Washington Pie.1907..(A Collection of Notes For a Buck Dance)..Theodore Morse.

[Steve Harrison]

This is a very good novelty composition with lots of variety. The piano score is written in Bb/Eb, my arrangement is in C/F as it fits the banjo more easily. It makes an interesting use of grace notes in  parts 1 and 3 which I've adapted from the piano score to make them playable on the banjo. The nearest thing to a Washington Pie in the UK is called a Victoria sponge cake, the baking of which is my wife's specialty....Steve. 

[Austin]

May I make some  hopefully constructive critiques of your engraving style?

[Steve Harrison]

You may, it may not suit everyone but it's a method I've used for many years, mainly for my own use..Steve.
Austin said:

May I make some  hopefully constructive critiques of your engraving style?

[Austin]

I understand that, but A lot of the material on this site is very difficult to read because of it. It's just, I feel like we need to label fingerings instead of fret numbers and leave the position markers above the staff. This would improve legibility by 100%.

Steve Harrison said:

You may, it may not suit everyone but it's a method I've used for many years, mainly for my own use..Steve.
Austin said:

May I make some  hopefully constructive critiques of your engraving style?

[Austin]

Sorry if that sounded rude. I just think it would benefit the tradition to have material as accessible as possible.

[Steve Harrison]

It's a fair criticism but my annotation is part of the arrangement in that it shows my suggested fingering and how I play it...Steve.
Austin said:

I understand that, but A lot of the material on this site is very difficult to read because of it. It's just, I feel like we need to label fingerings instead of fret numbers and leave the position markers above the staff. This would improve legibility by 100%.

Steve Harrison said:

You may, it may not suit everyone but it's a method I've used for many years, mainly for my own use..Steve.
Austin said:

May I make some  hopefully constructive critiques of your engraving style?

[Joel Hooks]

I, personally, am not a fan of all the added fret numbers.

Position, position barre, and left hand fingerings are okay.  String indications underneath a note with a number in a circle is okay. A very occasional asterisk to indicate the fret number of a high note also okay (*17 or similar).  Right hand alternate fingerings, absolutely.  Double flagged 5th Gs, a tradition that should be upheld.

But anyone who has worked through the Bradbury Method or similar should have no trouble finding, at sight, any note below 12th position. If they can't then perhaps they should continue working on easier pieces until they can. 

That said, the less the better.

I would think that most banjoists own pencils.  Writing in rehearsal marks and fingerings is part of my process of learning a piece and in a way allows me to connect a little more.

I usually start with marking the strains, Intro, (A), (B), [A], Trio. and so on.  I actually do not like it when the publisher marks these and I am glad it is rare (besides Intro and Trio).  The same with measure numbers.  I do not like these being printed.  I am not sure why, perhaps it is just me. 

I also cannot stand the "hanging 8" clef that is forced by music software now.  Nothing screams amateur more than the hanging 8 clef.  This is a recent thing and anyone who has read the first few pages of any banjo tutor will already understand that the banjo is noted one octave higher, we don't need to be told on every line of the staff. 

With all that said, I get that many banjoists today have an innate fear of notation and all the added numbers might help.  I also understand that we tend to get impatient and want to play the fancy stuff right away without the boring and repetitive hours of practice to get there.  I also know that many of the Morley publications are jammed full of similar fret markings and fingerings so there is an existing tradition of doing this. 

[Austin]

Yeah Farland added fret numbers but they were underneath the note. I'm going to put as much detail as I can into anything I write so it's not confusing 

Joel Hooks said:

I, personally, am not a fan of all the added fret numbers.

Position, position barre, and left hand fingerings are okay.  String indications underneath a note with a number in a circle is okay. A very occasional asterisk to indicate the fret number of a high note also okay (*17 or similar).  Right hand alternate fingerings, absolutely.  Double flagged 5th Gs, a tradition that should be upheld.

But anyone who has worked through the Bradbury Method or similar should have no trouble finding, at sight, any note below 12th position. If they can't then perhaps they should continue working on easier pieces until they can. 

That said, the less the better.

I would think that most banjoists own pencils.  Writing in rehearsal marks and fingerings is part of my process of learning a piece and in a way allows me to connect a little more.

