"hummingbird": a new musical notation

[vonFiedler]

Yeah guys I thought this was way harder to learn too until I took five second to read the guide

I understand traditional myself but what sells this to me as an idea is the fact that it could work for multiple kinds of thinkers, notes all have their own symbols but they are still spatially structured so it's not like old musicians have to treat it any differently. Hummingbird isn't for you, person who has been using traditional for years. It's for new musicians, for schools, and anything that acknowledges that different people learn in different ways gets my blessing.

 

[Robo-Ky]

I may be a bitter purist, but this looks ugly as shit, and everything is too small (huge killing point for someone with crappy eyesight like me). The different note heads are also really confusing to look at.

Hummingbird isn't for you, person who has been using traditional for years. It's for new musicians, for schools, and anything that acknowledges that different people learn in different ways gets my blessing.

I suppose I get this, but I would still teach traditional notation seeing as it's used everywhere and really isn't that hard to understand, even when starting out.

 

[Lemonade]

Yeah guys I thought this was way harder to learn too until I took five second to read the guide

I understand traditional myself but what sells this to me as an idea is the fact that it could work for multiple kinds of thinkers, notes all have their own symbols but they are still spatially structured so it's not like old musicians have to treat it any differently. Hummingbird isn't for you, person who has been using traditional for years. It's for new musicians, for schools, and anything that acknowledges that different people learn in different ways gets my blessing.

The thing is, I think it needs some modifications to make it contain as much information as traditional does. Keys definitely get more significant the more you learn music, but hummingbird lacks a key signature completely. Sure you can figure it out from the accidentals, but then that kind of defeats the purpose of having an easy way to determine the key of a piece.

Also from what I understand there is no need to place the keys on the lines and spaces? This is horrible for learning intervals and sight reading. On piano especially, muscle memory can make reading music much easier because you see a third or a fifth and your fingers know how far to go. Many guitar and piano players can determine a chord based on the spacing of the notes alone--I don't see the symbols for notes being able to do this even if you learn hummingbird unless you place them in the respective positions, in which case the notation is useless.

 

[DM]

Uhhhh this is terrible. I'm glad they spent so much time fixing something that was nowhere near broken.

"The soft, bubbly forms are fun!" makes me want to puke. Quick, hand me chaos's trumpet.

 

[mattj]

If each note has a different symbol, what's the point of putting them on lines?

 

[vonFiedler]

What V0x said, also that different people learn in different ways.

 

[Every1XplodeNOW]

Yeah I don't really see why everyone is worked up about this, It's just a different way to write music. If it's easier for some people to learn this way, than good, if they want to learn by the traditional way, than that's also good. No matter how it's written, it will still sound the same.

Edit: I also think it's a good ideal to still have the lines and spaces in because it helps the transition to traditional written.

 

[Heroes Fall]

If each note has a different symbol, what's the point of putting them on lines?

The symbols are there for quick recognition when notes are far off the staff. Still need to place them on the appropriate place because it is easier to read music when you don't have to know the note and can play from its position compared to the last note. Octaves are also another reason.

It's an interesting system, I'd be interested in how new students to music find it to read if they learn this before the regular system.

 

[tape]

i actually really like this

although i understand it roughly as well as traditional, and that isnt exactly much. or... anything really.

edit: why is everyone lashing the SHIT out of this? holy crap, its like everyone's house was put outside down (and dont even try to argue its something like that. ridiculous and an exaggeration)

did anyone actually watch the video/ read the guide??? i actually LOVE how each pitch is different. i had so much trouble trying to learn the traditional way when i was a kid.

edit2: i guess one gripe i have with this is the mnemonics might only work in english? but since every pitch still keeps its own design i guess its ok.

 

[mattj]

Oh! Don't misunderstand. If this works for someone, then I hope they have fun learning this way. I actually use lead sheets, (which just show the name of the cords and you fill in the rest), or guitar tabs for 90% of the stuff I play anymore. I guess it's just that I was trained in classical notation, and when I look at it, it's not correct. Maybe this would work better for someone who has no experience with classical notation?

 

[TytsMagee]

I like the idea of trying to come up with something new, because while I am able to read traditional, I don't particularly like it.

With that said though, this is a terrible attempt at trying to come up with something new. Like, really, really bad.

 

[Pernicious]

has anyone actually tried it...?

 

[Ampharos]

It's a moot point anyways, I'd be stunned if this ever really catches on.

 

[Stratos]

this score actually brings up a good point against hummingbird imo, and that's that any completely musically illiterate simpleton could still see in half a second that there is a quick slide down the scale, whereas with hummingbird it just looks like a bunch of different notes in a row—and when they're 64th notes you don't have time to puzzle out which note is which; it's much easier to just drop by one step in quick succession.

