Re: Step by step lesson book



> From: Stephen Calder <calder9@xxxxxxxxx>
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 08:10:53 +1000
> Subject: Re: Step by step lesson book


>>> In my opinion, it never helps to blame or make someone else the problem.
>>>

>> Here again we'll have to disagree. Children are captive audiences. Whatever
>> they receive, or don't receive, is predetermined and _compulsory_. They have
>> little choice to speak of in anything regarding their education. Therefore,
>> much responsibility and _blame_ (where appropriate and deserving) rests
>> squarely at the feet of their teachers -- the ones who claim to be
>> facilitating them, fulfilling their _fundamental_ educational needs.
>> Education, or lack thereof, is a life sentence. The children, students, are
>> the one who pay for failed experiments and incompetence, and very often for
>> the rest of their lives.
>>
>>
>
> This is an unsupported generalisation.
>


hmmm. I see a minimum of five specific and indisputable facts in there.



>>> Who are these music educators you speak of?
>>>
>>
>> the ones who think we already have all we need, the ones who stopped looking
>> and stopped trying long ago. In other words, the vast majority.
>>
>
> This is an unsupported generalisation.
>


You're beginning to sound like Mike, and that's not a good thing.

Your previous statements was really all the "support" and evidence required.
You yourself said; "If there were a better way to transcribe the sounds (and
the system we have has evolved markedly from its beginnings) we should have
discovered it by now."

In other words; if the generalization fits, _wear it_.


>> yes, I did say there _are_ some new things are on the horizon, and some new
>> voices, means, and tools, but only very very recently. And I might add,
>> these advances are independent of, and pretty much in spite of the status
>> quo machinery. It, the status qou, would have gone nowhere, little or no
>> advancing, on it's own. The best they could come up with, even after the
>> internet reared it's head, was the No Child Left Behind Act. God help us.
>>
>>
> What advances?
>


Most particularly _the internet_ is a huge advance in general, the wider
access to information, tools (old and new), help, and yes even alternative
view-points on anything you might choose to explore or learn about. The
potential of the web, for delivering alternative packaging of information
has barely even been scratched. Widespread availability of inexpensive
instruments, via the web, is a good thing too. My method is most certainly
_an advance_ (of music education) and the internet allowed me to make it
available to everyone in the world. Others will do similarly.
http://www.TheCipher.com/
My readers comments page demonstrates that I've found and created one more
way/means/tool for wanna-be music learners to get what the need. I looked
for and found what the entire world couldn't see. I've proven that there are
things right under our noses to find if we only look for them. I walk the
talk. I _know_ I'm right.


Whatever advances are to come, will, from now on, be seen first on the
internet, most likely. The only way to get anything done these days is to
*do it yourself*. You'd be a fool to wait for the rest of the
(establishment) world to catch up, or to even start looking (for new ways of
do things)!


>>
>> you know what, I just don't buy that. My learning to play to guitar was a
>> complete fluke accident, even though I really really loved music and
>> everyone knew it. It took a series of very unusual circumstances and bits of
>> facilitation that would not normally have been available to me,
>> circumstances that would never have come together otherwise. My adoption was
>> essentially annulled, and I was placed in a children's home at the age of
>> 14. It was only there that my love of music was truly recognized, by the
>> staff persons, and THEY facilitated me. I would never have gotten that
>> facilitation at home nor at school otherwise. This I know for a fact. I
>> would have been forever a music lover without my lifelong mate and
>> companion. One of myriad of unfacilitated wanna-be music makers, one of that
>> 98%.
>>
>>
>
> Yet you are an accomplished musician. You'd be better off without the
> resentment.


love and hate, _passion_, two sides of the same coin. The best you can do is
channel your energies in to something constructive, do something about
fixing the problem -- and I have done. I've earned the right to bitch, I'm
part of the solution, I've more than done my bit. But there's still always
more to do, more and more to do, I'm not content, yet. That's the
difference. That what makes me "a producer".


>>> Music notation is a poor tool? That there's no better because we haven't
>>> looked for it? You must be kidding.
>>>
>>
>> no, I'm not kidding, and I'm not alone in my assessment.
>>
>
> Evidence and supporting argument please.


Mike? is that you? Stephen, I don't have the time nor energy to go through
this one with you. This is really one of those things that you either see,
know, and relate to, or you don't. I said in my initial reply to Lumpy that
if you like the existing tool-set, if you think we had all we need, that's
your prerogative.


>>> To prove that, you'd have to come up
>>> with a better one.
>>>
>>
>> or side step it, or add to it -- which I have done.
>>
>>
> You won't convince me this way. But I am genuinely curious. Can I elicit
> further information?


