Earlier quoted context omitted.
The 90° isn't the big problem with traditional notation. It's that the same note in different octaves looks different . It's as if in programming you wrote a for loop differently for every level of nesting. The new notation draws against the same pattern of staff lines for each octave; plus, you don't have to remember sharps and flats from the key. I've long wished for these two improvements, especially the first one…
Notes in different octaves are different and hence should look different. Even if you restrict to keyboard instruments, I am not sure you describe an existing problem with classical notation. For the non-keyboard instruments I know how to play, tones in different octaves having different identifications is a must unless you want to add extra parts to the notation.
How I’d redesign piano sheet music
101–110 of 165 posts
Re: How I’d redesign piano sheet music
#102Interesting read though. For something not so 'serious' (e.g. not a Concert piece), it could definitely make the correlation easier.
Re: How I’d redesign piano sheet music
#103Re: How I’d redesign piano sheet music
#104Re: How I’d redesign piano sheet music
#105I really love this. When I was young, I was really excited to learn to play the piano. The biggest problem I had was being able to read the sheet music. It was incredibly difficult for me to read and understand the notes for both hands at the same time. A big part of this was that when individual notes were off the normal staff (e.g., C is below the staff), you either had to have an innate sense of how far from the s…
You shouldn't be counting.
Any decent pedagogical training is going to introduce the lower and higher notes one at a time. And 'decent' can include self learning. Have some patience and don't try to jump into advanced things right off. You will just learn bad habits.
Say you know by sight all the notes g below middle c. The next exercise should introduce the f below middle c. When you see it it will be the one and only note you haven't trained on, and before you know it it will be trained into your muscle memory. Soon you will just see all the notes and know what it is. No counting required.
We are talking a couple of weeks here. A note a day, say, will get you pretty far - scores almost always change clefs before going 14 semitones above/below the staff.
Some people will do anything to avoid learning in a disciplined manner, and then spend years never advancing or fighting their bad technique. Take a bit of time, and the world of music is opened up to you.
Analogy - imagine somebody asks you to teach them how to pitch (baseball). You ask to see their current throw and it is some weird, lurchy, shot put type of throw. You show them a standard over shoulder release. They say no, they want to keep their current style, and maybe, just maybe, over many months, first remove some part of the weird lurch. In six months, then maybe they'll raise their hand a few inches. After that is working over several months, then maybe they'll start moving their hand behind their shoulder just a bit. Why, in just 10 years they'll be able to throw a ball!
It's crazy. If you want to pitch a baseball, just learn the movement that is required. If you want to play piano, learn how to hold your hands, and learn to read the music on sight. If you want to play guitar, learn the correct way to hold the strings with the left hand, and learn the proper plucking/fingering of the strings with the right hand. Etc. It's a few weeks of boredom, followed by a life time of being able to play.
actually I find it very zen, and love to go back to the beginning exercises, seeking absolute, unthinking perfection, letting each note ring for several seconds. Learned that from reading about Horowitz, and it works. But it is a bit much to expect 'zen' from a beginner that just wants to play some Billy Joel tune. To them I say Billy Joel did this to get the skill to play his songs, and you are probably not more a natural genius than he is, so you probably can't skip over what he had to do.
Re: How I’d redesign piano sheet music
#106Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only the simple, combative, stupidly contrarian mind. Albeit, such minds are much too common on HN.
Why the ad hominem? I understood the scope of the OP's suggestion. I just thought it could've been presented more clearly. The fact that tons of the comments here are directed at the idea of this notation as a replacement would seem to bear this out. For my thoughts on the notation itself, see this post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9831337
At this point, we should just all agree that article titles are at least slightly sensational. If no one on HN debated the clickbaitiness of a headline, comment volume would drop dramatically.
Edit: reordered the paragraphs.
Re: How I’d redesign piano sheet music
#107How I'd redesign a piano, is with the black keys equal in color and shape to the white keys. That way, transposing a song by a semitone is equivalent to shifting your hands by one key. Much more natural. I think they call an instrument with this property "chromatic", but I'm not sure. Actually, perhaps somebody can explain why the black keys were invented. Because their existence makes little sense to me. For example…
You have to ask yourself what should feel more natural: transposing songs or actually playing them. I don't know much about why the piano was designed like this, but I can see your idea wouldn't be useful: - Black keys are a reference. Either by touching them or by looking at them, you can always know where you are. Not so easy with all the keys being the same. - The size of the keyboard is more or less adapted to ou…
Re: How I’d redesign piano sheet music
#108IMO, an experienced sight reader would have more difficulty sight reading more complicated music using this notation.
Re: How I’d redesign piano sheet music
#109I'm a bassist, of the "don't quit your day job" variety. Owing to the accident of having a certain musical background, I'm a fluent sight-reader, and the groups that I play in require this skill. I frequently encounter a mixture of standard notation (SN) and chord symbols, plus the occasional Nashville number chart. From what I can tell, people have explored different notation systems for a couple of reasons. The fir…
SN is difficult for beginners because music is difficult for beginners. Notations that focus on the mechanics of the instrument are easier to start with, because they don't require any theoretical background in music. That's fine, but they won't be able to replace SN.
I'm very interested in this sort of cognitive technology, but I have yet to see a proposal for improving on SN in its own terms. Is there some notation out there that is simpler than SN, but just as expressive? Something that could be approachable for beginners, but still useful for experts?
Re: How I’d redesign piano sheet music
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only the simple, combative, stupidly contrarian mind. Albeit, such minds are much too common on HN.
Why the ad hominem? I understood the scope of the OP's suggestion. I just thought it could've been presented more clearly. The fact that tons of the comments here are directed at the idea of this notation as a replacement would seem to bear this out. For my thoughts on the notation itself, see this post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9831337
HN users getting their hate on and their cynicism and all of that, it’s all so awful and pointless to discuss, really.