Talk:Extended technique

Untitled
Methinks the amount of performers is beginning to be such that a separate page might not be too much... Aarnepolkusin 06:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Opening
"Although the use of extended technique was uncommon in the common practice period (c. 1600 - 1900), extended techniques are more common in modern classical music since about 1900."

I would really like to see a citation for that sentence. Obviously from a modern stance looking back, anything that was an extended technique in 1650 would be fairly normal by now. We have to remember that singing in thirds was--at on point--unorthodox. I can think of several techniques for my instrument that are fairly "mainstream" but were considered strange during the 17th century. Jmclark (talk) 21:48, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Bass 'Slapping' as extended technique?
Question is here. --Thaddius (talk) 15:03, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Microtones?
Are playing microtones really considered extended techniques? On the piano I would say yes, that is, tuning the piano differently to microtones. I don't know whether they are considered extended techniques on wind and brass instruments, but on strings? really? --User:Number Googol User talk:Number Googol (Special:Contributions/Number Googol) 21:31, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Although string players will modify their intonation to achieve the best sound, they learn a particular pattern of fingering which only coveres the chromatic tones commonly in use. In fact, the basic finguring is based on diatonic intervals, with the chromatics being "half"-positions.  Any deliberately notated use of tones beyond this is therefore "extended" by definition. The use of microtones is actually still very rare, and Alois Hába's experiments are rarely extended beyond local colouring.  --Jubilee♫ clipman  23:10, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Capitalization?
This article's capitalization is extremely inconsistent among the non-proper nouns. Shouldn't all of the things mentioned be lowercase except for the proper nouns? --User:Number Googol User talk:Number Googol (Special:Contributions/Number Googol) 21:37, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

List of performers
Is there any reason to list the performers in this order? Shouldn't it be in orchestral order (with "other" at the bottom)? --User:Number Googol User talk:Number Googol (Special:Contributions/Number Googol) 04:39, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

String extended techniques
I should be noted that Heinrich Biber used a number of those techniques. In particular, extreme scordatura with strings crossed in his Mystery Sonatas and Harmonia artificioso-ariosa. These are not modern inventions as the article seems to imply. --Jubilee♫ clipman 23:10, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:


 * http://www.radiopapesse.org/w2d3/v3/view/radiopapesse/notizie--1372/index.html?area=5
 * Triggered by  on the global blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 15:51, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Harp
There is a notable lack of extended harp techniques in the article, and, indeed, a lack of any information related to the instrument. I can see how a problem could be found in the classification of harp techniques relative to those already present — a harp is both a stringed and percussive instrument, similar to a piano, and nearly mimics the piano's layout in terms of note progression in that each string corresponds to a note (although the half-tones corresponding to each note are not given separate strings, like they are with the black keys of a piano). However, this challenge should be no reason to leave out the wealth of extended technique available to this instrument (not all of which is present in the linked site, mind you), which I presume has been left out for so long simply because it hasn't been thought about yet, or because harp isn't as widely played an instrument as those already mentioned in the article.

For reference, there is a piece called "Animal Parade" by Julia Kay Jamieson which heavily utilizes some of these extended techniques. I can provide a scanning of the piece upon request, or you can purchase it if you're so inclined (I don't know why you would, unless you just feel like owning some harp music).Crossark (talk) 20:37, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm not totally convinced
Yes, I know what's being discussed here, being fascinated with Cage since about 1970. However, the overall impression I receive is that the term is recent, with the definition citing a 2005 article. This clashes in my head with reference to (for instance) Berlioz and Bartok. Is it even a proper apellation, or merely a generic label? When was it first recognized as "a thing"? when was it first named?

How do we categorize performers like Tom Keith, longtime sound-effects guy for A Prairie Home Companion? For that matter, how do Foley artists fit in here?

That nobody has yet seen fit to mention musique concrète or experimental music generally does suggest to me that this might be nothing more than someone's self-interested hobbyhorse. For that matter, where does it fit within general music pedagogy? Oddly, "pedagogy" appears nowhere here as of this moment.

Can anyone justify that this is NOT merely a glorified Wiktionary entry, or gratuitously padded Disambiguation page? Weeb Dingle (talk) 16:57, 30 April 2017 (UTC)


 * I will grant you that this article leaves a great deal to be desired, especially when it comes to sources. However, the first two words, "In music" should make clear why Foley artists and "sound-effects guys" do not fit in here. Musique concrète involves manipulation of recorded sounds of any kind, not specifically those produced by mistreatment – oops! – I mean, unconventional ways of making sounds on traditional musical instruments (including the human voice). As for pedagogy, I suppose there is a certain amount of it, in the form of books and articles describing such techniques (many of which are listed under "Further reading"), but as long as they remain unconventional (and this is certainly a movable feast—the conspicuous item here being col legno, which ceased being unconventional more than a century ago) these techniques are bound to resist incorporation into ordinary music instruction.
 * Your question about when it was first named certainly deserves to be answered. I can personally recall the term from at least as far back as the 1960s, but I am not a "reliable source", so this bears investigation. It would be a mistake, however, to assume that the practice only began to exist when the term was first invented. If this were the case, then tonality did not exist before 1810, and the 14th-century ars subtilior composers had to wait until 1960 to begin writing music. Terminology almost always follows practice, often by hundreds of years.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 18:34, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Further to the above, a quick search of the New York Times database confirms my own memory, with a citation of the term as early as 1966. From an article by Nat Hentoff, "The New Jazz: Black, Angry, and Hard to Understand", New York Times (December 25, 1966), p. A10: "the new jazzmen can also be characterized by their insistence that no sound, no device need be alien to their music. Trombonist Grachan Moncur III, who has studied at the Juilliard School of Music, emphasizes, 'If it’s necessary to use an extended technique to express what I am trying to say, I'll do it. If I have to bang on a dishpan with a stick, I’ll do that too.'" The context suggests that the expression was already familiar at the time.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 18:57, 1 May 2017 (UTC)


 * But except for the very anemic lede, it's not an actual credible article, right?
 * The Examples are either original research or likely made-up fancruft (or both) because there is not even one source cited to be credited/blamed for listing all those "techniques" — therefore it is subject to permanent deletion, by any editor, at any moment.
 * The same can be said of Notable composers.
 * Ditto Notable performers — as this was flagged SEVEN YEARS AGO for no sources, I'd have to contend that the pitiable four citations (each for only one name) is vastly insufficient and only clarifies the pointlessness.
 * Seeing as entire volumes must have been written about "extended technique" — and certainly hundreds of YouTube videos posted — either this should become an actual PROSE article (rather than a magnet for fanboys' list-building) or be properly subsumed back into Musical technique shorn of the cruft. Weeb Dingle (talk) 04:42, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Extended technique. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041209033902/http://www.mti.dmu.ac.uk/~ahugill/manual/ to http://www.mti.dmu.ac.uk/~ahugill/manual/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:48, 26 September 2017 (UTC)