|
My EMF-822A electromagnetic field radiation tester has just arrived.
I read in one of the reports, a maximum suggested exposure limit of 3 milligauss. I am getting a reading of 2 milligauss just sitting in front of my CRT (there is also a 2 bulb flourescent light about 3 feet above my head). Moving the meter closer to the monitor gives readings up to 12 milligauss. I'll play with this more in the days to come. Scout |
"Wally" wrote in message ... Lady Pilot wrote: Your love powers his computer? Hehee. Probably so, I'm such a great power source...TONAL Ah, my email address is why you thought I might be Donal in disguise? 'Fraid not- it's tonal, as in 'tone', as in musical. Are you musical? Regards Tonal -- |
Nice area. I hate that red light on 100 South, (steep hill, blind
curve).. Scotty "Scout" wrote in message oups.com... Scott Vernon wrote: so, where exactly is this dump? Just a few miles East of your place, near Bucktown. Scout |
Donal wrote:
Are you musical? Yup, played guitar for about 25 years. Occasionally compose stuff using MIDI. -- Wally www.artbywally.com www.wally.myby.co.uk |
"Donal" wrote in Ah, my email address is why you thought I might be Donal in disguise? with diamonds? |
On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 20:53:26 -0500, w_tom wrote
this crap: Tell us Bob Crantz. How strong are those fields underneath that high voltage transmission line? I can walk underneath power lines with a compass, and the needle won't stray from North. Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now! |
w_tom wrote:
Tell us Bob Crantz. How strong are those fields underneath that high voltage transmission line? Strong enough to stop the emaciated ponies from falling to the centre of the earth. -- Wally www.artbywally.com www.wally.myby.co.uk |
On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 04:10:47 GMT, "Bob Crantz"
wrote this crap: Here's a reference from a company that produces permanent magnets. They explain the cause of magnetism in the permanent magnet: http://www.arnoldmagnetics.com/mtc/pm_manual_chap_1.htm "Magnetic fields from permanent magnets arise from two atomic sources: the spin and orbital motions of electrons. Therefore, the magnetic characteristics of a material may change as a function of alloying with other elements. For example, a non-magnetic material such as aluminum can become magnetic in materials such as alnico or manganese-aluminum-carbon. It may also change from mechanical working or any other stress to the crystal lattice." So that's how Magneto managed to bend the aluminum on the train, the copper straps on the Statue of Liberty, and Wolverine's adamantium. Thanks for clearing that up. I still think that since Yoda beat Count Duku, (Christopher Lee), in a fair fight, and Saruman, (Christopher Lee), beat Gandalf, then Yoda should have no problem taking out either Magneto or Gandalf. Who do you think would win between Yoda and Professor X.? Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now! |
yep, our CDL instructor likes to challenge the Class A candidates with Rt
100. Scout "Scott Vernon" wrote in message ... Nice area. I hate that red light on 100 South, (steep hill, blind curve).. Scotty "Scout" wrote in message oups.com... Scott Vernon wrote: so, where exactly is this dump? Just a few miles East of your place, near Bucktown. Scout |
I hold a Florida class A CDL. I wonder how many others here have a
Class A CDL AND a Masters License. CN "Scout" wrote in message ... yep, our CDL instructor likes to challenge the Class A candidates with Rt 100. Scout "Scott Vernon" wrote in message ... Nice area. I hate that red light on 100 South, (steep hill, blind curve).. Scotty "Scout" wrote in message oups.com... Scott Vernon wrote: so, where exactly is this dump? Just a few miles East of your place, near Bucktown. Scout |
One month I ran 42 loads down to Eagle, a printing press, some were
heavy and wide. I really hated that light! Scotty "Scout" wrote in message ... yep, our CDL instructor likes to challenge the Class A candidates with Rt 100. Scout "Scott Vernon" wrote in message ... Nice area. I hate that red light on 100 South, (steep hill, blind curve).. Scotty "Scout" wrote in message oups.com... Scott Vernon wrote: so, where exactly is this dump? Just a few miles East of your place, near Bucktown. Scout |
The best numbers are those found standard in a home. IOW it
