Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: suggested guidelines


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by 'fess'r on April 30, 2003 at 11:08:09:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: suggested guidelines posted by Kane on April 30, 2003 at 10:33:25:

more of an experiment than a prank...

You certainly passed your times/division tables test in the 3rd or 4th grade. You still know all of those times and division problems (at least up to 12 X 12) as if they are all part of your being.

How many who once passed a "test" can say the same for these 48 basic scales?...

Though the scales were simply an arbitrary minimum requirement suggested as a gateway to discuss things that are virtually imperceptable (lacquer vs silver / chunky mouthpieces, etc., etc.), I would stand by a statement indicating that those 48 basic scales are far more than a test to pass one time in one's junior year of college.

As to my credentials, I guess you'll continue to suspect.

...and I'm not at all accusing you personally of posting nonsense "lacquer vs. silver" type posts. You needn't be offended on that point, but you and I both (if we are to maintain our musicianship) must both regularly run through - with a high degree of accuracy - our scales, arpeggios, and much much more if we are to consider ourselves reliable performers. Further, to consider ourselves tuba (baritone) performers, we should always maintain a repertoire of solos at hand available to play if someone asks "Hey, play something for me on that thing." Guitarists, violinists, flautists, trumpeters,marimba players, harmonica/accordian/bagpipe/banjo/whistle etc. and other musicians do this, and consider it a "given". If we have no ready solo repertoire, we are but "operators" of tubas/baritones...yet still discussing the incredible revelations of chunky mouthpieces and precisely how far these amazing chunky mouthpieces insert themselves into our instruments.


Follow Ups: