quote :" OBs because I objectively can hear that the pitch is off" For me it's a little bit funny to here this , and it looks like it's always coming from people that play or at least enjoy listening to harp songs that have the 5 draw tuned 29 cents flat , and they cannot hear nothing off with that .
If a note sounds imperfect to someone, I'll take their word for it.
I remember being played Del Junco's (first?) CD where he kicks off with a blues tune then changes key a few times to, well, to show that he can. The guy playing it to me wanted me to see what OBs could achieve.
It achieved the outcome that I never bothered to learn how to OB because they didn't appeal to me, subjectively or otherwise.
(Disclaimer: of course, I've forgotten more about OBs than anyone, even Buddha, so I can say whatever I want. I even forgot that I had mastered them to 4th dan level, then forgot them. I also have forgotten more about being the President of the US than other Presidents. Also the moon landing. It was fun but I forgot any of the details. I had a point, but I forget what it was).
Sometimes they are things I have come across in the past or they are things other people have sent me.
Most of the time, I google the very first thought that comes into my head. And in the case of the Rainbow vid, I heard "hungry and crying Bears see rainbows from the mountain"
I believe all that is, is nothing more than a projection of my mind. It's interesting to me, that I can think of something no matter how obscure or arcane and it's out there.
"It achieved the outcome that I never bothered to learn how to OB because they didn't appeal to me, subjectively or otherwise."
I had a similar experience, but the harp player I saw was Howard Levy. He was sitting in with a real legendary Blues piano player who had been playing in the 20's. I didn't like how his playing meshed with the piano player.
I gave him another listen. I saw one of his jazz shows. I liked his piano playing better than his harp playing.
I gave him another listen. I listened to a radio broadcast. It wasn't my thing.
I decided he was too deep for me. Clearly, I couldn't grasp what he was doing.
Buddha - if you have absorbed the same message in reverse then my work here is done and I can return to my planet. Hope you don't forget so much that you can no longer play or even speak English.
Joe, right. This intellectual stuff is too deep for me. On the other hand, I enjoy music as a means of entertainment and expression and I feel sorry for all the over-analytical guys who will never really enjoy music for music's sake.
How is Howard Levy playing 'intelligent' music? That doesn't make sense. Music is music when you are listening, and if you find it 'intelligent' I think you're trying to understand something that you should just be enjoying. If he's playing blues it is no different than Jazz, all the same notes.
How can you say overblows overdraws are overrated if you are unable to play them?? they have advanced the 10 hole diatonic enabling you to play chromatic. I want some of what ever the rainbow guy was on
I say play what moves you and forget about what anyone else thinks. If we all played strictly for ourselves, the musical spectrum would be so much more diverse. Most players are so indoctrinated into what they think is the right way to play, they don't have a real clue as to what really is their own sound, and just mimic what is already being done. this has led to a very limited openess to anything outside the stuff that sells. Basically, most musical opportunities outside of ones own house are if the suit fits you got the gig........ Walter ---------- walter tore's spontobeat - a real one man band and over 1 million spontaneously created songs and growing. I record about 300 full length cds a year. " life is a daring adventure or nothing at all" - helen keller
@ Buddha "science supports me in this, the human body wasn't designed for running or even walking long distances."
YOU ARE WRONG
Humans are the only animal capable of running a marathon not to mention an ultra marathon. And records are still being set. Horses don't often set records any more.
Here is an interesting book. You might like it, it has to do with lost knowledge of ancient cultures.
I have seen some interesting videos somewhere... there was an athlete trying to pull a rope from a female ape of approx. the same weight. The ape won single-handed.
I don't know what exactly is wrong with humans, but I must state that everything is wrong and working very inefficiently compared to other animals. ---------- www.truechromatic.com
Jim "I don't know what exactly is wrong with humans, but I must state that everything is wrong and working very inefficiently compared to other animals."
...errmmm, what?