is not advisable to live in a region of 1 gauss. That, I thought, was obvious from my posts. But how much lower must magnetic (or electric) fields be to be safe? Well, you and your neighbors are all not suddenly dying. Therefore the E-M fields in your neighborhood are probably a good benchmark for safety. Some are so worried about magnetic fields as to say 3 milligauss is too high. Then danger is everywhere. Others put those maximum acceptable limits higher. Bottom line: currently household appliances appear to be acceptable limits for safety. As I said before, you have a crude measuring device. If fields in that location cause a monitor to shimmy, then that *might* be levels too high. Indeed, that location is higher than what most people experience. Therefore it is advisable to limit time in that area. IOW don't put a bed there. Did I give a magic number? Of course not. There is no magic number. Concepts must be tempered by the numbers. Provided is a crude method to measure field exposure - to get ballpark numbers. No conclusive evidence says low level fields, as found in most locations, are destructive. AND (returning to the original post) speculation about high voltage transmission lines is not what we should be discussing. Unfortunately, too many with a junk science perspective foolishly worry about those high voltage wires. If E-M fields are dangerous, then we should be more worrying about household appliances, automobiles, electric stoves, and wires inside the walls. BTW, there was a wide difference in the fields from different cars. Provided is a 'best guess' value. There is no magic number. There are numbers to make only a subjective evaluations. Without numbers, then we only have junk science reasoning - not even a good subject evaluation. Is your house dangerous? First, what are the numbers? Notice that Scout is doing just that. He has a meter. He is first collecting facts - the numbers. Thom Stewart wrote: w_tom, Using your own advice, please tell us what kind of meter were you using for your car dash test. Should we believe you when you don't specify type of meter, what you were measuring, what the values were, under what conditions were your testing done. IOW you have ignored the very things you are condemning. I stated ; "The jury was still out on effects" You haven't really said anything of value other than your own slant on your "Urban Myth" Ole Thom |
Excellent. Experience from that meter is what every poster
should have had before posting. Please report fields in many locations including car - and that transmission line. Warning: sometimes transmission lines are not carrying much current. Therefore the readings may appear low. Take readings at various time of day or year to better understand the fields. And find other equivalent transmission lines to verify readings at your transmission line are reasonable. 3 milligauss is one of the lower limits that many claim to be 'maximum permissible'. Notice that what is and is not healthy is a very wide region because - despite all the papers such as those from Bob Crantz - we still don't known what is dangerous; if anything. Bottom line. If HV transmission lines don't exceed what is normally created in the house, then transmission lines (currently) can be considered safe. Also take electric field readings. E fields are measured in volts per meter. Furthermore, notice what does and does not eliminate or reduce both magnetic and electric fields. I love it when people are more interested in the numbers rather than just hyping what could be junk science. Its called 'dirt under your fingernails'. Number are what junk scientists fear to learn or post. Use numbers from research papers by Bob Crantz to put your meter readings into perspective. Appreciate why speculation on the dangers of either magnetic or electric fields is so widely disputed. Then appreciate why so many reiterate worries without the 'temper' of reality - the numbers. Scout wrote: My EMF-822A electromagnetic field radiation tester has just arrived. I read in one of the reports, a maximum suggested exposure limit of 3 milligauss. I am getting a reading of 2 milligauss just sitting in front of my CRT (there is also a 2 bulb flourescent light about 3 feet above my head). Moving the meter closer to the monitor gives readings up to 12 milligauss. I'll play with this more in the days to come. Scout |
"w_tom" wrote
Notice that Scout is doing just that. He has a meter. He is first collecting facts - the numbers. I placed the meter on my knee while driving home today. My knee actually leans against the door speaker. The meter read as high as 30 milligauss (I like my music rather loud). At work, I placed the meter close to the transformer in my room, and read over 200 milligauss. Naturally, that number dropped quickly as I backed away. At my desk, I'm exposed to about 2-3 mG. Don't know if any of these is dangerous, but I do like having a new toy to play with. It'll be a while before I can get out to the property in question. Scout |
I have a PA class A with passenger, tanker, and of course, air brake
