[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Notational conventions
From: |
Hans Åberg |
Subject: |
Re: Notational conventions |
Date: |
Wed, 9 Nov 2016 15:00:29 +0100 |
> On 9 Nov 2016, at 14:47, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> Hans Åberg <address@hidden> writes:
>> I prefer no overlap in the ornaments, that is, legato style.
>
> Hm? I was not talking about overlap (and when referring to a singing
> manual, overlap with the main note would be quite a feat). I was
> talking about _when_ to change to the main note with an appoggiatura. I
> don't know any school that would make a nonlegato execution of an
> appoggiatura a serious option.
>
>> Even in Balkan music, overlap does not seem necessary.
>
> You completely lose me here but it's not like that would be anything new.
In your video, I got the impression you had chosen a style with heavy overlap
on a trill there.
- Re: [Why you don't really want] irrational tuplets [nor CF approximations], (continued)
- Re: [Why you don't really want] irrational tuplets [nor CF approximations], Hans Åberg, 2016/11/08
- Re: [Why you don't really want] irrational tuplets [nor CF approximations], Thomas Morley, 2016/11/08
- Notational conventions, Hans Åberg, 2016/11/08
- Re: Notational conventions, Thomas Morley, 2016/11/08
- Re: Notational conventions, Hans Åberg, 2016/11/09
- Re: Notational conventions, David Kastrup, 2016/11/09
- Re: Notational conventions, Hans Åberg, 2016/11/09
- Re: Notational conventions, David Kastrup, 2016/11/09
- Re: Notational conventions, Hans Åberg, 2016/11/09
- Re: Notational conventions, David Kastrup, 2016/11/09
- Re: Notational conventions,
Hans Åberg <=
- Re: Notational conventions, David Kastrup, 2016/11/09
- Re: Notational conventions, Hans Åberg, 2016/11/09
- Re: Notational conventions, David Kastrup, 2016/11/09
- Re: Notational conventions, Hans Åberg, 2016/11/09
- Re: Notational conventions, David Kastrup, 2016/11/09
- Re: Notational conventions, Hans Åberg, 2016/11/09