Author
|
Topic: Mu-Sym-Tab and Jimmie
|
Winnie Winston Member From: Tawa, Wellington, NZ
|
posted 04 February 2005 12:17 AM
profile
Not sure if this should go under "Pedal Steel" or "Players" so... here it is... Of all of the amazing ideas that Jimmie Crawford contributed to steel guitar in his life, the one that can really be a lasting legacy to him is his system of "Mu-sym-tab." When he first outlined it to me I was surprised at its simplicity and pissed off at myself for not even thinking of it! How would it have changed our way of looking at things had I adopted a similar notation method in my book? As is, I took an easy way out by using "A, B, C" for pedals, but did suggest an "L" for "lower" and an "R" for "raise" with the knee levers.Jimmie's system makes so much sense. When we were writing up the patent application we used an analogy to describe it: (understand, this was 1982-- way before automotive controls became standardized) So... CAR A has the headlights as a pull switch on the left of the dash, and has the wipers as a turn knob on the right of the dash. CAR B has them just reversed. We don't say, "turn on your lights by pulling the knob on the right" because that would only apply to CAR B. We can say: "Familiarize yourself with the controls. Now, turn on the lights." When applied to steel, the whole thing of LKL and RKR and pedal 1 becomes moot if we just say: Familiarize yourself with the pedals and knee levers. Now, raise the 5th string a whole tone and lower string 8 a half tone." Jimmie told me he started thinking of this method when a student, in town for Jeff's school, asked for some time with Jimmie. Jimmie was showing him a bunch of stuff and, in the process, did a little thing, and the student said, "How'd you do that?" So Jimmie said, "That's on the 5th string. I start with it open on the 3rd fret and when I slide to the 6th fret I raise the string a whole tone." To which the student replied, "Do I have a pedal that does that on my steel?" As Jimmie said to me, "I realized that this boy knew all about pedals A and B but had no larger concept of WHAT they did." And THAT understanding led to "Mu-Sym-Tab." Since I learned about it, I've not used any other system to write tablature-- at the odd times I do so. The system is totally descriptive of the action on the tuning, and is independent of any notation about LKR or LKV or even just "E" and "F" or even "X". All you do is understand the open tuning, and then look to see how it changes. If we all used the system it would be a fitting (and lasting) tribute to a grand steel player and thinker. My Two Cents. JW |
Archie Nicol Member From: Ayrshire, Scotland
|
posted 04 February 2005 03:24 AM
profile
When I purchased `A Manual Of Style` in 1980, I could not believe how easy the tab was to read. I'm surprised it has not become the universal system. As for playing the material in the book, well, lets not get into that. Cheers. Arch. |
John McGann Member From: Boston, Massachusetts, USA
|
posted 04 February 2005 05:11 AM
profile
I use the system along with standard notation as in the "Manual of Style". Reinforcing exactly what is going on...this really aids me in understanding what's happening MUSICALLY and not just mechanically. I think a lot of teaching material falls short in that it presents a "just do this" approach...using the "give a man a fish and he eats once, teach a man to fish and he eats forever" analogy, the Mu-Sym-Tab teaches you to fish! ------------------ http://www.johnmcgann.com Info for musicians, transcribers, technique tips and fun stuff. Joaquin Murphey transcription book, Rhythm Tuneup DVD and more...
|
Tommy Detamore Member From: Floresville, Texas
|
posted 04 February 2005 06:03 AM
profile
You guys are sooo right! I mentioned how brilliant I thought the Mu-Sym tab system was in the "Another Great One is Gone" thread, but it certainly deserves own topic. Thanks Winnie! I really expected it to become the standard way to write steel guitar tab. It's just so elegant....And the "Manual of Style", along with a certain other hallmark publication put out back in the dark ages , changed my playing forever. Uh, thanks Winnie again! |
Larry Bell Member From: Englewood, Florida
|
posted 04 February 2005 06:52 AM
profile
By far the best way to present how to play a phrase or song on pedal steel. I remember how excited Jimmie was when that book first came out.It gives you Note duration String / Fret / Pedal Phrasing Chords It reinforces Knowledge of std notation and how it relates to tab Which pedal changes which string by what interval The last item is particularly important. Most students I've run into push their A pedal MECHANICALLY. As soon as he/she recognizes that the 5th string is attached, A LITTLE LIGHT GOES ON. It becomes musical rather than mechanical. The other advantage, obviously, is that the D E F knee lever mystery is gone. It doesn't matter what you CALL it. What it DOES is most important. Using both the notation and tab is very important and this wonderful system lays it all out there. Jimmie is helping us from beyond the grave. God bless you. It's noteworthy that some of our teachers (John McGann for one) publish course work and transcriptions using MuSymTab, or variations. It does us all a favor. And thank you, Winnie, for your contribution. ------------------ Larry Bell - email: larry@larrybell.org - gigs - Home Page 2003 Fessenden S/D-12 8x8, 1969 Emmons S-12 6x6, 1971 Dobro, Standel and Peavey Amps
[This message was edited by Larry Bell on 04 February 2005 at 06:56 AM.] |
L. A. Wunder Member From: Lombard, Illinois, USA
|
posted 05 February 2005 10:26 AM
profile
When I first saw mu-sym tab, I was struck by how logical it was. It is by far the closest thing to regular "notation" in the field of steel guitar transcription. I'm surprised that it didn't quickly become the standard way of transcribing material for the instrument. Could this have anything to do with copywrite issues? Or does it have more to do with the fact that many players don't equate regular "note" music with the PSG? I am currently attempting to trascribe some music for steel, and am using the A, B, C, R, L, format, because it seems the most prevailant. However, I would gladly switch to Mus-ym tab, style arrangements if it wouldn't be a copywrite infringment. Does anyone know if there would be a problem? I think the use of his tab system would be a fitting tribute to Mr. Crawford. |
John McGann Member From: Boston, Massachusetts, USA
|
posted 05 February 2005 11:10 AM
profile
Winnie, it looks like your encouragement for us all to use the system might imply that there is no restriction due to copyright or patent law?This is really a classy and elegant system and elevates "tab reading" to another level. The use of standard notation plus Mus-Sym-Tab gives you the big picture; as complete as notation can be (which of course is incomplete without touch, tone, soul, nuance, etc. all of which can't be notated- just hard earned!) Winnie- your two cents has a bit more than face value 'round these parts. Thanks! ------------------ http://www.johnmcgann.com Info for musicians, transcribers, technique tips and fun stuff. Joaquin Murphey transcription book, Rhythm Tuneup DVD and more...
