano sound like a singer singing a song. Mendelssohn certainly thought so, calling his works with a vocal-style melody "songs without words." And if someone doesn't understand? Then you explain it to them. I think it's useful to have these analogies; trying to attain the ideal of making the piano sound like it's singing can inspire really musical playing, phrasing, etc.
Posted by: pianojerome

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/04/06 11:45 AM

Yes, it is a good analogy, but then there is the obvious question, "OK, how do I make the piano sound like a singer singing a song?" (which has been asked here on this forum before)

Then you have to explain (and if I recall correctly, that thread that I am remembering went on for several pages).

The analogy is meaningless unless you explain, but you are right; coupled with a thorough explanation, it is a good analogy.
Posted by: pianojerome

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/04/06 11:47 AM

 Quote:
Originally posted by Shosti:
I think you're being too literal. The use of the word "singing" isn't going to confuse people just because pianos don't have vocal cords. I think to most people the metaphor is obvious-- we want to make the piano sound like a singer singing a song. [/b]
 Quote:
Originally posted by Max W:
I prefer to use the term 'sing' at the piano not in any specific usage, but simply that you are expressing music so it sounds like it's coming from you, not from you to the piano[/b]
Posted by: Jan-Erik

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/04/06 11:52 AM

"Singing" on a piano means:

1) The piece you play one or two clear melodies that clearly dominate over the rest (accompagnement). Like in Mendelsson´s "Songs without words".

Staccato is not "singing".

2) The piano has a warm sound and long natural sustain (oppsite to hard or brilliant sond with a strong attack and fast dacay).

I think these two meanings are well established and cannot be disputed.
Posted by: BruceD

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/04/06 02:58 PM

Yes, "sing" can effectively be used as a metaphor to describe how to play a melody line in a piano composition. I don't think that was the original "issue" raised here.

It still doesn't justify the use - in the context of a composition of a classical composer - of the word "song" when what, in effect, is a non-vocal work.

As pointed out, it is a generational phenomenon which stems from the fact that much downloaded music from the Internet is generically referred to as "songs".

The confusion - and the ignorance - are compounded when one unknowingly refers to works of composers who wrote not only instrumental works but vocal works - songs - as well.

Regards,
Posted by: Ted2

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/04/06 08:40 PM

I'll keep out of the song debate, but I do find most renditions of this piece too fast for my taste. I'm enjoying playing it, and other Chopin studies, much more since I've slowed down a little. Most of Chopin's wonderful melodic phrases "sing", and it's hard to make anything "sing" at a uniform ninety miles an hour.
Posted by: Derulux

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/05/06 03:05 AM

Normally, I don't do this, but just this once, I will:

 Quote:
[1] And it is just that... yes, yes, we all know that languages develop and change over time, but in common English usage as it stands today, it's just wrong.
Actually, you are wrong. In what you call 'common English', the term 'song' to refer to a 'piece' is absolutely correct. In formal diction, it would be incorrect.

Back to your normally-scheduled poster-remarks:

And thus, when we speak of a piano singing, this is more the definition we are referring to.

But alas, you've known what we meant all along, and only wish to argue for the sake of arguing. So have at it.[/b]
I know exactly what "sing" means, and I know exactly what "song" means. But you cannot pick and choose when you want to use them, and then blaspheme someone else's use. ;\)


PJ: 'sing' by itself is meaningless and, of course... "'Sing' is so ambiguous by itself – even more so because it is an impossible task with the piano – that if you don't explain, the person has absolutely no way of interpreting exactly what you mean."
D: At last, one of them understands! ;\)


I prefer to use the term 'sing' at the piano not in any specific usage, but simply that you are expressing music so it sounds like it's coming from you, not from you to the piano[/b]
But don't you see how arbitrary that is? Without anything further, it is impossible to make the sound of the piano come from you. The sound comes from the piano. It HAS to go from you to the piano. That's the only way a piano sound is made! ;\)

The use of the word "singing" isn't going to confuse people just because pianos don't have vocal cords. I think to most people the metaphor is obvious-- we want to make the piano sound like a singer singing a song.[/b]
It confuses the hell out of me. A piano cannot, under any circumstances, sing...so why would you try to tell me to make it sing? What, specifically, about my TECHNIQUE can I alter to produce this effect that you desire (whatever it is)? THIS is what you should be saying. When teaching a student, you HAVE to get at the CAUSE, not the effect!