It's on my web site Stephan. It starts with intervals, interval numbers,
chromatic interval numbers. It starts by translating diatonic number formula
to chromatic number formula. And it starts with guitar fretboard, it's
built-in underlying numeric chromatic semitone map. You marry one to other
and then you _integrate_ those with common standard diatonic interval
numbers. This gives you the completed set of tools we should have had in the
first place, hundreds of years ago. It both side-steps a bunch of things and
it adds to our tool-box -- adds no less that *one full half*, the missing
half, of our potential tool-set (I call that an advance). Chromatic numbers
are counting numbers, a language understood by all, they are universal and
universally understood. I've translated common musical formula and recipes
into a language known to all, welcomed by all, accessible by all. Intervals
are the key. Getting their foot in the door, quickly and painlessly, is all
you really need to do, that's the hardest part -- which I've made _child's
play_, literally. It couldn't be any simpler nor more elegant. It works,
like a charm. It cut's through _instantaneously_ with crystal clarity. Boom,
problem solved.

http://www.TheCipher.com/3_minute_intro.html


>>> It's concise and precise, is unambiguous and follows
>>> logical rules,
>>
>> this is laughable. Sorry Stephen.
>>
>>
>
> This is not an argument. We don't have a discussion if you dismiss a
> reasonable (to me) statement as laughable.


I already told you I don't want to argue with anyone about this. If you are
content with what you had, so be it. All I can say is that even a cursory
but rational look at those tools should be cause for alarm, should
immediately send up red flags. Here's the test; if we had to do it all over
again, starting now, in 2005, sent out a "call for papers", looking for a
solution to our problem from our very best minds, no-one in their right
minds would propose doing it that way again. You would be the laughing
stock. But again, it's not easy to look rationally at something you're
invested in and content with.


>
> It IS concise. You can get the melody and harmony to a whole song on a
> single page. It's mathematically precise; so much so that a computer can
> be programmed to "read" music. It's also therefore logical and
> unambiguous, or a computer could not do that.


"Concise" implies and requires that anything was _successfully_ communicated
in the first place. There is no, zero, _mathematics_ about the staff or the
standard numbers and letters. Imprecision is the rule in standard procedure.
Knowing that you need "some kind" of 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 9th, when
viewing dots on the staff, isn't good enough. The thing called a "seventh"
can be either 9, 10, or 11 things away, but never 7 -- not in the chromatic
environment we've lived in for hundreds of years already, not on pianos or
guitars in particular. It's all devoid of math, arithmetic, that was the one
of the biggest problems -- numbers that are _not_ numbers.

R 3 5 -- is not math, are not numbers
0 4 7 -- IS

but the trick is to use and integrate BOTH


>> dem dat already has are always content. The tools used pretty much define
>> the requisite skills. Change the tools, change the requisite skills. If you
>> want to learn how to cook Mandarin Duck you can go study Chinese for the
>> next couple of years, or you can look for a recipe that's already been
>> translated into a language you're more familiar with. Your choice. One
>> choice makes learning Chinese a mandatory "requisite skill", the other
>> doesn't. If you're lucky, someone who came before you already blazed that
>> trail, did the translation, and made the translated recipe available for you
>> to benefit from. That's what teachers do, by the way. That's their job.
>> Packaging and repackaging information for their students. The medium is the
>> message, and your tools are the medium.
>>
>>
> The analogy is flawed. Music is not a language in the ordinary sense.


The analogy was "ingredients and recipes", how you communicate that stuff.
Perfect analogy if I say so myself.


>> yes, but who's writing the tests, and from where, when, and whom, do the
>> breakthroughs come. I'll tell you one place they don't come from, and that's
>> from people who refuse to look for them, people who are content with things
>> the way they are.
>>
>>
> The breakthroughs always come to those who need them and seek them.
>


precisely!

Roger

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Two Click disassembly/reassembly
    ... that time into hand translating all of his applications to the new CPU. ... which is one more reason the conversion to a different CPU is ... RosAsm, at this point). ... the first place -- the power of the native CPU's language. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: Function missing for complex numbers
    ... translating other languages codes is unavoidable. ... two floating point numbers and returns a complex. ... porting code from one language to another, ...
    (comp.std.c)
  • Re: Native language versions
    ... It is a different language which can be translated ... into perl and can use Perl modules. ... away quite a bit from the OP's notion of just translating perl keywords ... There's probably not much use for a user-accessible programming language ...
    (comp.lang.perl.misc)
  • Re: Fundamental difference between English and German
    ... Once one knows the foreign language one begins ... oneself in the foreign language than in one's native tongue while one ... problem translating into French but I realise that I can't be as nuanced ...
    (uk.politics.misc)
  • Re: Memory Limit for Visual Studio 2005???
    ... translates from a source language to a target language that are ... that definition *isn't* fulfilled by a JIT compiler? ... will realize that the most important thing that compilers do is translating ... much more accurate to call it an assembler. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)