Chimps are much stronger than humans because they have evolved to be, thanks to their diet & lifestyle, they also have much better short term memory recall than humans, but humans have their strong points too...or did a chimp design & build the PC you are sitting at right now? Perhaps the animals have us sussed out and built the zoos, so that half witted humans could queue up to file past to be studied and have faeces thrown at them and monkey bits waved in their faces? :-)
However, this thread and some of the posts therein, do appear to bring serious doubts as to whether human intelligence is a match for even the simplest of life forms.
Darwin would be turning in his grave. Whether you believe his theories or not, he was a very clever, if a little greedy, man. 150yrs ago he was brought an orchid from Madagascar, the nectar was stored in a bowl a good 12" from the narrow opening at the top of the flower. "Easy" says Darwin, "somewhere there is a moth with a 12" tongue that feeds on this plant". Suffice to say, he was not widely believed. A few years a go a BBC camera crew set up a remote camera by an orchid of the type in question, it subsequently recorded exactly what Darwin predicted over 140 yrs before (Morgan's Sphinx moth)!
Now can we get back to harmonicas - alien harmonicas, monkey harmonicas, puny human slave harmonicas, whatever you like...just back to the thread in some loose way at least?
Last Edited by on Jul 06, 2010 7:03 AM
I don't think that overblows are overrated at all, I just wish that I could get one. I feel like someone who has their nose pressed up against the overblowers clubhouse window and can't get in. If I ever do learn how to overblow I will for sure encorporate them into my blues playing. "The blues is overrated." No it's not. End of discussion. ---------- myspace
Yes, we evolved for running and walking long distances efficiently. In fact running on two legs is more efficient, in terms of calcoric spending, than is running on four legs. Four legs will get you going faster, especially over short distances, but two legs will get you further per calorie than will four. One of the main hypothesis is that we evolved this ability to hunt down animals by pure endurance. We essentially ran animals to death, and then ate them.
And now, for your entertainment and edification, here is a supercool, if slightly sensationalized, video of a !Kung San hunter from southern Africa running down a Kudu in a persistence hunt.
Well I'm moved to contribute some harp content to this thread. In the video posted by Mr VLUN, I must say that the monkey puppet's embouchure was excellent, the harp was deep in his mouth and he had duck lips just like Adam teaches us newbies....
Stickman is right, Buddha is wrong. Humans were born to run. We are endurance predators, deep in our prehistory. We're not terribly fast. But we are designed, and evolved, to run long, slowly, with great discipline and stick-to-it-iveness.
Buddha, of all people, should joy in this. It accords 100% with his ethos of "There's no such thing as genius. There's only hard and shrewd work focused on a long-term goal."
Exactly. It's all about the hard work. And long-distance running, deep in our prehistory, helped hard-wire us for precisely those sort of activities. We have no particular genius for running. We're certainly not the fastest or most elegant running animal. But we were indeed, as a species, designed to run.
The human genius, which derives from our prehistory as endurance predators, is our ability to forumulate long-term goals and then jog doggedly towards them, hour after hour, day after day, week after week, year after year, confident that there will be a payoff at the end. Writing novels, or a dissertation. Resolving to become great harp players. Rebuilding a '49 Willys from the frame on up. Etc.
Heinrich set an American record in the 100K (62 mile) distance. He's a well-known and respected evolutionary biologist. He walks the walk--or runs the run--as well as talking the talk. Here's an extract from his Wikipedia entry:
"In 1981, he set an absolute American record (i.e., the best of either road or track venues; this one was a road race in Chicago) of 6:38:20 for 100 km (62.137 miles). Two years later, he set an absolute American record for the 24-hour run of 156 miles, 1388 yards in a track race in Maine. In 1984, he set an absolute American 100 mile record of 12:27:01, again in a track race. One year later, he set the American track record of 7:00:12 for 100 km. In so doing, he became the only American man to hold both the road and track versions of the American record for the same event. His 12:27:01 for 100 miles and 7:00:12 for 100 km still remained, at the end of 2007, the official American track records. At the end of 2007, Heinrich was inducted into the American Ultrarunning Association's Hall of Fame....In his book Why We Run: A Natural History, Heinrich reflected on the sport of running as a scientist, and recounted his performance in the 100 kilometer race that ushered in his ultra-marathon career. Originally titled Racing the Antelope, one of the arguments of the book was that humans evolved to be ultra-distance runners that could run down even the swiftest prey, through a combination of endurance, intelligence, and the desire to win (c.f. Persistence hunting)."