Point:
Staccato is not "singing". [/b]
But a singer can sing in a staccato....
The piano has a warm sound and long natural sustain (oppsite to hard or brilliant sond with a strong attack and fast dacay).
[/b]
Actually, compared to other instruments, the piano DOES have a fast decay.


And now, your moment of zen:
and it's hard to make anything "sing" at a uniform ninety miles an hour. [/b]
You don't often drive a car and blast the radio at the same time, do you? :p
Posted by: PoStTeNeBrAsLuX

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/05/06 12:20 PM

Derulux:
 Quote:
Actually, you are wrong.
I don't think so.
 Quote:
In what you call 'common English', the term 'song' to refer to a 'piece' is absolutely correct. In formal diction, it would be incorrect.
You seem to misunderstand the meaning of vocabulary or expressions being "common English" (your interpretation) or in "common usage" or in this particular case "common English usage[1]". "Formal diction" doesn't even enter into the debate. Are you sure English is your first language? ;\)

- Michael B.

[1] i.e. the "common usage (of English)" rather than "the usage of common English." If you google for the phrase "common English usage" (with the inverted commas) and you will find various illustrative examples.
Posted by: drumour

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/05/06 04:10 PM

Funny use of "blaspheme" too.


John
Posted by: drumour

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/05/06 04:16 PM

I think, maybe, those who use words for which they have their own special definitions, or who regularly betray a "creative" attitude to language, should provide us with a glossary of that day's definitions. Then the rest of us would find it easier to stay up to speed.


John
Posted by: tenuki

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/05/06 04:25 PM

Words are an endless and hopelessly dark labyrinth with no exit. Wander through them at your own risk!
Posted by: PoStTeNeBrAsLuX

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/05/06 04:48 PM

John:
 Quote:
Then the rest of us would find it easier to stay up to speed.
Indeed. I think that Derulux should feel suitably anispeptic, frasmotic, even compunctuous, to have caused us all such pericombobulation.

- Michael B.
Posted by: Max W

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/05/06 05:18 PM

 Quote:
Originally posted by PoStTeNeBrAsLuX:
John:
 Quote:
Then the rest of us would find it easier to stay up to speed.
Indeed. I think that Derulux should feel suitably anispeptic, frasmotic, even compunctuous, to have caused us all such pericombobulation.

- Michael B. [/b]
More indubitable confabulation has never been announced!
Posted by: pianojerome

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/05/06 07:18 PM

 Quote:
Originally posted by PoStTeNeBrAsLuX:
John:
 Quote:
Then the rest of us would find it easier to stay up to speed.
Indeed. I think that Derulux should feel suitably anispeptic, frasmotic, even compunctuous, to have caused us all such pericombobulation.

- Michael B. [/b]
by Lewis Carroll


`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.



"Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!"

He took his vorpal sword in hand:
Long time the manxome foe he sought --
So rested he by the Tumtum tree,
And stood awhile in thought.

And, as in uffish thought he stood,
The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame,
Came whiffling through the tulgey wood,
And burbled as it came!

One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back.

"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.


`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
Posted by: Bernard

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/06/06 02:13 AM

 Quote:
Originally posted by holystorm:
I think this is one of Chopins greatest songs, but I want to know is it harder to play a song where 90% of the notes are on the black keys, opposed to the white keys?

Thanks. [/b]
Hey, holystorm, Well! You've stirred up a storm! Hee hee.

You are not to be faulted for your use of the word 'song'.

I was fortunate to have a band director in high school who pointed out the distiction right off the bat, and he made sure we were clear about it!! Hee hee.

I gather that by now you see that the word "piece" is the jargon. In classical music a "song" is a "piece" written for human voice (the greatest instrument of all!)

Anyhoo...

The black key etude may well be one of the easiest to master. It was indeed the first one I was taught.
Posted by: PoStTeNeBrAsLuX

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/06/06 03:32 AM

Sam,

Nothing to do with Lewis Carroll this time round: though still a British cultural reference. A little googling will provide the answer. Nevertheless let me offer you my most enthusiastic contrafribularities.... and I shall return interfrastically \:\)

- Michael B.
Posted by: tenuki

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/06/06 03:55 AM

geese guys, you have no excuse, you are obvously already on the internet...