I usually start with marking the strains, Intro, (A), (B), [A], Trio. and so on.  I actually do not like it when the publisher marks these and I am glad it is rare (besides Intro and Trio).  The same with measure numbers.  I do not like these being printed.  I am not sure why, perhaps it is just me. 

I also cannot stand the "hanging 8" clef that is forced by music software now.  Nothing screams amateur more than the hanging 8 clef.  This is a recent thing and anyone who has read the first few pages of any banjo tutor will already understand that the banjo is noted one octave higher, we don't need to be told on every line of the staff. 

With all that said, I get that many banjoists today have an innate fear of notation and all the added numbers might help.  I also understand that we tend to get impatient and want to play the fancy stuff right away without the boring and repetitive hours of practice to get there.  I also know that many of the Morley publications are jammed full of similar fret markings and fingerings so there is an existing tradition of doing this. 

[Joel Hooks]

So I should elaborate as I am not being critical.

The fret numbers, as used in Steve's arrangements, confuse my brain. I might be alone in this and it may very well be a personal problem.  But my brain wants to see left hand fingerings in those spots.  So when there is a 13 instead of a 4 I hesitate.  Could I get over it? I have no doubt.

A. J. Weidt was against all position markings. His logic was that one could figure it out based on the highest note with no trouble. 

[Austin]

Yes! Joel, I feel the same way! It's not my intention to nitpick. I just get confused when looking at these scores.

Joel Hooks said:

So I should elaborate as I am not being critical.

The fret numbers, as used in Steve's arrangements, confuse my brain. I might be alone in this and it may very well be a personal problem.  But my brain wants to see left hand fingerings in those spots.  So when there is a 13 instead of a 4 I hesitate.  Could I get over it? I have no doubt.

A. J. Weidt was against all position markings. His logic was that one could figure it out based on the highest note with no trouble. 

[Steve Harrison]

Large sections of my arrangements have no annotation. I don't add it to any measures, lines or sections of music that are repeated...Steve. 

Joel Hooks said:

I, personally, am not a fan of all the added fret numbers.

Position, position barre, and left hand fingerings are okay.  String indications underneath a note with a number in a circle is okay. A very occasional asterisk to indicate the fret number of a high note also okay (*17 or similar).  Right hand alternate fingerings, absolutely.  Double flagged 5th Gs, a tradition that should be upheld.

But anyone who has worked through the Bradbury Method or similar should have no trouble finding, at sight, any note below 12th position. If they can't then perhaps they should continue working on easier pieces until they can. 

That said, the less the better.

I would think that most banjoists own pencils.  Writing in rehearsal marks and fingerings is part of my process of learning a piece and in a way allows me to connect a little more.

I usually start with marking the strains, Intro, (A), (B), [A], Trio. and so on.  I actually do not like it when the publisher marks these and I am glad it is rare (besides Intro and Trio).  The same with measure numbers.  I do not like these being printed.  I am not sure why, perhaps it is just me. 

I also cannot stand the "hanging 8" clef that is forced by music software now.  Nothing screams amateur more than the hanging 8 clef.  This is a recent thing and anyone who has read the first few pages of any banjo tutor will already understand that the banjo is noted one octave higher, we don't need to be told on every line of the staff. 

With all that said, I get that many banjoists today have an innate fear of notation and all the added numbers might help.  I also understand that we tend to get impatient and want to play the fancy stuff right away without the boring and repetitive hours of practice to get there.  I also know that many of the Morley publications are jammed full of similar fret markings and fingerings so there is an existing tradition of doing this. 

[Joel Hooks]

Hi Steve, please understand that I was not being critical of your editorial choices, only sharing my personal preferences in general.  I have many personal ideas of how music should be printed for banjo, mostly based on historical design as I have spent so much time with the original settings that computerisms jump out at me.  The aforementioned "hanging 8" clef, pages not balanced (meaning partial lines at the end leaving blank space), measure numbers, more than two pages (exceptions can be made for specific pieces, but this rarely happens with the proper use of repeats, reading directions and voltas), and that sort of thing. 

This is all on me and please keep doing what you are doing however you want to do it.