endorsements. Naturally I have the motorcycle license too. My employer bought a bus and I drive on many field trips with 50 kids on board. I don't drive our Freightliner (18 wheeler) much, only enough to have an honest respect for the responsibilities Scotty has. Scout "Capt. Neal®" wrote in message ... I hold a Florida class A CDL. I wonder how many others here have a Class A CDL AND a Masters License. CN "Scout" wrote in message ... yep, our CDL instructor likes to challenge the Class A candidates with Rt 100. Scout "Scott Vernon" wrote in message ... Nice area. I hate that red light on 100 South, (steep hill, blind curve).. Scotty "Scout" wrote in message oups.com... Scott Vernon wrote: so, where exactly is this dump? Just a few miles East of your place, near Bucktown. Scout |
Horvath:
That was the absolute all time greatest post ever on ASA. But you'll still burn in hell! Bob Crantz "Horvath" wrote in message ... On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 04:10:47 GMT, "Bob Crantz" wrote this crap: Here's a reference from a company that produces permanent magnets. They explain the cause of magnetism in the permanent magnet: http://www.arnoldmagnetics.com/mtc/pm_manual_chap_1.htm "Magnetic fields from permanent magnets arise from two atomic sources: the spin and orbital motions of electrons. Therefore, the magnetic characteristics of a material may change as a function of alloying with other elements. For example, a non-magnetic material such as aluminum can become magnetic in materials such as alnico or manganese-aluminum-carbon. It may also change from mechanical working or any other stress to the crystal lattice." So that's how Magneto managed to bend the aluminum on the train, the copper straps on the Statue of Liberty, and Wolverine's adamantium. Thanks for clearing that up. I still think that since Yoda beat Count Duku, (Christopher Lee), in a fair fight, and Saruman, (Christopher Lee), beat Gandalf, then Yoda should have no problem taking out either Magneto or Gandalf. Who do you think would win between Yoda and Professor X.? Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now! |
w_Tom,
You are correct about the fields in the house being of more concern than the fields from a powerline. You are also correct about the studies from powerlines. I was playing around with you and you stood your ground. For that I have great respect.. Why didn't you catch the remark about the E field increasing in a dielectric? It actually decreases, the Displacement vector remains constant. My hat tips to you! http://www.emfacts.com/papers/case-histories.html Amen! You won't burn in hell! A powerline will get you instead! Bob Crantz "w_tom" wrote in message ... But Bob Crantz gave no numbers for the fields around high voltage power lines. Other fields should cause more worry. They are the missing numbers. Is it 100 volts/meter underneath the transmission line? But the those fields are also found inside the house. Don't worry about those high voltage transmission lines. Instead, move the bedroom depending on how the house is constructed and wired ... in every house. If fields are a problem, then the problem are things found inside every house. I am impressed that you do have fundamental knowledge of the concepts - even though you confuse electron spin (a concept in quantum physics) with electric current. But that is not the problem. The problem is that fields from high voltage power lines are not the source of potentially dangerous fields - if those fields are even dangerous. You have provided numbers for some observed scientific research - providing numbers that are only speculative. But those fields are everywhere - even confronting passengers in a car front seat. The problem is that you don't provide any useful numbers for making a conclusion - other than industry benchmark numbers. If field strength numbers you have provided are accurate, then we all are at high risk, constantly, in all homes. And would be dying more often. Many theories exist on what constitutes dangerous fields. Some research suggests as little as 1 gauss. A house, adjacent or not, to high voltage power lines contains no such fields. Others suggest limits like 100 milligauss. This is further complicated by how measurements are taken. But again, the original post is about high voltage transmission lines. The 'dangerous' fields, if they even are dangerous, are from elsewhere. Those worrying about fields from a high voltage power line are using classic "penny rich and pound poor" reasoning. BTW, I am not suggesting that citations Bob Crantz has provided are in error. Bottom line is that we don't really know what extremely long term health effects of these low magnetic and electric fields are. But one must live in reality. That means one must have numbers. Numbers - if these lower level fields are so dangerous, then we literally must rewire all homes. If you thought lead paint was a problem, then removing all TVs and other displays would be trivial compared to replacing or relocating househould wire. Yes it