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sing

substituting 'piano' for 'violin' seems somehow right to me for 1d, and 2a and 2b seem to apply as well. I'm sure many of you have other opinions though...

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=song

Not as clear unforunately, but it does mention short whatever that means.
Posted by: PoStTeNeBrAsLuX

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/06/06 04:31 AM

tenuki:
 Quote:
but it does mention short whatever that means.
The part that says "a short musical composition with words[/b]?"
 Quote:
Not as clear unforunately
The whole affair is very clear. A piece of non-vocal music is not[/b] a song. At least not in common English usage as it stands today. Perhaps in a few years it might be, via the influence of internet downloading terminology, mp3 players, etc.

Also for Bernard to state that the word 'piece' is 'jargon' is also erroneous[1]. If you ask any educated English-speaking non-musician how to term a non-vocal composition and one of his/her first responses would be 'piece.' The word 'piece' is common usage, and not at all classical music jargon. Indeed, the (mis)use of the word 'song' is a much better candidate for being jargon, seeing as appears to derive from internet downloading / mp3 tagging terminology, where music files (and by extension the music itself, regardless of its vocal/non-vocal content) are referred to as 'songs.'

- Michael B.

[1] Jargon is technical or specialised language used by a specific group of people (trade, profession, hobbyists, etc), and is thus usually not considered common usage. Though of course lots of jargon enters common usage over time: 'song' for non-vocal music may be yet another case.
Posted by: drumour

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/06/06 04:35 AM

Jabberwocky is an example of creative use of language, not of "creative" use of language. The first is interesting - Russel Hoban, James Joyce, Anthony Burgess; the second is sloppy, arrogant and tedious. The first has been produced by first-rate minds, the second by lazy would-be intellectuals. Was it Humpty-dumpty.....?

John
Posted by: tenuki

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/06/06 05:07 AM

Come on mr H4xOr, lighten up. I was _supporting_ your position and trying to be funny. Yes it quite clearly says 'with words'. duh.
Posted by: PoStTeNeBrAsLuX

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/06/06 07:18 AM

tenuki,
Sorry, your attempt at humour was lost on me. And I shall attempt to adopt a lighter[1] tone from now on \:\)

- Michael B.

[1] Though I cannot for the life of me see what there is[/b] to discuss in this matter! ....Nurse! NURSE!!!
Posted by: Derulux

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/06/06 10:22 PM

If you ask any educated English-speaking non-musician how to term a non-vocal composition and one of his/her first responses would be 'piece.'[/b]
Define "educated". The responses, after all, will vary depending on what type of education you are speaking, as well as what level of education (on the subject, particularly) one has. [1]

-Random break for the sake of breaking.

[1]What purpose do your "footnotes" serve? [q*uote]Oh, my god, a footnote! *whispers* He must be edumacated... [/q*uote]
Posted by: valarking

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/06/06 10:52 PM

 Quote:
Originally posted by Derulux:

Define "educated". [/b]
No.

Say no to needless semantics.
Posted by: rocky

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/06/06 11:32 PM

deleted \:D
Posted by: concertpianist12988

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/07/06 12:07 AM

can we get back to the black key etude?

what was that orange rolling about?
Posted by: Roger Ransom

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/07/06 12:22 AM

Sh-h-h-h-h Be quiet, I'm listening to a song.
Posted by: Roger Ransom

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/07/06 12:26 AM

I always thought 'piece' sounded funny too. Sculpters and painters call their creations 'pieces'and that sounds wierd to me too. what should we call what we're playing? I don't know uh how about "music"?

Pieces of what?
Posted by: valarking

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/07/06 02:04 AM

 Quote:
Originally posted by Roger Ransom:
Pieces of what? [/b]
Uh... music?
Posted by: PoStTeNeBrAsLuX

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/07/06 04:14 AM

Derulux:
 Quote:
[1]What purpose do your "footnotes" serve? [q*uote]Oh, my god, a footnote! *whispers* He must be edumacated... [/q*uote]
Did you consult Mr Google for the phrase "common English usage" and realise your rather basic error? Or have you been too busy making feeble attempts to criticise the formal aspects[1] of a post, rather than its content?

