22.9.11

Music for Minors




I have had a unique opportunity to explore elements of the Orff approach to music teaching, through teaching the Singing Rainbows pre-school program and Musical Jam for Year One and Two, both of which are influenced heavily by this philosophy. It is a new approach to teaching music for me. I always believed that if I had a child I would thrust an instrument in its hand as soon as humanly possible. But, when I did have my own child, I realised that greater benefit would be gained by having music as a constant in his life – we made sure there were lots of instruments around the house, the opportunity to experiment with sound and to listen to and play a variety of music. He, of course, lapped it up and seemed to have a really good ear. However, by about 4 he seemed to have lost all sense of rhythm... and pitch. Obviously, I was horrified. Then he became part of my Musical Jam class and my great experiment. It is a fantastic opportunity to watch his development, knowing everything I do about his past. 


I also teach the violin, in a formal more traditional way. Some of my students have had previous musical exposure and some have not. For the most part, the ones who have been banging on pots and drums driving their parent nuts, or the ones who are involved in church or cultural groups, or ones who have been involved in programs like Musical Jam, seem to be much further down the road from noise to music.
My sons proficiency has increased enormously since participating and collaborating in music making, so has his confidence and co-ordination. But the most notable thing is his new connection to the beat. He got his rhythm back! The other great benefit, the “group” aspect, means the kids start sharing their ideas and start to articulate themselves, musically. I know that when my boy starts more formal musical training, he has a great number of musical concepts already “instinctual” – or seeming so. This will leave him able to concentrate on the more “technical” aspects of music making and understanding, enabling him to progress much faster than he would have without these basic musical elements already in place.

Post by Meryl Main
Lewis Eady Music School Tutor

15.9.11

Q. Is a larger upright better than a smaller grand?


A. There has always been much debate amongst pianists and technicians over this but at the end of the day, with very few exceptions, Grand Pianos will always win out over upright pianos - even ones which may technically be larger and better.


This is primarily down to two incontrovertible facts:

1. The action on an upright piano is what we refer to as a single escapement action, whereas a grand piano utilises a double escapement action. Coupled with the fact that the grand piano action is working with gravity, whereas the upright action is not... means the grand action will be faster, smoother and more responsive than most upright pianos.

2. The grand piano soundboard is horizontal with clear space above and below to allow for optimum sound transmission. Compare this with the upright which is generally shoved up against a wall with the lid down. Once again the grand will appear to give more sound.

As always there are exceptions. A few years ago we put on a 'duelling piano' promotion using our model A 6' 2" Steinway grand piano and our model K 132cm Steinway upright piano. I made the mistake of taking off the front of the upright in an attempt to balance up what should have been a no contest... to my horror the upright drowned out the grand!

Post by John Eady


Visit the Lewis Eady showroom and experience the best in pianos and customer service.

10.9.11

Buy responsibly... guitars that is

On Tuesday this week this article came to my attention, http://www.tennessean.com/article/20110904/BUSINESS/309030089/Gibson-goes-offensive.
At the time it made me concerned for the US guitar making industry. That’s Martin, Fender, PRS, Guild, Larrivee, Collings, the list goes… If Gibson, an industry leader has been taken down by the Federal government what’s stopping one of the others been taken down?

And that’s the question. I can’t comment on the legality of Gibson’s practice but I turned to Andrew at Lyn Mac (the importers of Martin guitars for NZ) because what they don’t know about importing US made guitars isn’t worth knowing.

Apparently it all comes back to a 100 year old piece of legislation called the Lacey Act. In a nutshell, an Act to stop illegal transportation of endangered animals, plants and wood products. What this means today is practically every guitar that comes out of a US factory needs to have paperwork showing where every piece of wood came from, who and where that wood was processed by etc.

Martin don’t cut corners, and I would assume the same could be said about the other brands listed above. Two quick examples of this:
  • Around a year ago we ordered in a very special Martin for a customer. It had a rare veneer on the headstock, and rare material for the nut and saddle. It took 3 months longer than expected and cost around 3 times more than usual to bring out that single guitar while all the paper work was checked.
  • Guitar manufacturers found a source of Rosewood in Madagascar that came close to the Holy Grail, Brazilian Rosewood. Martin created an artist model with Rosanne Cash (Johnny’s daughter) that used Madagascan Rosewood. This was going to be limited to 100 guitars only. Part way through production of this model a coup broke out in Madagascar and wood supply was sold illegally and irresponsibility to fund the fighting. Martin stopped production of all models that used Madagascan Rosewood straight away. Only 44 Rosanne Cash models were made.
Just some food for thought, but as with everything these days… Buy responsibly.