Heinrich argues that the human imagination--our ability, for example, to decide we're going to become the greatest harmonica player in the world and then go and do it--evolved in concert with our ability to track prey at great distances. We had to be able to carry on the chase even when we couldn't see our prey. Our imagination was the thing that told us, "The springbok is just over that ridge. Keep on jogging."
Our imagination developed, as it were, as an adjunct to endurance predation. It's an elegant theory.
Heinrich discusses a number of human physiological adaptations that helped us become endurance predators, including the fact that we don't have much hair and are able to sweat from much of our surface area. That enabled us to track animals for long distances across the savannah before running/jogging them to ground.
Read the book, everybody.
Here's some additional reading on the same topic:
http://barista.media2.org/?p=3080
Last Edited by on Jul 06, 2010 6:26 PM
Well,on human evolution and running... we could be selected to run until we are about 20, after reproducing at 13, and then we die. But...evolution did not stop on the plains of Africa. We continue to evolve and maybe the last 10,000 years we lost the physical ability to run as well. Detailed analyses of foot and leg bone architecture could actually answer the question. This article from Nature, one of the top scientific magazines in the world, published in 2004 suggests Adam's arguments are correct at a basic level, but are somewhat speculative in the details. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v432/n7015/full/nature03052.html
As far as harmonica, we have evolved to express ourselves vocally and do very very different things with our focal chords and mouth structures. Luckily, this also helps us play harmonica. Lucky coincidence.
@bluzlvr plunk your money down on a custom harp set up for overblows, and get some lessons from Chris if you want to do it, those things will help you over the hump. Having a harp that you know is capable of it and can do it easily really helps.
Buddha, bad shoes! Actually, I have heel spurs. I can still get around fine on grassy surfaces. It's the darn pavement that gets me. I got the heel spurs from running on a hard surface (combined with my weight which has a lot to do with the fact we haven't made an evolutionary adaptation to Oreos yet.) I imagine in a more traditional setting I'd either be in better shape or dead by now.
@arzajac is that what this rash on my ass if from? LOL
@nacoran - I'm on week two of running. I've been doing it every morning but I'm not having fun. I do enjoy the stiffness in my muscles though because it makes me feel like I did something good. Rather than beating the piss out of you guys.
Since this thread has morphed from a question about overblows into a question about running....well, what the heck. I guess the thread is itself the equivalent of an overblow: a thread that's not actually there, but we've made it pop up a minor third to an entirely new note/topic.
Great question from Buddha: the $10K question, in fact. Serious runners (see www.letsrun.com) have many different answers. Some claim that "modern" running shoes are much of the problem. They encourage overstriding, which is to say, a slow, long stride with a heel strike, rather than the ideal, which is a cadence of about 175-180 with a quick light midfoot stride. When you run barefoot on blacktop, you'll quickly find this latter stride--or else you'll seriously bruise your heel. Abebe Bikila, an Ethiopian runner, won the 1960 Olympic marathon in Rome running barefoot on pavement, so it can indeed be done. But the shoes: that's one argument. They're overpadded, they give too much heel lift, they take runners away from the short natural stride, and the injuries crop up.
I'm quite sure that running long mileage n hard surfaces, with concrete as by far the worst offender and blacktop a reasonably close second, is responsible for many overuse injuries. I've got one of them: a chronic medial tibial stress fracture. It goes away when I confine most of my running to softer surfaces, such as packed dirt trails, good university & HS tracks, and the like. Concrete kills me in a few days.
