Discussion:
Project Tarrega: Estudio in E minor
(too old to reply)
John Nguyen
2012-04-28 17:09:51 UTC
Permalink
Here goes the second installment. This piece is so simple to play but
so hard to play it well. Oh well, what the heck! :-)
Cheers,

John



2cts
2012-04-28 17:14:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Nguyen
Here goes the second installment. This piece is so simple to play but
so hard to play it well. Oh well, what the heck! :-)
Cheers,
John
http://youtu.be/EX90Y2wFy3w
Great!
wollybird
2012-04-28 17:46:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Nguyen
Here goes the second installment. This piece is so simple to play but
so hard to play it well. Oh well, what the heck! :-)
Cheers,
John
http://youtu.be/EX90Y2wFy3w
I used to play that- from a Liona Boyd book. I forgot all about it.
Liona Boyd turned it into a tremolo study. I think she went through a
period where she turned everything into a tremolo study:

She looks like Ruth Gordon from Harold and Maude in the video, but you
get the idea
Nice job. Maybe I'll dig it out
dsi1
2012-04-28 19:01:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by wollybird
Post by John Nguyen
Here goes the second installment. This piece is so simple to play but
so hard to play it well. Oh well, what the heck! :-)
Cheers,
John
http://youtu.be/EX90Y2wFy3w
I used to play that- from a Liona Boyd book. I forgot all about it.
Liona Boyd turned it into a tremolo study. I think she went through a
http://youtu.be/dApU0Nwk-Fw
She looks like Ruth Gordon from Harold and Maude in the video, but you
get the idea
Her man-hands are frighting to me. I think they're not using enough
gauze and Vaseline over the lens. :-)
Post by wollybird
Nice job. Maybe I'll dig it out
2cts
2012-04-28 20:25:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by wollybird
Post by John Nguyen
Here goes the second installment. This piece is so simple to play but
so hard to play it well. Oh well, what the heck! :-)
Cheers,
John
http://youtu.be/EX90Y2wFy3w
I used to play that- from a Liona Boyd book. I forgot all about it.
Liona Boyd turned it into a tremolo study. I think she went through a
http://youtu.be/dApU0Nwk-Fw
Her tremolo is awfully bad ;)
Douglas Seth
2012-04-28 17:58:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Nguyen
Here goes the second installment. This piece is so simple to play but
so hard to play it well. Oh well, what the heck! :-)
Cheers,
John
http://youtu.be/EX90Y2wFy3w
Thanks, John! I liked it! Humbly, a few words, I would work on melodic
shaping, tension/ release on non- chord tones to chord tones. The
appoggiaturas etc... Also I would try to delineate the parts by
bringing out the melody and using more of a "melodic tone" while
subordinating the other parts by using more of a static tone for the
inner voices. I always enjoy your playing. It is obvious the love you
put in it!
Matt Faunce
2012-04-28 19:32:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Douglas Seth
Post by John Nguyen
Here goes the second installment. This piece is so simple to play but
so hard to play it well. Oh well, what the heck! :-)
Cheers,
John
http://youtu.be/EX90Y2wFy3w
Thanks, John! I liked it! Humbly, a few words, I would work on melodic
shaping, tension/ release on non- chord tones to chord tones.
I'm trying to figure out what you had in mind, more specifically. I
tried playing the non-harmonic tones with a slight tenuto, and slightly
quieter. In context to everything else I did this sounded great. I don't
have the sheet music so I only tried it on the first phrase.
Post by Douglas Seth
The
appoggiaturas etc... Also I would try to delineate the parts by
bringing out the melody and using more of a "melodic tone" while
subordinating the other parts by using more of a static tone for the
inner voices.
The melodic tone. What can be said about that? I would say its opposite
is the snapped string tone. So, the melodic tone is where the attack is
closer to the loudness of the body of the tone. So more of an oblique
stroke on the string.