And before you ask, I could define the word feeble if that helps...

- Michael B.
[1] I like the use of footnotes[2].
[2] It prevents a build-up of parenthetical comments in the main text[3], and gives the reader the choice of reading a shorter version, and/or consulting below for more detail.
[3] Something I'd have thought an 'educated' person such as yourself might have noticed and appreciated ;\) .
Posted by: Derulux

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/07/06 03:24 PM

 Quote:
Originally posted by valarking:
 Quote:
Originally posted by Derulux:

Define "educated". [/b]
No.

Say no to needless semantics. [/b]
So you're saying that the guy who got his GED and now works at Firestone in West Philly will have the same response as a History of Music professor with a Ph.D. from Juilliard? :rolleyes:
Posted by: valarking

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/07/06 03:39 PM

 Quote:
Originally posted by Derulux:
 Quote:
Originally posted by valarking:
 Quote:
Originally posted by Derulux:

Define "educated". [/b]
No.

Say no to needless semantics. [/b]
So you're saying that the guy who got his GED and now works at Firestone in West Philly will have the same response as a History of Music professor with a Ph.D. from Juilliard? :rolleyes: [/b]
Define response please.
Posted by: RalleStar

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/07/06 04:01 PM

Derulux, if you can honestly say you would tell people that you would like to "sing them a song", and expect them to expect you playing a piano piece, then by all means, call pieces for songs.
Posted by: Derulux

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/07/06 04:08 PM

if you can honestly say you would tell people that you would like to "sing them a song", and expect them to expect you playing a piano piece, then by all means, call pieces for songs. [/b]
NO. I don't believe "sing" accurately describes a piano, but I do believe that, for shorter pieces, song is certainly a more-than-acceptable substitute.

[1] I like the use of footnotes[2].
[2] It prevents a build-up of parenthetical comments in the main text[3], and gives the reader the choice of reading a shorter version, and/or consulting below for more detail.
[3] Something I'd have thought an 'educated' person such as yourself might have noticed and appreciated .[/b]
Ok, that cracked me up. \:D

Define response please.[/b]
I didn't use the word response in the text you quoted. Reread the post, please. ;\)
Posted by: valarking

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/07/06 04:22 PM

 Quote:
Originally posted by Derulux:
Define response please.[/b]
I didn't use the word response in the text you quoted. Reread the post, please. ;\) [/b]
Oh, but you did. Your turn to reread:

"...will have the same response[/b] as a History of Music..."

:p
Posted by: playliszt

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/07/06 06:55 PM

Hey holystorm, look what you started. Do you have any more "innocent questions"
Posted by: Derulux

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/07/06 10:07 PM

 Quote:
Originally posted by valarking:
 Quote:
Originally posted by Derulux:
Define response please.[/b]
I didn't use the word response in the text you quoted. Reread the post, please. ;\) [/b]
Oh, but you did. Your turn to reread:

"...will have the same response[/b] as a History of Music..."

:p [/b]
*laughs* Damn, I even reread it before I posted to see if I actually had used the word. Nice one. \:D
Posted by: Giacomo

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/07/06 10:27 PM

Funny how a recent thread on the Piano Forum seems to imply that here in Pianist Corner posters do not engage in argument for argument's sake ...

Let me volunteer:

song[/b], n.
1.[/b] The act or art of singing; the result or effect of this, vocal music; that which is sung (in general or collective sense); occas., poetry.
2. a.[/b] A metrical composition adapted for singing, esp. one in rime and having a regular verse-form; occas., a poem.
b. the Song of Solomon, Song of Songs[/b], one of the books of the Old Testament.
c.[/b] Naut. the call of soundings by the leadsman in the channels.
d.[/b] Mus. A musical setting or composition adapted for singing or suggestive of a song. song without words[/b], an instrumental composition in the style of a song (after Mendelssohn's title ‘Lieder ohne Worte’); also transf.
e.[/b] transf. A sound as of singing.

educated[/b], ppl. a. (and n.)
a.[/b] That has received education, mental or physical; instructed, trained, etc.; see the vb. Often with an adverb prefixed, as half-, over-, well-. Phr. educated guess[/b], a guess based upon a background of experience of the matter in hand.
b.[/b] transf. Carefully tended, trained into shape.