could become a problem just like lead paint. Or it just as easily become another witch hunt. We don't know. But we do know what fields currently exist in the house. We do know the source of those 'theoretically dangerous' fields are not high voltage transmission lines as some totally irresponsible news anchors suggest. Low voltage, higher current wires inside walls should cause concern - if concern is justified. That is what too many if not most posters failed to comprehend. Provided is a crude tool to find locations with high fields. Fields will cause the TV or CRT picture to shimy or distort. This is a numerical perspective provided by ball park measurements. Bob Crantz wrote: "w_tom" wrote in message ... Where are your numbers, Bob Crantz? Read the NASA citation. There's numbers. Read the handbook for Magnetic shielding. There's numbers. Every reference I gave has numbers. A stationary and permanent magnetic creates electricity? Yes it can, if you move relative to it. Faradays unipolar generator (featured on the English 20 pound note) needs no relative motion between the conductor and magnet to produce electricity. Look it up. Which field is dangerous - electric or magnetic? They both can be. And how much? 80 mv transmembrane potential is all it takes. How much are the fields under a high voltage transmissions lines? Between the lines take the voltage between them and divide by the separation of the lines to get the field strength in volts per meter. If you know the location of the ground below them (as in electrical ground) you can create the image circuit (using the method of images) and calculate the field strength also at the ground level. And why do you worry about those high voltage wires when your own citations, instead, discuss lower voltage wires inside the building? The high voltage is ionizing the air. Ever hear that crackling noise? What is the voltage induced in a moving object under a power line? Any idea? Indoor wiring = very bad! It is a classic junk science maneuver. Hype some fear. Provide no numbers. Then when numbers expose the fear as hype, attack the messenger rather than provide required numbers. Well, where's the proof of your point? Tell us Bob Crantz. How strong are those fields underneath that high voltage transmission line? You hyped the fear. But you forgot to mention whether such fearful numbers even exist under that transmission line. 100 V/m typically, which would induce 200 volts in a standing human. 80 mV is all it takes. In the meantime, others should again remember which electric lines are accused of being dangerous. Not the high voltage transmission lines. Even Bob Crantz's own citation discusses which electric lines were originally suspect. Those low voltage wires inside the building. Worry more about where the wire to your electric stove is routed - if there is anything to even worry about. I'd really worry about wiring in the house! ... |
"Wally" wrote in message ... Donal wrote: Are you musical? Yup, played guitar for about 25 years. Occasionally compose stuff using MIDI. I try to, too. However I'm not creative enough ... yet! Mind you, I'm getting there ... slowly. Regards Donal -- |
"Donal" blathered thusly: Mind you, I'm getting there ... slowly. That's to be expected in a Beneteau. CN |
"Donal" wrote in message news:cri3gu$ch2$1
Yup, played guitar for about 25 years. Occasionally compose stuff using MIDI. I try to, too. However I'm not creative enough ... yet! Mind you, I'm getting there ... slowly. What do you do, Donal? Play an instrument? Compose? |
"Wally" wrote in message k... "Donal" wrote in message news:cri3gu$ch2$1 Yup, played guitar for about 25 years. Occasionally compose stuff using MIDI. I try to, too. However I'm not creative enough ... yet! Mind you, I'm getting there ... slowly. What do you do, Donal? Play an instrument? Compose? I'm learning the piano. When I started four years ago, I thought that it would take a year to become reasonably proficient. I'm still hoping that I will be reasonably proficient within a year.... Regards Donal -- |
"Donal" wrote in message news:crkl6g$shc$1
I'm learning the piano. When I started four years ago, I thought that it would take a year to become reasonably proficient. I'm still hoping that I will be reasonably proficient within a year.... I would describe 'reasonably proficient' as being the point where the equipment becomes transparent - when you can play stuff that gives you a buzz without having to think about the actual playing. It's like having a CD player that can change the feel of the music instantly through mind control. Took me a good ten years or more... Do you read dots? Take lessons? Compose? Play by ear? Improvise? Here's some of my MIDI-based stuff... http://www.wally.myby.co.uk/music/Ba...reamsFront.htm |
Some nice tunes there, Wally...are you a Taddy clone?