John, since you're playing near the soundhole, and over the soundhole
for parts, it's tricky to change tonal shades via changes in attack
there since the string is more easily activated as compared with sul
ponticello. It only takes a slight change in attack to yield a big
change in tone. I'd say keep doing what you're doing, but I think there
is really only one way to get closer to the goal of more control. I'll
just say from my experience that I'm never quite happy with my control
unless I've been playing several hours a day every day. I remember
seeing Rudolf Nureyev saying on video that he dances best when slightly
fatigued. I think this the same principle applies with control over
these right hand tonal shadings. A fresh hand is more volatile. So, the
trickiest area to have control over tonal shadings is over the
soundhole, plus it's harder to control the subtleties with a fresh hand.
Post by Douglas Seth
I always enjoy your playing. It is obvious the love you
put in it!
Agreed! John, I love how you went sul tasto on the repeats. You started
moving back to the normal position after four bars. I wondered how it
would've sounded if you stayed sul tasto for the complete eight bars of
the repeat. Try it if you haven't. Maybe you prefer the way you
transitioned back, but maybe you'll like the contrast more.
--
Matt
Douglas Seth
2012-04-28 19:56:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matt Faunce
Post by Douglas Seth
Post by John Nguyen
Here goes the second installment. This piece is so simple to play but
so hard to play it well. Oh well, what the heck! :-)
Cheers,
John
http://youtu.be/EX90Y2wFy3w
Thanks, John! I liked it! Humbly, a few words, I would work on melodic
shaping, tension/ release on non- chord tones to chord tones.
I'm trying to figure out what you had in mind, more specifically. I
tried playing the non-harmonic tones with a slight tenuto, and slightly
quieter. In context to everything else I did this sounded great. I don't
have the sheet music so I only tried it on the first phrase.
Melodic shaping does sound great when it is done! I hear so many
players just ignore what the music is actually us, hell, begging us to
do. Everything we need to know is already in the music. Once you start
doing it, you'll notice it more and more and you won't be able to stop
doing it! For example, in the D7 chord, the g is the non chord tone/
4-3 sus/ appoggiatura resolving to f#. Using an agogic and/or dynamic
accent on g and playing f# softer will always sound great and should
always be done. I could go on and on about all of this....:)
Post by Matt Faunce
Post by Douglas Seth
The
appoggiaturas etc... Also I would try to delineate the parts by
bringing out the melody and using more of a "melodic tone" while
subordinating the other parts by using more of a static tone for the
inner voices.
The melodic tone. What can be said about that? I would say its opposite
is the snapped string tone. So, the melodic tone is where the attack is
closer to the loudness of the body of the tone. So more of an oblique
stroke on the string.
Basically, what most people would describe as a "good" tone. Warm,
bell-like, distinct. For free stroke, rotating the forearm to the
right and pushing in on the string will help make this kind of tone.
Post by Matt Faunce
John, since you're playing near the soundhole, and over the soundhole
for parts, it's tricky to change tonal shades via changes in attack
there since the string is more easily activated as compared with sul
ponticello. It only takes a slight change in attack to yield a big
change in tone. I'd say keep doing what you're doing, but I think there
is really only one way to get closer to the goal of more control. I'll
just say from my experience that I'm never quite happy with my control
unless I've been playing several hours a day every day. I remember
seeing Rudolf Nureyev saying on video that he dances best when slightly
fatigued. I think this the same principle applies with control over
these right hand tonal shadings. A fresh hand is more volatile. So, the
trickiest area to have control over tonal shadings is over the
soundhole, plus it's harder to control the subtleties with a fresh hand.
Post by Douglas Seth
I always enjoy your playing. It is obvious the love you
put in it!
Agreed! John, I love how you went sul tasto on the repeats. You started
moving back to the normal position after four bars. I wondered how it
would've sounded if you stayed sul tasto for the complete eight bars of
the repeat. Try it if you haven't. Maybe you prefer the way you
transitioned back, but maybe you'll like the contrast more.
--
Matt
Matt Faunce
2012-04-28 21:23:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Douglas Seth
Post by Matt Faunce
Post by Douglas Seth
Post by John Nguyen
Here goes the second installment. This piece is so simple to play but
so hard to play it well. Oh well, what the heck! :-)
Cheers,
John
http://youtu.be/EX90Y2wFy3w
Thanks, John! I liked it! Humbly, a few words, I would work on melodic
shaping, tension/ release on non- chord tones to chord tones.
I'm trying to figure out what you had in mind, more specifically. I
tried playing the non-harmonic tones with a slight tenuto, and slightly
quieter. In context to everything else I did this sounded great. I don't
have the sheet music so I only tried it on the first phrase.
Melodic shaping does sound great when it is done! I hear so many
players just ignore what the music is actually us, hell, begging us to
do. Everything we need to know is already in the music. Once you start
doing it, you'll notice it more and more and you won't be able to stop
doing it! For example, in the D7 chord, the g is the non chord tone/
4-3 sus/ appoggiatura resolving to f#.
I played the f# of the second chord tenuto (slightly longer) and
quieter, and the g of the B7 chord tenuto and quieter. I thought the
second chord was an Am. <shrug> Maybe we shouldn't be so quick to label
it. Add an e' to make it an Am, or a d' to make it a D7 (the ' means
above middle C). I think the d' changes the character more than the e.
As it stands, either way you look at it, both the g and the f# are
dissonant to something. The g is either the m7 of Am or the sus of D7.
The f# is either the 6th of Am or the 3rd of the D7 which begs to be
resolved to the root of G.
Post by Douglas Seth
Using an agogic and/or dynamic
accent on g and playing f# softer will always sound great and should
always be done. I could go on and on about all of this....:)
f# is also the end of the little phrase, so quieter... and when I played
it longer served the purpose of a rit.