Those two things are most of it, and unsurprisingly: the evils of civilization.
Also an ideology for the general public that say, "Hey, you too can go from couch potato to marathon in six months!" That's insane. People do it. But it's terrible for their bones and joints, even though their muscles can be trained for the task, barely, in that period of time.
I ran a 2:53 marathon in 1983 and just missed qualifying for Boston. The rules have been considerably relaxed, and in 2006 I qualified with a 3:30:59 at age 48. But I lost interest in the 26.2 mile distance, and my tibia couldn't take it. I like to keep my long runs a little shorter than the marathon demands: 14-15 miles. Marathons consider that a maintenance long run, not a REAL long run, which is 18-22 miles. I did those during marathon training, but they took 2:40 to 3:15 (as in hours:minutes) rather than two hours or so. Two hours is long enough. And you thought harmonica players were crazy! Don't forget that there's a whole subculture of ultra-marathoning whose members think of marathoners, with their puny 20-milers, as lightweights. Ultra runners pack a fanny pack and head off into the mountains for six-hour jogs up and down mountains. Google the name "Scott Jurek." The holy grail of ultra runners is the Western States 100, as in 100 miles, which passes through mountains and uses a lot of old mining trails. A final tuneup training run for that sort of thing consists of a 40-miler at race pace. He holds the American record of 165 miles for 24 hours. That's 8:45 pace for 24 straight hours. 8:45 pace isn't fast, but it's not slow, either, and it's definitely not jogging. It's a 27 minute 5K. Lots of suburban joggers, male and female, are happy with that. Jurek did 54 of those 5Ks, roughly, over a 24 hour period. That, my friends, is the legacy of an endurance predator: the record is the antelope that he was chasing.
Matt Fitzgerald's books are terrific. Tim Noakes's LORE OF RUNNING is the ultimate nerd's compendium. But of course we're seriously off-topic and I'll restrain myself from offering reading lists.
Last Edited by on Jul 07, 2010 4:00 AM
Do read "What I Talk About When I Talk About Running" by Haruki Murakami.
No evolution theory here, but a great non-fiction from one of the greatest living fiction writer, who happen to be a marathon runner (and a jazz fan btw).
Most land animals have had over 50 million years to evolve their limb bones, muscles and tendons. The basic limb morphology was already there when a group of rodent-like creatures began the evolutionary line that led to tree-living primates.
Having come back down from the trees to live on the savannah, the evolutionary line that led to Homo Sapiens has only had about 5 million years to develop the legs we have now.
Evolution isn't working towards any goal. It isn't design. what works and gives an individual a survival advantage is not necessarily the most efficient or elegant solution. Given all that I think our legs are pretty good for the lifestyle that drove their evolution as Isaac's video demonstrates; and for the other recreational purposes as Adam's tales of Ultra runners attests.
And then there's all the heat regulation adaptations, which other theories about bipedalism do not really explain adequately.
I'm left wondering how common impact injuries are in !Kung San hunters. Pretty low I'd imagine.
Those links to articles and papers make a lot of sense as a theory.
Wow! You guys are all about doing independent research! I wish you folks would have signed up for some of the freshman "intro to Anthropology" seminars I've taught here at ASU. I can barely get these ASU kids to go to wikipedia, much less to look up articles in Nature! :)
So, I'll address the two publications presented here: The 2004 Nature article linked by walterharp, the story in Medical news that discusses the 2010 JEB article linked by Chris. I haven't read the book Why We Run linked by Adam, so I can't comment on info presented inside.
