Site member Eric Womersley has been very busy in the background working through A.J. Weidt's "Elementary Studies for Banjo"

and has transcribed the entire tutor book from A tuning to C notation  and has also added TABlature!

He tells me that is an ideal tutor for beginners to the Classic Style, has some great tunes and is:

"A Practical Method for Class and Private Lessons"

Containing:

Exercises

Music Melodious

Carefully Fingered

Well Graded

Thank you Eric, that has been a lot of work producing that PDF, and nicely done too!  It never ceases to amaze me how people work together to advance the content of this website... I am humbled ;-)

LONG LIVE CLASSIC BANJO

.... and they said it was dead!!

Eric's full Weidt's tutor is now available for download on the TUTOR BOOKS page.

Views: 312

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Very cool. Thank you Eric!

Yes, and it looks like it was a ton of work!

I was going through it and could not help but notice that the text, RH and LH fingerings were all absent.  Was this meant to be a companion to the Weidt books?

These were originally published in both A and C notation so there must be a copy floating around in C-- does anyone have it in their stacks?

What was cool and novel about the Weidt stuff is that they all worked together.  You have the banjo book, your buddy has the guitar book and neighbor has the mandolin book and they all match up.

The lessons are top notch-- correct right hand alternate fingering.  The exercise are graded and each one introduces some new element.  It is a complete course that could be used without a teacher.  The best part is that if one were to carefully work through the instructions then they would not need tab.

I copy of this in C would be fantastic if it were to show up!

Eric, if I may make a suggestion: in order for others besides yourself to benefit from this project without side effects it might be a good idea to align your terminology with Weidt and with the rest of the classic banjo world. By calling the tuning "dropped C" there is an implication that gCGBD is a deviation from a standard tuning. But that is not the case. In bluegrass music (which I love), and *only* in bluegrass music, the standard tuning is gDGBD. In the bluegrass context. the term "drop C"— which sounds like "dropsy" and which is less grammatically correct than "dropped C" —makes sense.

But bluegrass banjo players and the old-time players who adopted bluegrass terminology never say "dropped C", it's always "drop C".

I think it would be better to avoid either term in a project that purports to represent Weidt's book.  In classic banjo it is gDGBD that is the deviation as the standard tuning is gCGBD. The common term in days past for gDGBD  was "elevated bass".  The first time I encountered that I thought it meant the bass string was raised high off the fingerboard as in a Hawaiian guitar and I wondered how in the world banjoists managed to raise only one string while leaving low action on the others.  My point is that in self-directed projects any terminology that suits one's fancy is the correct terminology. But once it's presented for others to use the unintended consequence of anachronistic terminology is the editing of history. Another consequence is an apparently small but actually significant shift of point of view.  I don't think replacing "standard tuning" (meaning gCGBD) with "dropped C" is a good idea to present to beginners.

I also don't see the advantage of changing Weidt's titles. His title for the first piece is "The Fairies". Below that on the next line is written "waltz".  I don't see the change to "The Fairies Waltz" as an improvement.  As a note to oneself it makes no difference at all. As a guide to others, I think it is worthwhile to accurately present historical documents.

Ah, default settings. They'll getcha everytime. I think the disclaimer will take care of everything. 

Eric Womersley said:

Hi Jody

Thanks for your comments which I have noted. 

The Dropped C description and inclusion is a default setting in Guitar Pro which is the software I use to tab. I cannot change that but can remove it altogether.I will do that in future.

As for the song title, I did not set out to produce something to share with others but simply created an aid to learning for myself. Having completed the whole book, however, I thought others might appreciate it and its my way of putting something back into this site.

Your point is valid, however, so I will endeavour to better replicate anything I produce in future. I think I will also include a disclaimer to explain that my efforts are no substitute for the original but merely a companion.

Kind regards

Eric


Jody Stecher said:

Eric, if I may make a suggestion: in order for others besides yourself to benefit from this project without side effects it might be a good idea to align your terminology with Weidt and with the rest of the classic banjo world. By calling the tuning "dropped C" there is an implication that gCGBD is a deviation from a standard tuning. But that is not the case. In bluegrass music (which I love), and *only* in bluegrass music, the standard tuning is gDGBD. In the bluegrass context. the term "drop C"— which sounds like "dropsy" and which is less grammatically correct than "dropped C" —makes sense.

But bluegrass banjo players and the old-time players who adopted bluegrass terminology never say "dropped C", it's always "drop C".

