> Says Perlman:
> 
> Violinists have a harder time to make pure music than pianists, because
> pianists ... are immediately forced to turn the phrase. They don't have
> to deal with vibrato, they don't have to deal with shifting, they don't
> have to deal with sliding, they don't have to deal with bow-speed ....
> [On the piano,] basically you put down the key and you get a sound....
> You have to deal with music immediately."

James Britt wrote:
> Of course, I'm no Perlman, but I still found his opinion peculiar.
> 
> I've played some piano, and played some violin, and much prefer the
> violin because, to me, it gets out the way far more than does a piano.
> 
> Plus violins are lighter;  carrying a piano around gets tiresome.
> 
> Hence, violins are more agile.

Agreed ... interesting quote.  I don't play violin, but I do play guitar 
quite a bit and have a (small) bit of piano exerience.  This is how I 
took the quote.  When you play piano, you have very few constraints on 
what you can play.  The only limitation is that somehow the notes have 
to be allocated to your ten fingers in some many.  You can voice a chord 
in many different ways (e.g. put the root note in the bass, put the root 
note on top).  Some constraints, but not many.

On a guitar, you also have choices on how to how to voice a chord, but 
the contraints you have to deal with are much greater in number.  You 
can only have 6 notes at a time.  The notes have to be allocated across 
the strings in such a way that a single hand with four fingers can reach 
all of them.  Each string has only a certain range available to it.  And 
so on.   I think that's what Perlman was trying to say.

> I tend to think of Ruby as the Stratocaster of programming languages.

I would have pick a fine Olson :)

-- Jim Weirich





-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.