educate[/b], v. trans. or absol.
1.[/b] To rear, bring up (children, animals) by supply of food and attention to physical wants. Obs.
2. a.[/b] To bring up (young persons) from childhood, so as to form (their) habits, manners, intellectual and physical aptitudes.
b.[/b] To instruct, provide schooling for (young persons).
3.[/b] To train (any person) so as to develop the intellectual and moral powers generally.
4. a.[/b] To train, discipline (a person, a class of persons, a particular mental or physical faculty or organ), so as to develop some special aptitude, taste, or disposition. Const. to, also inf.
b.[/b] To train (animals).

Praeterea censeo, ad maiorem subtilitatem colendam, disputam lingua latina tantum continuandam esse. :rolleyes:
Posted by: Derulux

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/07/06 11:07 PM

You've forgotten:

Song[/b]
1. A Chinese dynasty (960-1279). Under its rule China achieved one of its highest levels of culture and prosperity.
2. A distinctive or characteristic sound
3. (idiom) At a low price: bought the antique tray for a song. (See also: "a very small sum")

Now, argumentatively, your item #2 is fairly close to mine, but the choice of language in the words I referenced lends a distinct quality to our discussion... at least, for most music, far more than the Chinese dynasty. ;\)
Posted by: Loki

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/08/06 09:55 PM

 Quote:
Originally posted by valarking:
 Quote:
Originally posted by xyz2004slc:
It is a song without words. I would rather it be a "song" because that implies a nice cantabile. [/b]
Black Keys etude is not a singing melody or cantabile of any sort. [/b]
the melody of the black key etude can be sung, for it is in the bass line. however, a song is derived from the word sing.

according to Websters dictionary:

Sing - 1. to utter a series of words or sounds in musical tones. 2. to render in tones with musical inflections of the voice. 3. to proclaim or extol, especially in verse.
Posted by: pianojerome

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/09/06 12:13 AM

Just a thought.

Everyone is pulling out their dictionaries.

If it was as simple as looking it up in the dictionary, then there wouldn't be a 3-page discussion (which, incidentally, includes at least half a dozen people quoting dictionary definitions of 'song' and 'sing')


The question isn't, what does the dictionary say. The question is, how do people (not dictionaries) use the word 'song' in reference to music for solo piano, and is this an appropriate synonym? The other question is, how do people (not dictionaries) use the word 'sing' in reference to piano playing, and is this an appropriate analogy?


Dictionaries are irrelevant. (especially now that probably a dozen people have given us dictionary definitions that we already knew anyways)
Posted by: Derulux

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/09/06 12:39 AM

(especially now that probably a dozen people have given us dictionary definitions that we already knew anyways)[/b]
Ok, you sooo did not know about the Chinese Dynasty... :p
Posted by: PoStTeNeBrAsLuX

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/09/06 02:19 AM

Sam:
 Quote:
The question is, how do people (not dictionaries) use the word 'song'
Define 'people' \:\) .

Just out of interest, how many (ignorant) people have to (mis)use a word before their error becomes so widespread that it is accepted as a common usage alternative?

Then at what point does the (previously) erroneous usage become predominant, and the former definition get relegated to the classes of obsolete/archaic?[1]

I think you will find that certain contributors to this thread did not just quote from dictionaries, but did indeed refer to what is common usage, i.e. the generally accepted definition, as used by people. But just because certain people use a certain word or construction, it doesn't make it elegant or acceptable to (the majority) of others ;\)

- Michael B.
[1] The (mis)usage of the word 'song' does nothing to add any further nuance or shade of meaning to the language[2]; quite the opposite in fact. It is merely mp3 tag jargon for describing a computer file, and by extension anything contain in it. The English language would be poorer for it being adopted wholesale... IMNSHO \:\)
[2] It has nothing to do with the relative cantabile characteristics of any piano piece; the idea of a piano 'singing' is an irrelevance and distraction from the main point of discussion.
Posted by: Derulux

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/09/06 02:46 AM

Just out of interest, how many (ignorant) people have to (mis)use a word before their error becomes so widespread that it is accepted as a common usage alternative?[/b]
A-wo-hun, a two-who, a three-eee. *crunch* Three. ;\)

