Transposition at Sight
  • Palestrina
    Posts: 422
    I’m sure that a number of us here who accompany chant from neume notation are used to using ‘movable do’ to make our lives easier...

    Has anyone here used a method based on the above as the basis for transposing at sight in modern notation? Would be interested for your thoughts...
  • Chris Garton-Zavesky
    Posts: 6,902
    Palestrina,

    "our" lives, usually means accompanying the ordinary in a range the choir can reach comfortably, regardless of what is easier, in terms of manuals and pedals.

  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,982
    I play what is printed on the pages, which also happens to be exactly where the pastor wants to sing. The pastor is always right. If in doubt, ask the pastor. ;-)

    I should have noted we have used the ICEL Chant Mass exclusively since 2011.
  • NihilNominisNihilNominis
    Posts: 1,023
    I just use the interval shapes, keep my sharps and flats in mind in terms of scale degree, and start in the correct new place. Not perfect, but a workable conceptualization.
    Thanked by 2CharlesW Incardination
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,982
    I must admit I have gotten really lazy about transposition since I had a transposer installed during the console rebuild. I was never great with transposing, but it is too easy to rely on that transposer.
    Thanked by 1madorganist
  • Chris Garton-Zavesky
    Posts: 6,902
    Charles,

    My problem is purely practical: I see keys in front of me and expect pitches. When I don't hear the right things, I play what ought to be coming out, and the result is a mess.

    How did you get a transposer on a non-simulacrum?
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,415
    At any creditable institution of higher learning's music school, transposition is taught and expected to be mastered in the course of studies leading to organ degrees. I did, in fact, find this very difficult, but became acceptably adept at it. I would never stoop to using a so-called transposer. What an embarrassing brain simulacrum such a gadget is!!! As with improvising, if you can't transpose, don't - there is nothing wrong in that.
  • Palestrina
    Posts: 422
    Interesting responses thus far... but nobody has answered my basic question...

    Does anyone have a consistent method for changing clefs in a way that allows one to read the notes in the same staves as before, but in the new key? Imagine, for instance, that you are transposing up a fourth, but rather than visualising it all up four notes, you simply read the notes on their current spaces and lines a fourth higher...

    Easily done with the four-line staff... not so easy with modern notation...
  • MarkS
    Posts: 282
    The answer is to use old-fashioned c clefs (soprano, mezzo-soprano, alto, tenor) of the sort found in older scores. Studying conducting where I went to school involved much practice in reading and playing (for instance) SSATB scores with the top four parts in c clefs rather than treble or bass. Essentially, just moving where middle c is on the staff, and reading accordingly.

    Edit-does not make all transpositions possible, but takes care of many.
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen eft94530
  • NihilNominisNihilNominis
    Posts: 1,023
    To Palestrina... yes, that's what I meant. I follow the shapes of the chords and their relative placement.
  • Chris Garton-Zavesky
    Posts: 6,902
    I should have been more specific. I transpose tolerably well. I don't transpose well when I use a transposer gadget thingy, especially (and this actually happened to me) when the transposer key has been activated without my knowledge.
    Thanked by 1NihilNominis
  • eft94530eft94530
    Posts: 1,577
    transposing at sight in modern notation?

    Only during practice and only one half step and only slowly.
    Ideally the same letter pairs (F or F#) (Ab or A) so only mental signature change.

    Using a console transposer gadget sometimes makes me crazy.
    Playing live during Mass I tell myself it sounds wrong and endlessly
    command myself to ignore the sounds and play the keys-pedals as specified.

    I have used the example of being a child and learning to read.
    A symbol has a name and a sound.
    Then we get to music and we do not act consistently.
    See H-A-L and yesterday say H-A-L and today say I-B-M and tomorrow say G-Z-K.

    Therefore I argue that
    .. fixed do is a waste of time
    .. chord symbols are a waste of time

    It is not about names.
    It is ALL about interval relationships and roman numeral symbols
    found on continuo scores and used in music analysis class.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,982
    Chris, when they replaced the pneumatics, magnets, and assorted switches with a Peterson system of circuit boards, the transposer came along with 120 or so channels of memory for the combination action. All the transpose does is let you go up or down the scale in half steps Peterson is amazing.

    I could actually do more in terms of transposing and playing by ear when I was younger. The teachers used to actively discourage it because they said it made you sloppy. That you would play by ear rather than by what was on the page. Thankfully, that has changed, but maybe too late for me.
  • TCJ
    Posts: 986
    Certain keys are easy to transpose to on the fly. Others I have difficulty with. I also have a tendency to re-harmonize when I transpose. I will use a button, but I'm not particularly proud of it.
Add a Comment