What I meant by tenuto was slightly longer, this and quieter (or the
same if louder is expected) is like emphasizing but showing the
vulnerability of a note at the same time. It's a nice way to stress
something in a tender way. Try it on the g of the B7 chord.

Careful about that word "always." Listen to some Nancy Wilson (R&B/Jazz
singer). She broke the rules with such stunning musicality and dramatic
effect I'd say she redefined the rules. Of course, it takes a very good
sense of the rules before you can break them so effectively.
--
Matt
Slogoin
2012-04-28 22:20:21 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 28, 2:23 pm, Matt Faunce <***@gmail.com> wrote:

<shrug> Maybe we shouldn't be so quick to label

Try dim.
Matt Faunce
2012-04-29 01:54:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matt Faunce
<shrug> Maybe we shouldn't be so quick to label
 Try dim.
F# dim with 2-1 sus. I didn't think of that, but sure, that too. Of
course the ii to V functions the same as a iv to V, which functions
like a [V7 with suspended root] to its resolution (F# dim is the
basically suspension of the root of B7 (an F# half dim 7 can be
thought of as a double sus of the B7, i.e., a sus of the root and
third.)) And of course, a VII to V rounds out the forward motions to
the dominant. They're all tones--the g" and f#" are both still
dissonant notes--the labels are there to help us understand the
function. F# dim is probably what should be taught first, following
typical music ed. conventions.

(I didn't want some kid to think "Damn, Matt and Doug didn't see that
it was a diminished chord," as if that's what it is, end of story. No.
That's only the beginning of the traditional music educational story.
We all heard the same functions of the tones, (and the treatment of
the melody tones was the subject.) Doug labeled them "VII to V," I
labeled them "iv to V" and Larry labeled them "ii to V," which are
motions "down a third," "up a second," and "down a fifth"
respectively, and are all related motions, which goes to show we all
heard basically the same thing. My disagreement with Doug would be
over which implied tones to accept. My disagreement with Larry would
be over the merit of implied tones, especially for an improviser. But
really, there's no disagreement.)

Matt
Matt Faunce
2012-04-28 18:11:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Nguyen
Here goes the second installment. This piece is so simple to play but
so hard to play it well. Oh well, what the heck! :-)
Cheers,
John
http://youtu.be/EX90Y2wFy3w
Ain't that the truth. These so-called easy pieces really expose the
player's musical sensibilities--no fireworks to hide behind. You did a
nice job.
--
Matt
dsi1
2012-04-28 18:58:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Nguyen
Here goes the second installment. This piece is so simple to play but
so hard to play it well. Oh well, what the heck! :-)
Cheers,
John
http://youtu.be/EX90Y2wFy3w
You should try his prelude in Am. That will blow your mind! You have to
manage two alternating voices. The idea and the piece sounds simple, but
it's hard to execute. Anyway, nice vids!
John Nguyen
2012-05-01 21:25:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by dsi1
Post by John Nguyen
Here goes the second installment. This piece is so simple to play but
so hard to play it well. Oh well, what the heck! :-)
Cheers,
John
http://youtu.be/EX90Y2wFy3w
You should try his prelude in Am. That will blow your mind! You have to
manage two alternating voices. The idea and the piece sounds simple, but
it's hard to execute. Anyway, nice vids!
You meant the Prelude he wrote for Miguel Llobet? If that's the one,
it always threw me in a loop after hearing it. I got dizzy with the
two voices in my head.
Cheers,

John
dsi1
2012-05-01 22:18:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Nguyen
Post by dsi1
Post by John Nguyen
Here goes the second installment. This piece is so simple to play but
so hard to play it well. Oh well, what the heck! :-)
Cheers,
John
http://youtu.be/EX90Y2wFy3w
You should try his prelude in Am. That will blow your mind! You have to
manage two alternating voices. The idea and the piece sounds simple, but
it's hard to execute. Anyway, nice vids!
You meant the Prelude he wrote for Miguel Llobet? If that's the one,
it always threw me in a loop after hearing it. I got dizzy with the
two voices in my head.
Cheers,
John
Boy, I have no idea what's the story behind the piece. I must have cut
class the day they discussed that. Luckily, Youtube has any number of
really goofy looking guys playing that piece - one of them disturbingly
so. :-)

Anyway, the piece is played in a pensive and reflective manner. Whatever
you do, don't play it like this. After all, it ain't no gay romp with
Eva and Adolf at Berchtesgaden!: