|
Post by guzhenglover on May 23, 2007 2:32:27 GMT
Hi people, the other question I have is regarding the rhythm of zhuang (executed by the LH). From what I understand, zhuang (and I mean the standard zhuang, not da zhuang etc.) has a generally used rhythm, which goes something like: dotted quaver+semiquaver + quaver (well you know what I mean). But there are times when the rhythm can change, for e.g. when zhuang precedes a tui fu, as in the second section of feng lei yin. In these (more exceptional) cases the rhythm apparently goes something like crotchet+semiquaver+semiquaver+quaver+quaver (and one finds this indication in Gong Yi's green book).
Can someone tell me whether I am right in saying that there's a "general" rhythm for zhuang versus the more "exceptional" rhythms for zhuang (in certain contexts)? Thanks. Oh, the reason why I wanted to be sure about this is it would help me better in contrasting a zhuang with a dou (which, again, has a different "general" rhythm).
|
|
|
Post by SCWGuqin on May 23, 2007 4:44:33 GMT
There are several answers people here could give you. I take a different approach to ornaments than most people I hear talk about them. My approach is this: ignore what the books and scores say, ancient or modern. Listen to what the masters do, and also what your teacher tells you. I noticed early on that most ornaments as written and described (yin, rou, etc. plus fingerings like the suo series) are NOT the same as what qin masters actually do. And of course all those masters differ from each other.
The idea of zhuang having a standard rhythm sounds odd to me. Zhuang is a one-time thing. You pluck a note, and then after a certain duration you jump up quickly and return. What "rhythm" is there to that? It depends on the piece, the context, and the style. The only zhuang figure I can think of that uses a "rhythm" is double zhuang, as in Zhang Ziqian's performance.
Is there something wrong with me that I don't know what "dou" means?
|
|
|
Post by SCWGuqin on May 23, 2007 4:53:46 GMT
Oh, I just found out what "dou" is. Look at the Toronto University Guqin association page: it has an in-progress manual on qin basics. Juni Yeung is serious and knowledgeable.
Both zhuang and dou involve abruptly jumping up in pitch and then returning. Where they differ is *firmness*. Zhuang stresses the firmness of the return to the base note. Dou puts more stress on the initial rise.
Either way, this has nothing to do with rhythm as you have discussed it.
|
|
|
Post by Si on May 23, 2007 8:48:12 GMT
Utmostvacuity2 - thanks for putting my mind at ease. I was a bit baffled by the complex rhythm question too. Zhuang seems hard to get wrong to me - just up and back quickly. My teacher did tell me that there are many different types of niao and yin of which you need to learn from a teacher as usualy they are not notated specifically. I think i have only ever seen dou once (yan guan san die - near end). GZL - have you looked at the following web site www.tcfb.com
|
|
|
Post by guzhenglover on May 24, 2007 3:00:40 GMT
I think i have only ever seen dou once (yan guan san die - near end). GZL - have you looked at the following web site www.tcfb.com What's tcfb.com? Centre for Business? What business? What's your view on this zhuang business, Charlie? Somehow I still suspect a rhythmical link wwith zhuang, as I seem to have read from somewhere. But even just a quick browse of the guqin pieces transferred to western notation reveals a general tendency, that is the tendency that zhuang seems to be characterised by a dotted rhythm. I suspect that it's that very movement when you do zhuang that causes the rhythm to be "dotted"...
|
|
|
Post by SCWGuqin on May 24, 2007 3:12:48 GMT
www.tcfb.com/guqin/Peiyou Chang's website, with helpful treatment of fingering, ornamentation, etc. On a personal note, I know Peiyou and think she's a very thoughtful and serious qin musician. Western notation...music is music! Music is an aural art, not scratches on a page. Listen.
|
|
|
Post by guzhenglover on May 24, 2007 4:23:58 GMT
Well I know this website, thanks anyway syburn + utmostvacuity2.