 

[chaos]

Yeah I don't really see why everyone is worked up about this, It's just a different way to write music. If it's easier for some people to learn this way, than good, if they want to learn by the traditional way, than that's also good. No matter how it's written, it will still sound the same.

I would argue that nobody in this topic is "worked up" about hummingbird. But, if anything will work me up, it's posts like this.

It is intellectually stimulating to discuss the pros and cons of a different way of doing things. It helps us, the practicing musicians, identify what is important to keep with our system of notation. It helps those who want to fix our system of notation by giving feedback on what is wrong with the system, so that future notations can better serve the musical community.

Saying "oh just let people use what they want" is tantamount to ignoring the project altogether. For example, their notation is completely useless to me because it removes key signatures. If nobody tells them how important key signatures are, then hummingbird will never be fixed, and their net contribution to society will be zero. But maybe if people actually take the time to react critically, the next system of notation developed WILL include key signatures and actually improve how we read and write music.

Lazy as fuck, man.

did anyone actually watch the video/ read the guide???

yes

 

[phoopes]

My goodness I've played piano for 12+ years and this is not only not pleasing to the eye but I think even more complicated than standard notation. Maybe if I were raised on it... ick.

EDIT: After looking at the guide I guess it's not more complicated but still, it's visually in appealing to me, especially the small little tails indicating the note's rhythm and accidental. The no key signature thing turns me off as well.

 

[Ulttimaa]

So what I would do would colour notes differently for different pitches, then you can add the other shit like the lines after notes and the flats and shit, but keep stems and noteheads exactly as they are.

wouldn't coloring notes be problematic for when the music has to be mass-produced/copied, and now needs to be done in color instead of just black and white?

 

[LonelyNess]

I like that there's no key signature.

I also like that the notes are easy to recognize off the bar.

I like that the notes are easy to recognize regardless of whether or not you're reading bass clef or treble clef. I was a trombone player (all of our music is in bass clef). When I was in school and a flute player asked me to help them read their music, I was almost completely useless to them because I didn't know how to read treble clef music (all I could really do is help them with the rhythm, I couldn't like, hum the melody or anything for them). If I had this, I wouldn't need to do any transposing.

I don't like that there's no stems.

I don't like the notation for eighth / sixteenth / etc.. notes.

 

[Birkal]

For example, their notation is completely useless to me because it removes key signatures.

Not true. They specifically not on their guide how key signatures function:

Key signatures still work with Hummingbird, but we put them in plain english at the beginning of the song. We call it a "key marking" and treat it just like a tempo marking. Traditional key signatures (with the accidentals on their respective lines) also work, but we only use them when there are four or more accidentals; otherwise, they add unnecessary difficulty when it's just as easy to show accidentals for each note.

What V0x said, also that different people learn in different ways.

I don't think anyone will disagree with the notion that different people learn in different ways, but it's impractical to use this phrase as a blanket statement to support your points about education. A slight difference between dots on a page doesn't qualify as "distinction of learning styles" by any means. If a music teacher decides to use this tool and claims that they're appealing to various learners, then they are a fool. I think that Hummingbird can be a tool used to appeal to different people, sure, but it is a weak one. In terms of learning styles, it falls under the exact same category that standard notation does: visual. If you really want to be appealing to other learns, teach a piece aurally, or incorporate the music through tapping the rhythm (tactile/kinesthetic). So as an education tool, I feel like Hummingbird doesn't stack up to the host of other methods that can be utilized.

Furthermore, I can't help but feel like this is just a "get rich quick" scam with people claiming that they're revolutionizing music. I can't help but wonder who they aim to appeal to with this notation. New musicians? Here's my qualm with that argument: Hummingbird only helps when playing complex music. How much of a difference do you think this notation will make in learning Hot Cross Buns? I'm betting that it's roughly the same. So what confuses me that the example they have on their front page is quite complex. That looks like some piano repertoire for late high school / early undergraduate. You're not going to be teaching such a piece to a primary school student; there hands probably aren't even big enough to reach those octaves!

So what, they're appealing to advanced musicians? Good luck there. We're all heavily biased towards standard notation since we've all been using it for so long. But even the mechanisms of Hummingbird has some pretty significant flaws. Note length is indicated horizontally, which is too much information. It's easier to have a whole note at the start of the measure and think, "I'll hold for four beats and check back in," while you go to focus on other notes. Note length is indicated by little tails, which can be tough to catch at a glance, unlike beams which are quite obvious. And the crap about composing anywhere? I don't buy it; this looks like a nightmare for composers, especially considering the deletion of proper key signatures in modulating passages. Finally, a lot of musicians enjoy the fact that we use (nearly) the same notation as our forefathers. It's cool to think that we read the same notes as those in our musical lineage. A tweak in the system for the sake of modernness just isn't appealing to a group of people that revels in the integrity of the past.