First, I'll address the 2010 JEB article: The thesis is that human bipedalism evolved for efficient walking. The evidence presented is an empiric study of lab volunteers who walked on treadmills using a different gait. They only do this type of biomechanical study, and don't do any evolutionary research such as real comparative anatomy or looking at fossil evidence. The most efficient walking gait was a normal human gait where the heel goes down first. This is all well and good. I, and every other anthropologist would agree. But this is where the paper goes awry. The researchers then make an unsubstantiated analogy from human bipedal walking to quadrupedal walking in other animals. They say that since other animals walk on the balls of there feet, and that they do so because they evolved for running, the fact that humans DON'T walk on the balls of their feet means that we weren't evolved for running. That's a clear and egregious overstatement, putting it lightly. Here is why: They say, in their own article, that quadrupedal running is more efficient on the balls of the feet. This type of running is mainly sprinting. Quadrupedal animals that have evolved for long distance running (e.g., horses) have also evolved completely different foot morphologies to those sprinting animals they are comparing. Additionally, their study does not conclude ANYTHING about the efficiency of human running. In fact here is a quote from the paper: "Humans are very good at running long distances. We are physiologically and anatomically specialized for running long distances." They are taking this info directly from the 2004 Nature article. They go on to say that we are good at long distance running DESPITE the fact that it seems that our foot morphology evolved for efficient walking. I, and many other anthropologists, would posit that we are good at distance running BECAUSE our feet and leg morphology evolved for efficient walking.
Okay, the 2004 Nature article. This is THE article when it comes to discussing the evolution of efficient running in humans, as well as a good paper on the evolution of human walking. This subject has been intensively researched and (as you can probably tell) hotly debated for some time now. We debated it in my freshman intro to anthro class some 15 years ago, where my professor at the time, Lynne Isbell, was comparing walking in Homo to walking in other primates, specifically Patas and Vervet monkeys. Anyway, I digress. This study covers it's bases. It combines biomechanics with evolutionary research including analysis of the fossil evidence and rigorous comparative anatomy. It looks at the big picture, in terms of evolutionary pressures and trends over deep time. And of course, they make the most important connection: We run extremely well, with the abilty to do so over variety of speeds, DESPITE a primate ancestry. That means that there HAD TO BE specific evolutionary pressures that turned our ancestors from animals that had four hands into animals that had two hands and two feet, and feet and legs that could be used to run and walk very efficiently. They make the important distinction that we are not THE most efficient runners in the animal kingdom, but that we are more than efficient enough runners that the ability for efficient running must have been a very important evolutionary factor for our ancestors. The study is exhaustive, and I won't go into most of the specifics, but that last sentence is the take-home message.
Okay, now to answer the very poignant question raised by Chris, "if humans are meant to run then why do so many runner have running induced injuries?". In three words: "Gene-Environment Mismatch". Okay, I'll explain. You have to get all this "I evolved to run, and therefore I should be able to go running and be a perfect runner" stuff out of your head. It's not true. I can see you all scratching your heads and saying "What?!? But he just said we WERE evolved for running!". Yes, we evolved for running. BUT we evolved for running under specific conditions for specific reasons and while we lived a specific lifestyle. That is to say, we evolved to run while we were living as hunter-gatherers. We ran barefoot, over natural substrates, and we ran for two purposes: while hunting, and while traveling.
Let's examine this further. Most modern runners run for fitness or for pleasure (or both), and have very different goals and styles of running than our hunter-gatherer ancestors (and modern H&G's) do. We strap on our shoes (shoes!), chug some water, and go jogging or running around the block (on concrete or asphalt sidewalks) or on the track, or on a hard packed dirt trail. We run for 30 minutes or an hour straight. Then we go back home or go to work or whatever. Sit down in a chair (a chair!) or a sofa (a sofa!) or lay down in a bed (a bed!) or stand all day behind a counter (stand all day?!?!). We eat highly processed materials, high in carbs, low in micronutrients, low in the types of proteins that our body really needs. We have jobs that don't keep our bodies doing the kinds of activities that we were meant to be doing. So we run or play sports or whatever in an attempt to "keep ourselves fit", but these are only part-time activities for us. Then after a while of doing this lifestyle, our knees blow out, or we twist an ankle, or we hurt our hips, or we get arthritis, etc.