It still seems to me that a discussion can be had between qin fingering and its links with rhythm and, for that matter, kinesthetics (whether or not we agree with GY on using western notation for Chinese music - and I do not agree)
|
|
|
Post by Si on May 24, 2007 7:03:41 GMT
That green book of GY is a waste of space to me. There are even tunes with no notation at all - the cheapo cheek of it!!! I think its written for his university students - as they have loads of time to work out the notation them selves.
i often follow the gu qin qu ji book and all the time my teacher has to correct the score cos it has so many mistakes. we have had to abandon the "chang men yuan" score from this book as its to different from the usual, now im using the shen mi qin pu version ( i think she felt I would be more familiar with the western style notation thats why we were using it).
GZL -I think you are making zhuang sound complicated when it should not be. Its usualy a quick short one but can be a longer slower one, but i think not all scores will be so clear (like guqin qi ji for instance).
|
|
|
Post by guzhenglover on May 24, 2007 7:22:46 GMT
That green book of GY is a waste of space to me. There are even tunes with no notation at all - the cheapo cheek of it!!! I think its written for his university students - as they have loads of time to work out the notation them selves. i often follow the gu qin qu ji book and all the time my teacher has to correct the score cos it has so many mistakes. we have had to abandon the "chang men yuan" score from this book as its to different from the usual, now im using the shen mi qin pu version ( i think she felt I would be more familiar with the western style notation thats why we were using it). GZL -I think you are making zhuang sound complicated when it should not be. Its usualy a quick short one but can be a longer slower one, but i think not all scores will be so clear (like guqin qi ji for instance). Well I am not very fond of the green book, either, or any other book that tries to westernise qin music in a similar fashion. Still I think sometimes with things like rhythm there needs be a way of discussing the music rigorously and comparatively. And while I may indeed be making much out of nothing, it is true that music kinesthetics is becoming an increasingly popular aspect of musicology which I think is fascinating and which in my opinion warrants pursuing in more detail. Maybe I'll just pursue this in relation to zhuang and dou in an independent study of my own.
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Huang on May 24, 2007 9:50:27 GMT
Syburn: Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! You'll get the censorship police on us again!
As for the concept of zhuang, I agree with UV. Listen to the music and it will feel right. Dotted quaver means that zhuang is often played quickly after the initial pluck in order to fit in the bar. Trying to describe in rhythmic terms will over complicate things.
Also, I don't think there is a dou in YGSD... There is dou in Qiu Shui. Dou is simply adding a grace note at the head note and doesn't have any rhythmic significance.
|
|
|
Post by SCWGuqin on May 24, 2007 13:22:50 GMT
Hah, Charlie, the only possible censorship police here equals you! Plus, I've seen criticism of GY's book everywhere--I guess he's learned to accept that by undertaking a controversial career!
And in case anyone thinks the rants from 2003 were unique, I'm told that at least one LXT concert in conservative Hong Kong degenerated into shouting from audience members.
|
|
|
Post by Si on May 24, 2007 16:25:35 GMT
utmostvacuity2 - i am so intrigued as to how guqin concert could turn into a ranting/raving situation. Please tell more.
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Huang on May 24, 2007 17:29:39 GMT
Well, maybe censorship police is wrong term. More like legal police.
I've experienced double standards regarding 'criticisms of senior players'. On one hand, there seems to an unwritten rule about not criticising them, whether your criticisms are valid or not; and on the other, you hear about stuff as highligthed by UV and some rather invalid ways of airing out criticisms. THB, I heard GY's attitude towards people criticising him, and frankly, I don't think he gives a shit IMHO.
Surely, all this raving about 'progress' yet you can't analyse is part of the big hypocrisy of the qin world. What people need to do is get on with what they want to do at hand without any hoo-harr about protocol, but do it respectfully and remember you are human. Let the traditionalists dabble in their cultivation and the modernists dabble in their progress and development. ATEOTD, I'm more concerned with music and not having to play the musical chairs that is the feudal rabblings of those who cannot see past the end of their noses, so don't stone me to death for it.
Shameless to say, that even I have entered the hypocrisy I so wish to remove myself from! Rant over.