"Wally" wrote in message k... "Donal" wrote in message news:crkl6g$shc$1 I'm learning the piano. When I started four years ago, I thought that it would take a year to become reasonably proficient. I'm still hoping that I will be reasonably proficient within a year.... I would describe 'reasonably proficient' as being the point where the equipment becomes transparent - when you can play stuff that gives you a buzz without having to think about the actual playing. It's like having a CD player that can change the feel of the music instantly through mind control. Took me a good ten years or more... Do you read dots? Take lessons? Compose? Play by ear? Improvise? Here's some of my MIDI-based stuff... http://www.wally.myby.co.uk/music/Ba...reamsFront.htm |
"katysails" wrote in message news:NimDd.73248
Some nice tunes there, Wally... Thanks. ... are you a Taddy clone? My influences are many and varied, but I'm a clone of nobody. |
"Wally" wrote in message k... "Donal" wrote in message news:crkl6g$shc$1 I'm learning the piano. When I started four years ago, I thought that it would take a year to become reasonably proficient. I'm still hoping that I will be reasonably proficient within a year.... I would describe 'reasonably proficient' as being the point where the equipment becomes transparent - when you can play stuff that gives you a buzz without having to think about the actual playing. It's like having a CD player that can change the feel of the music instantly through mind control. Took me a good ten years or more... Do you read dots? Take lessons? Compose? Play by ear? Improvise? I don't take lessons.... yet. I try to compose, but I'm "creatively challenged". I'm beginning to be able to play by ear. I've been using a book called "Learn to Improvise the Blues" by Tim Richards. It starts with very basic stuff and works up to some difficult music. I take breaks to try and learn stuff like Bach's "Tocata and Fugue", and I'm currently doing "Air on a G string". Here's some of my MIDI-based stuff... http://www.wally.myby.co.uk/music/Ba...reamsFront.htm Very nice!! What kind of keyboard do you use? I've got a Yamaha CVP-096, which only gets used in "Grand Piano" mode. Regards Donal -- |
Can you play 'Chopsticks' yet?
Scotty "Donal" wrote in message ... "Wally" wrote in message k... "Donal" wrote in message news:crkl6g$shc$1 I'm learning the piano. When I started four years ago, I thought that it would take a year to become reasonably proficient. I'm still hoping that I will be reasonably proficient within a year.... I would describe 'reasonably proficient' as being the point where the equipment becomes transparent - when you can play stuff that gives you a buzz without having to think about the actual playing. It's like having a CD player that can change the feel of the music instantly through mind control. Took me a good ten years or more... Do you read dots? Take lessons? Compose? Play by ear? Improvise? I don't take lessons.... yet. I try to compose, but I'm "creatively challenged". I'm beginning to be able to play by ear. I've been using a book called "Learn to Improvise the Blues" by Tim Richards. It starts with very basic stuff and works up to some difficult music. I take breaks to try and learn stuff like Bach's "Tocata and Fugue", and I'm currently doing "Air on a G string". Here's some of my MIDI-based stuff... http://www.wally.myby.co.uk/music/Ba...reamsFront.htm Very nice!! What kind of keyboard do you use? I've got a Yamaha CVP-096, which only gets used in "Grand Piano" mode. Regards Donal -- |
"Donal" wrote in message news:crndpe$fb3$1
Do you read dots? Take lessons? Compose? Play by ear? Improvise? I don't take lessons.... yet. I've never had a lesson. I kinda avoided them when I first got started, on the assumption that one can end up sounding like the teacher, which I didn't want to happen. I try to compose, but I'm "creatively challenged". I would say don't *try* to compose - just fart about, explore sounds and combinations of notes. The monkeys and typewriters principle applies. When something good comes out, play it a few more times before you forget it - memorise the hand movements that make it happen. Incorporate it into every session until you can play it fluidly, and fart about around that theme. If it's as good as initial impressions suggest, more bits will come out - one thing leads to another. After a while, you'll have enough bits to arrange them into a piece. To my mind, that's when the actual 'composing' starts. Have a listen to this while I try to explain how I went about creating it... http://www.yachtsea.com/music/TheDance.mp3 I wrote it a couple of months ago. It started with a sequence of six notes on the guitar (the opening notes). I thought it sounded quite nice, but I'm crap at playing arpeggiated stuff, so, to get a decent listen to it, I put it into the MIDI sequencer (keyed in manually, note-by-note). Then I added the bassline, which helped