keystring James Watt is another example. He did not invent the steam engine. He was just an engineer who repaired the Newcomen steam engine. By repairing it, he understood how it worked, and he recognized how to lower the heat loss. So he made an improvement to the design to enhance the efficiency.
Back at this time, he was an ordinary engineer, maybe more of a mechanic, but no steam engine expert by any means.
Clefs: how many do we really need?
- Edited
BartK Thanks, and I'm questioning rather than describing how piano music is written. Sticking to the idea of possibly keeping the notes-to-lines relationship consistent, there would have to be 3 ledger lines between the upper and lower clefs to put an F back on the top line of the bass clef? More to keep track of, but is it more radical to rename every line & space after just one ledger line on C?
I'm guessing it was/is better to have just one ledger line C between the upper & lower staffs. But ANY complex system can be learned and habitualized, even to the point of losing track of the options (the very function of tradition). I'll keep looking for core reasons that the line renaming system became standard, as it's become clear to me that many traditions were settled on for reasons not always ideal. It won't change in my lifetime, but it's an interesting puzzle. Thanks.
Perpetual Beginner, Yamaha P115
- Edited
WieWaldi Sure, I can name Richard van Basshuysen. Today, he is referred as the father of the direct injection engine for diesels.
I looked up van Basshuysen. Here is what I found. (I know you read German).
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_van_Basshuysen
Kfz Schlosser (automotive mechanic-plus), then training as a mechanical engineer in the German system, then practical work in the research department in engine and transmission development. He was not a beginner inventing something in an unfamiliar field. That background gives an enormous and varied amount of experience in the field, combined with theoretical knowledge.
James Watt, by what you described, also had practical experience; his learning path was unconventional from what I read just now.
Both men would have had years of practical experience preceding their inventions.
I don't want to link this to any of the discussions about music here.
WieWaldi James Watt is another example. He did not invent the stea
MRC n fact I don't think that would be a problem. In WieWaldi's proposed system, the continuance is at the note D, being on a space at the same distance down from the bottom line of the top clef (1 1/2 spaces) as it is up from the top line of the bottom clef.
I was looking at his reference in the Tantacrul video to three hypothetical clefs named Tr, M, B which all had G as the bottom line. I didn't see anything about D in that discussion, but in fact, we'd end up with D as the middle line. That came to me while taking a nap. 
keystring Both men were educated. But not exactly in the field of their biggest achievement.
I might be a piano player beginner, but as a computer engineer I am working with scripting languages all my life. And some scripting languages are graphical constructed, to have a quick overview of the script without the need of reading every text line.
WieWaldi I might be a piano player beginner, but as a computer engineer I am working with scripting languages all my life
As a computer engineer, your work will also have a practical application, am I right? When you work with this scripting language, are you also involved in how it is used and that it is useable?
I tried to stay away from the "about you" or "about anyone here" aspect and keep it an abstract generalization, because this can easily devolve into ad hominem, or hurt feelings.
My attention was caught this morning by this.
WieWaldi You know my opinion, one clef for LH and RH staff is better than having two different clefs.
This seemed to reflect a lack of knowledge or experience regarding piano music. Yes, there are staves, and mostly music played in the lower staff is for the left hand, and music played in the upper staff is for the right hand. Sometimes it isn't - for good or stupid reasons.
More important is the idea of a given clef for the left and right hand. If you are a beginner, you are probably playing music where the LH plays notes that are in the vicinity of below middle C, and the RH plays notes that are in the vicinity above middle C. If so, you're getting a distorted keyhole view of a much larger room.
In piano music, you can have both hands playing below middle C or above middle C. In current notation, you may find the RH playing music in the bass clef. You will also have hands crossing over each other or flipping above, below, or in between. If by chance you have that limited view of piano playing, and you are designing notation for piano playing, I see potential problems.
Any successful design will have testing procedures, experience and knowledge, as part of the process. Both of your examples had that.
It is possible that the system you have in mind will work even if the hands go elsewhere than you expect, and it may do so. But that one statement gave me pause.
keystring Everything is true what you wrote about LH and RH. And I am very aware of it. I was just simplifying it, because most of the time the LH plays the bass clef and the RH plays the treble clef.
And here comes another problem with 2 different clefs. Sometimes when the score has a lot of high notes, the lower staff is written in treble clef and the upper staff is a treble 15va. And suddenly piano players are forced to read the treble clef on the lower staff. Most piano player are not used to do it. This leads to confusion and often to wrong notes during learning. Not to mention how much more difficult this makes sight-reading.
Same happens if the music goes down and both clefs are bass clef (the lower with 15ba). And on top of that, when hands are crossed the RH must play a bass clef, the LH the treble.
It is not only to get rid of learning 1 clef instead of 2 different ones. Currently we are learning 2 clefs, but used in 4 configurations in total (treble/bass is probably used 90% of all sheet music, treble/treble is 5%, bass/bass is 4% and bass/treble is 1%). If you ask me, that is a heck more stuff to learn, compared to a single clef with octave shift indicators.
Actually, I underestimated the advantage. There is a big problem many of us piano players face (not only the beginners amongst us):
If both staff lines are treble. Or if both staff lines are bass clef. (One with an octave shift). So many players struggle in this situation, because they are not used to read treble-clef on the lower staff. Or reading bass-clef on the upper staff.