P.S. Pardon my rants. I'm currently in an irritable mood for some reason...
|
|
|
Post by guzhenglover on May 25, 2007 4:03:13 GMT
No, syburn is right. Dou does appear at various points in YGSD.
I get the feeling that people don't follow what I am on about, so I'll not press on with my point except to say that one shouldn't take it for granted that something "feels right" in music. In the same sense that linguists try to describe and examine languages rather than merely speak the language in the way that they feel is "right" as everyday language users, musicologists too attempt to study music - Chinese, western or otherwise - in a rigorous manner rather than simply making music as musicians the way they feel is correct. I too don't want to make things more complicated than they should be; however as some of you out there appreciate who are not only musicians but musical "scientists", so to speak (like utmostvacuity2, I believe), I am sure you know what I am trying to say. And the reason why this qin notation + rhythm business intrigue me is, I'd like to get to know whether there's any kinesthetic link between certain notes, MOVEMENT and/or musical expression.
|
|
|
Post by Si on May 25, 2007 4:26:24 GMT
I do hope you people dont think I have anything against GY. He seems to have done loads for qin in shanghai and seems to have taught everyone i ever meet here. I just dont like his book.
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Huang on May 25, 2007 7:53:10 GMT
No, syburn is right. Dou does appear at various points in YGSD. Really? *gets out Qinxue Rumen* Nope. I can see none. Unless you can prove otherwise. Or you have a different version of it.
|
|
|
Post by Si on May 25, 2007 9:46:34 GMT
haha - mines from mai an qin pu - but written out by my teacher. Its in part 3 near the end. The bit thats suppose to sound like a rocking boat - although mine never does - haha
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Huang on May 25, 2007 16:38:01 GMT
Hang on. There is no YGSD in the Mei'an QP...
|
|
|
Post by Si on May 25, 2007 16:53:25 GMT
oh...............
errm - well like i said my teacher wrote it out based on her teachers way.
|
|
|
Post by guzhenglover on May 28, 2007 3:16:05 GMT
No, syburn is right. Dou does appear at various points in YGSD. Really? *gets out Qinxue Rumen* Nope. I can see none. Unless you can prove otherwise. Or you have a different version of it. Just got out my qinpu and the YGSD version that I've got is from gu zai pu of Qin Xue Ru Men...Well you are not going to believe this but, I see that there is at least one dou in each of the dies...um...
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Huang on May 28, 2007 9:19:18 GMT
I need photographic evidence!
|
|
|
Post by guzhenglover on May 28, 2007 9:28:26 GMT
I don't have a scanner, I am afraid, but dou's are definitely there. Don't worry - I'll just play from my version and you can play from yours (and I realise that some pu's indeed do not have dou's in YGSD).
BTW, I've just reviewed LXT's video on zhuang and there he does indeed comment on the rhythmical aspect of zhuang's and dou's. According to his demonstration, zhuang's usually have the dotted rhythm (the "elsewhere" condition) though in "special contexts" such as Qiu Feng Ci, zhuang's are played differently MINUS the dotted rhythm (as the zhuang gets "stretched" and prolonged, I supposed). But I didn't mean to press on with this issue.
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Huang on May 28, 2007 9:40:55 GMT
Are you on about the YGSD of the ORIGINAL qinpu or a transcription? I'll toothpick it again to seek the dou you all so claim to be there but thinking about it when I play, I cannot comprehend that there is one at all...
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Huang on May 28, 2007 14:16:44 GMT
OK, I was wrong. It does have two dou in the original version. I learnt the LXT transcription, which doesn't have it that's why.
|
|
|
Post by hezekiahpipstraw on Jun 15, 2007 11:14:49 GMT
That green book of GY is a waste of space to me. There are even tunes with no notation at all - the cheapo cheek of it!!! I think its written for his university students. GY is a professional musician involved in training other professional musicians, and he requires them to know by heart (eventually, at least) the positions of very note on every string in every tuning that they play in. He also believes that this approach will benefit amateurs because it concentrates on the music instead of what he considers to be an abstruse and obstructive notation system. So syburn's right - GY was wrote for students aiming to play at the gighest level.
|
|