I think it would be better to avoid either term in a project that purports to represent Weidt's book.  In classic banjo it is gDGBD that is the deviation as the standard tuning is gCGBD. The common term in days past for gDGBD  was "elevated bass".  The first time I encountered that I thought it meant the bass string was raised high off the fingerboard as in a Hawaiian guitar and I wondered how in the world banjoists managed to raise only one string while leaving low action on the others.  My point is that in self-directed projects any terminology that suits one's fancy is the correct terminology. But once it's presented for others to use the unintended consequence of anachronistic terminology is the editing of history. Another consequence is an apparently small but actually significant shift of point of view.  I don't think replacing "standard tuning" (meaning gCGBD) with "dropped C" is a good idea to present to beginners.

I also don't see the advantage of changing Weidt's titles. His title for the first piece is "The Fairies". Below that on the next line is written "waltz".  I don't see the change to "The Fairies Waltz" as an improvement.  As a note to oneself it makes no difference at all. As a guide to others, I think it is worthwhile to accurately present historical documents.

Eric, please don't take this as a discouragement.  I debated whether or not to even ask about the fingerings.  I find Weidt's way the reason for the book-- fingerings and positions.  I also like how he starts right away with duets.

I had a similar problem with Tabledit.  That is a program that does what it was designed to do well-- make tab.  What is does not do well (but offers) is notation.

I decided to search out some software that would make good notation.  I started using Musescore and it only took me a few of evenings to learn it.  I am 100% happy with what I get from it.  It is fully editable with fingerings, positions, any markings you want to add and (using a small workaround) double flagged notes.  The recent version offers tab, but likely the tab is like Tabledits notation.

I know that this is not a tab v notation discussion but I am not kidding when I write that all the work learning notation is in the flags.  Once you understand the duration of the notes the hard part is done.  With tab you still have to know the duration, there is no way around that.

I'm also not kidding when I write that if I can learn to read banjo music anyone can!

Tab has been the standard for over 50 years for fretted instruments so it is a relevant option.  But I found what Clarke Buehling told me to be true… that if I took all the time I spent making tabs and worked through the exercises and scales instead-- I would no longer have to spend any time making tab.

If tabbing this stuff makes it more accessible then by all means number those lines.

I prefer to edit the heck out of notation-- mark every position and fingering.

I use Musescore. It's not perfect but it's dead simple. Thanks to Steve Harrison for suggesting it.

I agree with Joel on everything in his post except for one point. Tab is not standard at all. Many string instrument teachers do not use it and will not because of its crippling effects on the musicality of beginners. Also they consider it bizarre and not relevant to making music. I concur with that view.  For a well considered and clearly expressed view that is opposite to mine check out Trapdoor's comments on this forum on the topic of tab.


Joel Hooks said:

Eric, please don't take this as a discouragement.  I debated whether or not to even ask about the fingerings.  I find Weidt's way the reason for the book-- fingerings and positions.  I also like how he starts right away with duets.

I had a similar problem with Tabledit.  That is a program that does what it was designed to do well-- make tab.  What is does not do well (but offers) is notation.

I decided to search out some software that would make good notation.  I started using Musescore and it only took me a few of evenings to learn it.  I am 100% happy with what I get from it.  It is fully editable with fingerings, positions, any markings you want to add and (using a small workaround) double flagged notes.  The recent version offers tab, but likely the tab is like Tabledits notation.

I know that this is not a tab v notation discussion but I am not kidding when I write that all the work learning notation is in the flags.  Once you understand the duration of the notes the hard part is done.  With tab you still have to know the duration, there is no way around that.

I'm also not kidding when I write that if I can learn to read banjo music anyone can!

Tab has been the standard for over 50 years for fretted instruments so it is a relevant option.  But I found what Clarke Buehling told me to be true… that if I took all the time I spent making tabs and worked through the exercises and scales instead-- I would no longer have to spend any time making tab.

If tabbing this stuff makes it more accessible then by all means number those lines.

I prefer to edit the heck out of notation-- mark every position and fingering.

Yah, we've discussed TAB v Notation a bunch.

Regarding TablEdit:

I recently sent Matthieu (owner, proprietor and writer of TablEdit) a note about double flags...and he incorporated it in the latest version. I can now do double flags...no problem. Unfortunately, he wrote it into the fingering feature and if you select a double flag, that particularl note cannot have other fingering associated with it (like RH fingering in the TAB).

Another cool feature (for the notational end of TablEdit) that has been recently added is the ability to throw in string assignments into the notation (number in circle, under the staff). I haven't used it (since I don't usually produce notation) but it is there.

For my purposes, TablEdit works great. If I were doing notation, I'd want something better.

I just checked my classic banjo website and there is a PDF of Weidt's Elementary Studies along with a Zip file of all the songs in MIDI. The book is in C notation. Has anyone checked it out?

Reply to Discussion

RSS

© 2024   Created by thereallyniceman.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service