[This message was edited # on 05 February 2005 at 11:12 AM.] [This message was edited bb on 05 February 2005 at 11:12 AM.] [This message was edited by John McGann on 05 February 2005 at 11:15 AM.] [This message was edited by John McGann on 05 February 2005 at 11:16 AM.]
|
Larry Bell Member From: Englewood, Florida
|
posted 05 February 2005 11:16 AM
profile
LA, The answer is NO, it would not infringe on anything.A copyright is the RIGHT to COPY a document or musical composition, usually retained by the originator of the work. Webster says: Main Entry: 1copy·right Pronunciation: -"rIt Function: noun : the exclusive legal right to reproduce, publish, and sell the matter and form (as of a literary, musical, or artistic work) Since MuSymTab is a system and not an actual document or composition, a copyright is not applicable. I believe Jimmie would be honored for you to use that system. I've been using the tab portion of it ever since he showed it to me, prior to the publication of 'Manual of Style'. ------------------ Larry Bell - email: larry@larrybell.org - gigs - Home Page 2003 Fessenden S/D-12 8x8, 1969 Emmons S-12 6x6, 1971 Dobro, Standel and Peavey Amps |
L. A. Wunder Member From: Lombard, Illinois, USA
|
posted 09 February 2005 10:39 AM
profile
Thanks Larry, I have alot of re-transcribing to do! How are you comming with your transcribing course by the way? I for one, would be interested in it. L.A. |
Larry Bell Member From: Englewood, Florida
|
posted 09 February 2005 02:10 PM
profile
Depends on how some upcoming auditions go. If I go on the road most of the spring and summer it will take a bit longer. I'm thinking fall will be the earliest I can get it done, but I'll be working on it -- even on the road.Thanks for asking. ![](http://steelguitarforum.com/smile.gif) ------------------ Larry Bell - email: larry@larrybell.org - gigs - Home Page 2003 Fessenden S/D-12 8x8, 1969 Emmons S-12 6x6, 1971 Dobro, Standel and Peavey Amps |
Winnie Winston Member From: Tawa, Wellington, NZ
|
posted 10 February 2005 01:31 AM
profile
L.A. says: "....I would gladly switch to Mus-ym tab, style arrangements if it wouldn't be a copywrite infringment. Does anyone know if there would be a problem? I think the use of his tab system would be a fitting tribute to Mr. Crawford. "I would suggest that what is needed is a note that the piece is transcribed in "Mu-sym-Tab" -- and maybe use the trade-mark logo that Jimmie and I devised. JW |
P Gleespen Member From: Lakewood, OH USA (I miss Boston!)
|
posted 10 February 2005 07:15 AM
profile
Aside from "A Manual of Style" where can one see what Mu-Sym-Tab looks like? I'm not sure I exactly understand how it works... |
Dave Ristrim Member From: Whites Creek, TN
|
posted 10 February 2005 01:16 PM
profile
YES! I always thought that the A,B,C,D,E thing was totally wrong. I mean, the "A" pedal is a C#, The "B" pedal raises to an A, the "D" Lever usually raises to a F.... Never liked using those designations. I switched to Jimmie's approach as soon as I saw the book. Thanks Jimmie, you rule! Dave |
Dave Ristrim Member From: Whites Creek, TN
|
posted 10 February 2005 01:19 PM
profile
sorry, double posted[This message was edited by Dave Ristrim on 10 February 2005 at 01:21 PM.] |
P Gleespen Member From: Lakewood, OH USA (I miss Boston!)
|
posted 11 February 2005 08:46 AM
profile
So, are we talking about something like this: 1 __________________________________________ 2 __________________________________________ 3 __________________________________________ 4 _______________________________12_________ 5 _______________12_____12--12##_12##--_____ 6 _12#_______12#____12#______________12#____ 7 ________12________________________________ 8 _____12___________________________________ 9 __________________________________________ 10__________________________________________
or do I have it wrong? |
Ray Minich Member From: Limestone, New York, USA
|
posted 11 February 2005 02:05 PM
profile
Is this the tab method used in the Emmons E-9th course(s) documentation? |
Winnie Winston Member From: Tawa, Wellington, NZ
|
posted 11 February 2005 08:24 PM
profile
What it looks like? Sort of. There IS a musical notation for "double sharp" which looks like an "X." So a move written as 12-- 12A in standard notation would be: 12-- 12X in Mu-Sym. There were other small difference I don't recall having to do with the release of a change where a "Natural" sign was used, and a way of writing a passage where one note is sustaining but another in changing. It is very clear. And, NO. The Emmons course does not use it as far as I know.JW | |