Transcribing issues....

[fusionbassist1]

I've decided to go on a transcribing binge as I'm aiming to have a website of sorts up and running around this summer as a way of posting gigs, videos etc for networking/reference purposes and have come across a few issues.


--


This mainly involves tidyness but its seem that when I look at different scores in books or on lucaspickford's website that most people's grouping of notes and rests is rather lazy and it's difficult to spot a consistent rule if there is one that exists.

Ones i found odd where with 8th notes (quavers):
rhythm goes - 8th note - [8th note rest]- [8thnote rest] - 8th note

I've always though that the quavers should in this instance stand alone and not be bridged together and that the rests should indeed be individual 8th note rests rather than one quarter note rest.....am i right in that thinking?

another issue I had with bridging (what i mean by bridging is the beam that runs between any series of notes larger than an 8th note) was a rhythm that goes : 8th note - 8thnote -[8th note rest] - 8th note.

do you bridge all the 8th notes together or have a pair, rest and one on its own?

finally
8th note- [8th note rest] - [8th note rest] - [8th note rest]

(in half a bar of 4/4) I've writen that as note, 8th note rest, quarter note rest. Correct?
You could technically ahve a dotted quarter note rest but it just doesn't look right somehow.

I can read music very confidently but when it came down to writing it I just confused myself as to what's right and what's not.

---

On another point when it comes to bass charts for mainly home playing I've been debating with myself as to what layout is most useful.

The 3 I thought made most sense where

1.Each main section just writen out in it's entirety but not layed out as a flowing score that runs from start to finish
[eg 'A' section and 'B' section scored out with an approximate order at bottom fo the page]
2.A complete that score runs like one you could be handed at a gig with 1st time bars,repeats, coda etc
3.A score that does run start to finish but has little embelishments and fills actually writen in.

I'm not sure which to use but I'd like to have a universal system in all my transcriptions so they are as accessible as possible.
the first method would allow you to see the score, get the jist of the riffs for just jamming purposes and carry on with your day but wouldn't let you appreciate the little licks and tricks in the song OR have a record of the entire structure or small interludes not worth transcribing.
Second method means it could be printed out and used at an actual gig but again loses the embelishments.
The third method includes all the embelishments pretty much but wouldn't flow as well in terms of how it looks on a page and due to the little fills would be very difficult to use live although would be from a note-for-note point of view most accurate of the three.

Sorry about the lengthy rant but I think we'd all benefit from agreeing on what is most effective in transcriptions, however small these matters may be.

Cheers guys,

Ben.

[TKenrick]

Here's my two cents regarding beaming of notes:

If I'm writing out parts, I'll always try group notes and rests to make each beat of the bar as clear as possible for whoever reads the part, so if you had the rhythm that you suggested of 8th - 8th - (8th rest) - 8th then I'd beam the first two together but have the last one on its own. Regarding the use of dotted crotchet rests vs quaver then crotchet rest, it's up to you - I find that i'll use dotted rests in simpler parts and subdivide each beat of the bar in more complicated things.

As for whether you present your transcriptions as sections only charts, note-for-note scores or a combination of the two, I think it largely depends on the piece that you've transcribed. I'm trying to do more note-for-notes transcriptions to improve my accuracy, but if the song is simple or largely riff-based then i'll do a sections only chart.


Tom

[Eight]

[quote name='fusionbassist1' post='421336' date='Feb 27 2009, 09:16 PM']I can read music very confidently but when it came down to writing it I just confused myself as to what's right and what's not.[/quote]
I gave up trying to understand all the horrendous rules regarding note grouping a long time ago. Now I just let computer software take care of that side of things, and I sleep better at night.

[timloudon]

One thins that helps is this:

A good transcription will be easy to read - that means despite the many ways of representing various rhythms, the easiest to read rhythm is the best.

Edited February 28, 2009 by timloudon

[Bilbo]

I'm with timlouden. Its about making the chart as legible as possible.

I think you need to decide what you want to achieve with each chart. In the 5 or 6 transcriptions I have posted here I tried to make them as full as possible, including every fill, solo etc. But sometimes you may only be transcribing a part - a riff, a specific solo, an ostinato part etc. so you don't need to be as comprehensive. My choice for doing complete charts comes from years of frustration on my part at the lack of good practice reading material for jazz students. So I take a performance I like and write the whole thing out.