Now look at that !Kung San gentleman in video I posted. Running is not a "part-time activity" for him. He's not running to "stay fit" or to break a speed or distance record. To run for those reason would not make any sense to him. In fact, this is because he's running for a VERY different reason than why we run, and he's doing so in a very different style than we would run. He lives a very different lifestyle, and he always has. He grew up running and walking they way humans were evolved to run and walk, and he did so for the same reasons that helped shape the evolution of human walking and running. In other words, his genes are still matched to his environment, and thus his phenotype is working the way it was meant to. He's eating the diet that we evolved to eat. He is doing the activities that we evolved to be able to do. He even experiences the world differently, and therefore has a different psychological and emotional profile than we do.
Gene-Environment Mismatch is responsible for many many "modern" ailments, including most types of acne, diabetes, obesity, hypertension, heart disease, certain cancers, depression, repetitive stress, carpal tunnel, insomnia, and much more. The problem is that humans, unlike any other animal, have another means of "evolving", beyond the physical, Darwinian type of evolution. We have culture, and culture evolves according to a Lamarckian pathway, not a Darwinian one. This means that we can learn and adapt new cultural practices while we are still alive, and we can pass these cultural traits along to anyone, rather than, as in physical evolution, only being able to pass on our successful genotypically-linked traits to our direct descendants. So cultural evolution can happen at a much much faster rate than can our physical evolution. When there were only 1 million people in the world, dispersed into small groups of hunter-gatherers, cultural evolution kept pace. But after the Neolithic (Andrew was almost correct about this), when the human population in the nicer areas of the world became sufficiently dense that we were forced into resource intensification (a process which domesticated us, as well as those few main staple plants and animals we relied on), there were enough people living sufficiently densely for cultural evolution to take off at a rapidly increasing rate. Modern society is the result of that, but in the mere 10,000 years that has passed since that time, almost nothing has occurred in our physical evolution (aside from a few things like adult hypolactasia, which let's most of us digest milk after we grow out of infancy).
Okay, this lecture period is over. ;) I expect all of you to read chapter two by next week, and come to class prepared to discuss why overblowing is not a trait that humans evolved to do specifically, but instead is a trait that co-evolved with bending, and thus is a natural extension of bending! (see there is SOME harmonica content in this post!) ---------- ------------------ View my videos on YouTube!"
Last Edited by on Jul 07, 2010 1:33 PM
Xander: "Where did you get the coffee?" Anya: "From that place that used to be a bookstore - you know, it was a bookstore, then it sold books and coffee, then it stopped selling books. It's like evolution but without the getting better part" ---------- Andrew, gentleman of leisure, noodler extraordinaire.
So happy coincidence... just like evolution gives rise to novel uses for things evolved for other reasons, like flappy skin on a mammal species arm can end up a bat's wing after many generations.
two opposing reeds can be modified slightly (gapped tighter) and that, combined with rapid cultural evolution and the physically evolved capacity for oral and vocal gymnastics in humans.. to lead to overblows..
ahh, but evolution always has unintended consequences, like endless internet banter about the importance of overblows!
I would think humans evolved for predatory running in a cooperative setting. If we get injured, our group can take care of us while we get better. We don't have to outrun predators often because if we are in a group and have a spear, most predators know better than to attack us. We can single out a weakened or isolated animal.
I'm just worried that Oreos will evolve to roll away from us. I dropped one once and it seemed to be trying! (Actually, if Oreos rolled away more often it might be good for Oreos and me.)
