Yellow Converse

[Tim Twiss]

Some of us have the "Little Yellow" Converse book. I assume that more folks have the Joe Weidlich Converse book in TAB. Anyway, I'm into this book right now, and find this to be very good for beginning to intermediate playing...all tunes of which are worthy of sticking into the repertoire. There is way more continuity in this book than any other, with some thread throughout that makes positioning, fingering, and styling familiar from one tune to the next. No "curve balls" in this book. You get a taste of those type of tunes in 6/8 time, as well as solid Stroke play. Which came first...this or the Green One? I would assume this one did. I hope someone is enjoying the versions I'm posting. I do them more for a diary of the songs than creating entertaining segues and arrangements. The videos are 99% true to the written page...100% unless I screwed something up. Let me know.  

[Trapdoor2]

As far as I know, the "Little Yellow" book was first published in '64 and then again in '65 (and probably afterwards). The "Greenback book" is from '65. "The Banjo and How to Play it"? All from the same tw0 year period? The "Greenback Book" seems more sophisticated than the other two.

I still haven't found my original...still unpacking stuff.

[Tim Twiss]

I just worked through "Luke West's Walk Around". Oddly enough, the themes of this one are found in "Matt Peel's Walk Around" in the Green book. The B section here is unlike either of those, however. It twists around like Cane-brake Jig from Buckley 1860. These 2 books have a lot of cross-over material. I wonder if the Yellow Book had been around for a while, kind of following the format from portions of the Rice Book, taking the explanations to the extreme. They have 2 different publishers.

[Tim Twiss]

A few more tunes to go in this book. Maybe tonight finish it up. This has been WAY cool to immerse myself in this collection this weekend. It really helps your chops. I feel more solid in my fundamental Stroke approach now. This is absolute bread and butter Stroke stuff...all 100% cool. It is a great blend of easy repertoire and simple pieces, as well as "keepers" for the show. They all lay so well. I'm posting an experimental page which is part of something I plan to continue working on. It is the original score put onto one page, plus the tab under it. This was prepared for the Harpers Ferry Weekend, but I want to do more. I know the Weidlich book covers this collection in tab, but I've never seen notation laid out in a way that it is easy to read by being on one page.

[Tim Twiss]

Okay..it's done. That's all the tunes in this book (until I do "Arkansas" with somebody). I hope this is useful. The tunes are as is, at reasonable tempos for learning, and performance. This is most likely the only early tutor to follw any kind of graded progression of difficulty. The first few tunes are almost like exercises with titles...which is okay.

[Rob MacKillop]

Tim, regarding your notation experiment, it looks good to me, but I found myself unsure which was easier to read. Then I started thinking that the tab readers would read the tab, and the standatrd notation readers would read that. So why waste space on the page when only one version is being used? I guess for comparison purposes, but how many people would be doing that? Oh, I don't know...In the case of the yellow book it takes out all the guff, so that's a good thing!

[Tim Twiss]

To encourage tab readers make a connection with notation. It would be complete that way...and not in 2 books. With the Yellow Converse book, I had to do my own noatation, but I hope to do this with the other books and use the original fascimile, and then tab under it. I still have hope that more people will read notes.

Rob MacKillop said:

Tim, regarding your notation experiment, it looks good to me, but I found myself unsure which was easier to read. Then I started thinking that the tab readers would read the tab, and the standatrd notation readers would read that. So why waste space on the page when only one version is being used? I guess for comparison purposes, but how many people would be doing that? Oh, I don't know...In the case of the yellow book it takes out all the guff, so that's a good thing!

[Tim Twiss]

Here are 2 original pieces, plus tab. (Buckley and Briggs'). I think it is good to see the originals. Don't change anything. Then tab it according to what was shown. If there are mistakes or other fingering suggestions, there will be room on the page to do it and talk about it a bit. It will be good to connect the tune with other similar tunes in the repertoire, or better yet, cite the source and make a brief stylistic comment. . All this might take up a page, if the notes are big enough to read.

[Rob MacKillop]

That's better. What do those two dots mean: Corn Shucking Jig, penultimate bar, first two notes - a pull off with two dots? I see you have ignored the dots, which is probably the best solution. They look deliberate, though.

[Rob MacKillop]

Boston Jig...

The 'P' is a conundrum. In Buckley's 1860 Book, where this comes from, he starts out by typing the full word 'pull' Cf.page 13, 'Exercise in two-four time', which I assume is a confirmation that the curved slur line means pull off. In the next piece he starts that way but later omits the slur, just using the word pull. Looking further into the book, sometimes he uses 'pull' on its own, sometimes a slur line on its own, and sometimes both. The 'pull' gets shortened to a 'p'. I wish he had been more consistent!

So, my question to you, Tim, is, do you really need to continue with the confusion? It looks like a slur line and 'p' mean different things, but I'm not sure they do. Or am I missing something (again!)?

[Tim Twiss]

I did ignore it. Can't have it both ways. The first phrase did not do it it, and stylistically it makes no sense.

Rob MacKillop said:

That's better. What do those two dots mean: Corn Shucking Jig, penultimate bar, first two notes - a pull off with two dots? I see you have ignored the dots, which is probably the best solution. They look deliberate, though.

[Tim Twiss]

Hey, don't kill the messenger. Perhaps he had one of the kids doing his work for him. (I'm sure they heard about that one at the dinner table!)

Rob MacKillop said:

Boston Jig...

The 'P' is a conundrum. In Buckley's 1860 Book, where this comes from, he starts out by typing the full word 'pull' Cf.page 13, 'Exercise in two-four time', whcih I assume is a confirmation that the curved slur line means pull off. In the next piece he starts that way but later omits the slur, just using the word pull. Looking further into the book, sometimes he uses 'pull' on its own, sometimes a slur line on its own, and sometimes both. The 'pull' gets shortened to a 'p'. I wish he had been more consistent!

So, my question to you, Tim, is, do you really need to continue with the confusion? It looks like a slure line and 'p' mean different things, but I'm not sure they do. Or am I missing something (again!)?

[Rob MacKillop]

No attempt was made to kill the messenger. I just don't see the point of having both a 'p' and a slur sign in your tab version. The original is there for all to see, so there is little point in reproducing such idiosyncrasies when all they do is clutter the page and add confusion. But I'm probably in the minority. I think including the original is great, but the tab version is surely your edited version?