For ther record, I understand that Charlie Banacos, the US educator that has worked with Jeff Berlin and Mike Stern, always encourages his students to transcribe whole charts inlcuding piano parts in an effort to improve people's ears. It is very important to make sure your charts include harmony/chords and not just the dots as their absence would devalue to exercise.

[Dan_Nailed]

Having done 4 years of transcription and reading, IME:

Rests break beams.

And dotted rests are fine if there isn't too much else going on in the bar. I wouldn't dot anything smaller than a 1/4 note anyway.

[dlloyd]

It depends. Sometimes you see rests 'bridged' by beams as it can be easier to read groupings of notes if the beams are intact.

Dotted quaver rests are fine.

As long as appropriate note groupings are used, and they're spaced correctly within the bar, you should be fine.

[mrcrow]

quote name='fusionbassist1' date='Feb 27 2009, 09:16 PM' post='421336'

Ones i found odd where with 8th notes (quavers):
rhythm goes - 8th note - [8th note rest]- [8thnote rest] - 8th note

I've always though that the quavers should in this instance stand alone and not be bridged together and that the rests should indeed be individual 8th note rests rather than one quarter note rest.....am i right in that thinking?

[color="#FF0000"]YES THERE MAY BE HARMONY NOTES NEEDING TO BE TIED TO THE 1/8 PASSAGE RHYTHM MOTIF[/color]

another issue I had with bridging (what i mean by bridging is the beam that runs between any series of notes larger than an 8th note) was a rhythm that goes : 8th note - 8thnote -[8th note rest] - 8th note.

do you bridge all the 8th notes together or have a pair, rest and one on its own?

[color="#FF0000"]NO FOR THE SAME REASONS...A PASSAGE WHICH HAS AN 1/8 NOTE MOTIF SHOULD BE KEPT DISCRETE SO THAT AN ARRANGER OR CONDUCTOR CAN 'SEE' THE SHAPE AND COLOUR OF THE PASSAGE..A BIT LIKE A BANDED EQ ON A PREAMP...YOU CAN SEE THE SHAPE[/color]

finally
8th note- [8th note rest] - [8th note rest] - [8th note rest]


(in half a bar of 4/4) I've writen that as note, 8th note rest, quarter note rest. Correct?

[color="#FF0000"]NO AS YOU ARE SPLITTINGTHE BAR INTO 2/2..SINCE ITS 4/4 YOU NEED AGAIN TO PRESERVE THE CADENCE OF THE MUSIC IN THE NOTATION...RESTS ARE NOTATION REMEMBER[/color]

You could technically ahve a dotted quarter note rest but it just doesn't look right somehow.

[color="#FF0000"]YES IT DOESNT LOOK RIGHT[/color]

I can read music very confidently but when it came down to writing it I just confused myself as to what's right and what's not.

---

On another point when it comes to bass charts for mainly home playing I've been debating with myself as to what layout is most useful.

The 3 I thought made most sense where

1.Each main section just writen out in it's entirety but not layed out as a flowing score that runs from start to finish
[eg 'A' section and 'B' section scored out with an approximate order at bottom fo the page]
2.A complete that score runs like one you could be handed at a gig with 1st time bars,repeats, coda etc
3.A score that does run start to finish but has little embelishments and fills actually writen in.

I'm not sure which to use but I'd like to have a universal system in all my transcriptions so they are as accessible as possible.
the first method would allow you to see the score, get the jist of the riffs for just jamming purposes and carry on with your day but wouldn't let you appreciate the little licks and tricks in the song OR have a record of the entire structure or small interludes not worth transcribing.
Second method means it could be printed out and used at an actual gig but again loses the embelishments.
The third method includes all the embelishments pretty much but wouldn't flow as well in terms of how it looks on a page and due to the little fills would be very difficult to use live although would be from a note-for-note point of view most accurate of the three.

Sorry about the lengthy rant but I think we'd all benefit from agreeing on what is most effective in transcriptions, however small these matters may be.

Cheers guys,

Ben.

[color="#FF0000"]WHEN TYPING OUT THE ABOVE NOTATIONS WITH THE RESTS ALSO WILL KEEP A 'RHYTHM' IN YOUR HEAD SO THAT SCANNING IS MORE REALISTIC[/color]

and finally ....sorry about all the red and caps...i just wanted to put answers right next to your questions
thats my 2p...or euro

Edited March 2, 2009 by mrcrow