Transcription Style

I agree, too many accidentals. Maybe he forgot to preset the Key Signature in his program?

You have the wrong link. It's www.marcopanascia.com

 

It's easier to read when the all the accidentals are explicit, esp in a key like Ab. There's to mistaking whether something is sharp/flat, not to mention a tune might be in mulitple key centers.

 

GG, those are plausible questions but we're talking about reading accidentals on a solo transcription.

Still, I certainly would trust my ears far more than my sight-reading/transposing abilities. If I have the luxury to shed on a particular tune, I prefer to learn my tunes without the chart, transpose them into multiple keys and be able to play the head in most keys. How the chart is written becomes a moot point save for looking at arrangements and checking if I have the melody right.

Having my nose in the paper only gets in the way of interaction and knowing a tune inside out. I play worse if I have to look at the chart.

If someone's gonna write out a transcription, I'd rather have it written in C with all the accidentals thrown in, unless it's only got one or two accidentals. It also depends on the tune. All the Things sits mostly on simpler key signatures and only ends on Ab at the end - esp with C being one of the key centers. It makes more sense for it to be written in C to me.

 

Agree... especially with bebop transcriptions or anywhere lots of chromatic notes are happening.
I am working on a few songs at the moment, out of the Charlie Parker Omnibook. Donna Lee for example is written in C with all the accidentals written in.
It is a lot easier to read than a transcription I have in another book, that is written in Ab.

 

I can't help but to think that you're losing something by not identifying the key signature, if there is one. Even a lot of bop tunes have a primary key sig even though there are a lot of non-diatonic notes. I agree that it's easier to read with all of the accidentals written out each time, but aren't you missing an important aspect of the tune? Some tunes, however, really don't have a key sig, like Metheny's Song for Bilbao, which uses sus chords for most of the tune. In that case, I think a key sig provides a bit of inaccurate info. Am I missing something?

 

Yeah, but having played Giant Steps in 12 keys really made it **** ton easier playing in the normal key! Try it!!!

Do it enough and it takes very little time to learn tunes. I'm starting to get into that weird phenomena where some people can memorize changes to a new tune just by playing it through a few choruses at a session.

I've been told of anecdotes of famous jazz players who couldn't transpose on the spot as well - and it was brutal.

Here's another.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUbaLwCeri8

 

Actually that makes complete sense. i was talking to my piano player friend of mine and he commented that with piano, due to the way the keys are arranged, every voicing has it's own handprint or shape in every key. Because of the physical location of the black keys, you knew where you were on the keyboard if you used your tactile senses. That sometimes playing in C major was harder because you had no physical landmarks.

They keys are literally color coded.

 

@Shlyder: Funny, I have been working out of the Omnibook for about 20 years now - my main instrument was saxophone at University. I thought you had been mistaken about the no key signature thing in the Omnibook, but as it turns out, the alto version is written in the key of C too with accidentals.

It is funny because I can picture the key signatures. I guess I just automatically just imagine the key 'center' when playing and play in that key.

(If it was a poll on key signature or not, I like to have the key signature written just because I tend to think in terms of keys when I play...fyi. Good or bad, it is what it is I guess)

 

If your analyzing the solo then having the key signature and the chords and all that other stuff is helpful. If you're just reading it then I think its easier in C with a ton of accidentals most of the time, or even accidentals that don't hold over through the measure, because then one doesn't have to worry about preset accidentals either in the key or the measure. Though I can see scenario's where that can get really messy. I guess just be able to read anything.

 

I find it baffling that any literate musician would use accidentals instead of a key signature.

 

Reading 5 sharps/flats is a PITA.

Too much to think about and remember if you're having to play the chart on the stand. If I was playing classical pieces that were 10 pages long, sure. But not when the material is likely not to be rehearsed.

And I'm going to write transcriptions like I'm going to write leadsheets. Who cares about what is "technically correct". Get'er done. There's more important things to focus on. Usability should be put before technical correctness.

 

My experience is the opposite. I find it much easier to read those keys with the use of a proper key signature than to have to read an accidental on every note, because when a key signature is properly used, it's much easier to see at a glance what notes are diatonic to the key.

 

+1

 

No, of course not.

 

over the top baffling! I can see writing "giant steps" with no key sig, or "inner urge", but write out Donna Lee or All the things, or Softly, without key signature....why????
what about "round midnight"? Eb minor with 6 flats, who would actually rather read it with all accidentals? Not me... I find that very absurd.
www.basslessonslosangeles.com