to set the overall feel (the guitar arpeggio doesn't really define a melody because it just repeats). With the bassline in place, I tried various sounds over the top (clicking an on-screen keyboard with the mouse) to see what the melody instrument should be - looking for the sound that 'works' with the backing. (By this time, the atmosphere or feel of the piece is starting to become apparent - I'm starting to focus on the mood I'm trying to convey.) The tooty-flutey sound was the one and the melody for that was written in the sequencer, step-by-step. Not in one go, though - it was repeated and adjusted until it sounded right, just like I'd do it if I was writing a lead solo on the guitar - when it loses its way, I stop and start again. The tinkly stuff in the middle is a two-part harmony based on the guitar part. The two harmonies are distinct melodies in their own right. Here, I'm experimenting with the idea that the three parts (guitar and two celestes) intermingle, such that further parts - parts that I didn't write - can be distiguished. I went from the handful of notes on the guitar to the arranged piece in one evening, and then spent about a week refining the mix. I tried some other instrument sounds along the way (sequencers make this easy), but settled on the guitar and flutey thing that I started with. At no point did I know what was coming next - not even when I was in the middle of laying down a particular part did I know what notes would follow. I guess you could say I composed this piece, but it doesn't feel like that to me - it's more like I 'found' it, or discovered it. Plucked it from the ether and made it real. Once the thing gets started, it takes on a life of its own and it's my job to try and render that in a tangible form. Composing, to me, suggests that I have some sort of plan, a vision of the finished piece, which just isn't the case at all. All I do is fart about, pick out the good bits and turn them into arrangements. I'm beginning to be able to play by ear. Very important, in my view. The language of musicians is music, pure and simple. Anything else is one step removed from that - a translation, a representation, not the real thing. I've been using a book called "Learn to Improvise the Blues" by Tim Richards. It starts with very basic stuff and works up to some difficult music. Interesting - never read a book on how to improvise. What sort of approach does it advocate? I take breaks to try and learn stuff like Bach's "Tocata and Fugue", and I'm currently doing "Air on a G string". Good plan. I think it helps to have a diverse range of interests. |
"Wally" wrote I'm currently doing "Air guitar in a G string". Ugh, now there's a mental pic. SV |
"Scott Vernon" wrote in message
"Wally" wrote I'm currently doing "Air guitar in a G string". "Risky Buisness"? Ugh, now there's a mental pic. SV |
"Scott Vernon" wrote in message ... "Wally" wrote I'm currently doing "Air guitar in a G string". Ugh, now there's a mental pic. I thought that you'd like that thong. Regards Donal -- |
"Scott Vernon" wrote in message ... Can you play 'Chopsticks' yet? Yes, ... on the clarinet!!! Regards Donal -- |
"Wally" wrote in message k... "Donal" wrote in message news:crndpe$fb3$1 Do you read dots? Take lessons? Compose? Play by ear? Improvise? I don't take lessons.... yet. I've never had a lesson. I kinda avoided them when I first got started, on the assumption that one can end up sounding like the teacher, which I didn't want to happen. I try to compose, but I'm "creatively challenged". I would say don't *try* to compose - just fart about, explore sounds and combinations of notes. The word "try" was misleading. What happens is that I "wander off". However, I can only go in one direction. It tends to be very repetitive. Most good music either consists of mixtures of styles/tunes, or a very rich tune. The monkeys and typewriters principle applies. When something good comes out, play it a few more times before you forget it - memorise the hand movements that make it happen. Incorporate it into every session until you can play it fluidly, and fart about around that theme. If it's as good as initial impressions suggest, more bits will come out - one thing leads to another. After a while, you'll have enough bits to arrange them into a piece. To my mind, that's when the actual 'composing' starts. Have a listen to this while I try to explain how I went about creating it... http://www.yachtsea.com/music/TheDance.mp3 I wrote it a couple of months ago. It started with a sequence of six notes on the guitar (the opening notes). I thought it sounded quite nice, but I'm crap at playing arpeggiated stuff, so, to get a decent listen to it, I put it into the MIDI sequencer (keyed in manually, note-by-note). Then I added the bassline, which helped to set the overall feel (the guitar arpeggio doesn't really define a melody because it just repeats). It sounds nice. I've tried to do