Overall, it just seems impractical, and I don't think it will sell to musicians, whether young or old.

 

[chaos]

Not true. They specifically not on their guide how key signatures function:

Key signatures still work with Hummingbird, but we put them in plain english at the beginning of the song. We call it a "key marking" and treat it just like a tempo marking. Traditional key signatures (with the accidentals on their respective lines) also work, but we only use them when there are four or more accidentals; otherwise, they add unnecessary difficulty when it's just as easy to show accidentals for each note.

OK I must have missed that, but I think they are missing the point when I read about "only 4 or more accidentals". A key signature is not merely a way to keep your hands from cramping from writing sharps and flats in predictable places. It is a high-level instruction that concisely informs your brain about the fundamental relationship between the notes in the piece. Their notation places so much importance on the individual notes and that is the wrong approach. Unless you have perfect pitch, the notes themselves don't matter, it is the relationship between the notes.

 

[Redew]

I seriously doubt that this makes playing any easier. It really isn't hard to depict what the traditional notes mean, especially since they show it larger than hummingbird.

wtf man

 

[vonFiedler]

I don't think anyone will disagree with the notion that different people learn in different ways, but it's impractical to use this phrase as a blanket statement to support your points about education.

With hummingbird you can recognize notes spatially and using symbols. This is literally one more way to learn the notes, on the same page.

If you really want to be appealing to other learns, teach a piece aurally, or incorporate the music through tapping the rhythm (tactile/kinesthetic).

Well sure, but that's not sheet music anymore. You still need a written record to be able to teach in those ways with any consistency.

How much of a difference do you think this notation will make in learning Hot Cross Buns?

As big a difference as using physical objects makes when teaching kids that 1+1=2. Or writing the letters onto the sheet music, which kids did back when I was in school.

 

[Birkal]

With hummingbird you can recognize notes spatially and using symbols. This is literally one more way to learn the notes, on the same page.

... No? Spatial learning is visual learning. It's understanding concepts through images, in a nutshell. Read the Wikipedia article if you wanna learn more. While they are different subsets of this in terms of how long you hold out a note (spatial vs. non-spatial), standard notation and Hummingbird are very similar. What I'm suggesting in my post is that if you really want to appeal to students in a variety of ways, use different learning modalities. That's a much more effective tool that offering slightly modified versions of what is essentially the same path of learning.

Well sure, but that's not sheet music anymore. You still need a written record to be able to teach in those ways with any consistency.

Also not true. Most African cultures, for example, historically didn't have a written language. Almost all of their traditional music is passed down aurally from generation to generation. Their music is consistent, especially their rhythmic ideas. These ideas can absolutely be applied to Western education; it's ignorant to think otherwise. Choral teachers can (and often do) teach musical ideas in a call-and-response fashion.

And sure, it's not "sheet music" anymore, but the entire push of Hummingbird seems to be that it's a revolutionary new way to appeal to different people. In actuality, it's just another copy of visual learning, and is less effective than other modalities in terms of teaching in a varied pattern.

As big a difference as using physical objects makes when teaching kids that 1+1=2. Or writing the letters onto the sheet music, which kids did back when I was in school.

No, because using physical objects is tactile/kinesthetic; they are not comparable. Writing with letters is comparable (that's visual), but that's an interesting case in that you're using past knowledge (the alphabet) to teach a new concept, which I'd argue also has more meaning than Hummingbird, which is an entirely new system of complex symbols.

 

[Myzozoa]

Part of the reason I don't like it is because it doesn't actually help anyone, no one will put harmingbird transcribed music in front of you in the real world or even the school world, it's coddling children.

 

[LonelyNess]

Part of the reason I don't like it is because it doesn't actually help anyone, no one will put harmingbird transcribed music in front of you in the real world or even the school world, it's coddling children.

Coddling? What? If this method is better (not saying it is or isn't) and easier way to teach / show sheet music, it's not coddling to teach it to children, it's smarter to teach it to children. We should always be looking for ways to improve the way we convey information because there's so much stuff that needs to be taught these days that there just aren't enough hours in a day to get to it all... any attempt to streamline / make learning easier should be admired, not cast off as coddling.

You wouldn't call it coddling if someone found an easier way to teach Calculus than is already taught, would you?

Christ...