You see, we pianists are forced to learn 2 different clefs. And we train it by daily usage. And as result we are only able to apply the treble-clef for RH and bass-clef for LH. Leaving us screwed if the regular layout is broken and those exceptions come into play.
With everything the same clef, but only for different octave ranges, none of the hurdles happens in the first place.
- Edited
WieWaldi Everything is true what you wrote about LH and RH. And I am very aware of it. I was just simplifying it, because most of the time the LH plays the bass clef and the RH plays the treble clef.
The problem with this kind of simplification is that it suggests what you understand and hold to be true. I'm not sure that I agree with the "most of the time".
WieWaldi And suddenly piano players are forced to read the treble clef on the lower staff. Most piano player are not used to do it.
This points to a major flaw in how music is taught. That situation should not exist. Here we're back in the world of teaching. For the last statement, most pianists would be used to it because it happens all over the place. But above all, we're getting at teaching flaws. That is a different topic.
If your system allows for the fact of what actually exists in music, namely that either hand can play anywhere on the keyboard, then all's good.
- Edited
WieWaldi My point is, to get rid of exceptions.
exceptions to what?
- Edited
WieWaldi In the current system, the normal thing is to read the treble clef on the upper staff for the right hand, and read the bass clef on the lower staff for the left hand. Everything different than that is an exception.
In the current system, the normal thing is to read music in the clef indicating the geographical area on the keyboard where the music occurs. What learners are exposed to and how it is taught may give an impression of a false norm which can also hamper the student in the long run or force an unnecessary transition later on.
In general, ledger lines are a nuisance, especially when there are more than two of them between a note and the closest staff. In playing cello, I'm happy to have, in addition to the bass clef, the tenor clef and the treble clef to avoid the use of extensive ledger lines. I also prefer either 8va or 8vb (played an octave higher or an active lower than written) to avoid the use of ledger lines. I'm often surprised at the way violin music is written, sometimes with six or more ledger lines! Very cumbersome looking. Why not an 8va?
pseudonym58 . I'm often surprised at the way violin music is written, sometimes with six or more ledger lines! Very cumbersome looking. Why not an 8va?
Talk to violinists and you will find out why. For a violinist, the place of a note on the page is associated with a place on the string. There is no simple octave shift, as there is on a piano. The way a passage is written, with ledger lines, corresponds to the way it feels when you play it.
Here's a bit more on the subject of ledger lines:
This is from Elaine Fine's Behind Bars, which is, without a doubt, the best book on modern music notation.
Notice what Ms Fine says about keyboard instruments on that page: they can make more use of octave signs than other instruments, but it's better to keep the octave changes to a minimum:
"Even in piano music it is more helpful to show the contour of the music in order to alert the player to the necessary leap of the hand."
- Edited
When I look at violin music, it doesn't often get higher than a few ledger lines except for advanced music with shifts into high positions. Reading is also less crucial than piano, where forum discussions are often about reading - in violin fora it's about stance, technique, endless debates about shoulder rests. That said, the points made make sense. Thank you for sharing.
MRC . For a violinist, the place of a note on the page is associated with a place on the string.
This is absolutely incorrect. Except for the lowest notes on the G string, a given note can be played on different strings, esp. higher notes. E5 is an open note on the E string (no fingers down). That same E5 can be played on the A string putting down the 4th finger (pinky) - or 1st finger at the same spot with hand shifted over. It can also be played on the D string, on a spot even higher up, with the hand shifted up even more. On the G string, 8th position with a bit of a stretch you might reach that same E5. Three or four locations for one pitch (note).
In addition, there are harmonics and artificial harmonics. I grabbed this from the net. The bottom notes are what you play - the top is the actual note you're aiming at. It's interactive so we can hear the pitch.
Just another element to reading music.
https://andrewhugill.com/manuals/violin/harmonics.html
- Edited
(Continuing above idea) Recently in the other thread when Pashkuli suggested writing a score by hand, I pulled out an old score I had written by hand. It's a violin score for Meditation (Thais). I've copied part of it to illustrate some of this.
In red circles you see "sul E, sul A". That means to play these notes on the E or A string. The "sul A' notes in m. 8 could be played on the E string, respectively.
Every time you see a finger number, it indicates what string and position to play that note on. Notice m. 5, (D, E) - There is an E string, but E has a 2 over it. D has 1. So we play the D and the E on the A string, but with the hand shifted into "3rd position" to put 1 on note D, 2 on note E. We could have played D with the hand in first position and then the E on the E string. The last note is A (the open string) - the next note in m. 6 is B with a 1 .... telling us we're still on the A string but slide the hand back down.
These are some of the complexities of reading violin music. You do not have one spot on only one string for producing a given pitch. That's what I'm trying to show here.
- Edited
I worked as a full-time professional cellist in opera and symphony orchestras, and the violinists would often bemoan the ridiculous number of ledger lines. So I'm just repeating what they indicated. Speaking for myself, I would much rather have an 8va indication than lengthy excursions into multiple ledger line land, except for brief passages. (But we cellists have the advantage of both tenor and even treble clef, which pretty much ensures that you can stay mostly "on-staff".)
Here are a couple of typical rapid passages that I remember the violinists complaining about. The Dvorak doesn't use an 8va, and the Dukas does. To my mind the latter is easier to read. But I will stop posting to this thread at this point as I fear that I am pulling it off topic in a direction away from piano notation!