Then at what point does the (previously) erroneous usage become predominant, and the former definition get relegated to the classes of obsolete/archaic?[/b]
When all the old people stop complaining about the "misuse" of a word that has a "new" use, or, perhaps more properly, when there are more young people yelling than old people. ;\)

It is merely mp3 tag jargon for describing a computer file, and by extension anything contain in it. The English language would be poorer for it being adopted wholesale... IMNSHO [/b]
Dunno what all them tag jargon letters stand for, but "song" was around WAY before the mp3 craze. Like, way...

the idea of a piano 'singing' is an irrelevance and distraction from the main point of discussion.[/b]
Actually, the MAIN point of discussion was supposed to have been teh Black Key etude....whoopsie!

You know, it's funny... more people are concerned about "song" versus "[insert random correct word here]" than "Black NOTE" versus "Black KEY", or the other far worse post I saw: "How is this [thing] called?" instead of "What is this [thing] called?" If anything, that last one is the greatest blaspheme of the English language than the "song" debate. So, again, I must roll my eyes to the "I'll take this argument to the grave because I'm right and it's a damn PIECE!" sayers who say nothing about other far worse blasphemes of the English language. If you're going to be picky, after all, be picky about EVERYTHING. Don't pick one little word that, in the community may be correct or incorrect, and then claim to be an expert on the language. :rolleyes:
Posted by: PoStTeNeBrAsLuX

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/09/06 04:47 AM

Thanks for answering my questions ;\) .

"song" was around WAY before the mp3 craze. Like, way...[/b]
Not in my experience. As I mentioned before, I had never heard it used in such a way during 30 years of British music-making, some of which was (shock, horror!) with visiting Americans... Regarding the other solecisms you mention, I had assumed that people who asked questions such as "How is this *** called?" are not native speakers, as such constructions so clearly reflect French/German/Spanish/etc usage. As I wrote before, I don't think it fair to leap heavily upon the errors of non-native speakers. I contribute to a few French-language forums (and indeed work in French, written and spoken, 8-10 hours per day), and of course, as a non-native speaker I make the odd grammatical or vocabulary mistake. However, this is not the same as being ignorant of one's mother tongue.

Don't pick one little word that, in the community may be correct or incorrect,[/b]
See above.

and then claim to be an expert on the language :rolleyes: [/b]
I do not claim to be an expert, but as a speaker/reader of a few foreign languages (and not all European either), I would claim to have some insight into the subject; indeed part of my Masters degree did include a 15'000 word study concerning speech errors \:\) [1].

- Michael B.
[1] This however was concerning the Arabic language and dealt mostly with the development of the Classical language and how it influenced the formulation of Islamic law up to the 14th century CE. So no pieces/songs, nor black notes/keys ;\)
Posted by: Derulux

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/09/06 08:13 PM

As I wrote before, I don't think it fair to leap heavily upon the errors of non-native speakers.[/b]
I don't find it constructive to leap upon them, either. Interestingly enough, I also do not find it constructive to ignore mistakes of non-native speakers. They never learn the language that way. ;\)

This however was concerning the Arabic language and dealt mostly with the development of the Classical language and how it influenced the formulation of Islamic law up to the 14th century CE.[/b]
Is it written in English? (Can I read it?) \:\)
Posted by: PoStTeNeBrAsLuX

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/10/06 04:49 AM

Derulux:
 Quote:
Is it written in English? (Can I read it?)
Yep, all the Arabic examples were transliterated into Roman script. The last time I remember seeing my copy it was in a box in my parents' attic ~10 years ago, which was ~10 years after it was written[1] \:\) . I used my Arabic degree(s) for about 5 years after graduation (working for various Arabic publications in London), after which their importance faded, and French/German/Italian became more professionally useful again.

- Michael B.
[1] This was when the university had BBC Micro's plus green-only screens, and one had to store things on really floppy floppy disks. The electronic version is long lost...
Posted by: Derulux

Re: Black Note Etude - 05/10/06 01:32 PM

Hmm... where do your parents live? :p


(I have an interest in mythology, language and history--the last two, in particular relation to the development of each culture's mythos.) ;\)