@Adam Gussow Overblows when i heard Adam play my favorite song Key to the highway with Charlie on the Port Smith NH video. He played overblows and Adam did the most beautiful version ive ever heard. It may sound weird but the hair on my arms stood up it moved me and man Adam i want to Thank you for posting that video and tell Charlie i said Thanks too he's a awesome guitar player. R.B
Hey Adam, I have an idea! You should see if you can't get in Guinness for the longest run while simultaneously playing harmonica! :)
(Of course I'd imagine you'd need a song that alternates between blows and draws pretty regularly.)
edit: I actually play my harmonica on my exercise walks, but not for the reasons you might think. When I walk for long periods of time my hands get swollen. I guess it's not too uncommon a thing. It goes away after 15-20 minutes. I looked it up online and they suggested holding your hands up high while you walk. Of course, unless you are running, that just looks silly, but I've discovered if I play harmonica while I walk it accomplishes the same thing in a slightly less silly fashion.
---------- Nate Facebook
Last Edited by on Jul 07, 2010 12:08 PM
That was the needed dose of analytical, intellectual and knowledgeable for this forum. I was really surprised to read that after the types of "discussions" this forum has recently had. And it was actually helpful too - it explained why my jaws were hurting after two weeks of hard practice with overblows. And it also explains why my back is actually feeling better after couple of hours of digging holes in my yard yesterday - as it was little bit hurt I thought it would actually kill me today but quite the opposite.
So thank's a lot by widening our perspectives on anthropology and gene-environment mismatch!
Nice post,Isaac! So does cultural evolution explain why Olympic record times have fallen over the past,say 80 years? That's certainly not much time in the Darwinian sense. Remember the great barrier of the 4 minute mile?
Thanks guys! This is within the subject (anthropology) that I have devoted my life to studying, so I always love to share what I know and help simplify the admittedly overly-complex "science-y" arguments so that they can actually be understood by someone who HASN'T spent years and years learning how to unravel them. I've got more stuff I could say about this topic (and many many others), but I figure that I basically covered it. If there are any more specific points folk have, however, I'd be glad to clarify them for ya.
And Tuckster: Yes, in fact that situation does indeed fall under the aegis of cultural evolution. We continually break those records not because our physical bodies are evolving, but because our training methods, sports equipment, and pharmaceutical technology is evolving! Now, when we start genetically engineering better athletes, that's going to be something else entirely! That will be the point where cultural evolution has come to dominate our total evolution, and cultural practices (genetic engineering) will actually control our physical evolution. That's going to happen sooner or later, and it will certainly be a brave new world, if perhaps a bit of a scary one!
Isaac, I've read a couple of anthropology primers, and the two things that I'd like to read a bit more about are the anthropology of illness and the anthropology of mathematics. If you can suggest any books, I'd be grateful. ---------- Andrew, gentleman of leisure, noodler extraordinaire.
Do not jump on me! I have taken my lumps. I am not reviving this topic, which went from "Overblows are overrated" to monkeys and running.
I want to post a streaming sound file (not video) of me playing. Streaming as opposed to download, open and play. Have a look at Buddha's post, 5 steps down, and tell me how he managed to post a non-YouTube sound file.
My file is about the difference between tremolo and vibrato.
I have a feeling I can't use that. I'm not a harmonica pro, my name isn't Chris, and I don't smoke weed. I looked at the "The MBH Forum How-To" and didn't get an answer that looked like it would work.
Buddha, can you tell me how you do this, apart from using the website you used? Can anyone tell me? Personal email is fine if the question is too pedestrian for the public forum. My email address can be found by clicking my user name.
wolf, I use Drop Box. You open an account, download the software, and then you have a little folder that appears on your desktop. You drag or copy a copy of the sound file (I save them as mp3's first) into the folder into the 'Public' folder. Right click on the file in the folder and there will be an option that lets you copy the url for the file, then just follow the instructions on the MBH how to (put the url into the html.) It only takes a couple minutes to set up and after that it's as easy as pie. I'm storing lots of music there now. You can even access it from other computers. You get something like 2 gigs of free storage. You can get more if you refer new users or pay. (Unfortunately I'm not on my own computer or I'd refer you so I could get more space!)