something similiar in the past. With the bassline in place, I tried various sounds over the top (clicking an on-screen keyboard with the mouse) to see what the melody instrument should be - looking for the sound that 'works' with the backing. (By this time, the atmosphere or feel of the piece is starting to become apparent - I'm starting to focus on the mood I'm trying to convey.) The tooty-flutey sound was the one and the melody for that was written in the sequencer, step-by-step. Not in one go, though - it was repeated and adjusted until it sounded right, just like I'd do it if I was writing a lead solo on the guitar - when it loses its way, I stop and start again. The tinkly stuff in the middle is a two-part harmony based on the guitar part. The two harmonies are distinct melodies in their own right. Here, I'm experimenting with the idea that the three parts (guitar and two celestes) intermingle, such that further parts - parts that I didn't write - can be distiguished. I went from the handful of notes on the guitar to the arranged piece in one evening, and then spent about a week refining the mix. I tried some other instrument sounds along the way (sequencers make this easy), but settled on the guitar and flutey thing that I started with. At no point did I know what was coming next - not even when I was in the middle of laying down a particular part did I know what notes would follow. I guess you could say I composed this piece, but it doesn't feel like that to me - it's more like I 'found' it, or discovered it. Plucked it from the ether and made it real. Once the thing gets started, it takes on a life of its own and it's my job to try and render that in a tangible form. Composing, to me, suggests that I have some sort of plan, a vision of the finished piece, which just isn't the case at all. All I do is fart about, pick out the good bits and turn them into arrangements. I'm beginning to be able to play by ear. Very important, in my view. The language of musicians is music, pure and simple. Anything else is one step removed from that - a translation, a representation, not the real thing. I've been using a book called "Learn to Improvise the Blues" by Tim Richards. It starts with very basic stuff and works up to some difficult music. Interesting - never read a book on how to improvise. What sort of approach does it advocate? He starts with basic chords and rythms. He then introduces more complicated chords (6th's, 7th's, 9th's, 13th's), and he also covers more complicated rythms. The real beauty of the book is that you can easily skip parts, and also go back. I've re-started the book 4 or 5 times, and each time I get more out of it. I take breaks to try and learn stuff like Bach's "Tocata and Fugue", and I'm currently doing "Air on a G string". Good plan. I think it helps to have a diverse range of interests. I like most types of music. Regards Donal -- |
Not as bad as the mental pic of Katysails in a G string.
That's a sight no one can stand, even Mr. Sails. CN "Scott Vernon" wrote in message ... "Wally" wrote I'm currently doing "Air guitar in a G string". Ugh, now there's a mental pic. SV |
After over 25 years together, Mr Sails can pretty much stand almost
anything... "Capt. Neal®" wrote in message ... Not as bad as the mental pic of Katysails in a G string. That's a sight no one can stand, even Mr. Sails. CN "Scott Vernon" wrote in message ... "Wally" wrote I'm currently doing "Air guitar in a G string". Ugh, now there's a mental pic. SV |
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 00:11:52 -0000, "Donal"
wrote this crap: "Scott Vernon" wrote in message ... Can you play 'Chopsticks' yet? Yes, ... on the clarinet!!! Ever notice how gay guys like to play the clarinet? Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now! |
"Horvath" wrote in message
Ever notice how gay guys like to play the clarinet? No, but we bow to your in-depth knowledge of the subject, wrought from years of in-the-field research. |
"Wally" wrote in message k... "Horvath" wrote in message Ever notice how gay guys like to play the clarinet? No, but we bow to your in-depth knowledge of the subject, wrought from years of in-the-field research. I believe that Horvath plays the Skin Flute! CM |
"Horvath" wrote in message ... Ever notice how gay guys like to play the clarinet? I bet that you are an expert mouth organist. Regards Donal -- |
i have not been following this thread, or the NG really, but if you're
