Why, and in what ways has transcription been an important component of ethnomusicological research?
Ethnomusicological research has been an ongoing process over the years as scholars try to find ways that they can use in comprehending different notes and pitches that are involved in the production of music. First, the different formats that are used in decoding various pieces can be used as an avenue of learning about the different cultural tenets that are exhibited by people from a specific place. Transcription allows an individual to learn about the core components without losing the intended meaning. Notably, it is prudent for a person who wants to learn about comparative musicology to get to know how to transcribe. After that, everything else can follow. The research process aids in understanding the changes that have been realized over time.
What complaints about transcription-related practices have been raised within ethnomusicology?
Ethnomusicology is related to the cultural backgrounds that people come from. Therefore, individuals tend to have a deep relationship with the music that is produced during a specific time. However, transcription can be misleading if a transcriber does not take heed of crucial musical components such as pitch, bars, and others. Some of the crucial bits of a musical production can be lost if the transcribers are not keen on the approach that is being used at any given time.
What does Nettl mean by his reference to “Seeger’s” dichotomy?
Seeger came up with an interesting format that would help him in understanding some concepts that people had been assuming about music. Charles Seeger has been known to be among the strongest proponents for the inclusion of automatic devices. His views were relatively different from his peers over time. He came up with points that could aid in the differentiation of some terms within the field. In one of his final comments during the closure of a transcription symposium in 1963, he addressed the issue of transcription by ear and Western notation. These two aspects are exceedingly essential for the comprehension of the aspect of ethnomusicology. He uses the aforementioned concept to draw an elaborate dichotomy between the two variables that have been mentioned above. Seeger addresses both individual and the fact-value dichotomy in his analysis.
How did the advent of sound recording devices alter the nature of musical transcription?
The sound recording era changed several things within musicology. The events that unfolded were a confirmation that machines had begun changing the dynamics of music. The pitches of musical pieces had to be understood. Further, the rhythms had to be comprehended accordingly so that the process of breaking down the original pieces was not watered down. Bar lines were used to divide phrases as there were deliberate attempts to avoid discerning the formal rhythm and form of music. Transcription became more complex as compared to the earlier days because musical pieces had metamorphosed with the introduction of sound recording techniques.
How do the opposed terms “phonemics “and “phonetics” relate to issues in ethnomusicological transcription?
Both terms are crucial because they are related to intonation and the processing of different key in music. Therefore, ethnomusicological transcription would lose value if some of the elements were missing. For example, the essence of keys cannot be assumed at any given time. Hence, a transcriber ought to ensure that “phonemics” and “phonetics” are incorporated in the entire process. The pronunciation of specific words has to be done according to their place of origin without changing the meaning of the initial song.
What refinements have machine-aided transcribing aids brought to the understanding of various types of music? Why hasn’t machine-aided transcription completely taken over from manual transcription?
Machine-aided transcriptions have aided in refining music so that people can have an improved version as compared to manually-transcribed songs. The machine-aided version has an element of rigidity, while the manual approach is relatively flexible and can be edited without many difficulties. Further, little has been done to ensure that a song that has been transcribed individually would be of a lesser value to the society as compared to those whose transcription has been done through machines