interested in a book for the guitar try Chuck Wayne's book. it is something like 20 pages of genius. it basicly just gives you the structure of the insturment. everytime i look at it , i find something new. i can't remember the exact title but its around here somewhere if you want more info. in fact i think i'll find it and hangout with a guitar tonight. the girls won't be here till tomorrow :) gf "Donal" wrote in message ... "Wally" wrote in message k... "Donal" wrote in message news:crndpe$fb3$1 Do you read dots? Take lessons? Compose? Play by ear? Improvise? I don't take lessons.... yet. I've never had a lesson. I kinda avoided them when I first got started, on the assumption that one can end up sounding like the teacher, which I didn't want to happen. I try to compose, but I'm "creatively challenged". I would say don't *try* to compose - just fart about, explore sounds and combinations of notes. The word "try" was misleading. What happens is that I "wander off". However, I can only go in one direction. It tends to be very repetitive. Most good music either consists of mixtures of styles/tunes, or a very rich tune. The monkeys and typewriters principle applies. When something good comes out, play it a few more times before you forget it - memorise the hand movements that make it happen. Incorporate it into every session until you can play it fluidly, and fart about around that theme. If it's as good as initial impressions suggest, more bits will come out - one thing leads to another. After a while, you'll have enough bits to arrange them into a piece. To my mind, that's when the actual 'composing' starts. Have a listen to this while I try to explain how I went about creating it... http://www.yachtsea.com/music/TheDance.mp3 I wrote it a couple of months ago. It started with a sequence of six notes on the guitar (the opening notes). I thought it sounded quite nice, but I'm crap at playing arpeggiated stuff, so, to get a decent listen to it, I put it into the MIDI sequencer (keyed in manually, note-by-note). Then I added the bassline, which helped to set the overall feel (the guitar arpeggio doesn't really define a melody because it just repeats). It sounds nice. I've tried to do something similiar in the past. With the bassline in place, I tried various sounds over the top (clicking an on-screen keyboard with the mouse) to see what the melody instrument should be - looking for the sound that 'works' with the backing. (By this time, the atmosphere or feel of the piece is starting to become apparent - I'm starting to focus on the mood I'm trying to convey.) The tooty-flutey sound was the one and the melody for that was written in the sequencer, step-by-step. Not in one go, though - it was repeated and adjusted until it sounded right, just like I'd do it if I was writing a lead solo on the guitar - when it loses its way, I stop and start again. The tinkly stuff in the middle is a two-part harmony based on the guitar part. The two harmonies are distinct melodies in their own right. Here, I'm experimenting with the idea that the three parts (guitar and two celestes) intermingle, such that further parts - parts that I didn't write - can be distiguished. I went from the handful of notes on the guitar to the arranged piece in one evening, and then spent about a week refining the mix. I tried some other instrument sounds along the way (sequencers make this easy), but settled on the guitar and flutey thing that I started with. At no point did I know what was coming next - not even when I was in the middle of laying down a particular part did I know what notes would follow. I guess you could say I composed this piece, but it doesn't feel like that to me - it's more like I 'found' it, or discovered it. Plucked it from the ether and made it real. Once the thing gets started, it takes on a life of its own and it's my job to try and render that in a tangible form. Composing, to me, suggests that I have some sort of plan, a vision of the finished piece, which just isn't the case at all. All I do is fart about, pick out the good bits and turn them into arrangements. I'm beginning to be able to play by ear. Very important, in my view. The language of musicians is music, pure and simple. Anything else is one step removed from that - a translation, a representation, not the real thing. I've been using a book called "Learn to Improvise the Blues" by Tim Richards. It starts with very basic stuff and works up to some difficult music. Interesting - never read a book on how to improvise. What sort of approach does it advocate? He starts with basic chords and rythms. He then introduces more complicated chords (6th's, 7th's, 9th's, 13th's), and he also covers more complicated rythms. The real beauty of the book is that you can easily skip parts, and also go back. I've re-started the book 4 or 5 times, and each time I get more out of it. I take breaks to try and learn stuff like Bach's "Tocata and Fugue", and I'm currently doing "Air on a G string". Good plan. I think it helps to have a diverse range of interests. I like most types of music. Regards Donal -- |
now there's an ambigous statement if i ever heard one!
i'll take it as postive optimism. "katysails" wrote in message ... After over 25 years together, Mr Sails can pretty much stand almost anything... |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:07 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com